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

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#181

Post by boulos »

So, I’m sort of curious to see what this price point does to the home battery market.

The new LG Chem RESU 16h (16 kWh) is available for preorder at $8,400 [1].

The base model truck has a 110 kWh suite of batteries and seemingly will start at $40k (unclear if that’s before or after the $7500 expected federal rebate).

Naively multiplying it out, the base model F-150 Lightning is a free vehicle attached to the equivalent of 6 of the 16 kWh batteries.

There are likely:

- integration issues (you can’t hook it up to 48V or 400V solar)

- battery life? (Though it’s a vehicle. You expect daily usage for years)

- something else?

tl;dr: if this is really 110 kWh of storage that can power your home, shouldn’t there be a secondary market of “just the batteries” for half that?

[1] https://sunwatts.com/16-kwh-lg-chem-lithium-ion-home-battery...

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#182

Post by jrsj »

idiotsecant wrote: post #152
mfer wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trucks very much have a place in society. Farmers, construction workers, and some other areas definitely need them. The trend that they need to be an everyday vehicle for anyone is something that should be looked at. What is the psychology and intentional planning that's caused this shift? What subtle population engineering has lead to this without people realizing it?

There are a certain group of users that need the machines to be strong for towing, tall for required ground clearance, and with bed capacity to haul material, tools, and other everyday cargo. There is another group that doesn't need any of things but is convinced that they might some day. They are aspirational requirements. Why are those people convinced they need these things? The same reason anyone is convinced the…

I’m about as “casual” of a user as possible and it’s still much less that I might theoretically need these things someday and more that I do need them, occasionally. For myself or for friends + family.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#183

Post by voisin »

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…

Beyond the practical reasons re irregularly hauling something to the dump or picking something up for a Reno, two reasons we got a truck that don’t seem mentioned here are for (a) visibility on the road (it is just nicer IMO to be up high) and (b) my wife has long legs and often sits between our kids in the backseat on long drives and it has as much legroom as a Bentley.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#184

Post by ajb92 »

boulos wrote: post #181

So, I’m sort of curious to see what this price point does to the home battery market. The new LG Chem RESU 16h (16 kWh) is available for preorder at $8,400 [1]. The base model truck has a 110 kWh suite of batteries and seemingly will start at $40k (unclear if that’s before or after the $7500 expected federal rebate). Naively multiplying it out, the base model F-150 Lightning is a free vehicle attached to the equivale…

> The base model truck has a 110 kWh suite of batteries and seemingly will start at $40k (unclear if that’s before or after the $7500 expected federal rebate).

During the live presentation, I believe it was indicated the sub $40k price tag is before the rebate.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#185

Post by ffggvv »

tibiahurried wrote: post #63

Who wants a Cybertruck anyway :) I am all for F-150

i think they are different markets.

cyber truck is for affluent city people who probably never had or wanted a truck before but like the design.

f150 is more for normal people who actually just want a normal truck that’s electric

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#186

Post by kibwen »

ffggvv wrote: post #144
anotherQuarter wrote: post #6

I hope the ability to use your EV battery to backup your house power becomes an expected capability in the future. Glad Ford included it. Too bad Tesla backed away from it, i’m guessing due to their powerwall business.

i wonder how long a car could possibly power a house

From other reports I've seen claims of three days at "normal" power draw, up to ten days if you're deliberately conserving power.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#187

Post by woeirua »

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.

Yes, it will be heavier, and yes it will have more acceleration...

But newer vehicles also have AEB with pedestrian detection. If these vehicles displace older existing vehicles without those safety systems we will see fewer fatalities overall. Most kids and pedestrians are hit at low speed, not at 60+ mph due to the driver not paying attention or not being able to see the pedestrian. While AEB can’t save all pedestrians that would otherwise be hit, we know that these systems lead to big reductions in preventable accidents [1].

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31381447/

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#188

Post by jrsj »

brokencode wrote: post #164
mfer wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trucks very much have a place in society. Farmers, construction workers, and some other areas definitely need them. The trend that they need to be an everyday vehicle for anyone is something that should be looked at. What is the psychology and intentional planning that's caused this shift? What subtle population engineering has lead to this without people realizing it?

It’s a vehicle, not a mental disorder. Some people just want to be able to occasionally tow a boat or haul some furniture without needing to rent a truck. I think the attitude of “you don’t need a truck unless you’re a blue collar worker” is pretty elitist and ignorant, honestly. As if the decision to buy a truck is somehow invalid because white collar workers don’t see the need for one.

It’s honestly a lot more practical than people seem to think. And if electric trucks hold their value anything like ICE trucks, getting one with a tax credit at about $40k for the base model is probably the best deal in a new vehicle you can find.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#189

Post by zzzeek »

csharptwdec19 wrote: post #128
perardi wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…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.

Well, There's speed, and then there's acceleration. This new Lightning (putting it that way because F150 Lightning once corresponded to a gas-guzzling Supercharged V8 trim) has 775ft/lb of Torque. For reference, the existing models are between 265 and 510 ft/lb. Additionally, one of the benefits of an electric motor, is that torque is essentially instantly available, compared to an ICE where there's only a slim power…

this is my biggest concern. my dad has a tesla, and you put your foot on that thing it feels like a jet on the runway. electric motors are allowing everyday, consumer level cars that can do 0-60 faster than a Ferrari, and silently as well. it leads to doing more aggressive turns and stuff like that which you can only pull off with maximum acceleration, which means scenarios like the left turn where you're whipping out like silent lightning to beat the oncoming cars, and some kid on a bike suddenly entering the road to your left where you're going, and in the opposite way in which you are looking (at the oncoming cars to the right) is toast.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#190

Post by pmarreck »

brokencode wrote: post #164
mfer wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trucks very much have a place in society. Farmers, construction workers, and some other areas definitely need them. The trend that they need to be an everyday vehicle for anyone is something that should be looked at. What is the psychology and intentional planning that's caused this shift? What subtle population engineering has lead to this without people realizing it?

It’s a vehicle, not a mental disorder. Some people just want to be able to occasionally tow a boat or haul some furniture without needing to rent a truck. I think the attitude of “you don’t need a truck unless you’re a blue collar worker” is pretty elitist and ignorant, honestly. As if the decision to buy a truck is somehow invalid because white collar workers don’t see the need for one.

> I think the attitude of “you don’t need a truck unless you’re a blue collar worker” is pretty elitist and ignorant, honestly.

A sedan with the rear seats folded down will likely hold as much as you can get in a Costco run.

Or two bikes you throw in there.

I know because mine does both of these things.

I'm pretty sure the vast majority of current truck owners 1) don't own boats 2) rarely, if ever, haul furniture 3) use the space in the rear on a regular basis.

Against this we have the known statistics of pedestrian and cyclist fatalities due to the obstructions to visibility provided by the very high front grille and very high ride height (plus wide A-pillars, etc.)

So it's therefore not only a waste of gas but a public health hazard, and making that claim is not "elitist", it's merely "rational" and "empirical" (and allow me to add, "humane")

https://smartgrowthamerica.org/bigger-vehicles-are-directly-...

"Recent research from the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee found the share of pedestrian deaths involving trucks, vans, and SUVs has increased from 22 to 44 percent since the mid-1980s. More SUVs and trucks in the fleet = more pedestrian injuries becoming deaths instead."

https://www.outsideonline.com/2411345/suvs-trucks-deadly-cyc...

Post reply on HN