Lightning vs. EREV Lightning

[RickLightning]

"The EREV will do 0 to 60 in under 5 seconds!"

"Umm, my EV Lightning does 0 to 60 in 3.8 seconds." MIC DROP

Sponsored

 

[Maineiac12]

"The EREV will do 0 to 60 in under 5 seconds!"

"Umm, my EV Lightning does 0 to 60 in 3.8 seconds." MIKE DROP

Poor Mike. I hope he’s not hurt. What did he ever do to you?

 

[ridgebackpilot]

Frankly, I think the Lightning EREV is a pretty cool idea. A full-size EV pickup with the range of a diesel? Sign me up!

 

[Joe Dablock]

I feel bad for Ford. They keep making bad decisions. Now if there was a generator delete option that would be a possibility.

I feel once the battery range makes it to 400 miles, the problem is solved!

Ford just has to figure out a way to get non-believers in the seat of EVs. All loaners at dealers should be EVs.

 

[djwildstar]

I think the Lightning EREV is a pretty cool idea. A full-size EV pickup with the range of a diesel?

I think that Ford's strategy should have been to offer all the options in F-150 drive-trains: Conventional V8, EcoBoost V6, PowerBoost hybrid, PowerBoost plug-in hybrid, Pure EV, and EV with a gas range extender.


There are some significant use cases where an EREV Lightning would be a good idea. The ideal use case for an EREV is to cover the vast majority of driving on battery power, and use the range extender infrequently, if at all. For example: a truck that is mostly used for suburban and exurban commuting and errand-running, typical daily drives of under 100 miles ... but where there needs to be a capability that is otherwise infeasible with a BEV. Some examples include a family that pulls a camper 300 miles into the mountains to a campsite every other weekend from Memorial Day to Labor Day; or a farm truck that spends 325 days a year on the farm, but has to pull a horse trailer 500 miles every weekend all summer.

The other purpose of the EREV is to act as a range-anxiety security blanket for suburban and exurban drivers who don't tow or haul (but find the option to be able to emotionally comforting), and take road trips once or twice a year.

The gotcha with an EREV is that (despite what many people think), it is typically less-efficient than the more-complex "conventional" PHEV. This is because mechanical trnsmissions and clutches are highly efficient. Coupling the gas engine directly to the wheels avoids energy losses in the generator and power electronics, which can be steep. This is why most hybrids avoid the EREV configuration.

So if you frequently have to drive for more than the EREV's battery-only range (or do thing things that depend on gas power, like towing), you're better-off getting a conventional plug-in hybrid like the Ranger PHEV or a PowerBoost if you need the full F-150 capability.

The funny thing is, if Ford had offered a PHEV F-150 back in 2022-2023, I probably wouldn't be driving a Lightnig today. However, having gotten hooked on a BEV, I personally don't want to have to deal with a combustion engine ever again. I would have loved to see what the T3 truck offered (and at this point, we may never know). I do plan to drive my Lightning as long as I can. I'm expecting to be good for another 5-8 years and a total of around 150,000 miles ... so looking for another BEV pickup sometime between 2030 and 2035. I expect I'll have options, just a question of from whom.

 

[ridgebackpilot]

The funny thing is, if Ford had offered a PHEV F-150 back in 2022-2023, I probably wouldn't be driving a Lightnig today.

Well said. I’ve wondered the same thing. When I acquired my Lightning, I suspect the EREV option would have been pretty attractive.

I sometimes go fishing in central Oregon, 200+ miles from any charger. I couldn’t take my Lightning on that trip, but the EREV would handle it easily.

That said, I’m with you in never wanting to deal with internal combustion engines again!

 

[hturnerfamily]

Frankly, I think the Lightning EREV is a pretty cool idea. A full-size EV pickup with the range of a diesel? Sign me up!

while that's a typical idea of what the new version might provide, it's unrealistic to think that a promoted 'up to 700+ miles range' is going to translate into towing a 10,000lb trailer going anything close to that distance...

and, those same owners are HIGHLY unlikely to then also want to have to stop and find a charger and wait, wait, wait to 'fill up'.... then also have to move over to the pumps to add gas.

I don't see the allure.

 

[RickLightning]

while that's a typical idea of what the new version might provide, it's unrealistic to think that a promoted 'up to 700+ miles range' is going to translate into towing a 10,000lb trailer going anything close to that distance...

and, those same owners are HIGHLY unlikely to then also want to have to stop and find a charger and wait, wait, wait to 'fill up'.... then also have to move over to the pumps to add gas.

I don't see the allure.

Stop being practical.

 

[sotek2345]

while that's a typical idea of what the new version might provide, it's unrealistic to think that a promoted 'up to 700+ miles range' is going to translate into towing a 10,000lb trailer going anything close to that distance...

and, those same owners are HIGHLY unlikely to then also want to have to stop and find a charger and wait, wait, wait to 'fill up'.... then also have to move over to the pumps to add gas.

I don't see the allure.

And that is assuming it even comes with a DC fast charging option. It could be limited to L2 charging to keep costs down.

 

[djwildstar]

It's unrealistic to think that a promoted 'up to 700+ miles range' is going to translate into towing a 10,000lb trailer going anything close to that distance...and, those same owners are HIGHLY unlikely to then also want to have to stop and find a charger and wait, wait, wait to 'fill up'.... then also have to move over to the pumps to add gas.

I'm guessing that you will probably never use DC fast charging with the EREV Lightning. If you're on a road trip or towing and need range, you add gas. Overall, gas miles will be cheaper than most DC fast charger miles, and cheaper than the rates I've seen for some AC chargers at hotels.

I'll bet dollars to donuts that the EREV Lightning's specifications include similar electric motors (and therefore similar torque and horsepower) to the BEV Lightning, a naturally-aspirated Cyclone V6 (maybe the 3.3L) coupled to a ~130kW generator, a 23- or 30-gallon gas tank, and a battery with 50kW-75kW usable capacity. The idea would be to get 100mi to 150mi of battery-only range, and then add 550mi to 600mi of gas range. The combination would likely get about 2.0-2.4mi/kWh on batteries, and 20-25 MPG on gasoline.

In a road-trip situation, a gas fill-up will add 550-600 miles of range, and takes a few minutes. The relatively small battery (likely using a 400V architecture) will probably limit DC fast charging rates; I'm guessing it'll take about 30-40 minutes on the fast charger to put 100 miles back in the battery. It is possible that Ford may not even include DC fast-charging (on the theory that it makes no sense -- just put gas in).

The big shock will be that when towing or long road trips (where almost all of the miles are gas miles), the EREV will need more gas than a similarly-sized PowerBoost truck.

 

[RLXXI]

One is real the other imagined.

 

[K6CCC]

I have not seen specs - is the gas engine large enough to be able to functionally use it as a gas only vehicle? In other words, on a long drive could you only fuel on gas? Or is the engine smaller such that it really can only extend the range of the battery by some percentage?

 

[RickLightning]

I have not seen specs - is the gas engine large enough to be able to functionally use it as a gas only vehicle? In other words, on a long drive could you only fuel on gas? Or is the engine smaller such that it really can only extend the range of the battery by some percentage?

It is a generator to charge the battery. It powers nothing.

 

[Athrun88]

I have not seen specs - is the gas engine large enough to be able to functionally use it as a gas only vehicle? In other words, on a long drive could you only fuel on gas? Or is the engine smaller such that it really can only extend the range of the battery by some percentage?

All EREVs work the same way.

There is only one drivetrain, the EV drivetrain, that drives the wheels. The ICE component, completely separate and disconnected from the drivetrain, only turns on to charge the HVB when it drops to a certain threshold. There is no gas-only mode; it is always EV mode with a gas generator to charge the HVB when needed.

What I'm confused about is; why wouldn't they keep the BEV Lightning and just shove the ICE components in the frunk for the EREV? Means that BEVs will get the benefit of a frunk and additional secure storage. EREV buyers will have to sacrifice the frunk but will get a gas generator to top up their batteries as needed. Seems like it would be a doable path forward without having to scrap an entire product line that is the inevitable future.

 

[RickLightning]

Because they are going to dramatically cut the battery size.

Sponsored