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

2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

ford.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#131

Post by goodcanadian »

cduzz wrote: post #34

It looks like a great vehicle. I hope ford's got a plan for making millions of battery packs for these things. I wonder if "backfeed from the EVSE" is going to be a regular / standardized feature of some vehicle chargers in the future? Combine this with time-of-use awareness and auto-auction mechanisms to backfeed the grid when power's necessary (and turn off back-feeding to not kill linemen repairing wires) it seems…

"Smart charging" is already a thing. Vehicle feeding back into the grid ("Vehicle to Grid") is more experimental, but it also exists:

https://www.indra.co.uk/

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#132

Post by ddingus »

zdragnar wrote: post #92
WillPostForFood wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a touchscreen is bad for volume, it is probably bad for most other up and down adjustments too (e.g. temp). I'd argue touch screens are bad for everything when you are driving, because you can't feel your way around.

I hate touchscreens in cars. Avoiding them is a big part of why my current ride is from 2011.

Same. Want nothing to do with them.

Also night driving. I love low interior indicator lighting. The big screens inhibit night vision. The older we get, the worse this is.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#133

Post by jschwartzi »

bb123 wrote: post #97
CalRobert wrote: post #8

It's great to see the best selling vehicle in the US be zero emissions. It's wonderful. But this truck will be very heavy, very tall, and very fast. Drivers are already the leading killers of children, and more and more people are being killed while walking and cycling. I'm very worried about the effect of making this vehicle even faster and heavier. Hopefully reduced deaths from pollution offset this.

Electric vehicles often have much better safety credentials than their ICE powered counterparts for a few reasons: * All of the weight is in the bottom of the vehicle, giving a lower centre of gravity. I'd bet this will kill the old F150 in a moose (or child!) test. * The lack of engine means the entire front part of the car is a huge crumple zone. This gives designers more wriggle room for pedestrian protection too.…

> * All of the weight is in the bottom of the vehicle, giving a lower centre of gravity. I'd bet this will kill the old F150 in a moose (or child!) test.

The important thing to note about the moose test is that it doesn't specify that the moose has to survive. It's simply a test of whether the occupants will survive hitting a moose. I would wager anything that is designed to pass the moose test will kill anything that it hits that is below the moose's center of gravity. So actually the vehicle is way less safe for pedestrians than a vehicle that would fail the moose test.

But if all that matters is the safety of the occupant I guess this is okay.

> * The lack of engine means the entire front part of the car is a huge crumple zone. This gives designers more wriggle room for pedestrian protection too. This is an increasingly important requirement in road safety standards.

The kind of "crumple zone" that enhances pedestrian and cyclist safety is more like a beer can. Again, the crumple zones in this vehicle are designed to keep the occupants safe but not designed to keep any other road user safe.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#134

Post by iamhamm »

CobsterLock wrote: post #102
tw04 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not half and half, it's touchscreen with a physical volume knob which in my opinion is the right way . Having touch controls for volume is a horrible idea (my car has touch control for everything and I despise trying to get the volume adjusted quickly). https://i.imgur.com/Lw4GgNW.jpeg

Maybe I am asking for too much but I want physical knobs for: Volume Control, HVAC Fan Speed, HVAC Temp. A tangential question: Does anyone know why there is an AC button on older cars? I can turn the temp all the way down but that just does outside air temp. If i want real AC I need to hit a button to turn it on. In my ideal car turning the knob to the lowest temp would get me cold air no matter what.

I had a 1996 (iirc) Buick that had AC/Heat knob that did that. It was red on the right, blue on the left. If you left it at the detente position it was outside air. Turn in left, AC; turn it right, heat. Then there was just a separate knob for fan speed. Now that you mention it, I’ve never seen that again.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#135

Post by criddell »

namdnay wrote: post #30
pionar wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've never been one of those things, but they're still useful. I had an F150 for a while that I only used to transport things like mulch or helping friends move or moving myself. I still have an old Ranger that I use for those purposes today. It seems insane to assume you can be the judge of what's "useful" or "utility".

I think you're being a bit unfair. We all agree that they're useful, but surely in a world win which we need to a) reduce road and parking space in order to encourage better forms of transportation , b) reduce our consumption of natural resources ,maybe we need to discourage individual ownership of 3000kg utility vehicles?

In the US, discouraging individual ownership of vehicles is probably not going to succeed. I don't want to give up my car and I suspect that electric vehicles and self driving vehicles (when they get here) are going to drive the cost of trips way, way down which will increase the number of trips by a similar amount. The number of vehicles on the road is going to increase.

Because of the increased demand on raods, reducing road space probably won't happen. When cars can get to and from parking spaces by themselves, parking space can move into central towers or edge lots, but the number of spaces is probably going to increase, not decrease.

We all want better forms of transportation, but there's a lot of disagreement about what's better.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#136

Post by jonfw »

CobsterLock wrote: post #102
tw04 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not half and half, it's touchscreen with a physical volume knob which in my opinion is the right way . Having touch controls for volume is a horrible idea (my car has touch control for everything and I despise trying to get the volume adjusted quickly). https://i.imgur.com/Lw4GgNW.jpeg

Maybe I am asking for too much but I want physical knobs for: Volume Control, HVAC Fan Speed, HVAC Temp. A tangential question: Does anyone know why there is an AC button on older cars? I can turn the temp all the way down but that just does outside air temp. If i want real AC I need to hit a button to turn it on. In my ideal car turning the knob to the lowest temp would get me cold air no matter what.

If you want to defrost your windows, you want hot, dry air. Air conditioning dries your air. If you combine A/C and heat, you get the best defrost performance.

A/C also consumes some amount of power and fuel efficiency- you may want the coolest air you could possibly have without A/C.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#137

Post by heymijo »

voisin wrote: post #106
ginko wrote: post #64

So according to this[1] it looks like the motors and batteries are in the bottom of the car like in other EVs. Which makes me wonder: What's under the enormous hood in front? Is it just empty space? [1] https://www.ford.com/is/image/content/dam/vdm_ford/live/en_u...

There’s a trunk there for extra storage. I understand they did not integrate the motors and batteries into a new frame built specifically to accommodate them like Tesla did but rather added them on top the existing frame. I really like that Tesla is a ground up design and something about this F150 annoys me for carrying on all of the institutional inertia of a 100 year old company. Also, I read Ford is planning on 40…

That puts it in perspective.

Ford sold 787,000 F-150’s in 2020 and about 1 million F-series trucks in total.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#138

Post by csharptwdec19 »

bamboozled wrote: post #42
perardi wrote: post #23

I have no idea if this’ll be lightning or a lead balloon, because a significant amount of pickup truck buyers do it for the machismo. Which sounds like some city-slicker talking down to the cheap seats, except, I grew up in a town named Farmington. (Go Farmers.) I know pickups. I know the people who drive pickups. My dad sneers at fancy new pickups because he used to shove a good 700 pounds of mink pelts in a pickup,…

Macho man and their egos like the fastest, toughest trucks with the most torque / power. This is it. It wins.

It depends.

There's a couple classes of 'Truck guys'. The Truck guys that just want power, yeah they'll probably go for this.

The Truck guys that like throwing turbodiesels in to get HP/Torque numbers like what we see in the lightning, I would say it depends on whether Ford makes it 'Moddable' or not.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#139

Post by foobarian »

perardi wrote: post #45
CalRobert wrote: post #8

It's great to see the best selling vehicle in the US be zero emissions. It's wonderful. But this truck will be very heavy, very tall, and very fast. Drivers are already the leading killers of children, and more and more people are being killed while walking and cycling. I'm very worried about the effect of making this vehicle even faster and heavier. Hopefully reduced deaths from pollution offset this.

…what a non sequitur. The F-150 is already a bloated monstrosity, it makes no difference if it’s electric. It’s some tiny bit faster, but they’re all fast enough.

I would buy this truck for the 11 outlets with gobs of power alone. They get it.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#140

Post by JamesSwift »

endisneigh wrote: post #50

I'm curious, with the advent of electric what's the advantage of a truck vs. a minivan for a lot of situations? IIRC there were literal space constraints before which is why a minivan couldn't tow like a truck, but since the motor and batteries sit underneath the car, couldn't one build a van/minivan with just as much power as this? If that's the case, other than hauling very tall objects, why get a truck? A minivan…

The minivan has the space but only if you plan ahead and allocate the space to hauling. I've underplanned trips in my minivan for large/bulky items (e.g. beverage fridge, ikea bookshelf) several times and had to do impromptu adjustments of the seats/positions to get items in. It doesn't help that I have a bunch of kids car seats to deal with when converting to "hauling mode".

Much less futzing w/ the truck I'm sure.

Post reply on HN