Ford BlueOval SK battery plant (Kentucky) production begins. Will provide batteries for Lightning

[Fuego14]

https://www.thecooldown.com/green-tech/blueoval-sk-ford-ev-battery-production-plant/

Looks like Ford is moving forward with their Blue Oval facility.

The $5.8 billion Glendale facility will produce nickel manganese cobalt (NMC) batteries for the automaker's popular F-150 Lightning electric pickup truck and its E-Transit van.

"We are proud to build batteries at our Kentucky 1 facility that will power next-generation electric vehicles," BlueOval SK CEO Michael Adams said in a press release.

"The start of production is a significant milestone that strengthens our position in the electric vehicle battery market."

Sponsored

 

[RLXXI]

They are far too heavily invested at this point to do anything else. Even without subsidies. Win win for everyone.

 

[thequackenbush]

Ford can read the tea leaves - when the rest of the world is moving aggressively to EVs

 

[Gimme_my_MME]

Title is wrong. Construction isn't just starting, PRODUCTION is starting at the plant

 

[TaxmanHog]

Title is wrong. Construction isn't just starting, PRODUCTION is starting at the plant

Fixed "The start of production is a significant milestone."

 

[Lytning]

The article implies that Ford will continue to make the F-150 Lightning and use the NMC battery. The new midsize electric truck on the Universal EV Platform will use the new Lithium Iron Phosphate battery.

 

[GDN]

Maybe the reason for dropping the SR Lightning. They've got capacity to make them here, they need to sell them and keep the factory busy so they just put a bigger one in every truck.

 

[Vulnox]

Them dropping the SR has me more confused by the 123kWh battery. At this point isn't it more economies of scale better to just make one or the other? I am guessing there is something more to the 123kWh battery that makes it close to the same cost to manufacture as the old SR or something, but still far enough apart from the 131.

 

[djwildstar]

Them dropping the SR has me more confused by the 123kWh battery.

I find this interesting as well.

My understanding is that Ford builds two types of Lightning battery modules: an 11.95kWh module and a 16.43kWh module. All trucks contain 9 modules, but:

• 98kWh usable SR has 9 x 11.95 for 107.55kWh total and ~8.9% reserve
• 123kWh usable ER has 3 x 11.95 + 6 x 16.43 for 133.23kWh total and ~6.0% reserve
• 131kWh usable ER has 1 x 11.95 + 8 x 16.43 for 142.99kWh total and ~8.4% reserve

So even eliminating SR trucks (as Ford has done -- even the Pro is 123kW for 2026), Ford is still building the same two types of modules regardless -- the only question is the mix of 11.95kWh versus 16.43kWh modules. It seems plausible that the labor to build a module is roughly the same regardless of how many cells are in it, so in that sense using more of the 16.43kWh modules might be more efficient. The 123kWh pack has less reserve capacity, so delivers very slightly more kWh per dollar -- though this is minor, and was likely done to make the Flash's range come out to 300mi rather than an awkward 290mi.

The other factor may be that SR trucks simply don't sell very well. Ford's own press release on the 2026 STX trim suggests this, saying that customers have been asking for a "rugged" trim with "more range than the standard range XLT". The move from 98kWh to 123kWh for Pro may be a reflection of what customers are asking for -- the 240mi SR might be just a tad short, but budget-conscious customers may still want to pay for less than the full 131kWh ER battery.

The 123kWh battery is also enough to support 7700lb of towing (10,000 with Max Tow), so this means that all Lightnings can tow at least 7700lb, which likely also helps with potential buyers.

 

[Newton]

…the 240mi SR might be just a tad short, but budget-conscious customers may still want to pay for less than the full 131kWh ER battery.

It is almost the other way around. With current prices the manufacturing cost difference between the two batteries is probably insignificant, they just want a differentiator so that the price insensitive (fat cat) consumers have a reason to pay more for the top trim. This is how the game will be played going forward.

In reality the current SR has enough range for the large majority of F150 customers but GM has a lot more. It is like horsepower in the ICE vehicles. We all know what is like to drive a clunker with inadequate horsepower so more is better, so cars are insanely overpowered for their use. EVs have so much better 0-60 times than ICE vehicles that we have to have some other reason to overpay for fake leather and a sunroof.

 

[Deleted member 15277]

I applaud the news, but in my experience with my 22' ER, they should make the ER the new "SR" and add a top tier closer to 200kWh to stay up with the competition. Also, replace BruiseCruise, but I'm off topic.

I guess the Lightning replacement (T3? whatever) coming out in 203? can utilize the cells manufactured at this plant. Changing the battery capacities on the Lighting is just kicking the can down the road.

 

[Vulnox]

I applaud the news, but in my experience with my 22' ER, they should make the ER the new "SR" and add a top tier closer to 200kWh to stay up with the competition. Also, replace BruiseCruise, but I'm off topic.

I guess the Lightning replacement (T3? whatever) coming out in 203? can utilize the cells manufactured at this plant. Changing the battery capacities on the Lighting is just kicking the can down the road.

That may even be the reason for the change. Start the 123 kWh process battery and keep the 131 around to basically just be a placeholder for the upper trims knowing that the next gen Lightning will have the 123 as the "SR" and possibly a 160kWh as the "ER".

I don't see them going 200kWh like GM as Ford leadership has said they don't see the near future being massive batteries in huge EVs. So they may just meet in the middle from what GM did and go 160 or so and assuming some efficiency improvements in the next gen, may be enough to get them right to the 400 miles mark.

I think many would find that to be a worthwhile upgrade without having the silly amount of weight in the top end GM offerings. They would need to get their full size truck to 2.5 miles/kWh on the standard EPA cycle to claim the 400 mile mark, but I think it's doable.

Sponsored