Another Post on Range Lower than Expected

[srowley]

I have a 2024 Flash with the 131 kWh extended range battery. I have read through all the other posts on range. Many say don't pay attention to the Guess O' Meter (GOM), just the mi/kWh. I disagree with this. I put 100K miles on a 2017 Chevy Bolt and have a 2023 Bolt with 20K miles on it. They both have always tracked the expected range or been above it. The GOM in my Flash is always way below the expected range. I can't just ignore the GOM and go by mi/kWh. That is like saying "don't pay attention to your gas gauge". When I am driving a long distance I have to plan my charging based on the GOM, so I am bummed out that the range is so much lower than the advertised range.

Of course it all depends on how many mi/kWh you are actually getting. Based on what my truck is reporting as mi/kWh, I should be getting a range of 299 mi at 100%. Instead, the range reported by the GOM (extrapolated to 100%) averages at 248 mi. The point is that one of these is wrong, either the GOM is off or the mi/kWh is off, but I still have to manage my charging based on what is reported by the GOM, so I am effectively getting a reduced range.

I have attached a spreadsheet of my driving over the last 1500 miles from June 20 to July 27. The key values in this file are:
1) column B: the GOM calculated total range which is based on the displayed range and percent of charge
2) column H: the Trip Range which is calculated by multiplying the reported mi/kWh by the battery size, 131 kWh
3) column I: compares the GOM Total Range versus the Trip range (calculated based on mi/kWh)
4) row 12 is the key comparison showing the average GOM Total Range (248) versus the calculated range based on the reported mi/kWh (299).

The point is that one of these has to be wrong. The GOM should be based on the mi/kWh from actual driving. I find this completely unacceptable to have the GOM Range so much lower than the mi/kWh. I plan to report this to Ford, but not sure how to do that.

I'm interested in feedback from the forum on my detailed range analysis, findings, and what to do about it.

Sponsored

 

[RickLightning]

Did you put a destination in and let the truck predict the range?

2.2 is not 2.2. It is 2.151. Or, 2.243. 2.151x132=282, not 299...

131? Might be 125 based on temp and state of health. 2.151x125=269....

 

[Joe.....Montana]

Yesterday I got in the truck at 60% charge and GOM reading of 190 miles. Ended up covering 28 miles on my errands and came home with GOM reading 175 miles of range...GOM tried to rob me of 3 miles but I fought and clawed it back...I know this site went through a maintenance issue last week and lost a lot of threads...but the "Ford GOM is unreliable" thread is the proverbial dead horse...

 

[RocketGhost]

That is like saying "don't pay attention to your gas gauge".

No, it's like saying "pay attention to the gas gauge, not the 'miles to empty' estimate that most cars have on the dash nowadays."

The GOM should be based on the mi/kWh from actual driving. I find this completely unacceptable to have the GOM Range so much lower than the mi/kWh.

It is based on actual driving. But keep in mind that EV efficiency can vary a lot more than ICE car efficiency depending on driving conditions and use, and a large brick like the Lightning is going to vary more than a Bolt. The GOM is based on how you've used the truck in the past but doesn't know how you are going to use it. Putt-putt around town and it's going to estimate a decent range, but you can't rely on that if the next day you take a road trip and blast down the highway in the cold with a headwind.

The GOM is based on past driving history. How far back and how it calculates and weighs different factors is unknown to us. It's a tough balance. Should it look at just the past 50 miles? 100? 1000? Weigh recent driving by a factor of 1.5x? 2x?

And Ford may have intentionally made it conservative. Image the consequences and backlash if it consistently overestimates range.

Unfortunately the best way is to know your mi/kwh and do the math when range will be critical, like a road trip. You know when you get in the truck to expect ~2mi/kwh that day, but the GOM doesn't know you are about to get on the highway unless that how you've been driving all the time. It also doesn't know that you'll be driving in a storm with a strong headwind and will be getting ~1.8mi/kwh instead.

 

[On the Road with Ralph]

This subject has become SO tiresome.

The displayed range of a modern EV is always a best guess. What is somewhat more closely tied to reality is the SOC and the average miles/kW. The truck also provides – albeit graphically, not numerically – an instantaneous indication of current power use. The driver who frequently pushes the vehicle towards the limits of its range simply needs to become facile at using this information - along with weather, speed, and topography – to arrive at a fair estimate of actual range. I do a lot of long distance traveling in my Lightning and easily do this in my head. If this mental effort is too much for you, then enter your destination into either the built-in NAV system or Apple Maps via CarPlay every time you drive. These systems do a reasonably good job of using route information to massage the range estimate.

 

[srowley]

This subject has become SO tiresome.

The point of my post was one that I hadn't seen in any other post on range. Over 1500 miles of tracking both GOM and mi/kWh, they don't come even close to matching. If the GOM is not based on history of mi/kWh, then what is it based on?

I have put 120K on two Chevy Bolt EVs over the last 8 years, so tracking this stuff is not new to me. The Chevy Bolt has the GOM dialed in. Why let Ford off the hook? They have to do better. The GOM they are reporting and the mi/kWh they are reporting over 1500 miles don't come close to matching. Why isn't that a bug, plain and simple?

 

[srowley]

2.2 is not 2.2. It is 2.151. Or, 2.243. 2.151x132=282, not 299...

Yes, if 2.2 is the average for that trip it could be 2.151 to 2.249, so why assume the lowest? Over 1500 miles that I tracked it should be very close to the average. For my trip on 7/20/2025 my spreadsheet lists it as 2.2, but on that trip of 276.8 miles it changed from 2.3 to 2.2 about 4 miles from home, so at least on that trip it was for sure on the high end, probably 2.245, which would equate to a range of 294, rather than the calculated 242 the GOM displayed at the end of the trip.

 

[srowley]

The GOM is based on past driving history. How far back and how it calculates and weighs different factors is unknown to us. It's a tough balance. Should it look at just the past 50 miles? 100? 1000? Weigh recent driving by a factor of 1.5x? 2x?

And Ford may have intentionally made it conservative. Image the consequences and backlash if it consistently overestimates range.

Yes, GOM is based on past driving history. By far the biggest factor in the GOM calculation is your actual mi/kWh. I have shown with my tracking that the GOM is consistently an average of 17% below the range calculated based on mi/kWh over 1500 miles of my actual driving.

Why cut Ford slack on this? 5% below is conservative. 17% below is broken. The GOM range on the Chevy Bolt is way more accurate.

 

[RocketGhost]

Why cut Ford slack on this? 5% below is conservative. 17% below is broken. The GOM range on the Chevy Bolt is way more accurate.

17% is probably about what's left in a gas tank when it's on E or the distance you can go with 0 miles left on ICE vehicles. I know from experience on vehicles I've had when it's on E there's still a couple gallons left.

On your Bolt did you ever test the range (drive until it stops)? They may have built in a buffer where you can keep going with zero miles left, while in the Lightning zero means zero (from what I've heard people report).

 

[srowley]

On your Bolt did you ever test the range (drive until it stops)? They may have built in a buffer where you can keep going with zero miles left, while in the Lightning zero means zero (from what I've heard people report).

Never drove it until it stopped - not good for the battery! But it goes into "turtle mode" where it won't go above about 30mph when it gets down to 15 to 25 miles of range. Only did that a couple times... Thus, I am pretty nervous about getting my Lightning to a really low SOC. I've read that the Lightning will similarly limit power at a low SOC but not sure of the details.

 

[RocketGhost]

Never drove it until it stopped - not good for the battery! But it goes into "turtle mode" where it won't go above about 30mph when it gets down to 15 to 25 miles of range. Only did that a couple times... Thus, I am pretty nervous about getting my Lightning to a really low SOC. I've read that the Lightning will similarly limit power at a low SOC but not sure of the details.

Wow that turtle mode is punishing!

The Lightning doesn't directly limit speed, but will start to limit available power at a fairly high SOC (maybe 20%?). It will gradually decrease. But you won't notice until it gets very low since in normal driving, unless you punch it, you're not getting close to the max. Somebody who has experienced it may chime in, but I don't think you start losing top speed and drivability until very close to the end. I have heard that single digit battery % is the danger zone, and it can suddenly drop to zero with a few % left. And when it says zero it's not joking.

I personally treat 20% as zero. On road trips I plan charges with at least 20% left and I calculate my range manually using very conservative mi/kwh.

 

[No Oil HaHa]

Never drove it until it stopped - not good for the battery! But it goes into "turtle mode" where it won't go above about 30mph when it gets down to 15 to 25 miles of range. Only did that a couple times... Thus, I am pretty nervous about getting my Lightning to a really low SOC. I've read that the Lightning will similarly limit power at a low SOC but not sure of the details.

I can only speak of my personal experience: I’ve seen the power available to the motors start dropping at 45% charge in about 45F degree weather. It hasn’t governed how fast I can go just the power available to the motors.

Sponsored