Important Update: Ford EV Roadmap & Future of F-150 Lightning (EREV Next Gen Model) - ⛔️ ADMIN WARNING: NO POLITICS

[krusherVA]

At least I can now go back to not owning a Ford like I was fine with for 32 years. When this bricks (maybe from the general ridicule of those saying “I told ya so!”, Lol) I’ll move on to another brand.

Sponsored

 

[Dimitri]

Having owned BMW i3 with range extender, I believe that is NOT the answer. One of the beautiful things about EV is the very clean no maintenance technology. I hate maintaining a generator, am thrilled to have my Lightning as a backup power source. I have always owned Ryobi battery powered outdoor tools in order to avoid dealing with gas mowers blowers trimmers chainsaws etc. Ii would not want my Lightning to have a range extender. I would want Ford and the Federal government to invest more in reliable, cheap coast to coast charging network.. There lies the answer.
When Ford sold the Model T, retailers saw the opportunity to sell gasoline and built the gas stations to support the new drivers. Horse breeders did not buy off our government to stop them, nor did hay bailers spew anti- ICE propaganda on social media. Today those same gas companies that made the model T a success, along with oil exporting oligarchs are sabotaging the marketability of superior technology of the Lightning to save their profit margins through their political influence. Luckily this is not the case in Europe and Asia to the same degree so Ford will continue to build EVs to satisfy those markets and we will enjoy some of those benefits.

 

[LUXMAN]

I'll offer you $25 a piece now for them. I'll probably need the extra battery modules, and I can only imagine the price from Ford if they are available at all. I'm wondering how long these things (battery modules) will store on a shelf and how many they get built to supply us all with over the coming years?

Truly as good as the trucks drive, in 10 years they will start to fall by the way side, there will be a lot residual value in the batteries to supply those that still have drivable trucks or hell buy 2 to 3 old truck just for the batteries. You'd have the capacity for your house for a month, living off the grid. You just need a few panels to get them charged with.

HA! I know you are good for the $50 so I will hold onto that offer.

I am not worried about parts availability for the next few years. I've got 4.5 years left on the warranties and my mileage usage wont beat those time limits, so I and most others have time to evaluate the market and decide if we can bail with at least part of the shirt we lost on residual value we lost already.

That said, you @GDN know how much I and @TexasGardeningGirl love ours trucks and will continue to drive them. I would not even worry about it if @Ford Motor Company had announced the same thing yesterday but with a new BEV to replace it.

The only thing I am concerned with is availability of the Batteries and to a lesser extent the chargers (past experience) and specific Lightning modules.
The aftermarket repair and parts has not really developed outside of a few specialty shops and Hobbyists. And with none around here really in Oil Country, one has to look at really so you don't end up with a brick in your garage. I guess worse case you could make a bunch of money by slowly parting it out on eBay.

 

[WXman]

Why did you buy a lightning in the first place if this is how you feel?

I didn't buy it. I leased it. Because I'm wise.

 

[WXman]

It sounds like you were never the target market for EV trucks. Why did you get it if you are towing a camper so often?

Have you ever heard the old saying, "Live and learn!" ?

 

[BlakeGJ]

No thanks. I don't want a hybrid. I bought a new Lightning in '93 and then this one in '23. This will likely be my last Ford truck.

 

[WXman]

What is interesting is that roughly two weeks prior to yesterday’s announcement, I got a survey about the F-150 Lightning that I assume most owners also received and it came from a third party who was clearly contracted by Ford to gather data on owners’ opinions of the truck. The survey asked specific questions about how the truck was being used, and about which things needed to be improved. I remember towing being a topic that came up frequently during that survey.

It does make me curious if Ford had that done because they wanted to use the data in the decisions that ultimately were made yesterday. The survey was all Web based and so the statistics and data from it would have been available real-time to compile into a report to quickly give to shareholders and upper management.

I heard Farley say that from now on EV tech will be pushed to smaller vehicles used primarily for commuting while full size trucks will be given powertrains that can tow more efficiently and for longer distances. I just have to believe that all the survey data coming in from owners of Lightning trucks pushed that decision.

 

[Chillguy]

ABSOLUTELY SHAMEFUL!.. I decided to splurge almost $100K on my Lightning which I absolutely love just to hear this ABSURDITY!... It's as if homo sapiens reverted to Neanderthals!!... I've been driving EVs for the past 13 years and I always had ice F-150 for family trips and I CHOSE my Lightning between Hummer EV and Cybertruck (only VERY small fraction of Lightning owners tow long distance for work! I personally don't have a problem with making an additional charging stop when traveling/towing twice a year!) Ford is a despicable company by just dropping us like our money does not matter.. I was really looking forward to a new model in a couple of years... The ONLY problem is Ford never invested $1 in a meaningful advertisement! I never saw a TV ad boasting about how great this truck is! Ppl walk up to me almost daily asking about the truck BECAUSE no one out there realizes Lightnings EXIST!!.... But THIS will be a goodbye to Ford FOREVER from me.. I'm BURNT!... Fudging HATE IT!

 

[sotek2345]

What kills me the most is that plenty of data shows that the vast majority of people who get plug in hybrids never actually charge them and they get horrible efficiency toting around a heavy battery that is effectively never used. I suspect that will be the case for many of these EREV "Lightnings" and folks will see sub-par performance and sub-20mpg real world economy. Might as well just get a powerboost.

 

[fhteagle]

If this is the case, why are so many hung up on maintenance?

13 year Volt owner, so I can speak from firsthand experience about EREV maintenance. Engines do not like to sit unused. So the Volt required you to run the engine up to a minimum temperature every 40 something days. So you were burning maybe a tenth of a gallon that you didn't actually need to burn. And if you only let it run that maintenance cycle and no more (no real load), there'd be issues with carbon build up near the EGR, oil didn't truly get all the water out of it, plugs didn't get really cleaned up, etc. Stale gas even with a pressurized and no vent gasoline tank, which means every start in cold conditions means you car reeks of paint thinner type smells until the cat is good and hot.

In the last year I had it (and also a MYLR), I had to think _more_ about maintenance with that car that with any pure ICE. Sure, oil changes were still 2 years apart, but I did more mental gymnastics about when to run the engine to accomplish real heating/loading of all the components.

EREVs are the best of both worlds and the worst of both worlds. We don't need the "best" in terms of longer range any more. For the costs Ford is putting into pivoting back to an EREV they should have had a decade ago, we could fill in the gaps in the charging network how many times over? And the tiny percentage of people who do need high towing capacity _and_ range simultaneously are better off with a diesel F250 or higher anyway.

This, combined with the timing of Farley headed to kneel before Conalld Rump, absolutely stinks of fossil fuel market manipulation / corruption. Guess I know how many Fords I will own in my lifetime (1).

 

[JustLookingThanks]

Feel free to ignore my post - I just needed to vent.

I've owned at least one F-series pickup every year for the past 27 years, and my 23 Lightning Platinum is hands down the best truck I've ever had. Despite buying it at near the price peak during the dire days of the post-covid supply chain issues, I've never had a moment of buyer's remorse.

But this will be the last Ford vehicle I ever buy. Ford's announcement that they are abandoning BEV in their next-gen Lightning feels like an utter betrayal and my trust has been undermined. In a single post I went from Ford "superfan" to "never-again".

I'm not a particularly hot-headed person, so when I first read this news I decided to sleep on it. But when I woke up this morning, I was still angry. This company can go to hell.

 

[LightningCanuckNB]

Hard to express how disappointed I am in Ford right now.

We are in the market for a new vehicle in 2026 (to replace our second vehicle). Ford is now off my list. Never buying another Ford again. Voting with our dollar is the only power we have a consumer.

Also, the "we will support it for 10 years" is a cop out. 10 years from now it will be 2035, just two years before the 2037 event when its possible all these trucks could turn into bricks if they dont have software support anymore. Look at what happened to Fisker owners after their vehicles stopped being supported. Vehicles need constant software updates, this isn't the 2000s anymore. Buying from a "reliable" brand like Ford that I knew would still be here in 25 years is what made me confident to jump to EVs in the first place. Ford has now destroyed that reputation.

 

[PJnc284]

And the tiny percentage of people who do need high towing capacity and range are better off with a diesel F250 or higher anyway.

Those were my thoughts just because they claim the lightning can tow 10k or the regular f150 can do "up to 14k lbs" in particular configurations doesn't mean you should. I'd put money on those who are doing hard-core towing not being interested in an erev if they have no interests in evs as is. This may be perfect for someone like Martin with Martin Rebuilds though who loves the truck and tows a lot but the range has made him start considering other options. But of course I expect that market to be rather small.

 

[hturnerfamily]

as an original 'pure ev' 2022 LIGHTNING PRO SR owner, I can see both sides, although, personally, the long-term is not made up of EREV vehicles, except for those who have definite plans, or a business-use, to tow long range.

My LIGHTNING is NOT to tow. My LIGHTNING is NOT to use in business. My LIGHTNING is simply my vehicle, just like a MachE is to others, or a ModelY is to many, or a Nissan LEAF still is to yet a few.

I can see a manufacturer offering BOTH options, but deciding to go solely with a single 'powertrain' type of vehicle, is yet, still not the answer, long term...


as to an EREV and how it works, I can see the value, and it certainly solves many 'range anxiety' issues, or 'charge anxiety' concerns, but it also presents MORE potential annoyances, and costs, such as now having to stop to 'fill up' with gas, having to endure the NOISE of a constantly running High-Output engine right in front of the driver, and now having to MAINTAIN the engine, just like in the typical engine-based vehicle.

Some will submit that they have a home generator and have never had many maintenance needs, but that is really a totally different use-case scenario, as it is rarely used.
An onboard EREV generator engine is likely going to be CONSTANTLY used, and at constant HIGH-SPEEDS, for hours and hours on end, unlike most any typical generator engine.

I admit that the manufacturers may design better long-term high-output generator engines, with possibly lower maintenance needs, but these are also going to come at a HIGH price - such as similar generator packs found to power 'whole-home' needs - you can imagine that the typical 'Generac' type whole-home generator is not a low-cost product.

The EREV will now also need the additional storage and mechanical equipment needed to bring this to fruition: a sizable gas tank, and it's storage location. a gas tank filler inlet location. additional Electrical wiring and connections and Converter to provide the engine output to the battery pack. Will the EREV need DCFast Charging? maybe not. Radiator: now a must for the new engine, and the equipment to get that cooling to where it is needed, and the tank and cooling lines, as needed. Maybe some of this will be integrated with the current battery pack cooling system.

We'll see. I won't rule it out, although if I get my SLATE truck, first, it's doubtful I'll ever move to any 'engine' vehicle, again. I like the SCOUT, too, but if they move to only an EREV version, it's doubtful, as well.

My LIGHTNING has performed so well, I have no need to even consider anything else, regardless.

 

[ctuan13]

I know I'm late to the party here, but I figured I'd throw in my $0.02 or I guess $0.05 with the death of the cent (RIP).

I love my 22 Lariat, one of the best vehicles I've ever owned and besides a few minor issues, it's been a mostly very enjoyable experience. As a tinkerer and long time gear head, its easy to work on in the ways that matter and with the right tools even most in-depth maintenance can be performed at home. I've done a drive-motor gear oil service on it, trunk pinch sensor replacement, trunk beeper silence mod and a million other small mods and upgrades. I'll be doing a brake fluid flush in the next few months.

When I first got my Lightning, I thought it was perfect for me, because I never drove very far, I didn't tow and I could easily charge at home. And that was true for the first year or so that I owned my truck. I loved it. The smooth power, instant torque, shiftless acceleration and the quiet cab, it was a dream. But then things changed.

I started a tradition of a summer road trip to see friends in western WA while towing my new teardrop trailer. (Keep in mind I live in western PA) That changed things a lot. Suddenly my range went from 285 on the highway to 145 and finding chargers that you can pull up to easily while hitched to a trailer was inconvenient at best or impossible at worst. (there were many instances where I was forced to unhitch) In addition, because of certain health issues, I had to bring lots of food with me in travel chest freezers in the bed, which combined with the tongue weight and the rest of my gear, put me awfully close to my max payload.

When I calculated the time I was losing, it seemed like my trip was taking me about 35% longer than it should have because of the constant stopping and waiting at chargers. The effortless power delivery, torque and quiet suddenly weren't nearly as sweet when I was worried about finding a charger before running out in South Dakota.

So to sum it up, my needs definitely changed, at least for part of the year and suddenly, despite being someone who swore he'd never even consider a combination of drivetrains, saw the value in an EREV. To have the best of both worlds and the distance needed for towing.

Here are my main critiques/requests of Ford's strategy:
- Pigeonholing people into only an EREV is a mistake. As someone who has been on both sides of the use case argument, trying to get everyone onboard with a range extender is a losing strategy. People that want a BEV, really only want a BEV. And those who want an EREV obviously want an EREV, but if non were available, would be far more likely to buy a mild hybrid or even just a gas truck. This is why I think the Scout approach of offering both will prove to be a winning strategy if they make it to production.

- If an EREV really is the only future for the Lightning, I would implore you to find a way if at all possible to make the generator fit under the bed (like the Scout design) or at least in the transmission tunnel behind the front trunk, up against the firewall. If the gas engine ends up taking up the entire current front trunk space, you will lose a huge utility upper hand that the current Lightning has. I think an EREV that still has a front trunk will be much more competitive than one that is essentially limited to the same storage options as a standard gas/diesel truck.

- electric range - I realize that part of the advantage of an EREV is also reduced cost because of the reduced battery pack size, but I think you should still try to maximize the battery size so that 99% of most people's driving can be done without the generator ever having to start up, and only on long trips or long distance towing, will the generator need to kick in.

In addition, of course packaging and space constraints will be an inherent design challenge and limitation. This was a suggestion I had for the BEV Lightning, but will still apply to the EREV: widen the frame rails, move them outward, just like the Ram REV was supposed to have, allowing you to maintain a fully frame, but with more distance between the rails for a wider battery pack that is also still protected by the frame rails from impact.

The main thing limiting the pack size on the current Lightning is the more narrow frame that was a carry over from the ICE design. With a wider frame and the body mount posts facing inwards, instead of reaching outwards from a narrow frame, there will be much more volume between the rails to allow for all the features buyers will want in an EREV full size truck: a full size spare, a powerful generator that can provide continuous drive power under load and a sufficiently large battery pack that will provide 170+ miles of real world range.

I'm sad to see you pivot away from a BEV Lightning and I hope to see you at least consider offering both options, instead of just the EREV. Still I hope that it does succeed, because if battery technology advances in the next 10 years, I have my fingers crossed that we'll finally be able to get a no-compromises electric truck from Ford.

Sponsored