2022 Ford F-150 Lightning

Post by kiliantics » Fri, May 21, 2021, 9:52 PM UTC

jessriedel wrote: post #608

zip1234 wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trucks are more dangerous to pedestrians because of the higher and flatter front--means people end up underneath rather than above if they are struck. I understand why they kept the look the same and why they used that space but in the future would prefer that they made changes to make it safer for everyone and not just the occupants. The high hoods make for poor visibility around the front.

Pedestrians make up only a small minority of people killed in car crashes. (Like 6k of 40k per year.) So sure, it's good to make easy adjustments if they lead to big reductions in deaths, but it's not reasonable to care a ton about seriousness restricting the form factor yet think cars are fine in general. Best would be indexing car/truck sales tax to the size of the negative safety externalities, which would be a qu…

Post by tuxone » Fri, May 21, 2021, 9:53 PM UTC

HeyLaughingBoy wrote: post #795

zip1234 wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trucks are more dangerous to pedestrians because of the higher and flatter front--means people end up underneath rather than above if they are struck. I understand why they kept the look the same and why they used that space but in the future would prefer that they made changes to make it safer for everyone and not just the occupants. The high hoods make for poor visibility around the front.

Every single near-miss I've had while walking in Minneapolis has been due to the driver not paying attention. There wasn't a single time it was due to lack of visibility from inside the vehicle. My yelling at one driver who was staring at her phone while driving out of a parking ramp and across the sidewalk where she nearly hit me, probably woke her up enough to avoid driving into traffic and being hit by a bus! No,…

Post by m463 » Fri, May 21, 2021, 9:54 PM UTC

bhouser wrote: post #472

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…

I think the $40k price tag is deceptive if you look a bit closer. The extended range 300 mile battery is only available on the Platinum edition which starts at $60k IIRC, otherwise you're stuck with 230 miles which IMO going to make the truck feel hamstringed. The $50k Cybertruck gets you 300 miles.

Post by sgjohnson » Fri, May 21, 2021, 9:54 PM UTC

TchoBeer wrote: post #798

jessriedel wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedestrians make up only a small minority of people killed in car crashes. (Like 6k of 40k per year.) So sure, it's good to make easy adjustments if they lead to big reductions in deaths, but it's not reasonable to care a ton about seriousness restricting the form factor yet think cars are fine in general. Best would be indexing car/truck sales tax to the size of the negative safety externalities, which would be a qu…

>So sure, it's good to make easy adjustments if they lead to big reductions in deaths, but it's not reasonable to care a ton about seriousness restricting the form factor yet think cars are fine in general. unless the form factor has some very significant upside that I'm not seeing, preventing deaths should be prioritized over people's aesthetic preferences. >It's clear consumers in the US value the large truck forma…

Post by rootusrootus » Fri, May 21, 2021, 9:54 PM UTC

alexanderdmitri wrote: post #625

> Offering an ingenious array of connected, intelligent features with over-the-air Software Updates to help ensure your truck can get even better over time. Anyone else think it's anti-consumer to not be able to opt out of these 'features'?