Captainp4

9.5 is pretty big depending on context

At the Mach E vs Model Y level, the Ford just doesn't offer enough for someone to choose it over the Tesla and pay more for it unless they're a die hard Ford person or have an irrational hatred for Elon Musk. It almost matches most things, but falls a little short.. but who in their right mind would objectively pick it over the guys that have been doing it way longer when it's not substantially better in any category and pay more. If you're the new guy on the block and want to make things happen you need to leapfrog substantially to get someone's attention. It's like when Toyota/Nissan started getting into the half ton market. Ford is dipping their toes in but doesn't seem like they're fully committed. And I'd say the same about cybertruck compared to lightning - Tesla isn't fully committed to figuring out a truck buyer. IMO anyway. Hopefully we see some big improvements with the next gen of BEV out of Ford.

I have no need or interest in a truck that small personally, but I knew it would be a hit when I saw it. It hits a sweet spot on affordability and capability while still being unique and pretty cool, it has a lot of people that would never look at a Ford looking. Still think "passion" products is kind of misleading, like I said in the other thread.. there's plenty of people passionate about owning their boring ass Toyota/Honda sedan because it never lets them down and that's what matters to them. If "passion" means build something that people want to own for whatever reason, then uhh.. duh, you want people to want what you sell. Passion/commodity kind of falls apart if you change the rules to what it fits. Not disagreeing or agreeing with either side of the on-going argument, just trying to think out what's been said to it's logical end.

This definitely makes Ford's current EV offerings more appealing.

From what I've learned "researching" the Lightning, it comes with the truck charge port on one end, 30a if I'm remembering correctly, and two pigtails that you can plug into it, either the 14-50 pictured or a standard 120 plug. There's an option for a higher amp charger as well that can go up to 80a. Amp numbers might be off, but it's something like that. From what I've gathered the lower amp one is intended to be mobile so you can charge anywhere while the bigger one is meant to stay where you charge.

I was reading through a facebook comment section on something the other day, and I could only describe the people commenting as "passionate" about how reliable their toyota camrys/rav4s/etc were and that they were never going with another brand because they just work and don't let them down. What non car people want is affordable/fairly efficient for class/RELIABLE. Ford just can't or won't deliver on that last part, so it seems like they're just giving up and building things for the car guy that can fix it their self in their driveway, because it looks cool or makes cool noises/is fast/fun/etc. I honestly don't know if it's the right approach or not, as a car guy it sounds good, but it's blindingly obvious why Ford can't make any progress in what they call "commodity" vehicles. We saw what happened when Bob Lutz was the GM guy building car guy vehicles and Mulally was over here making things efficient and how well Stellantis has done with a stuff a hellcat in everything mantra. Car guy me likes Farley and hopes he figures out a way to make it work, but I'm still skeptical of giving up all this ground on "commodity" vehicles. I understand limited plant capacity and resources and all that, but the new and shiny is going to wear off eventually on the "passion" products unless they just keep delivering unique product that resonates, which historically tends to fade away after a couple generations of a product line.

Not sure, every source I can find says 123. This one and everything I click on youtube/google/forums/facebook groups says 123 . Not arguing with ya, cause I honestly I don't really care unless it's giving me more range. Where'd you find that doc? It also uses an induction motor on the front axle, and permanent magnet on the rear and the output numbers are wrong so maybe it's an out of date document? https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a46010154/tesla-cybertruck-battery-capacity/ Edit: Was looking at the awd motor outputs, looks like output numbers are correct for beast motors, but not motor type: " "Cyberbeast"—swaps motor locations (permanent magnet to front axle, induction motor to rear axle) and adds a second induction motor on the rear axle, offering a maximum combined output of 845 hp (630 kW) in Beast Mode,[4] split as 276 hp (206 kW) for the front motor and 284 hp (212 kW) for each rear motor."

Bunch of youtube videos previously and the google to confirm what I remembered before I posted that. I'm not sure if Tesla has officially released that.

123 kWh pack. It's efficient in that regard, personally wish they had stuffed some more battery in for people that wanted to use it as a truck, but there's enough people lined up for a status symbol it probably doesn't matter to them yet.

This same argument was made when the 04 150 came out with a fully boxed frame by the other guys that looked like they were twerking on the high speed bump tests. Same argument about the Ridgeline being too stiff because it was unibody. Not that I'm a fan of that thing, but lol. They said c channel semis worked because they flex and give, etc. .. more torsional rigidity doesn't seem to have any real world implications other than better driving dynamics from everything I've seen over the last 20 years or so of following the car/truck world. I imagine it has it's limits, but my instinct tells me sticking with c channel frames is just a cost saving thing.

The original promises made a good case for me. 14k towing, 500+ mile range. It made perfect sense for my business that tows roughly 9-10k daily, under 300 miles a week, and not more than 100 in a day, on a set route, comes back to the shop every night, and only used when the grass is growing (so, warm, no cold weather range loss concern). The 4 wheel steer looked pretty damn cool to not have to make 30 point turns on dead end roads too when towing the 26ft trailer. All that AND lose the diesel fuel and maintenance costs? SIGN ME UP! What we got was 11k towing, 340 mile range (you can get ALMOST 500 if you drop ANOTHER 16k on range extender pack that will surely diminish payload capacity even more) and on top of that has none of the towing doodads Ford has on the Lightning that make your life easier when towing. The stainless body was appealing to me too because despite any effort made to avoid it, you're going to send projectiles hurtling towards your own truck if you own a lawn care business and can't always choose the best location to park. If you get up close on my 2010 250 you'll see tons of little dings (still looks pretty dang good from 5-10ft, but if you look close you'll see them). But like I said earlier in the thread, just watching and waiting before I make my decision when my number gets called.

Repair costs will be interesting to see. On one hand it's going to resist minor dings and maybe even light fender benders, on the other hand people that can still work bare metal without filler and paint to hide behind are very few and far between (hell, even brand new cars have filler on the panels sometimes) so it's likely going to be full panel replacement if there's any distortion of the metal. Unless this particular alloy has a "memory" and can be easily stretched/shrank back. I wonder if the quarters are bolted on or bonded? Haven't seen anything about the one that got hit right after the delivery event yet.

Are you from the part of Australia where I can call you a cunt and it's a term of endearment? Either way, GFY ? All jokes, don't ban me pls

Those are certainly all words

Advertisers are customers, they pay you to run their ads. Still not seeing how this ties into the we/us narrative that's going on here.

I mean, I thought that moment was hilarious personally because I've said it to customers I've had enough of and found some validation there, but what's that have to do with the we/us thing?

This isn't true either if you read or watch him. He always gives credit to the team, be it SpaceX or Tesla.

There's a lot of articles that are flat out lies because the in thing to do now is hate Elon Musk because it gets clicks/views. At some point everyone will realize these articles keep happening every time Tesla hit's a temporary wall and that they always blow through it and come out on top of the predictions and naysayers.

Reservations say the demand is there and they're still coming in from what I've heard, but we've all seen how that can be misleading. I personally really like the looks of it after seeing it in person and think the price is fair IF it the things it's good at (speed/handling/tech) are what you're into and only occasionally doing truck things . The more reviews I watch of it though it's clear why F series is the leader in the truck market for people that need a truck for truck things, Cybertruck misses on all the things that make towing/hauling comfortable and convenient. Some of it can change with software down the road, some of it is physical things. Time will tell, but I think they'll sell every one they can make for the foreseeable future. I do have a reservation in but really not liking the reviews I've seen so far as far as "truck things" are concerned, Lightning is looking more and more like a better value for my use case and considering cancelling, but I'm so far down the line it'll be a while before I have to make that choice.

The market did not like that call ? Musk really needs to work on distinguishing between internal optimistic timelines and what he tells the public too, Elon Time is rarely accurate. Still waiting on the next starship launch in "3-4 weeks" since November

Look, there's still demand for it!

I guess I misunderstood, and things have been volatile in the last few years, but I'd consider 3/y affordable currently and in the last few years. Not entry level cheap, but on par with what mostly sells.

Their stated goals indicate they are the good guys, whether you like Musk or not or even agree with how he thinks he's helping, the "master plan" lays out the goal to convert the world to sustainable auto and they've met or exceeded every goal they stated. Whether you believe it's for the good of humanity or a money grab is on the person watching or reading, I've watched enough of Musk to believe him but I understand if you don't.. and even if you don't Tesla has laid out the blueprint on how to do it and make money for "legacy auto". Either way, I personally believe they are the good guys, but even if they aren't they're still doing it better than Ford on the BEV design and manufacturing end. Model 2 I'm skeptical about after waiting 4 years for the cybertruck to cost twice as much and have half the range promised with 3k lbs less towing. Holding a reservation for cybertruck, but been looking at the lightning lately and it seems like a better truck right now.

3/y made BEV affordable for a lot of people, they started with the high end cars to make enough money to develop the less expensive ones and have done an incredible job of increasing manufacturing efficiency and lowering part count to be able to have the margins they have, even while reducing prices. "The best part is no part, the best process is no process". I think Farley mentioned in a presentation trying to emulate that not that long ago, eliminating or consolidating parts - if they don't perform at least 3 tasks in one needs a redesign or something like that. Maybe Ford could make money on the boring lower end products while maintaining margins if more effort was put into efficiency on the design/manufacturing side? and maybe even higher margins on the higher end products or even room to adjust pricing to meet demand?

Clickbait in action