DC Charging Peak Speed: Extended 155kW, Standard 120kW

[gorwell]

Ford left a link to FAQs in another Thread.

One is specially around charging: https://www.ford.com/support/how-to...ightning-charging-frequently-asked-questions/

The following FAQ caught my eye:

What is the charging power for the F-150 Lightning?

The extended-range F-150 Lightning vehicles are both alternating current (AC) and DC adaptable with a 19.2kW onboard charger and are designed to charge quickly on a DC fast charger, allowing a controlled boost up to 155kW. The standard-range F-150 Lightning vehicles are also AC and DC adaptable with an 11.3 kW onboard charger and are designed to charge quickly on a DC fast charger, allowing controlled boost up to 120kW**.

I cannot understand why the standard range would only peak at 120kW... this seems like pretty poor design on Ford's part.

I (and I think many) assumed that the extended ranges faster charge time was tied to just being able to sustain higher peaks for longer, not that the standard was "nerfed"... I guess this makes more sense now as when intially reviewd for charging speeds, the assumption was that the standard range battery would be bigger (~110-120 vs. 98).

Their official charge time numbers don't change, but this just seems like a situation where they could have made life easier for Standard range owners when road tripping to get back on the road faster.

Not sure how they could release the Mach-e w/ 150kW charging, and then 2 years later, release a something that performs worse...

Doing some rough maths:

The Extended range averages about 135kW from 15-80%

The standard range is just at 95kW from 15-80%.


Another FAQ addressing this:

Can I charge at a 350kW charge station?

Yes. Most Electrify America DC fast chargers can deliver up to 350kW of power, but your Ford all-electric vehicle will only accept up to 120kW or 155kW, depending on if you have the standard-range or extended-range battery, respectively.

Sponsored

 

[LightningShow]

Darn, that was unexpected. Another reason to pay up for an ER.

 

[vandy1981]

Their official numbers don't change, but this just seems like a situation where they could have made life easier for Standard range owners when road tripping to get back on the road faster.

People were speculating 150 kw max when the truck was unveiled. I don't know whether the 150kw number came from official channels, but I'm pleased to see that it beats expectations.

I cannot understand why the standard range would only peak at 120kW... this seems like pretty poor design on Ford's part.

It's harder to safely pump kW into a smaller battery pack than a larger one. Higher kW ratings in the SR would probably require an augmented cooling system and battery management system that would drive up cost and complexity of the less-expensive model.

 

[jefro]

Many reports say that one should charge at the highest rate charger available. Some suspect that even if 150KW rate claimed that for some reason they don't fully deliver.

155 might put on in a much more expensive plan rate too so.....

 

[Sklith]

I'm not certain how many 400V DCFC stations out there do speeds greater than 150kW. Electrify America's 350kW chargers are 800V, and Tesla Superchargers aren't open to non-Tesla cars at the moment.

 

[gorwell]

Many reports say that one should charge at the highest rate charger available. Some suspect that even if 150KW rate claimed that for some reason they don't fully deliver.

Kyle from out of spec reviews recently explained why this was the case.

I don't recall the exact details, but the gist is: Some chargers have different amp ratings, so even if it is called a "150kW/350kW" charger, if it's a lower amp version, it'll do less than an higher amp one. You'd need to look at the technical label of the charger to see this data.

 

[RickLightning]

Mach-E SR charges slower than ER, so this is not a surprise.

 

[CoyoteJim]

People were speculating 150 kw max when the truck was unveiled. I don't know whether the 150kw number came from official channels, but I'm pleased to see that it beats expectations.



It's harder to safely pump kW into a smaller battery pack than a larger one. Higher kW ratings in the SR would probably require an augmented cooling system and battery management system that would drive up cost and complexity of the less-expensive model.

In another thread there was some discussion and conclusion that the Platinum has a faster charging time because it has the max tow package standard. So will an SR with the max tow package then be capable of a faster charging time?

 

[tbinmd]

In another thread there was some discussion and conclusion that the Platinum has a faster charging time because it has the max tow package standard. So will an SR with the max tow package then be capable of a faster charging time?

Doubtful, the faster charging time of the ER is due to the different wiring configuration of the battery.

 

[biers]

This would be really sad if true. The SR Lightning has a larger battery than the ER Mach E. Mach he can peak at 160 kW. So reason I see that the Lighting SR couldn't do the same or better. Please help us understand @Ford Motor Company

 

[CoyoteJim]

Doubtful, the faster charging time of the ER is due to the different wiring configuration of the battery.

I understand the SR and and ER have a different inverter/charger/bms setup. I’m referring to the charge times on the window stickers for the ERs - 10.1 hours for the non-Platinum ERs and 9.3 for the Platinum ER, the only difference being the extra cooling provided by the max tow package which is standard on the Platinum. So I’m questioning if there could be a similar effect on the charging curve for the standard range with extra cooling.

 

[Seageo]

This would be really sad if true. The SR Lightning has a larger battery than the ER Mach E. Mach he can peak at 160 kW. So reason I see that the Lighting SR couldn't do the same or better. Please help us understand @Ford Motor Company

Both numbers are impressively low peak values for the size of battery that they are. What new car has a lower peak than the SR? The Bz4x at 100kw?

The ER really should be charging at 200kw above 50% SOC. Big miss by Ford. The charging curve for the MME is already wonky. It really makes me wonder what part of their design is making them literally last in class in charging tech for new models.

 

[Seageo]

It's harder to safely pump kW into a smaller battery pack than a larger one. Higher kW ratings in the SR would probably require an augmented cooling system and battery management system that would drive up cost and complexity of the less-expensive model.

They should just be downsizing the pack and still have an adequate cooling system. 120kw for a pack that size is very very low power.

I'm not certain how many 400V DCFC stations out there do speeds greater than 150kW. Electrify America's 350kW chargers are 800V, and Tesla Superchargers aren't open to non-Tesla cars at the moment.

150kw stations are still 800v stations typically. It's fairly rare to find a 400v station in the U.S. the 150kw stations EA has are just limited in total output. And many will give 175kw. They can achieve that by varying voltage or amperage.

I don't recall the exact details, but the gist is: Some chargers have different amp ratings, so even if it is called a "150kW/350kW" charger, if it's a lower amp version, it'll do less than an higher amp one. You'd need to look at the technical label of the charger to see this data.

Many of the 350kw EA stations are currently limited to 350 to 375 amps. At on a 400v car they'll put out no more than about 150kw. For the most part that seems like a software issue for EA and not a hardware issue. Or a mixture of the two.

Ford really should have pursued an 800v charging system, even if they wanted to stick with 400v components elsewhere. Similar to what GM did.

 

[beatle]

They should just be downsizing the pack and still have an adequate cooling system. 120kw for a pack that size is very very low power.


150kw stations are still 800v stations typically. It's fairly rare to find a 400v station in the U.S. the 150kw stations EA has are just limited in total output. And many will give 175kw. They can achieve that by varying voltage or amperage.


Many of the 350kw EA stations are currently limited to 350 to 375 amps. At on a 400v car they'll put out no more than about 150kw. For the most part that seems like a software issue for EA and not a hardware issue. Or a mixture of the two.

Ford really should have pursued an 800v charging system, even if they wanted to stick with 400v components elsewhere. Similar to what GM did.

120kw into a 98kwh pack is 1.22C
155kw into a 131kwh pack is 1.18C

The ER has an even weaker charge rate than the SR. The 800V system is not going to change the C rating; it will only alleviate current demands from the charger. If a DCFC cannot provide enough current for the desired kw, then voltage of the systems involved need to increase. That said, if the EA systems can deliver 350kw at 800v, as you said they're only going to get to 175kw at 400v, and that's still well above what even the Lightning ER can take.

The Lightning uses batteries from SK Innovations, the MachE uses batteries from LG Chem. The Lightning uses different chemistry as well: https://fordauthority.com/2020/10/ford-f-150-electric-battery-chemistry-will-be-unique-to-model/

There are plenty of tradeoffs in battery manufacturing. Perhaps the Lightning is built for exceptional longevity / charge cycles at the tradeoff of output or charging speed. I'd be okay with that if true.

 

[adoublee]

Big miss by Ford. The charging curve for the MME is already wonky. It really makes me wonder what part of their design is making them literally last in class in charging tech for new models.

Need to see the full charge curve before that can be said. The area under curve is what matters, not the imaginary peak it "could" hit that many advertize on.

Sponsored