Ford kills the All-Electric F-150 • Hacker News Board

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#441

Post by cyberax » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:19 AM UTC

bluGill wrote: post #329

rootusrootus wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The convenience argument works for a small segment of the population that road trips a few hundred miles at a time regularly. For the rest of us, EVs are far more convenient. I don't ever go to a gas station, and every day I start out with 320 miles of range. I stop at the EV equivalent of a gas station two or three times a year . I've saved a lot of time not having to get gas every week.

The people I know make those road triys. Sure 99% of the time we don't, but we expect the car to do it

And as I pointed out, pretty much all these road trips are already possible, although some may require slight detours.

With some fairly limited changes, they won't require any detours.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#442

Post by grogenaut » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:20 AM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #239

WalterBright wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US isn't flat. Range can vary considerably with climbing into the mountain passes, or in cold weather.

It's mostly a wash, the efficiency on the descent balances the climb, and overall you get respectably close to the same range you'd have gotten on a flat route.

I rented a mach-e recently. Went up to Snoqualamie pass from seattle. I used over 60 miles range in 10 miles on the steep part at the end, 1/6th. Going the other way I got a maybe 20% boost in distance over flat. There were a few places I was able to regen-brake, but I never had the battery go up, only stay flat. And a few times I lost enough speed that I didn't handle an interim flat well. I was extremely disappointed.

It turns out friction and drag are still things. On a pure downhill you would be able to roll, but it's not as good as going down is bad.

I also found that the car did a lot worse rolling down hill than my mini-cooper manual when I just put the clutch in, which got up to hairy speeds. Heck vehicle seemed to have more inbuilt resistance to just rolling than the fire engine I've run down that hill.

Overall I got 90 total miles of range and hit the flat at 10% battery. I was able to get 290 miles driving in seattle with the same vehicle.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#443

Post by jama211 » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:21 AM UTC

inasio wrote: post #301

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…

My electrician drives an electric F-150, it's impressive how useful it is for him. The frunk carries a big box of tools, there's tons of outlets to charge his power tool batteries, he can even run a small welder

That’s pretty cool, and I just checked the prices and it only starts at 11k dearer than the standard f150, which is less than I expected. Interesting.

What’s more insane to me as an Australian is its 50k USD starting price in America, but in Australia it starts at $149k USD as they’re only sold by third parties that do right hand drive conversions (at imo a way too high premium, 100k for that service + shipping???)

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#444

Post by Dylan16807 » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:21 AM UTC

tooltalk wrote: post #433

Dylan16807 wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) I'm unsure if that's more anti or pro market to be honest. 2,3) Okay, yes, half-separating China from the rest of the world is anti-market. But then they did a lot inside the country that was pro-market. With a population of over a billion, I don't consider that picking winners. 4) That's obnoxious of them but doesn't really affect what I was saying. subsidies) I was unaware of extensions, and I thought the supply…

1) anti-market. China was likewise taken to the WTO in 2018 and agreed to end their restriction on market access/forced tech transfer, implemented in 2020/2021. Tesla is however still the only foreign automaker operating without a forced JV to this date. 2) restricting market access (and subsidies) to foreign automakers isn't exactly pro-market -- especially to those who were already in China and manufacturing produc…

1) Getting in trouble doesn't make it anti-market. If you give stolen data to enough companies, you encourage competition more than you hinder it.

2) Restricting subsidies reduces the pro-market effect, but overall providing subsidies to such a big number of companies was pro-market.

3) Yes that's anti-market but when you're splitting up such a big market into two still very big markets it's not hugely anti-market.

4) It exposes corrupt motives more than it actually affects the market.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#445

Post by chickensong » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:24 AM UTC

exabrial wrote: post #231

omnimus wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean the biggest issue is that “trucks” like F-150 are actually used because of US tax system that exempts such massive vehicles from emmision taxes because they are work trucks. They are pretty ineffective work vehicles but some people just love them as a symbol. That symbolism goes completely against electric/green vehicles. In other words - people who buy F-150 would never buy electric vehicle and people who are…

> people just love them as a symbol This is an unfortunate trope that is oft repeated by those that live their life in constant upgrade cycles. The regular F-150 is a pinnacle of value engineering for Ford. It's infinitely repairable for owners. Look around on the highway, you will see hundreds of 15+ year old F150s on the road, and a few times a day I will see 25+ year old trucks on the road too. There are thousands…

'99 F-150 with >250k on original engine and transmission here. Going to pick up 900 lbs of rock tomorrow. Suspension is pretty poor, but it still pulls hard under load. I'd like to upgrade to a newer model, but the '99 refuses to die.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#446

Post by vel0city » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:26 AM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #437

vel0city wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I (and practically most people) are rarely to never carrying stacks of full sheets of drywall. Having that be the basis of your needs for a car is absurd for most people. Even then, my minivan can pack some pretty long and pretty large things inside. Meanwhile it's got a better turning radius than most trucks, it has way better visibility, it's far less pedestrian unfriendly, it's got an easier loading height, slidin…

Those were some examples, not an exhaustive list. What about hauling a load of mulch or topsoil, you're not doing that in your nice minivan. Or a bed-load of tree limbs and cut brush? I do that a few times a year. Hauling furniture, firewood, lawn mowers, trash. An open truck bed is the most flexible configuration in my experience. Of course it's not perfect for everything. A utility trailer could do a lot of that to…

> What about hauling a load of mulch or topsoil, you're not doing that in your nice minivan

I've mostly just had that delivered when doing a big job, but I have just laid a tarp before. It's not that big of a deal really. And I don't even bother with a tarp for the smaller jobs, it's already bagged. Just don't grab bags with holes in it, and use the vacuum later. It's fine.

> Or a bed-load of tree limbs and cut brush?

I live in a suburb. The trash service picks up brush. If it's more than what I can fit in a few bags I just put in a bulky trash request and the send a truck with crane to pick up the pile. Welcome to living in a society, it's quite nice.

> Hauling furniture, firewood, lawn mowers, trash

Once again, large furniture moves have been easily handled with cheap rentals. One-off pieces have usually been easily partially disassembled to load even into a hatchback. I've had no issues putting my lawn mower even into my old Accord, they're not that big when you fold the bar down. Spend a couple of minutes unscrewing things and suddenly you no longer need a truck. Not that I need to move my lawn mower much, I'm not in the lawn service industry. I'm also not in the piano moving industry. But maybe most Americans do move pianos on a quarterly basis.

And once again, a small tarp and I've carried plenty of firewood for my fireplace. But once again like the majority of Americans I live in an "urban" area and don't rely on multiple chords of firewood to make it through a winter. But the family I had that did live in a rural area that did mostly heat by firewood just had it delivered. You might as well argue one needs a trailer rated to carry fuel oil or large quantities of liquid propane.

You know what's inconvenient? Navigating urban spaces every day with a giant oversized monstrosity that my kids can't even easily climb into on their own. A vehicle where I can barely open the doors on an average parking spot. A vehicle that gets less than 20mpg compared to 35+ (or even way more than that with my EV). A vehicle where each tire costs $200+ compared to $100. A vehicle where a brake job costs way more than it needs to.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#447

Post by rossjudson » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:26 AM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #399

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…

Point of order: dirt goes in your dump trailer, hauled of course by your truck.

How far are you going to haul that dirt?

Trucks think only trucks can tow.

I tow a 24 foot boat with an Audi Q7. Reasonably frequently, truck guys say something like "You tow that, with THAT?"

Uh, yeah. 7700 pound tow capacity (nearly as much as a base F150). Tows really well.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#448

Post by dalyons » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:27 AM UTC

jandrewrogers wrote: post #421

dalyons wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t that the rivian R1? Incredibly capable off-road. One of a small number of stock model cars to complete the Rubicon trail

The Rivian has pretty limited range. The Scout looks promising though. People out in the ranch country, oil patch, some mining areas, etc often want a reliable 600-ish miles unloaded. That’s why extended fuel tanks are a common option. Even without an extended fuel tank, you can often achieve that with an ICE and a jerry can. EVs have great potential as 4WD off-road vehicles. In a lot of ways they are more naturally…

i was assuming the person i was responding to was talking about recreational offroading, not ranching, oiling or mining in the middle of nowhere.

A max pack rivian has a 400ml range, which is plenty for the vast majority of recreational adventures.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#449

Post by chris_va » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:29 AM UTC

themafia wrote: post #344

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 IC…

Well, instead of cannibalizing ICE sales, why not have your cake and eat it to?

- Ford & Marie Antoinette

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#450

Post by lokar » Tue, Dec 16, 2025, 5:31 AM UTC

dpark wrote: post #397

craftkiller wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are suggesting that most F-150s are not purchased for real truck work like hauling stuff. Instead, they are purchased by people who use them exclusively to drive on paved roads, in towns/cities, mostly carrying passengers instead of large cargo. Therefore the concern about going off-road to remote locations isn't a real concern for this market.

It’s a real concern in the sense that a lot of them care about the capability. Objectively a Ford F-150 is the wrong vehicle for what 90% of its buyers need. But it’s an aspirational purchase. It can go off-road. It can haul a boat. It can haul a bed full of gravel. It doesn’t matter for these purchasers that they rarely if ever actually do any of this.

For many it’s also a visible badge showing membership in a culture.