241–250 of 1001 posts
F150 is the best selling vehicle in America. The price is actually comparable to the gas version. This might be the vehicle that really changes the EV game.
Ironically, the frunk on electric trucks is a game-changer. Complementing the bed with an enclosed, waterproof, secure place to carry things (and no mucking around with insecure bed covers) is a killer feature. No more springing for a crew cab just to carry groceries in the rear seats. In terms of practical carrying capacity this dominates an SUV.
There’s a lot of stereotyping of truck owners going on in this thread which is kind of funny given how pro-EV HN normally is. It’s like the aesthetics of a pickup truck is offensive to some people. Kind of bizarre and not something I’m used to seeing but I guess I live in Ohio so that probably has something to do with it. A lot of people just want to move stuff, they don’t want to like…burn your house down while wear…
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,…
It isn't fair to characterize everyone this way. I've owned my fair share of small cars (by US standards) but I bought a used F150 (my first truck) a few years ago and I love it. I don't care about how loud the engine is, nor do I think it makes me any more macho (I don't buy things for what others think of me.) It carts my family around comfortably and I can haul lots of things with it without caring if it's dirty/w…
For those infrequent long trips I stop every 3 hours/350km and charge for 30 mins. Watch some Netflix, use laptop, or have a short nap and move on. Works out ok.
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.
It needn't have been this tall. With the internal combustion engine out, Ford could have designed a lower, more curved, less deadly front end. Instead, they kept the high nose and used the space as a trunk. After all, injuring fewer pedestrians sells no cars. Indeed, the market prefers an enormous, deliberately threatening-looking chariot that makes you feel big and virile. Ford are behind this game in that they have…
Don't hit anyone with your vehicle and you won't kill anyone. I've been hit by a truck bicycling, thankfully not too hard. But I don't really think it would have been better to have been hit by a low slung sleek car. It would have put all the force through my legs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.…
I agree with the rest, but I'm pretty skeptical of this claim: > Switching our road transport to electric will probably save more children, and the adults they will become, from a lifetime of lung problems and premature death from pollution than better pedestrian safety features ever will. Do you (or anyone) have order-of-magnitude estimates for either/both of these figures? I mean, electrification in general is grea…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Drivers are already the leading killers of children, and more and more people are being killed while walking and cycling. I think more worrisome is the center console - pedestrian deaths had been going down for 20 years until smartphones became widespread and we've had increases every year since.
With the introduction of smart phones and social media we've seen lots of negative effects increase. For example, teen suicide was decreasing until they were introduced and then started to increase again. Girls especially. I wish there was more discussion and acknowledgement of the dangers here.
Not in a "guns don't kill people way", but because I think smarphone helped spread society's worse effects on girls, but they were already in a very shitty position, and we can't just get back to the status quo before the smarphones and social networks.
We can of course also work on reducing sns negative impacts, but I think it will also be a bad, long and thorny way before seeing improvements.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.…
I agree with the rest, but I'm pretty skeptical of this claim: > Switching our road transport to electric will probably save more children, and the adults they will become, from a lifetime of lung problems and premature death from pollution than better pedestrian safety features ever will. Do you (or anyone) have order-of-magnitude estimates for either/both of these figures? I mean, electrification in general is grea…
https://youtu.be/Jzfpyo-q-RM?t=355
On average in the US, the CO2 output required to power an electric vehicle is 1/3 of an ICE vehicle. So theoretically this would translate to less deaths as bb123 suggests, but hard to compare to direct pedestrian deaths. (Yes there are some logical gaps as ICE C02 output is a very low percentage of total fossil fuel output).
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
Why? Does the look of the truck make it more practical? The Cybertruck does not have any paint, and can sustain far more scratch/shock that the F150.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It needn't have been this tall. With the internal combustion engine out, Ford could have designed a lower, more curved, less deadly front end. Instead, they kept the high nose and used the space as a trunk. After all, injuring fewer pedestrians sells no cars. Indeed, the market prefers an enormous, deliberately threatening-looking chariot that makes you feel big and virile. Ford are behind this game in that they have…
Roads are made for large dangerous machines that move fast and can hurt you.