What gives 17 years from now?

[Jseis]

Figure I’ll add another 6000 miles a year to the ‘23 ER Lariat for a total mileage of around 156,000 miles by say 2043.

Charge at home, dink around the local area. I’m curious of what serious component fail is most likely? And could new technology provide a work around or render something moot like software?

Could the Lighting BEV be a niche vehicle of a run of 100,000 that’s enough to warrant a cult following? Will an EMP render it trash or say a motor goes out… what about 1 motor drive?

I’ve a drawer full of old useless cell phones. Plus a few laptops, iPads, & towers. Technology moves on. What do you all think?

The 2010 Adrenalin (below) was a low volume ICE niche trucklet assembled from various part bins with a few custom body panels. A collector ended up with ours and found most parts still available after 15 years. Used a lot of parts common to its Explorer BOF including AWD, 6 speed tranny, 4.6 V8, etc.

1 of 100,000

1 of 6,000

Sponsored

 

[sysop1]

RAV4 EV even with a production run of under 4,000 vehicles has maintained a fairly healthy repair ecosystem, which makes it a reasonable reference point when thinking about benchmarks for long-term serviceability.

 

[25StarWhiteLightning]

I am guessing it will be its connectivity that goes first and along with some strange system that will refuse to function without an internet heartbeat. We will beg Ford to open source and they won't. The revamped CPFB will issue a lawsuit against Ford that goes all the way to the Supreme Court but in a scathing decision by Supreme Court Justice Logan Paul, Ford succeeds and we scrap our trucks for the batteries.

 

[StrikesTwice]

I am guessing it will be its connectivity that goes first and along with some strange system that will refuse to function without an internet heartbeat. We will beg Ford to open source and they won't. The revamped CPFB will issue a lawsuit against Ford that goes all the way to the Supreme Court but in a scathing decision by Supreme Court Justice Logan Paul, Ford succeeds and we scrap our trucks for the batteries.

This checks out

 

[RLXXI]

Rumor has it motors, batteries and most modules are shared with the Mach E and that's not going any where.

How accurate that info is remains to be seen.

 

[Jseis]

This checks out

Here is an A.I. perspective

In 2026, the potential for Battery Electric Vehicles (BEVs) and hybrids to become inoperable due to proprietary software is a significant industry concern, often termed
"software-defined obsolescence." As vehicles transition into "computers on wheels," their functional life is increasingly tied to manufacturer support rather than mechanical durability.

1. Risks of Proprietary "Closed" Software
The unwillingness of manufacturers to provide open-source code or data access creates several failure points:

• Orphaned Vehicles: If an EV startup goes bankrupt (a high risk in 2026 for dozens of firms), their proprietary cloud servers may shut down. This can "brick" essential features like remote charging management, navigation, and security patches, leaving owners with no third-party recourse.
• Version Incompatibility: Manufacturers may stop supporting older hardware as new software updates exceed the processing power of early-generation vehicle computers. Unlike mechanical parts, these proprietary systems cannot be easily replicated by the aftermarket without access to the original source code.
• Systemic Failure from Bad Updates: A single flawed over-the-air (OTA) update can render a fleet inoperable. Without open-source alternatives or independent diagnostic tools, owners are entirely dependent on the manufacturer’s timeline for a "fix."

2. Legal and Regulatory Countermeasures (2026 Status)
To mitigate these risks, new regulations are emerging to force more transparency:

• Right to Repair Expansion: In 2026, many regions are implementing stricter Right to Repair laws. For example, Colorado’s law (effective Jan 1, 2026) mandates that manufacturers provide independent shops with documentation and embedded software necessary for diagnosis and repair.
• Data Standardization: Regulations like California's Advanced Clean Cars IInow require standardized on-board diagnostics (OBD II) for ZEVs by 2026 to ensure third-party access to critical battery and system data.
• Longevity Mandates: Some advocates are pushing for regulations that would require manufacturers to guarantee software support for the standard 12-to-20-year life of a vehicle.

3. Impact on Resale and Longevity

• Higher Depreciation: Vehicles from manufacturers with "closed" ecosystems may face higher depreciation if buyers fear the manufacturer might discontinue support or exit the market.
• Repair Monopolies: Proprietary software allows manufacturers to maintain a monopoly on repairs, often making out-of-warranty fixes prohibitively expensive or impossible for independent mechanics.

While some open-source automotive software initiatives exist to reduce redundancy and development costs, most major OEMs currently prefer in-house proprietary systems to maintain control over the user experience and secondary revenue streams (like subscriptions).

I am guessing it will be its connectivity that goes first and along with some strange system that will refuse to function without an internet heartbeat. We will beg Ford to open source and they won't. The revamped CPFB will issue a lawsuit against Ford that goes all the way to the Supreme Court but in a scathing decision by Supreme Court Justice Logan Paul, Ford succeeds and we scrap our trucks for the batteries.

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

Here is an A.I. perspective

I’m not sure an AI perspective is really a perspective, it’s more of an echo chamber.

The fact is nobody knows what the 10+ year outlook of the platform will be. I personally like to be positive, but it’s very likely developing technologies will make this truck irrelevant in 10+ years.

 

[RickLightning]

AI crap should be banned.

 

[Jseis]

Ah yes, Luddites enter the chat. Seen it before.

Anti A.I. comments pretty common. Ultimately like arguing with a dictionary-encyclpodis, etc.

Adapt or become not relevant.

 

[ClevelandBeemer]

Ah yes, Luddites enter the chat. Seen it before.

Anti A.I. comments pretty common. Ultimately like arguing with a dictionary-encyclpodis, etc.

Adapt or become not relevant.

Nope, just have enough institutional knowledge and common sense to form my own opinion. Furthermore, I can also recognize regurgitation of the popular points in the various forums and social media sites on this topic.

For a human perspective, I offer this: I’m not here to read what the latest AI model can regurgitate; I’m here to read the thoughts of the humans in the forum.

 

[Newton]

AI is complete nonsense and will probably lead to the death of our civilization if not our species. It has no real knoweldge, just a probablistic prediction of what the next word in a sentance should be.

Here is a recent example. We are going on a trip and I wanted to see what the lightest Tern cargo bike was to see if I could fit it in the car that we want to rent. I went to google and this is what came up in their AI section (which I usually ignore). Prompt was something like “what is the lightest Tern e-bike?”

That is a beautiful, compact and authoritive answer. The lightest Tern e-bike is the Tern Short Haul at a remarkably light 34.4 lbs (16.1) Kg. I would be perfectly capable of lifting that bike into a European car, and it is amazingingly light compared to my wife’s 60 pound Cube Fold which is one of the lightest non-carbon ebikes around.

There is one tiny detail, almost insigifinant. The Tern Short Haul is not an E-bike.

Let’s ask AI about that: (Prompt: Is the Tern Short haul an e-bike?)

Again, authortative, detailed, competent, and in this case correct - and completely at odds with its previous statement. It has no knowlege!

This is not one isolated example. I have asked google questions about music theory and I get wonderful sounding dissertations that are meaningless because one small but fundamental fact is compeletely incorrect. I asked if I could use bronze fittings to cap off a stainless steel water purifer and it confidently told me that it would fail due to galvanic corrosion which it helpfully explained. It completely missed that there are many grades of stainless steel, some of which are closer on the index to bronze and which - according to the manufacturer - are perfectly compatible with bronze fittings. For fun I have played with other versions of Ai than google with math and computer questions on which I am a subject matter expert and it lasts for a little while before coming up with complete howlers that would have absolutely convinced me when I was a student.

The term ”AI slop” perfectly describes the tool. A large part of its current acceptance is how the human brain works - people see images of Christ in toasted bread - we expect confident, well formatted statements to indicate a degree of intelligence. It looks like a scientific answer, so it should be correct. Unfortunately all it is really good at is mimicing reality.

Current techniques really are not going to improve this. AI can do impressive things through brute force seaarches for correlations, but as any statistician will tell you “correlation is not causation“. One famous medical use was for detecting some disease like TB and it did remarkably well with its training set - but it turned out that what it was detecting was how old the xrays were based on the resolution. TB was common (in Xrays) in the past and uncommon now.

Anyway, back to trucks. I think that 30 years is a bit too much to expect, I got about that many from my T-100 which suddenly blew the clutch. I will repair it because you can’t find single cab long bed trucks anymore, but the cost will be about as much as the truck is ‘worth’.

 

[RickLightning]

Ah yes, Luddites enter the chat. Seen it before.

Anti A.I. comments pretty common. Ultimately like arguing with a dictionary-encyclpodis, etc.

Adapt or become not relevant.

What is an encyclpodis? Maybe AI can tell you.

This forum is for human beings to have discussions, not regurgitate AI crap. Many forums are banning AI content, this one should also.

Fortunately if a specific visitor keeps posting AI crap, one can simply Ignore them.

 

[GDN]

Motors, batteries and most modules are shared with the Mach E and that's not going any where.

None of those are shared with the Mach E. Different manufactures. Some of the 10 year old infotainment tech is about the only thing shared.

 

[WXman]

Ford says they'll support Lightning through 2035. I firmly believe that by 2030 new driveline parts for Lightning will become hard to get from dealers, and by 2035 finding critical driveline parts will be a search of eBay and salvage yards.

Technology is moving fast. Federal policy is changing like people change underwear. Ford is already chomping at the bit to move to the next thing in the automotive world. I don't see any way they are still making and selling new parts for the Lightning, which was already outdated two years ago, in the year 2035.

So if you plan to keep one of these trucks on the road for the next 30 years all I can say is good luck. If your pockets are deep, the challenge might actually be fun and enjoyable.

 

[mr.Magoo]

Ah yes, Luddites enter the chat. Seen it before.

Anti A.I. comments pretty common. Ultimately like arguing with a dictionary-encyclpodis, etc.

Adapt or become not relevant.

AI is very good for some things, I use it almost daily for work, but questionable at best at other.

The output is only as good as the input and when AI doesn't have information it's like dealing with an overconfident person that just makes shit up and presents it with confidence, hoping no one will challenge them because it sounds like they know what they're talking about.

People were already very gullible before AI and rarely questioned a source or the story behind it, but now it's even worse and "we" copy/paste AI information as if it is fact, when many times it isn't (especially if there's limited information available on the topic).

If you really want to wear a tinfoil hat at this point you can start thinking about what happens when AI feeds itself its own slop, or when people with alternative agendas starts feeding misinformation into these models.

Sponsored