slemke

The rear looks really good. Tailgate likely fits on any F150.

As battery technology improves, Ford can add more range. The battery pack weighs close to a ton by itself. That cuts into payload if Ford wants to keep it under 8500lbs GVWR. Range vs payload. If Borg’s hp and torque numbers are correct, they are really good. I was expecting lower numbers on a base model. It could also be part of the reason the range numbers are low. I wonder what the range will be towing 10000lbs. Can’t wait to see the Ike gauntlet runs for the battery drain numbers. It will have no problem pulling the weight at 60mph.

You could get a tent to park it in.? The supercab 6.5’ bed has a nice balanced look to it. The regular cab with an 8’ bed doesn’t look good at all. The old pre ‘97 regular cab long beds looked fine, though.

Full perimeter frame....like a panther. Ford’s skateboard could be the ePanther platform.

Two eco sports and a vehicle to be named later for an F150 today. I read that customers are starting to face the reality of paying what the dealer is asking or someone else will buy the vehicle similar to the housing market. Not a buyers market. I’d wager that was is left of inventory more than a month or two old are unpopular trims/options/colors.

Second Lightning plant at the Kansas City site? Or expansion at Kentucky truck for expedition/navigator? Farley knows how to stir the pot and keep folks attention for what’s coming next.

I’m guessing all of them will be lightnings, but with themes similar to the bronco and bronco sport to differentiate the various trims, power and range. The affordable base and mid models along with the requisite first edition will be available first, followed by the performance/halo model similar to the Mach E launch.

There are others who have tried, but they were going after the low price -high volume segment. GM and the bolt for example. They went for the lowest cost with a decent range, but still missed the mark because it wasn’t refined enough, or low enough initial cost to compete with traditional econobox on price. It appears 50k or so is the current sweet spot. Even Tesla dropped/never built the lowest price model 3 configuration. At 50k, it allows the mfg, to add enough equipment to be competitive in segments with premium powertrains. Less than a week away from the lightning reveal and seeing what Ford has planned for the f150. It should be able to fit nicely into the pricing and powertrain matrix. Hopefully with higher volumes than the power stroke. Maybe similar sales numbers to Raptor.

It puts the flipper out of business. ? If a company is going to prevent adm, then they also need to prevent flipping/scalping/etc. Ford seems to have been pretty successful with it on the GT. Of course, Ford could follow the Tesla model and adjust sticker prices monthly based on demand and keep the profit themselves.

A 3 week delay. Hopefully that is the last one and you get it before Summer is over. At least it won’t be rushed down the line before leaving for 4th of July holiday.

That’s only 6 years away. I’m skeptical since the cost curve for batteries hasn’t fallen nearly as fast as predicted. If demand does take off, the prices of the commodities used in making the batteries, motors and power electronics will likely increase. Also need to consider the source. Bloomberg has an agenda.

How often do they need to be replaced? Maybe I just don’t drive enough at night, but I’ve only replaced a handful of bulbs in 30 years. I would expect very few LEDs would need to be replaced....which may lead to higher cost just to keep something in stock that may never be sold.

Calling it a crossover is iffy. More like a hatchback. The lines have been blurred between them. Whatever it is, it does look good.

It was also during the Explorer roll over fiasco and Ford stated they would not do a high performance suv as a result. Took 10 plus years before the Explorer sport was introduced. An Expedition with lightning components would have been a big hit. Same with a supercab or supercrew configuration.

Exactly. The bad taste it left moved them on to hybrids or cheap gas vehicles. I don’t see many bolts around here either, and GM is giving substantial deals to move them. It’s Tesla or nothing. Maybe the Mach e will change that.

Only 12k-15k per month. In fairness, those 2 plants needed to produce Mazda Tributes and Mercury Mariners also. With those numbers consolidating production to one plant made sense.

Then use a full-size transit or e-transit. :). Transit connects were used as taxis also. It could be a height issue if they are still using the sensor box on the roof.

I think you give them too much credit. Pay the fee and walk off with a license. Double yellow lines mean nothing around here.

Lots of infrastructure needs to be built out. And even then, debatable whether public charging will be appealing. It doesn’t seem to be from that study. The one big thing Tesla has/had going for it was the charging network and free charging for model S and X. Free fuel drove many of those early sales to my engineering friends. I’ll bet a good number of those not returning to buy an EV had compliance EVs. The ones with Leafs that I knew went back to gas or (eventually) a model 3. I just don’t see many leafs on the road...about the same as the new Mach e. Tesla’s are everywhere.

Yes, and 4 days on the lot seems to confirm that. What we don’t know is how close to the true demand is the supply. Is the demand for another 500 vehicles per month or 5000? We won’t know until Ford increases the supply and they start piling up on dealer lots.

Not sure if there is any correlation, but people seem to be driving worse than ever. My theory is safer cars are causing people to be more aggressive. I would like to see info on property damage claims and not just lives saved.

Expedition did very well with 8800 sales....outsold whatever fusions are left on the lot by a wide margin. Mach e selling under 2k per month isn’t setting the world on fire. How much of that is supply constraint? Aviator was Lincoln’s best seller....edging out Corsair for the title.

I hope so. Otherwise BEVs for the masses will be fantasy land. Light duty trucks will need a 250kwh+ battery pack to equal/exceed the range of today’s extended range 36 gallon tanks. The pack needs to be cheap, support high current output and fast recharge over thousands of cycles. Entry level cars will need a low cost battery that still delivers adequate range and recharge times. It will be a tall order. Current battery technology isn’t close enough (yet).

Considering how many suppliers are producing batteries (Samsung, LG, SK, Panasonic, etc.) Ford has plenty of choices to get what they need. No sense rushing in and getting stuck in a dead end technology. It isn’t like customers are clamoring for a Ford battery cell. I see battery cell production as being similar to chip foundries. Lots of research and development expense, capital intensive and plenty of opportunities to fail. There are many successful fabless chip companies (Apple, AMD, NVDIA, QUALCOMM, etc.) and I think automotive will be similar. Better to invest in getting the most out of the cells chosen and getting to choose from the best available cells than trying to develop them on your own. We will see what comes out of the Ion lab.

It would be lighter than a trx, so 600-650 could make the cut. For paper bragging rights, over 725hp is needed.