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

331–340 of 1001 posts

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#331

Post by ajross »

ben7799 wrote: post #245
bobince wrote: post #105

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…

Blame for killing falls on the driver of the vehicle, not on the company designing it or the shape of the front of the vehicle. 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.

"Blame" is something you argue in a civil suit.

Vehicle safety regulations aren't about "blame", ever. They're designed to save lives. If you can do that with better driver behavior, great. If you can do it with assistive technology, great. If you can do it with different vehicle designs, great. You do what you can, based on the techniques available and the costs involved.

To wit: if you start your safety analysis with "fuck the pedestrians, that's the driver's fault, not Ford's", then you're doing it wrong.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#332

Post by dboreham »

snypher wrote: post #259
xwdv wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of them have ever had to carry planks of wood from Home Depot.

At $20/hour for a new F-250 rental, Home Depot has better options available. If people wanted to haul lumber, they probably wouldn't show up with a trailer attached, they would buy a truck with a 8 foot box.

I _think_ you mean they wouldn't attach a trailer to their Camray? I was confused initially by your post because a trailer behind a pickup I find is a great combination. You can load stuff much more easily on the trailer but the pickup bed is there for any overflow. But I think you mean 10' box, no?

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#333

Post by js2 »

tzs wrote: post #288
js2 wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it makes sense though. Now you have to choose between transportation and powering your home. As well, the power needs to go out when the truck happens to have a full charge. I think it cost them little to add (because they already have on-board power ports, which does make sense), but from a practical standpoint, I don't know how useful it is.

In many scenarios, you can anticipate power going out and so make sure to charge up before that. I do a similar thing with my ICE car. We don't get a lot of snow here, but every few years we'll get a storm that leaves up to a foot on the ground. Significant snow like that is rare enough that the cities and county don't keep a large fleet of snow removal equipment, so they only clear the bigger streets. I'm on a long…

That's a good point. I've been through a couple hurricane-caused outages for up to two weeks, but in one of those, I required transportation. I've been through probably half-a-dozen outages of a few hours to a couple days that were due to equipment failure by the utility that I couldn't have anticipated. That's over decades though.

Grid power is so damn reliable in most places that any backup solution is going to have limited use. I guess I see this feature of the F-150 as icing on the cake, not something that would sway my purchase decision.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#334

Post by basch »

acomjean wrote: post #304
rootusrootus wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> stereotyping of truck owners It's kind of ridiculous, really. You know who buys F150s? Everyone. If there were a stereotypical "truck owner" then Ford wouldn't sell better than a million of these every year. They have broad appeal to diverse demographics.

>You know who buys F150s? everyone except those strange ones that buy Chevy or GMC. Or the real outlier, those with Ram Pickups.... (I didn't realize this was a thing till my civil engineering company last century bought a GMC to replace the fords). To this day I remember a Huge Ram diesel dually with a big dog in the bed towing in a single roll of landfill liner (23 ft long and About 2000 lbs of plastic) and thinkin…

Wouldn’t call Ram an outlier. Sells about as well and Chevy and outsells GMC. GMC+Chevy about equal Ford, and Ram sells like 65-75% of what Ford does.

Toyota is the “not quite first tier, not Nissan or a baby truck.”

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#335

Post by sjg007 »

jakob223 wrote: post #46
thanatos519 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that electric vehicles are almost silent.

Not when moving at any significant speed - most of the sound of a vehicle going faster than 10mph ish is tires.

Tires are an issue but diesels engine trucks and semis are audible. Also some times regular gas customers have modified exhausts. Tire noise is higher frequency though.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#336

Post by bryanlarsen »

mceachen wrote: post #301
bryanlarsen wrote: post #278

I get to eat my hat somewhat. I hope it's tasty. Just a few days ago I made the comment that the Cybertruck's killer feature is it's $40K price tag, if and only if that price tag actually happens. I said that Ford could not make a decent EV F-150 at that price point unless they throw their dealerships under the bus. And here we are with a $40K EV F-150. I'm glad I added the caveats though -- the $40K F150 is for comm…

Ford also hasn't sold that many EVs (yet), so it's still eligible for the US $7500 federal tax rebate (unlike Tesla). (BTW: It seems like such an arbitrary and ultimately bad decision to cap rebates by manufacturer. Rebate caps for expensive luxury cars? Sure. But penalize a manufacturer for making _too many_ of the thing you're incentivizing doesn't seem right).

Ford has already sold over 100,000 EV's, and if they can't sell 100,000 Mach-E's in the next 12 months then they're doing something wrong. So by the time the F-150 becomes available their credit should be in the wind-down phase.

Another likely scenario is that Biden gets his infrastructure bill through and the credit becomes available to all US-manufactured EV's.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#337

Post by dripton »

rootusrootus wrote: post #271
leesec wrote: post #230

I'm really happy Ford and others are starting to actually deliver on EV's. I do however think there will be a long list of issues as they scale the roll out, given the newness and complexity of this product. Here are some concerns I think people should be aware of: 1. No comprehensive supercharger network. This is a real big deal still. Using existing non-supercharging networks is not feasible for any long distance.…

> No comprehensive supercharger network. This is a real big deal still. I agree that this is important, but it is 99% psychological. In the entire time I owned my Tesla, I used the supercharger a half dozen times. Most people with an EV that has 200+ miles of range will rarely use DC fast chargers.

And I've used (checks file) 56 different superchargers in the last 4 years, some of them many times. It comes down to how many long road trips you make. Fast chargers are totally unnecessary for local-only driving if you have a slow charger at home, but critical for convenient road trips beyond your vehicle's range.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#338

Post by jdhn »

leesec wrote: post #230

I'm really happy Ford and others are starting to actually deliver on EV's. I do however think there will be a long list of issues as they scale the roll out, given the newness and complexity of this product. Here are some concerns I think people should be aware of: 1. No comprehensive supercharger network. This is a real big deal still. Using existing non-supercharging networks is not feasible for any long distance.…

>4. No Autopilot. This is a big sell for many EV users

Is it really? I'm looking at an EV for my next car, and not once have I considered Autopilots availability as a musthave feature. Then again, most people who get excited about Autopilot seem to think that driving is a chore that should be removed, while I love driving.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#339

Post by ajford »

pkulak wrote: post #286
jrsj wrote: post #233

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…

> It’s like the aesthetics of a pickup truck is offensive to some people. When a vehicle is driving in front of my house with a grill that's a foot higher than my oldest child... yeah, I don't much like those aesthetics. And it has nothing to do with "moving stuff". The UPS delivery vans that are actually built to, ya know, move stuff, have lower grills and way safer sight lines.

They're also optimized for having a driver hand-deliver packages from the back of it hundreds of times over an 8hr shift. That's moving entirely different things than you'd move in a truck. A pickup truck would make a shitty parcel delivery truck, and a UPS truck would be a shitty way to move construction materials.

Re: 2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

#340

Post by hannasanarion »

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.…

> The lack of engine means the entire front part of the car is a huge crumple zone.

Crumple zones don't help pedestrians.

The new F-150 will be bigger and heavier than the absurdly huge early-00s Hummers. The hood is so tall and long that they're talking about putting forward-facing cameras inside the cab because you can't see anything in front of you shorter than 6" tall out the windshield.

If Ford was interested in safety, they would reduce the outrageous length and height of the front end which is now no longer even pretending to be necessary housing for an engine. Vehicles made to work prioritize visibility, Ford trucks are made to intimidate and kill.

Post reply on HN