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

341–350 of 915 posts

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#341

Post by lern_too_spel »

rsync wrote: post #233

We don't want your electric car ... we want your car, but electric . We want an electric F150 or an electric Suburban or v90 wagon or whatever. But instead we get e-initiative i-mobiles. We get TRON-cars. We get iModels. There is a reason for this: The incumbent auto makers understand fully that the ICE version of whatever model they electrify will suffer enormously. They believe that they can somehow retain all of t…

Chevrolet makes these. The Blazer and the Blazer EV look roughly the same. The Equinox and Equinox EV look more different but not completely different. The Silverado and the Silverado EV look completely different, but given those other models, I don't think it's for lack of trying.

Similarly, Volvo's EX cars look almost exactly like their XC counterparts.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#342

Post by Zambyte »

tw04 wrote: post #310
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…

> *They're loaded with useless/barely-functional interior electronics that are poor copies of Tesla Having owned both an EV Ford and a Tesla I can say with absolute certainty that the ford runs circles around the Tesla. Outside of having steam games on the screen, Tesla’s infotainment does literally nothing better, and the interface itself feels like an early 2000s Linux gui. Oh, and Ford actually supports carplay an…

Outside of... having Steam games? What?

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#343

Post by fisherjeff »

bluGill wrote: post #318
eucyclos wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think what the issue would be aside from range. One thing that stood out to me about the cybertruck is that they made huge tradeoffs to make it more aerodynamic. The only reason to do that is to increase maximum driving distance. Put a big blocky trailer behind it and suddenly the battery's maximum distance is competing with a gas tank on a much more even playing field. Regenerative braking would make up for…

Charge time matters. I can fill a gas tank in the time my partner uses the bathroom. Evs need a lot longer.

Lack of pull-through charging stations is a very big hurdle too.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#344

Post by themafia »

rsync wrote: post #233

We don't want your electric car ... we want your car, but electric . We want an electric F150 or an electric Suburban or v90 wagon or whatever. But instead we get e-initiative i-mobiles. We get TRON-cars. We get iModels. There is a reason for this: The incumbent auto makers understand fully that the ICE version of whatever model they electrify will suffer enormously. They believe that they can somehow retain all of t…

> The incumbent auto makers understand fully that the ICE version of whatever model they electrify will suffer enormously.

So you're saying they make _less_ profit on the EVs? That seems dubious.

> They believe that they can somehow retain all of the sales of the existing ICE model while adding growth sales of a different electric model.

Well.. precisely. Isn't the solution to make the EVs more profitable than the ICEs? Meanwhile Toyota's out here killing it in Hybrids.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#345

Post by jeffbee »

skullone wrote: post #206

This is a shame. Coworker got a Lightning and he loves it. He doesn't tow with it but he does field work for fiber optic stuff, usually back home every day. Runs his computers, tools, ventilation for going down manholes, he even powered a sump pump from it, without needing to haul a generator. The hybrid truck can now do the same, but it's a really nice truck

The plain old ICE F-150 has had power outlets as an option package for more than ten years, i.e. 7 years before the Lightning even existed.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#346

Post by missedthecue »

tonymet wrote: post #330

$20b capital write down means that consumers paid that much more for all vehicles to subsidize redundant and insolvent EV product lines . Tesla is the only company making money off of these products . People keep complaining about the AI bubble but we sustained an EV bubble for 15 years without it popping .

How did they lose $20B on this? Gigafactory was $10B.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#347

Post by nunez »

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 interior is more or less the same as the ICE version of the F-150, and there is a lot of parts sharing between them. Probably part of the reason why it didn't have great range. EVs are also much simpler to repair, on average. Definitely not disposable. They sure were expensive, though.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#348

Post by dyauspitr »

sowbug wrote: post #246
dyauspitr wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Charge at home, that’s the whole point. My F150 lightning costs about $14 in electric charges a month for about 600 miles on average.

Home electricity in California is about 45¢/kWh. If your F150 mileage is typical, you're getting about 2 miles per kWh. 600 miles would cost about $135 here in California. Meanwhile, a 20 mpg gas car would cost about $110/month at $3.65/gallon. You must be paying about 4.7 cents per kWh, or about 90% less than you'd pay here.

7c/kWh, 11c/kWh at peak hours

Those prices are wild.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#349

Post by sroerick »

sefrost wrote: post #210
brandonmenc wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do you need a truck? To haul dirt. To haul junk out to the dump. Etc. Do people load their Transits with piles of dirt and mulch? I doubt it. I live in the US and have a small house in the city, and I haul stuff like this all the time. Yes, you can rent a pickup truck as needed from U-Haul, but that gets old real quick. Yes, I would love it if there was a nice small or mid-sized truck with an extended bed avail…

> Do people load their Transits with piles of dirt and mulch? I doubt it. I am from the UK but live in Canada. I only see three types of businesses using those Transit style vans here in North America: food delivery, parcel delivery and landscaping businesses. I assume the landscapers are carrying dirt at least some of the time.

I see carpenters and electricians who trick them out with a little workshop, but that's really it. Landscapers it makes sense because you're hauling equipment and storing it in the van, so you can probably both store more and protect from the elements

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#350

Post by [deleted] »

adrr wrote: post #254
class3shock wrote: post #237

The F-150 is in one of the markets I think ev's will take over first (small commercial vehicles) but it just was not the right vehicle to start with. To expensive, even when the tax incentives were still a thing, and Ford suffers from having corrupt dealers taking a large cut on top of that. So you are selling to either the top 5% or bigger businesses. If you are a top 5% buying this you want it to tow your expensive…

They should be cheaper than the F150 but Ford can’t figure out how to make batteries cheaply. Evs are a lot less complex, no gas engine, no transmission, no exhaust systems with hundreds of dollars of precious metal in them. It should be cheaper than a gas equivalent.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN