Jump to content

Fully Electric F-150 on the Way


Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, rperez817 said:

Good point rmc523 sir. Tesla may improve its new product rollout timing with the pickup and other future products. Hopefully they apply the lessons learned from Model 3. But I agree that 2022 to 2023 is the earliest that Tesla pickup truck sales will be in full swing.

That's why I think Ford is now the #1 company for upcoming BEV pickup trucks. Their announcement is the first from any automaker about a firm commitment to mass produce BEV pickups. Who knows, Ford's announcement may get Tesla to work harder on getting its pickup into production. And GM too. 

Remember too, they still have the Semi, Roadster, and Model Y coming before they even get to a truck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Steve557 said:

They can keep this electric stuff, keep building the Super Duties with a big V8 (without start stop bs or any other hybrid junk) is all I ask in the future

Why would you/anyone be opposed to any technology that gives you better gas mileage and reduces your carbon footprint?  What would be wrong with a future Super Duty that has the same power but increased range because of some "hybrid junk".  What is wrong with capturing the energy lost when braking?  What if start-stop was seamless?  I understand concerns about range, temperature, power etc., but simple objection to any "electric stuff" makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

And you would have thought they would have learned from the Model X about build complexity and yet they didn't.

Sincerely, the Model 3 and it's 5 piece wheel well assembly which literally every other company uses one piece for. 

Manufacturing is not their strong point.  Sandy Munro, whose company did a strip-down of the Model 3, called it's electronics best-in-class.  But he shook his head over the poor manufacturing processes used.  If Elon was more open to hiring good manufacturing people, he could have eliminated many of the Model 3's considerable start-up problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, msm859 said:

Why would you/anyone be opposed to any technology that gives you better gas mileage and reduces your carbon footprint?  What would be wrong with a future Super Duty that has the same power but increased range because of some "hybrid junk".  What is wrong with capturing the energy lost when braking?  What if start-stop was seamless?  I understand concerns about range, temperature, power etc., but simple objection to any "electric stuff" makes no sense.

I'll save you time - it's not worth trying to debate.

Edited by rmc523
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

Good point rmc523 sir. Tesla may improve its new product rollout timing with the pickup and other future products. Hopefully they apply the lessons learned from Model 3. But I agree that 2022 to 2023 is the earliest that Tesla pickup truck sales will be in full swing.

That's why I think Ford is now the #1 company for upcoming BEV pickup trucks. Their announcement is the first from any automaker about a firm commitment to mass produce BEV pickups. Who knows, Ford's announcement may get Tesla to work harder on getting its pickup into production. And GM too. 

Outside of the Bronco, it seems Ford rarely communicates much detail about future products, so the fact they communicated this may suggest it is closer to reality than concept, especially when it comes to their number one seller. I’m guessing they want to be the first mass market manufacturer providing this option. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, tbone said:

Outside of the Bronco, it seems Ford rarely communicates much detail about future products, so the fact they communicated this may suggest it is closer to reality than concept, especially when it comes to their number one seller. I’m guessing they want to be the first mass market manufacturer providing this option. 

That would seem to be a rational conclusion, but given all the PR gaffs we've seen lately I'm not so sure any more.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, msm859 said:

Why would you/anyone be opposed to any technology that gives you better gas mileage and reduces your carbon footprint?  What would be wrong with a future Super Duty that has the same power but increased range because of some "hybrid junk".  What is wrong with capturing the energy lost when braking?  What if start-stop was seamless?  I understand concerns about range, temperature, power etc., but simple objection to any "electric stuff" makes no sense.

If I ran the number on buying a vehicle with hybrid technology I find it highly unlikely it would pay off for me. The electric grid in this country cannot handle a mass change to electrics anyway.

Start stop can be as seamless as possible but it will never be the same as the engine running. I don’t  want to press a switch every time i get in a vehicle either. I have mostly found the nonsense behind reducing carbon footprints and increasing MPG to cost consumers quite a bit of money in the long run.

All this talk of a hybrid Bronco is hilarious too, give me a 5 liter or I won’t buy one (my last onewas a 94 and would love to buy a new one someday but no V8 is a deal breaker for me).

Edited by Steve557
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steve557 said:

Guess so if there’s no V8, disgusted if they put money into a hybrid instead of dropping a V8 in.

I don't understand the disdain for EcoBoosts and hybrids.  I mean, same or more power, more torque, MUCH better torque curve, and better fuel economy when you aren't using all that power.  Why prefer an inferior product?  I just don't get it.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

I don't understand the disdain for EcoBoosts and hybrids.  I mean, same or more power, more torque, MUCH better torque curve, and better fuel economy when you aren't using all that power.  Why prefer an inferior product?  I just don't get it.

Because he's stuck in 1996

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

I don't understand the disdain for EcoBoosts and hybrids.  I mean, same or more power, more torque, MUCH better torque curve, and better fuel economy when you aren't using all that power.  Why prefer an inferior product?  I just don't get it.

People are stuck in their ways-its just like carbs vs fuel injection back in the 1980s

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Steve557 said:

If I ran the number on buying a vehicle with hybrid technology I find it highly unlikely it would pay off for me. How many options people buy with a car "pay off".  However, there are a lot of benefits for the country and world to using less oil. The electric grid in this country cannot handle a mass change to electrics anyway. PHEV'S  add little to the electric load - especially as most are charged at night.  The grid will have time to grow with BEV's

Start stop can be as seamless as possible but it will never be the same as the engine running.What is the benefit of the engine running when you are stopped - if your heat/ac and everything else is still on? I don’t  want to press a switch every time i get in a vehicle either. ?? I have mostly found the nonsense behind reducing carbon footprints I have solar on my house.  Last year my electric bill was zero.  I have calculated my ROI to be 20% - tax free and increasing MPG to cost consumers quite a bit of money in the long run.

All this talk of a hybrid Bronco is hilarious too, give me a 5 liter or I won’t buy one (my last onewas a 94 and would love to buy a new one someday but no V8 is a deal breaker for me). 

The hp in your 94 Bronco with the V8 was @200 with 300lb torque 0-60 in 11.1  seconds,  14 mpg combined EPA.  The new Lincoln Aviator has a V6 with hybrid technology will have  450 hp +, 600lb torque,  should do 0-60 in less then half the time your V8 Bronco AND get double the gas mileage.

Give me a flux capacitor engine operated by a molecular D size battery that never needs refueling and I won't care about the number or lack of cylinders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

I don't understand the disdain for EcoBoosts and hybrids.  I mean, same or more power, more torque, MUCH better torque curve, and better fuel economy when you aren't using all that power.  Why prefer an inferior product?  I just don't get it.

Owning a few 6.2 SD’s and frequenting the ford truck forums I can tell you that the most trouble free motor Ford puts in a truck is the 6.2. In the 150 the MPG difference between 5.0 and 3.5 EB is minimal with the 5.0 being a much simpler motor. EcoBoost is a whole lot of hype IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

I don't understand the disdain for EcoBoosts and hybrids. 

Could be a bad experience with early generation EcoBoost and hybrids from Ford, which didn't live up to claims of driveability and fuel economy in the real world. The newer versions of both are much better.

After driving a 2018 Mustang EcoBoost last year, my impression of that type of engine changed. I think the newer EcoBoost engines are good! In fact I pre-ordered a 2019 Ranger with the 2.3L EcoBoost engine without test driving the truck first, because I'm convinced the powertrain should be perfectly fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Steve557 said:

Owning a few 6.2 SD’s and frequenting the ford truck forums I can tell you that the most trouble free motor Ford puts in a truck is the 6.2. In the 150 the MPG difference between 5.0 and 3.5 EB is minimal with the 5.0 being a much simpler motor. EcoBoost is a whole lot of hype IMO.

The 3.5L EB was the replacement for the 6.2L in the F150, not the 5.0L.  Compare numbers between apples and not between apples and oranges.  The 2.7L is a better comparison for the 5.0L than the 3.5L is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, rperez817 said:

Could be a bad experience with early generation EcoBoost and hybrids from Ford, which didn't live up to claims of driveability and fuel economy in the real world. The newer versions of both are much better.

They early EB's were fine too.  Had some minor issues but are still great powerplants.  I've got 2 of them and both have been stellar.  One, a 2010 SHO that just crossed 129k with the only engine "problem" was a bad knock sensor which was replaced under warranty.  Also have a 2011 F150 with the EB 3.5.  93k and it's great and tows our 10k camper great with plenty of power.  They truly are great engines - the only thing missing is the V8 rumble but I'll trade that for the feeling when you put your right foot into it.

Edited by itguy09
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/16/2019 at 8:50 PM, Sevensecondsuv said:

Then it was the diesel F150 was going to revolutionize the half ton market.  And now you'd be easily forgiven for not realizing a diesel F150 exists.  I suspect a bev F-150 sells even fewer than the diesel one.

I've always thought Diesels in the 1/2 tons are dumb.  Where I am now, Diesel is around $1 more a gallon than regular old unleaded.  When you have an engine like the EB 2.5 that gets close to Diesel MPG and better performance numbers why would I spend more on the expensive Diesel?  Especially since it has a higher up front cost, higher ongoing maintenance, and lesser performance....  And then you have the EB 3.5 which will kill the Diesel in every metric but MPG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...