Ford to launch another BEV Pickup

[mackinaw]

1 hour ago, 2005Explorer said:

Doesn't the 2WD F-250 and F-350 still have Twin-I-Beam?

 

Yes.

 

[twintornados]

7 hours ago, 2005Explorer said:

Doesn't the 2WD F-250 and F-350 still have Twin-I-Beam?

 

I almost want to say yes, but not sure since the move to the aluminum cab...you wont find it described in any literature.

[jpd80]

Mono beam (narrow front track) with coil springs, shock absorbers, stabilizer bar (F-250/F-350 4x4)

Mono beam (wide front track) with coil springs, shock absorbers, stabilizer bar (F-450)

Edited May 5, 2022 by jpd80

[BarneyFord]

https://thecampingadvisor.com/monobeam-vs-twin-i-beam/

[bzcat]

On 5/3/2022 at 10:32 AM, akirby said:

 

Commercial vs Retail

 

Farley and Ford PR would like you to use "Ford Pro" instead of Commercial ?

 

But yea, I posted on the previous page that I think this is exactly what Farley is planning - a Pro version that is more traditional and a retail Lightning that will probably push the envelope a bit more. 

[2005Explorer]

On 5/5/2022 at 4:34 AM, jpd80 said:

Mono beam (narrow front track) with coil springs, shock absorbers, stabilizer bar (F-250/F-350 4x4)

Mono beam (wide front track) with coil springs, shock absorbers, stabilizer bar (F-450)

Yes, but you never said what 4×2 F-250/350 have. I'm almost certain it's Twin-I Beam.

[DeluxeStang]

On 5/5/2022 at 5:21 PM, bzcat said:

 

Farley and Ford PR would like you to use "Ford Pro" instead of Commercial ?

 

But yea, I posted on the previous page that I think this is exactly what Farley is planning - a Pro version that is more traditional and a retail Lightning that will probably push the envelope a bit more. 

Which makes perfect sense, the lighting has proven to be quite popular with traditional truck buyers thus far. The types who just want a truck to look like a truck. But some have criticized the lightning for being too conservative, and not taking enough chances, especially stylistically. Here's hoping the next ev f-150 will satisfy some of these people. I really hope with the greater emphasis on areo that the didn't just make it look like a blob on wheels, like the ugly as sin late 90s to early 2000s f-150s. 

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, 2005Explorer said:

Yes, but you never said what 4×2 F-250/350 have. I'm almost certain it's Twin-I Beam.

You’re probably right.

I did some checking and found that Ford’s specs for the 2020 F250/F350 RWD makes reference to the twin I-Beam front but in 2022, the description for the RWD’s front suspension has been dropped….I think that might have been just an omission error in the specification section.

[jpd80]

On 5/6/2022 at 9:21 AM, bzcat said:

 

Farley and Ford PR would like you to use "Ford Pro" instead of Commercial ?

 

But yea, I posted on the previous page that I think this is exactly what Farley is planning - a Pro version that is more traditional and a retail Lightning that will probably push the envelope a bit more. 

Correct and as Fuzzy pointed out in an earlier post to me, Ford spent $700 million on building the new HEV centre at Dearborn, so after Lightning moves to TE1 and presumably new shape, the older T3 BEV F150 becomes remains as the commercial BEV truck line.

 

I wonder if a similar battery/motor configuration would work with a current Super Duty frame….that might make for a super easy transition in a few years time when Ford will have more battery supply……

Edited May 7, 2022 by jpd80

[rmc523]

13 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

Which makes perfect sense, the lighting has proven to be quite popular with traditional truck buyers thus far. The types who just want a truck to look like a truck. But some have criticized the lightning for being too conservative, and not taking enough chances, especially stylistically. Here's hoping the next ev f-150 will satisfy some of these people. I really hope with the greater emphasis on areo that the didn't just make it look like a blob on wheels, like the ugly as sin late 90s to early 2000s f-150s. 

 

Maybe it's because I grew up with them, but I actually like the 97-03 aero F-150s.....especially the flare side models (that's what my dad had).

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Maybe it's because I grew up with them, but I actually like the 97-03 aero F-150s.....especially the flare side models (that's what my dad had).

I find them charming and nostalgia inducing, but hideous. 

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I find them charming and nostalgia inducing, but hideous. 

I suspect that the TE1 Lightning’s proportions will be altered in a pleasant way that’s  different to what most expect. If you look at the changes made to BEV Silverado and Hummer, they have a shorter nose because no engine required in the space now occupied by the Frunk. Most of the other body styling and structure will be similar to T3 as a way of keeping most truck buyers interested as well as differentiation from the Cybertruck. In essence, the proportions of the Cybertruck but with a more traditional F Series styled body and when people see that familiarity, it will be love at first sight.

Edited May 8, 2022 by jpd80

[slemke]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

I suspect that the TE1 Lightning’s proportions will be altered in a pleasant way that’s  different to what most expect. If you look at the changes made to BEV Silverado and Hummer, they have a shorter nose because no engine required in the space now occupied by the Frunk. Most of the other body styling and structure will be similar to T3 as a way of keeping most truck buyers interested as well as differentiation from the Cybertruck. In essence, the proportions of the Cybertruck but with a more traditional F Series styled body and when people see that familiarity, it will be love at first sight.

One of the benefits of the long nose is the 14 cu ft frunk.  Very useful as that is the only enclosed cargo space.  I’d like to see a lightning with the 6.5’ bed.  It could support an even larger battery, but that might cut into the payload too much.

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, slemke said:

One of the benefits of the long nose is the 14 cu ft frunk.  Very useful as that is the only enclosed cargo space.  I’d like to see a lightning with the 6.5’ bed.  It could support an even larger battery, but that might cut into the payload too much.

 

Think about what a redesigned Lightning means in terms optimising usable space, maybe all the things you desire are part of Ford’s new design…

[rperez817]

6 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Think about what a redesigned Lightning means in terms optimising usable space, maybe all the things you desire are part of Ford’s new design…

 

Yes indeed jpd80! Optimised or optimized is an accurate description of how Ford will approach all aspects of design and engineering for future BEV pickups following the initial version of F-150 Lightning. Hopefully this means that Ford can achieve its goal of a 100% electric vehicle lineup (both consumer and commercial vehicles, including pickups) sooner than expected.

[slemke]

7 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Yes indeed jpd80! Optimised or optimized is an accurate description of how Ford will approach all aspects of design and engineering for future BEV pickups following the initial version of F-150 Lightning. Hopefully this means that Ford can achieve its goal of a 100% electric vehicle lineup (both consumer and commercial vehicles, including pickups) sooner than expected.

Ford should be optimizing all vehicles, not just BEV.  Many of the aerodynamic and weight reduction improvements can be used on either BEV or ICE.  Same goes for the electronics.

 

IMO, body on frame vehicles such as the 150 already have advantages for being converted to electric.  Plenty of space between the frame rails for batteries.  The floor pan could be modified to remove the transmission tunnel and lower the rear floor, which is already flat.  Or use that space for additional battery capacity.  Traditional truck buyers seem to want a brick with a long hood, any changes to the front end from that formula would likely relegate it to a niche.  Use the space for a 15+ cu ft frunk where tools and gear can be safely stowed from the elements.  We’ll see what comes out in the future, but the current lightning is pretty darn good from a packaging standpoint.  I would like to see additional cab and bed options, though.  With a frunk, regular cab flare side Lightnings may be able to make a comeback.  The ‘99 through ‘03 were my favorites.

[DeluxeStang]

On 4/27/2022 at 12:59 PM, FordBuyer said:

 

Jalopnik seems to think it will be a BEV Ranger. I sure hope they are right. Ford needs another affordable BEV priced below the Lightning. The long range Lightning starts at $70,000+. A long range BEV Ranger under $50,000 would be good. 

So an all electric ranger has been more or less confirmed. As vw discussed how their were currently working on an electric midsized truck with Ford. But I believe ford confirmed this additional truck announced was also an F-150. Sounds like an f-150 lightning 2.0, more expressive design, better range, likely better performance and capabilities etc. 

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

So an all electric ranger has been more or less confirmed. As vw discussed how their were currently working on an electric midsized truck with Ford. But I believe ford confirmed this additional truck announced was also an F-150. Sounds like an f-150 lightning 2.0, more expressive design, better range, likely better performance and capabilities etc. 

there was an interview with Trevor Worthington who heads up the T6 program, he basically said that the design covers hybrid, PHEV and BEV, whatever Ford requires….

[akirby]

10 hours ago, jpd80 said:

 the design covers hybrid, PHEV and BEV, whatever Ford requires….

[fuzzymoomoo]

10 hours ago, jpd80 said:

there was an interview with Trevor Worthington who heads up the T6 program, he basically said that the design covers hybrid, PHEV and BEV, whatever Ford requires….

I've heard from a powertrain engineer that it's just a matter of when not if. 

[jpd80]

7 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I've heard from a powertrain engineer that it's just a matter of when not if. 

Whisper is that hybrid and PHEV versions were developed as part of the main project, there’s just no point talking about or releasing them now with scarcity of batteries.

[fuzzymoomoo]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Whisper is that hybrid and PHEV versions were developed as part of the main project, there’s just no point talking about or releasing them now with scarcity of batteries.

I could tell you what I heard the original plan was but no doubt it changed so there's no point. 

[jpd80]

49 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I could tell you what I heard the original plan was but no doubt it changed so there's no point. 

Best not to say anything at the moment as T6 is important for Europe (diesel getting harder to justify) I’ll leave it at that….

[rmc523]

On 5/8/2022 at 5:44 PM, slemke said:

Ford should be optimizing all vehicles, not just BEV.  Many of the aerodynamic and weight reduction improvements can be used on either BEV or ICE.  Same goes for the electronics.

 

IMO, body on frame vehicles such as the 150 already have advantages for being converted to electric.  Plenty of space between the frame rails for batteries.  The floor pan could be modified to remove the transmission tunnel and lower the rear floor, which is already flat.  Or use that space for additional battery capacity.  Traditional truck buyers seem to want a brick with a long hood, any changes to the front end from that formula would likely relegate it to a niche.  Use the space for a 15+ cu ft frunk where tools and gear can be safely stowed from the elements.  We’ll see what comes out in the future, but the current lightning is pretty darn good from a packaging standpoint.  I would like to see additional cab and bed options, though.  With a frunk, regular cab flare side Lightnings may be able to make a comeback.  The ‘99 through ‘03 were my favorites.

 

Nah.  People don't want regular cabs because they can't fit people/trucks are today's "sedan".  Making it look better might sell an extra 5 units, but is aside from the reason they're scarcely sold.

[slemke]

3 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Nah.  People don't want regular cabs because they can't fit people/trucks are today's "sedan".  Making it look better might sell an extra 5 units, but is aside from the reason they're scarcely sold.

For personal use, not many as the extra row of passengers is quite appealing.  But for the termite guy, city inspector, or parts delivery truck?  I was thinking more for the commercial appeal of the regular cab.  The frunk at least alleviates the need to use the extended cab or back seat for cargo storage….so 7 or 8 more