Additional Battery Capacity by Removing Spare Wheel/Tire

[detansinn]

Further, the range of the extended range is act

I wonder if anyone noticed any difference in the DCFC charging curve with the new update?

The charging curve for the extended range trucks isn't bad at all. It's not the beast that my Taycan was (holding 200s deep into the pack), but I'll take 170s for the first 5-10 minutes.

Sponsored

 

[mr.Magoo]

The only real problem that more range will solve is when towing a large trailer. But that's a very small use case and I would say that if you're doing this often then you shouldn't be buying an EV at this time.

I absolutely agree, we all know Ford didn't build this truck to satisfy the "oh, I have to have a truck that can tow 10,000lbs for 600 miles without stopping"

I'm curious - with todays connected vehicles it would be fairly easy for an automotive manufacturer to log those kind of things, speed, distance, fuel (on an ice) consumption, weather or not a trailer was connected etc. and use that data in your own "market research" on how people are using their trucks.

Even without that data (as long as there's no GPS data involved I wouldn't see it as a privacy issue, but who knows) - I'd still think (and hope) that Ford has a pretty decent idea of what truck owners do with their trucks and sort of sized the Lightning accordingly.

My ER is overkill for me 98% of the year in terms of range, and I could have gone with the SR, but I wanted the extra umph and I figured resale would probably be better with the ER.

@On the Road with Ralph brought up a very valid point as well, once you accept the situation that you have to stop every so often it's actually not such a bad thing. After 4hrs in the car you could actually use a break and I try to plan my stops around food and/or scenic areas and so far that's worked out great.

 

[MickeyAO]

I would appreciate an answer to how much more battery capacity could be added if the volume the current spare occupies would be re-allocated to additional battery capacity.

For example, 4 cubic meters would equal 18 kWh of additional capacity. (Note these numbers are just examples).

It’s a simple question ladies and gentlemen.

Simple question? Have you taken into account the form factor of the cell and/or module? How about space ABOVE the rail? Now let's look at changes to the pack form factor, if for some insane reason Ford decided to use space below the rail where the spare sits. Think about loading that module into the pack. Think about transporting a pack with a large bulge at the bottom of the pack, and worse, not centered. The logistics become much harder.

Just because someone on Reddet comes up with an idea you like doesn't mean they have given the slights thought on all the ramifications of said idea.

 

[Henry Ford]

Tough crowd.?

OP, you'd probably have a better reception if you were more straightforward with where your question. I'll give an example.

Hey guys, what are the chances Ford installs an air compressor with a hose in the cab that can be used whilst driving down the highway? It would be nice to be able inflate a blow up for...uh... driving in the HOV lane, yeah that's it! Asking for a friend.?

 

[Yellow Buddy]

Just keep in mind that bigger batteries and even higher density batteries are not the only way for manufacturers to increase range.

Aerodynamics, weight and the efficiency of the motors plays a huge role, and believe it or not, software is just as critical because it determines how much power to use at any given time and when to pull power back, so Ford's second generation will likely see changes to all of these points too.

1st Generation models (which will likely include the '24), may get minor tweaks here and there, and of course software tweaks are pretty universal to all generations, but I saw an interview with Jim Farley where he said that the problem they're having now is that there are a lot of 3rd party modules in the 1st generation that they have zero control of when it comes to software updates. He made it clear that they will design and build all of their critical components for their 2nd gen vehicles so they can optimize everything in-house, like Tesla does.

Even with the tweaks and a new platform, a truck is a truck and there’s only so much you can do. The Rivian is a new platform and it’s marginally more efficient than the Rivian.

I’ve driven both over 10,000 miles each at this point and in the real world where traffic comes into play I’m finding I stop at pretty much the same locations over a 1000 mile drive.

 

[Yellow Buddy]

The real question should be do we really need more range?
For daily driving the answer is no...
For road trips it might be nice but I have discovered after several that it may not be needed . The key to road trips is changing how we drive... stoping for a sit down lunch while charging instead of eating while driving and stopping for a bathroom break, solves most time problems. Driving to 2Kwh per mile range gives the typical range you typically need to be able to make your destination in a timely manner with charger options. It takes a little planning now but as soon as we have more charger options then even the planning won't need to happen.
My first road trip was over 1200 miles in total in winter, learned a lot, now going to be doing the same trip again in summer and am excited to see if what I have learned will make this trip even better. I already know the charging network on my path has been upgraded and expanded...

So that is why I belive the question should be, do we really need more range...

Now a faster charging curve would be nice

Several times a month I do a 1000 mile round trip down the east coast over the course of 3 days, here’s my unofficial observations.

- I often see gas cars pull on after me, and off to rest stops before me.
- Range isn’t a function of how far the truck can go, but how far your bladder can go

Timewise:
The trip starting with 100% in the Lightning takes a single 45-60min charge (one way) and arrives at my destination with less than 10 miles remaining typically. Costing $35/ea way. The stop typically consists of a bathroom break and a sit down fast food meal with no other waiting.

The same trip in a gas car starts filling the car as it’s often not automatically filled, but we’ll ignore that overhead.

Once on the road, the gas car goes about 30-45 min longer (30-50mi) before needing to stop, I am running for the bathrooms when I get there. The stop takes 25 minutes in total after the bathroom break, filling with gas ($55/ea way) and grabbing food to eat while driving. (That increases to 60-85min if I sit to eat as I need to wait to fill until after I eat.) The difference is 20-35 min over the course of about 8 hours, in favor of the gas car if I eat in the car. Against the gas car if I sit down to eat.

It is an insignificant difference - with a caveat - if the charging infrastructure is there. I know this trip and I know my stops. If I had to go hunting for a station, or wait for another car to finish charging it would easily double if not more the wasted time.

We don’t have a battery range problem. We don’t even have a top charging speed problem (but it would be nice) we have a charging infrastructure reliability and availability problem.

 

[IdeaOfTheDayCom]

- Range isn’t a function of how far the truck can go, but how far your bladder can go
..
..
We don’t have a battery range problem. We don’t even have a top charging speed problem (but it would be nice) we have a charging infrastructure reliability and availability problem.

That's exactly what I tell sceptics who question my move to EVs 2 years ago.

Range wouldn't matter if there simply were a lot more (reliable) charging stations along the highways. Even if the range was only 150 miles, that's about as far as I'd ever need to drive before absolutely needing a break to use a bathroom and get something to eat. On the few longer trips I've made the charging time and bathroom / food breaks were all the time I needed to get enough power for the next part of my trip.

If every highways rest area had EV chargers, people wouldn't care what their range was.

 

[Yellow Buddy]

That's exactly what I tell sceptics who question my move to EVs 2 years ago.

Range wouldn't matter if there simply were a lot more (reliable) charging stations along the highways. Even if the range was only 150 miles, that's about as far as I'd ever need to drive before absolutely needing a break to use a bathroom and get something to eat. On the few longer trips I've made the charging time and bathroom / food breaks were all the time I needed to get enough power for the next part of my trip.

If every highways rest area had EV chargers, people wouldn't care what their range was.

Im also finding rest areas are more congested than pulling off the highway. My favorites right now are Walmarts that’s exist within a mile of an exit. I can waste 5-10 min futzing around a rest area entrance ramp/parking where as nobody is usually at the very back of a Wparking lot.

For my sanity I also prefer locations with 6+ charging stalls - 150kW are perfectly fine - and for anyone who doesn’t have one, I recommend an electric scooter. It opens up the charging possibilities.

It fits nicely in the frunk, and stays charged.

This is of course solo where my mentality is, every stop - even in a gas car - adds at least 20 minutes. With the family my mentality shifts, every stop keeps me from questioning why didn’t I just fly instead

 

[LightningShow]

Probably 10kWh but as others have said it makes no sense whatsoever and would never happen. It’s infinitely more likely that we’d get a bed mounted range extender (either battery or generator). That would give you a solid, legitimate range boost.

 

[pc500]

The real question should be do we really need more range?
For daily driving the answer is no...
For road trips it might be nice but I have discovered after several that it may not be needed . The key to road trips is changing how we drive... stoping for a sit down lunch while charging instead of eating while driving and stopping for a bathroom break, solves most time problems. Driving to 2Kwh per mile range gives the typical range you typically need to be able to make your destination in a timely manner with charger options. It takes a little planning now but as soon as we have more charger options then even the planning won't need to happen.
My first road trip was over 1200 miles in total in winter, learned a lot, now going to be doing the same trip again in summer and am excited to see if what I have learned will make this trip even better. I already know the charging network on my path has been upgraded and expanded...

So that is why I belive the question should be, do we really need more range...

Now a faster charging curve would be nice

Except the damn chargers are in wal-mart parking lots. If they were walkable to starbucks or food life would be good.

 

[djwildstar]

The real question should be do we really need more range?

I think the answer is a qualified "yes", even with improved charging infrastructure.

Looking at the EPA-estimated ranges of typical ICE vehicles, passenger cars have between 300 and 400 miles range. Standard-range ICE pickup trucks are 400 to 500 miles, while extended-range tanks give 600 to 800 miles range. Based on this, I suspect that the "sweet spot" for range in the US is 4 to 6 hours of highway driving (with the larger tanks on the trucks used to stay in that range sweet spot even if loaded or towing).

The F-150 Lightning with the SR battery has a 240-mile EPA range, while the ER battery has 320 miles -- overall, not a bad compromise, but also likely an hour or two short of ideal. There are plenty of places out west that are nearly impossible to get to or drive across with the Lightning.

I fully expect that the T3 truck will have longer range, either from improved efficiency, larger batteries, or (most likely) both -- I would guess a target of about 280 miles for a hypothetical SR version, and 420 miles for an ER version. I suspect that Ford will continue to offer higher efficiencies and smaller batteries -- and consequently lighter trucks, shorter ranges, and lower prices than competing EV trucks. IF it turns out that range is a factor that drives a lot of buyer choices between the Ford, Chevy, and Ram EV trucks, then they may re-think that, but I'd expect the effects of that decision to show up in the generation after the T3.

 

[Ekiehn]

Except the damn chargers are in wal-mart parking lots. If they were walkable to starbucks or food life would be good.

Actually, at least the Walmart EA's I have stopped at were near Starbucks or other similar places.. The non EA's I stop at also have a wide selection walkable... In fact one of the locations I use regularly is closer to the bulk of options than the Tesla chargers down the road... Granted if I went to the recommended EA for that stop it would be a different story... I don't lock myself to EA though the new chargers are really nice, EVgo FPL EVolution and even some Chargepoints can fit the bill...

 

[p52Ranch]

I would appreciate an answer to how much more battery capacity could be added if the volume the current spare occupies would be re-allocated to additional battery capacity.

For example, 4 cubic meters would equal 18 kWh of additional capacity. (Note these numbers are just examples).

It’s a simple question ladies and gentlemen.

Since no one else wants to humor your question, I'll take a stab at it.

Here is an example of the space required to store those 5 micro grams of electrons at full charge. This is from the Munro teardown of the Lightning battery pack. This is a picture of the battery containment structure (not the F150 frame) but fits between the frame. The front section holds a 12 KWh battery each section behind this where the frame gets wider holds a 16 KWh battery. I think there is a total of 9 or 10 battery packs in the ER Lightning. The difference between the ER and the SR is the ER stacks three additional packs on top of this frame under the bed of the truck.

You may be able to squeeze one of these battery packs into the space that the spare tire takes up but then you have placed that battery into the direct line of fire during a rear end collision. So the spare tire will remain where it is.

 

[Ekiehn]

Several times a month I do a 1000 mile round trip down the east coast over the course of 3 days, here’s my unofficial observations.

- I often see gas cars pull on after me, and off to rest stops before me.
- Range isn’t a function of how far the truck can go, but how far your bladder can go

Timewise:
The trip starting with 100% in the Lightning takes a single 45-60min charge (one way) and arrives at my destination with less than 10 miles remaining typically. Costing $35/ea way. The stop typically consists of a bathroom break and a sit down fast food meal with no other waiting.

The same trip in a gas car starts filling the car as it’s often not automatically filled, but we’ll ignore that overhead.

Once on the road, the gas car goes about 30-45 min longer (30-50mi) before needing to stop, I am running for the bathrooms when I get there. The stop takes 25 minutes in total after the bathroom break, filling with gas ($55/ea way) and grabbing food to eat while driving. (That increases to 60-85min if I sit to eat as I need to wait to fill until after I eat.) The difference is 20-35 min over the course of about 8 hours, in favor of the gas car if I eat in the car. Against the gas car if I sit down to eat.

It is an insignificant difference - with a caveat - if the charging infrastructure is there. I know this trip and I know my stops. If I had to go hunting for a station, or wait for another car to finish charging it would easily double if not more the wasted time.

We don’t have a battery range problem. We don’t even have a top charging speed problem (but it would be nice) we have a charging infrastructure reliability and availability problem.

Thankfully the infrastructure problem is getting better, the Tesla network will ease things as more stations are built out... Reliability is better as well, I worry less about failed stations than before, though I did have to reroute recently which added 15 minutes to the trip...

 

[Ekiehn]

I wonder if anyone noticed any difference in the DCFC charging curve with the new update?

Well maybe a bit not necessarily in a positive way... seems like the top end drops after 7 or 8 minutes instead of 9 or 10, then the drop level seems to be lower for the remainder of the charge... But I was at different chargers than normal and I didn't schedule them in Navigation so no preconditioning and its warmer... Next trip will be at known chargers in the Nav so it will be a better test.

Sponsored