Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 915 posts

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#151

Post by EgregiousCube »

cyberax wrote: post #144
roadside_picnic wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One is that pickups are a weirdly-politicized lifestyle choice in the US Based on my personal experience traveling, there's a more practical reason for the political divide. I spend a good portion of my life in rural parts of the US these days, where most of the residents are pretty conservative. But these are also parts of the country where I get nervous when I'm on 1/4 tank of gas. If you're routinely out in plac…

Try this map: https://supercharge.info/map , it has a feature called "range circles". If you set it to 50 miles, you'll see that most of the country is well within 50 miles of the nearest supercharger. Including almost all of Texas. At 100 miles of range, you only have a couple of blank spots. With third party chargers, there's really only one blank spot in Montana. At this point, the range is already a solved proble…

“There’s at least one spot within 100 miles where you can wait 20 minutes to get enough charge to get to the next charger” is not an argument that will convince someone to give up the convenience of the gas station.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#152

Post by SkyPuncher »

galkk wrote: post #76

I think that trucks are in worst position for moving to EV. Customer base is quite conservative in how the truck should look like. For example,F150 lightning had to look like F150. While a look of truck (and even ordinary car) is defined by the function - need to have beefy, but somewhat serviceable/accessible engine in the front. There is no need for this in the ev truck like at all. It's all dead space now. I suspe…

So, one of the main reasons it needs to look like a truck is because it needs to have a structure like a truck to be compatible with basically all of the aftermarket parts.

I want a truck with flat bed rails so I can put a cap on it. It needs to have a proper frame under the bed so it’s not bending with point loads.

I need a bed that’s a separate piece from the cab so they have flex for uneven grades.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#153

Post by Workaccount2 »

izend wrote: post #7

I am actually surprised they cancelled the F150 Lightning, I see a lot of them the Metro Vancouver area where a lot of contractors, (gardeners, pool maintenance, labourers, etc...) are driving them as electricity is super cheap here and gasoline is quite expensive.

I can confirm that the F150 Lightning community is basically Canadians.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#154

Post by chasd00 »

stonogo wrote: post #108
exabrial wrote: post #43

I expected the "T word" to come out in the article, however this fails to address any of the practical reasons it isn't a good replacement for the value-engineered F-150: * The price isn't right for small businesses. These trucks are quite expensive * They're difficult to repair. A regular F-150 is designed to be repaired; these things are designed like iPhones to be disposable. * Parts availability is scarce, contra…

I feel like many of these comparisons are more applicable to an F-150 of twenty years ago. Modern F-150s start at forty grand, are so hard to repair that the CEO of Ford whines about not having enough mechanics willing to get a PhD in Ford Repair, are absolutely software-constrained to the extent they're legally allowed, and have almost as many cockpit gizmos. The primary difference is the flashy bloat, but the major…

Yeah the F150 is a strange vehicle. It has a proven reputation as a blue collar workhorse. However, a fully loaded Raptor trim is a 6 figure price tag easy.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#155

Post by tzs »

ghaff wrote: post #120
nospice wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The price isn't right for small businesses. These trucks are quite expensive So are RAM trucks and I don't think they're hurting for customers. I think there are two fundamental issues. One is that pickups are a weirdly-politicized lifestyle choice in the US - i.e., if you're progressive, you're supposed to hate them and see them as the symbol of the gun-totting macho redneck culture, and if you're conservative, yo…

I'm guessing you're often either towing or you're doing a bunch of shortish drives for construction, etc. purposes--neither of which are a great match for electric.

How are short drives not a great match for electric?

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#156

Post by bpt3 »

hnburnsy wrote: post #38

>Ford expects to record about $19.5 billion in special items with the majority in the fourth quarter. It is believed that this is the largest impairment ever from a company.

It's believed by whom?

I think AOL Time Warner still has the record at over $50 billion, unless you're talking about some specific form of impairment.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#157

Post by nebula8804 »

tigranbs wrote: post #9

Maybe it is just me, but the “universal” platform architecture seems a bit inefficient. I think, with a software-first mindset and modularity in Hardware products, it is insane to think efficiency first, especially when the goal is to make it cheaper to produce and operate.

Its speed of execution. Tesla made designs and parts common across Model3/Y and BYD are excellent at this. However Tesla/BYD seem to move at the speed of a silicon valley company while legacies keep thinking in Model years. You can't do that in an era where the tech is rapidly evolving.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#158

Post by shmoe »

nozzlegear wrote: post #142
nebula8804 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess we will find out if many of these things actually matter with the Slate truck. It is in many ways the antithesis of this electric F-150. If that vehicle fails then there are no more excuses, a significant chunk of Americans just don't like electric vehicles and are destined to be laggards.

I love electric vehicles, but I want something that lands somewhere between the DIY-esque Slate and the literally-costs-more-than-I-paid-for-my-house F-150 Lightning. I have a 23 Chevy Bolt EUV which is the sweet spot for me right now, I just wish it had AWD for the winters where I live.

Ok, where are houses going for 60k? I need to know this secret.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#159

Post by porphyra »

bdcs wrote: post #79
kerblang wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay are we just saying they just discontinued one electric F150 in favor of another? Meh. Edit: Oh, an EREV is fancy way to say "hybrid" ok

>Oh, an EREV is fancy way to say "hybrid" ok Kind of. EREVs are what locomotives have been doing for a century (and to a lesser extent barges), which is called diesel-electric in that field. I agree the terminology is lacking, but EREVs are quite compelling (and their high market share in China supports consumer demand). Hybrid: * ICE must run during regular operation (except for ~very short distances at ~very slow s…

EREV is different from diesel-electric in that the EREV has a large battery whereas the diesel-electric locomotive does not. But the "ICE engine drives a generator which drives a motor" philosophy is similar in spirit.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#160

Post by shmoe »

bink wrote: post #53
exabrial wrote: post #43

I expected the "T word" to come out in the article, however this fails to address any of the practical reasons it isn't a good replacement for the value-engineered F-150: * The price isn't right for small businesses. These trucks are quite expensive * They're difficult to repair. A regular F-150 is designed to be repaired; these things are designed like iPhones to be disposable. * Parts availability is scarce, contra…

> The price isn't right for small businesses. These trucks are quite expensive They definitely aimed for the luxury market, like Rivian. Who knows how successful they would've been if they aimed for mid-range like Scout. That's the market they claimed to be entering when they started taking reservations. They also could've offered a fleet ready version without the luxury features, but must've decided not to. > They'r…

They also could've offered a fleet ready version without the luxury features, but must've decided not to.

They did offer a fleet version.. the "Pro".

Post reply on HN