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

761–770 of 915 posts

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#761

Post by Amezarak »

mrguyorama wrote: post #731
Amezarak wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This logic is only ever applied to trucks. The majority of HNers did not make an economically rational decision when they bought their Macbook or iPhone. Consumers buy what they like and feel like they need and can afford. They place an almost absurdly high value on convenience and not having to think about things like "oh I need to move this thing I need to go rent a truck because I only ever need to do this once ev…

I have a long history of sneering at people who ceaselessly buy Apple products despite their lack of economic "efficiency" but I "have a finely calibrated sense of value" ie I'm a tightwad. Being "economically efficient" with laptop purchases saves you a few hundred to a thousand dollars. Being just reasonable with a car purchase saves you $25k. These are not at all comparable to the average american. The average new…

> But Americans do not want that. Americans want to put down $50k for 80 months for a MANLY man truck for MANLY MAN things. Or the same money for a stupid box on the same frame as an """SUV"""

I’ve driven a Corolla in the last year. Despite not being particularly tall, my head is jammed against the roof. I have to put the driver’s seat all the way back, into the knees of any rear passengers.

The owner’s manual states the car should not be used to tow anything, eliminating the claim throughout this thread of “just buy a trailer when you need to move something big.

Why is it so hard to just admit that trucks and SUVs do in fact offer greater utility and convenience in most situations than small sedans? And that this utility and convenience, even if not needed all the time, is the main reason people are buying them?

I mean, your contention is that the average American, no doubt hard up for money, is so dumb they are willing to pay a 25k+ premium to feel “manly”. Does this really make sense? Economics are not people’s primary motive but they do have an impact.

Despite driving and loving the Honda Fit for 15 years, I bought a large SUV. Can you imagine no other reason for this than I am a madman?

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#762

Post by mrguyorama »

aydyn wrote: post #498
kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is that you make more profit selling 50,000 cheap trucks and 50,000 expensive trucks than just 100,000 cheap trucks. When you can fool a largely innumerate populace into 84-month loans with "cheap" monthly payments, overpriced vehicles are the way to go.

Competition? Its not like ford is the only seller out there.

Price conscious consumers have been out of the "New" car market for a very long time. New cars have a massive premium that never makes sense.

Instead of buying a brand new Geo Metro like you would in the 90s, you just buy a used Corolla or Civic. You end up with a better car and it lasts longer anyway.

That means the majority of the "New" car market has already decided price isn't that important.

Which is why the "average" new car price is $50k and people are signing up for 80 month loans on trucks.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#763

Post by throwaway-11-1 »

NewJazz wrote: post #363
jeffbee wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Lightning is the 10th-best-selling EV in California and the Rivian R1T is not even in the top 25. Rivian is also one of the handful of brands selling fewer vehicles so far in 2025 compared to 2024.

Yeah but the R1S is a better pavement princess anyway, and that does sell well. I guess Mach-E beats even the R1S but they're not really the same kind of car. Ioniq 5 beats Mach E in CA, as does the MY.

my buddy sent me a video of him crawling some seriously sketchy trails in an R1T, I wouldn't describe those trucks as being "pavement princesses" or whatever

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#764

Post by ActorNightly »

iberator wrote: post #417
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…

LOL. Why would you need a truck if not for towing something?!

Its not about need for a lot of people. Its about having the money to optimize, aspects of their life, which everyone does in different areas.

Trucks have the following advantages

* Can drive most anywhere due to high ground clearance and 4wd. This comes in handy quite a bit. Having 4wd + weight + all terrain or appropriate tires means being able to leave the place during a winter storm versus being snowed in.

* Can carry big things or dirty things. Motorcycles, mountain bikes, furniture, landscaping supplies, and so on, without being limited in where you can go or how fast you can go while towing a trailer like you would with an SUV.

* They are safer for the occupants. Can't control if other people drink and drive. Can control if you survive or not if you get hit by a drunk driver.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#765

Post by phainopepla2 »

imtringued wrote: post #643
theshrike79 wrote: post #559

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get the whole American thing for Pick-up trucks. Unless you're hauling hay or manure, why would you want your cargo area exposed to the elements? A normal van is better in every single way. I can't figure out why someone would put their expensive tools in a pick-up's bed when this is an option: https://modulinecabinets.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/van-...

Pick-up trucks aren't meant for work. Like, at all. They are inherently grocery/family vehicles. Europeans don't use pick-up trucks even for cargo that is suitable for pickup trucks, because small flatbed trucks [0] let you open the bed from the side, making pickup trucks mostly an obsolete concept for work purposes. [0] https://youtube.com/watch?v=sm7pMHTu_m0

I grew up on a farm, and I can tell you that some pick-up trucks are definitely meant for work, and used that way. Mostly older ones

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#766

Post by matty22 »

ActorNightly wrote: post #746
matty22 wrote: post #710

*Ford:* Makes giant, electric pickup truck that you can't purchase for less than $85,000 and your normal, weekend warrior has no need for to make their Home Depot runs. *Also Ford:* WhERe aRe all tHe cUstOmerS?! I don't understand what's so hard to understand about selling EVs like hotcakes. Make a reasonably sized vehicle, with a reasonable range, at a reasonable price point. They already have the Maverick. An excel…

>That truck would sell gangbusters. Nope. Live in Texas, where there are plenty of people with top level F150s, Raptors, 250s, 350s and so on. Ive seen maybe like 5 Lightnings total since they came out, despite them being the same price. Full size trucks is a different market. Car frame Trucks like Rivian or Maveric make sense because they are trucks for car people that like the idea of a truck. People don't really c…

Ok, well Texas ain't the entire country. The vast majority of the population of this country do not live in the rural Midwest. As of the 2020 census, 80% of the population live in areas considered "urban" and 20% live in areas considered "rural". I'd also hazard a guess that most people who drive trucks, are not people who buy them because they need truck "utility". They drive them because twice a year they need to carry a load of garden dirt and maybe on the weekends they carry tools to their buddy's house. If putting a lot of miles on your truck is what you need it to do, the hybrid Maverick gets ~35-40 mpg, 3-4x what any full sized pickup will get.

> EV in fullsize truck doesn't work that well

Yes, you are making my argument for me. Fullsize EV pickup trucks don't work well, so Ford should stop making them...

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#767

Post by throwaway-11-1 »

qball wrote: post #483
vel0city wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the situation. ICE also has a massive range hit as well, it's just easy to put a massive fuel tank in to get a stupid amount of range not towing compared to a battery electric that struggles to get a similar range. When you start with almost 600mi losing half isn't too bad, when it's maybe 300mi on a good day and you cut it in half is just not as usable for that usage. That said, if it's not the towin…

Additionally, all ICE cars can charge from 0-100% in under 5 minutes. Even if their towing range was somehow less than an EV, it would matter less because you don't have to spend an hour at a charging station.

yeah for sure...in this shithole country thats true, China has 1,000-volt chargers which are basically as fast as filling a tank. Maybe the US will get something comparable by 2050, after Miami is 6ft under water

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#768

Post by ActorNightly »

fragmede wrote: post #756
ActorNightly wrote: post #748

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They're loaded with useless/barely-functional interior electronics that are poor copies of Tesla Man, Tesla apologists are rewriting reality now. In no way shape or form is Tesla interior even remotely good.

I think you've been smelling too many of your car's ICE fumes there, mate. It's true that Tesla interiors aren't lined with old growth redwood trees that can never be replaced, and the seats don't use the finest baby seal leather like you'd find in a custom Bentley, but "even remotely good" is as ridiculous level of Elon hate as Teslafanboyism that thinks Elon Musk is the second coming (he's not). It's a car. The int…

Sure its fine, but like a basic Toyota interior is quite a lot better than anything Tesla has. Its pretty obvious where they cut costs.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#769

Post by matty22 »

1970-01-01 wrote: post #728
matty22 wrote: post #722

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you were gunshy about trying out VR. You'd never even worn a pair before and you wanted to give it a shot. Would you be more willing to spend $300 on a Quest or would you rather spend $3500 on an Apple Vision Pro? Now let's pretend we're in an alternate timeline and the $300 Quest never existed. The only option available to you was the $3500 option. Are you still interested in trying out VR? MSRP might not be the…

Apples and oranges. You can lease a vehicle. You cannot lease a VR headset.

You shouldn't ever lease a vehicle either. Unless you like setting piles of your money on fire.

Re: Ford kills the All-Electric F-150

#770

Post by ActorNightly »

matty22 wrote: post #766
ActorNightly wrote: post #746

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>That truck would sell gangbusters. Nope. Live in Texas, where there are plenty of people with top level F150s, Raptors, 250s, 350s and so on. Ive seen maybe like 5 Lightnings total since they came out, despite them being the same price. Full size trucks is a different market. Car frame Trucks like Rivian or Maveric make sense because they are trucks for car people that like the idea of a truck. People don't really c…

Ok, well Texas ain't the entire country. The vast majority of the population of this country do not live in the rural Midwest. As of the 2020 census, 80% of the population live in areas considered "urban" and 20% live in areas considered "rural". I'd also hazard a guess that most people who drive trucks, are not people who buy them because they need truck "utility". They drive them because twice a year they need to c…

Right, and the $40k truck that you are proposing is not gonna work either though.
Post reply on HN