Jump to content

Motor Trend 2023 Truck of the Year


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:


I'd point to the vast growth of Tesla (consistent 50% yoy) and huge demand/order numbers on any recent EV release. I'll admit I don't have numbers in front of me, but the sales and demand seem pretty clear. Obviously trends can change, but almost every manufacturer besides Toyota seems to think that's where we're going.


I think it’s more correct to say there is a clear market for BEVs based solely on consumer demand.  That number is somewhere  above 10% but we don’t really know how high it would be if we had a full range of BEVs at all price points.  My WAG is around 25%.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, akirby said:

The “PHEVs are bad” argument is particularly stupid.  For someone like me who drives less than 20 miles per day 95% of the time a PHEV would result in almost zero gasoline usage.  They’re only bad if your goal is 100% BEV adoption.


From my understanding, unless you can plug in your PHEV, your not going to see that big of an improvement-the battery has to be charged somehow. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:


From my understanding, unless you can plug in your PHEV, your not going to see that big of an improvement-the battery has to be charged somehow. 


Well of course I’d be plugging in nightly.  That’s the whole point.

 

But even without recharging it works just like a normal hybrid with a little added weight.

 

Car and Driver:

 

Quote

The EPA estimates the Escape plug-in hybrid will return 40 mpg once the battery is depleted, which is about equal to the regular hybrid's combined estimates of 41 mpg (FWD) and 40 mpg (AWD); that's also considerably better than the thriftiest nonhybrid Escape, which carries an EPA combined estimate of 30 mpg. 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, akirby said:


I think it’s more correct to say there is a clear market for BEVs based solely on consumer demand.  That number is somewhere  above 10% but we don’t really know how high it would be if we had a full range of BEVs at all price points.  My WAG is around 25%.


That's fair. To be clear, I agree that if the government said it has to happen tomorrow it just wouldn't work for some. I'm more optimistic on the drawbacks being solved more quickly than some, but I guess only time will tell on that. Also, everything I own is a gas guzzling v8 truck or classic car. Not an ICE hater, just like a lot of what EV has to offer and will be considering one if/when Ford can make a super duty class truck that delivers.

Liquid cooled charging should be a game changer for charge times. If the mega charger tech and what Ford was working on can deliver what they promise the whole "5 minute fill up in my gas car" debate will go out the window.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:


Liquid cooled charging should be a game changer for charge times. If the mega charger tech and what Ford was working on can deliver what they promise the whole "5 minute fill up in my gas car" debate will go out the window.


Only after we get enough public chargers built and that is no small task, especially in rural areas.  Too many people are basing their viewpoints on metropolitan areas where you have higher population density, more growth, higher incomes, newer homes, etc.  When you get outside the big cities you find very few fast public chargers and very few homes capable of supporting a level II charger.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, akirby said:


Only after we get enough public chargers built and that is no small task, especially in rural areas.  Too many people are basing their viewpoints on metropolitan areas where you have higher population density, more growth, higher incomes, newer homes, etc.  When you get outside the big cities you find very few fast public chargers and very few homes capable of supporting a level II charger.


Agreed, like I said earlier, there's still parts of the country that don't have enough gas stations. My 8mpg with a load 6.4 diesel gives me range anxiety sometimes pulling a trailer even on the east coast where it's 5-10 miles between exits ?

That said, there's still A LOT of the population that lives in those dense population areas and only commute to work 99% of the time (made up number, but you know what I mean) and that is where the EVs shine.

Edited by Captainp4
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

 

I guarantee you that's not true in the U.S. market. BEV have outsold PHEV every year since at least 2014.

 

Egil_global-EV-trends-3.png


 

Neither BEVs or PHEVs are available on a wide range of models and price points and brands so direct comparisons aren’t valid, especially with Teslaphiles being a large portion of BEV sales.

 

I think the point is given a choice of a BEV or PHEV a large percentage of buyers would choose PHEV today.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Manufacturers like Ford who have a high percentage of ICE sales could benefit by selling more HEVs and PHEVs,

GM is avoiding this and forcing its buyers to choose gasoline or BEV, no in-between so no transitional vehicles.

I think GM will regret that….

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, PS197TT said:

Amazing.  You’re telling me that EVs, with more models, are outselling something with far fewer models that’s virtually hidden in the back, dark corner of the dealership?  

 

No. The data indicates that BEV outsold PHEV even in years when there were more PHEV models available than BEV models. Example. In 2015, there were 13 PHEV models and 11 BEV models certified for sale in the U.S. market by the EPA. Yet Americans preferred to buy BEV over PHEV by a factor of 1.65 that year.

 

In recent years, the number of BEV models has increased steadily, while the number of PHEV models flatlined. Some categories, like the pickup truck segment that F-150 Lightning occupies, have no PHEV models at all currently. Stellantis hinted at a PHEV version of its upcoming Ram Revolution truck, but the BEV version is what should take center stage during the unveiling at CES this Thursday.

 

41 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

GM is avoiding this and forcing its buyers to choose gasoline or BEV, no in-between so no transitional vehicles.

I think GM will regret that….

 

GM's President Mark Reuss said 3 years ago "If I had a dollar more to invest, would I spend it on a hybrid? Or would I spend it on the answer that we all know is going to happen, and get there faster and better than anybody else?" Of course, BEV is "the answer that we all know is going to happen", and is also the correct answer.

 

While GM should have no regrets whatsoever for phasing out its hybrid (including PHEV) vehicles in the U.S. market, at least some GM executives probably regret not getting Silverado/Sierra EV to market faster. Thanks to its first mover advantage, Ford not only dominates the BEV LD fullsize pickup truck sales nowadays, but also has the highest "mind share" among prospective buyers. F-150 Lightning's 2023 Motor Trend TOTY award further enhances Ford's position in the super high growth BEV pickup truck segment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/1/2023 at 4:50 PM, PS197TT said:


That may be true however no buyer cares or even thinks about BTUs when buying an automobile.  They care about things like real world range, time and convenience to refill and price, amongst other things.  
 

And the reality is that an F150 with 26 gallons of fuel will go much farther on that single tank than the extended range Lightning will on two full batteries.  That’s not very efficient.  
 

Btw the MPG figures I quoted above were from fueleconomy.gov using the mixed driving number. And I chose versions of the engines without start stop as that is a joke. 

 

Another factor to consider when using the BTU numbers is they were most likely used when the trucks were empty. Lets compare how many BTU's it takes to haul 10,000 lbs, say 500 miles, which is not an uncommon outing for a F-150.

 

However, I agree in that I couldn't care about BTU's, as having a truck capable of doing the work required in a reasonable time frame is way more important. Even being retired, I still value my time and the time it would take a F-150 Lightning to tow 10,000 lbs 500 miles is not worth considering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

 

GM's President Mark Reuss said 3 years ago "If I had a dollar more to invest, would I spend it on a hybrid? Or would I spend it on the answer that we all know is going to happen, and get there faster and better than anybody else?" Of course, BEV is "the answer that we all know is going to happen", and is also the correct answer.

 

While GM should have no regrets whatsoever for phasing out its hybrid (including PHEV) vehicles in the U.S. market, at least some GM executives probably regret not getting Silverado/Sierra EV to market faster. Thanks to its first mover advantage, Ford not only dominates the BEV LD fullsize pickup truck sales nowadays, but also has the highest "mind share" among prospective buyers. F-150 Lightning's 2023 Motor Trend TOTY award further enhances Ford's position in the super high growth BEV pickup truck segment.

What Reus neatly avoids is the years of building up and reinforcing the idea that the LS/LT V8 was exactly what was wanted and needed by full sized Truck and SUV buyers……now he as head of GM products offers buyers an either/or choice on ICE vs BEV. The hubris in doubling down on the mostly premium priced future solution, leaves many of its current buyers thinking that they are buying their last GM truck or SUV because many just don’t like electrics……..

 

IMO,  GM is deaf to their conventional truck/SUV buyers and only listening to $100k BEV buyers.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

The hubris in doubling down on the mostly premium priced future solution, leaves many of its current buyers thinking that they are buying their last GM truck or SUV because many just don’t like electrics

 

Good point jpd80 about GM executives' hubris. This is the company's biggest weakness nowadays. However, the hubris isn't related to premium priced products, or to its customers not liking BEV. GM has a wide variety of current and upcoming BEV, across the entire spectrum of price points and segments, in their main markets of North America and China.

 

Instead, the hubris at GM is exemplified by their CEO repeatedly suggesting that GM will soon surpass Tesla in BEV design, manufacture, and marketing. That's extremely unlikely. Ford CEO Jim Farley by contrast is much more reasonable. He is content for Ford to be #2 in BEV to Tesla overall, but with leadership in certain segments such as pickup trucks. Which is something F-150 Lightning has already achieved beyond Farley's expectations. ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PS197TT said:

 

All things being equal, people would prefer a PHEV over an EV.  The 2015 numbers are simply those that want an EV no matter what.  

 

PHEVs are a far better solution to lowering petroleum usage than EVs.  You reach a much wider portion of the market because they don't have the pitfalls of EVs.  It's business 101.

 

Lastly, you should be advocating for PHEVs.  Being how they would appeal to a much larger audience, automakers would be able to innovate at a much faster pace and the same advancements that help PHEVs would scale to full EVs.  But right now, it's ICE that is funding EV development.  The 8 ICE F-150s Ford can sell for every Lightning (200 chips vs 1800) is what is funding Lightning development.  That truck and the MachE are not anywhere close to being sustainable on their own.

 

You have offered no evidence that consumers prefer PHEV over EV or how it could reach a wider portion of the market. If people can't plug in anyway, then what good does PHEV do? Why would they consider it? And if they can plug in, EV works better in almost every scenario where PHEV also works, but without the downside: PHEV becomes gross polluters if people rarely or never plug them in.

 

Car companies have lots of data. They spend a fortune studying their customers. If there is huge demand for PHEV, they will be rushing to fill it. But all of them with perhaps exception of Toyota have concluded the demand is in EV.

 

The major problem with PHEV is conceptual: If you actually plug the car in regularly and do not use any gas, then you should be driving an EV. Why lug around an engine you are not using? The trade off for the engine and transmission not being used is actually more battery and longer range. It's a trade off most people are willing to make when they are presented with actual choice and dollars. This is why EV sales took off while PHEV sales flat lined. Car companies do focus group, simulation and data studies to find these things out. They are not just making it up like you.

 

The practical problem with PHEV is the complexity. You have to engineer two full parallel drivetrain that also function as a serial hybrid. Extra the cost that eats into the profit margin. Basically. 

 

There is a place for PHEV. For example, in trucks that offer reliable towing capacity and such. But for family vehicles that are used mainly for commute, PHEV is a bad compromise. If you have access to charge overnight, why would you want to reduce your EV range by 70 or 80% just to have an ICE? Wouldn't you rather cover your entire 60 mile roundtrip commute all in EV mode rather than just 15 miles and then fire up the ICE the rest of the trip? If you don't have access to charge overnight, then stick with a hybrid. PHEV is not relevant. 

 

 

Edited by bzcat
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, PS197TT said:

All things being equal, people would prefer a PHEV over an EV.  The 2015 numbers are simply those that want an EV no matter what.  

Lastly, you should be advocating for PHEVs.  

 

No. 

  1. The future of the global automotive industry is in part defined by 100% electric vehicles
  2. Sales data clearly indicate American consumers have preferred BEV to PHEV for almost a decade (if not more), and that preference is only getting stronger
  3. PHEV perpetuates and prolongs the use of ICE and petroleum much more than they facilitate the transition to BEV (read the ICCT report linked earlier in this thread).
  4. Nowadays, BEV are fully capable substitutes for millions of ICE vehicles. F-150 Lightning is a good example.

 

In terms of PHEV related advocacy, a good starting point would be to eliminate all PHEV models from qualifying for the clean vehicle tax credit under Internal Revenue Code Section 30D.

Edited by rperez817
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bzcat said:

 

You have offered no evidence that consumers prefer PHEV over EV or how it could reach a wider portion of the market. If people can't plug in anyway, then what good does PHEV do? Why would they consider it? And if they can plug in, EV works better in almost every scenario where PHEV also works, but without the downside: PHEV becomes gross polluters if people rarely or never plug them in.

 

 


Here we go again.  EVs do not work better in “almost every scenario”.  They work better in SOME scenarios.  They do not work (yet) for the majority of drivers in rural areas and won’t for at least a decade or two.  And a large percentage of buyers are not willing to drive long distances with an EV for 2 reasons either they are traveling to a rural area without much charging infrastructure or they are not willing to plan their trip routes and times around charger availability.  I’m certainly in that category.  I bet the majority of EV owners have another ICE vehicle for exactly those reasons.

 

So a PHEV allows some EV operation under the right circumstances but also allows unrestricted travel with no compromises.  Is it more complicated?  Yes but no more so than a HEV.  And it works for everybody everywhere.  I admit the use cases where someone is willing to charge every night and drive less than 30 miles a day are limited but they do exist.  
 

One BEV and one ICE/HEV is a good compromise for households with 2 vehicles but for folks who only have one vehicle and don’t want a BEV a PHEV makes sense.  Of course it’s a temporary situation as BEVs and infrastructure improve over time.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, akirby said:


Well of course I’d be plugging in nightly.  That’s the whole point.

 

But even without recharging it works just like a normal hybrid with a little added weight.

Right , but if you can recharge at home, BEV would be generally a better bet if you want to save on gas…

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to F-150 Lightning. Lightning's main downside is none of these.

  • Long distance towing
  • Charging (times, infrastructure, etc.)
  • Usage in rural areas
  • Competition from upcoming Tesla, GM, and Stellantis BEV pickups
  • Price increases

The main downside is that demand (both short and long-term) for the truck is so far ahead of Ford's ability to build them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

Right , but if you can recharge at home, BEV would be generally a better bet if you want to save on gas…


I don’t know why we keep talking past each other.  MOST drivers are not willing to go 100% BEV yet due to the reasons I already mentioned.  Once you get away from metropolitan areas and large cities the public and residential charging infrastructure is scarce.  I would not even consider driving a BEV to my hometown.  The house and/or hotel does not support 220v charging and the nearest public charger is 40 miles away.  Others are simply not willing to take long trips and plan their drive around chargers and spend extra time recharging.  Doesn’t mean it can’t be done if you’re willing to make a lot of compromises but not something most buyers are willing to do right now.

 

So for these people the choice is ICE, HEV or PHEV.  In that case PHEV makes sense.  Use electricity 98% of the time but use gasoline on longer trips.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, bzcat said:

PHEV becomes gross polluters if people rarely or never plug them in.

 

Relative to what?  Almost nothing about this electrification subject is that black and white.

 

 If compared to an HEV, a PHEV adds a little weight, so yes, if powered strictly from ICE energy because it rarely gets charged it would pollute more than a similar HEV by maybe 10% or so, but does that make it a gross polluter?  Isn’t it still better than most ICE options being sold today?

 

If compared to a BEV powered from 100% renewable, then yes, PHEV pollutes more.  However, if BEV is powered from typical grid mix at present, or over next 10 years for that matter, it’s probably a toss-up.  I can’t view PHEV as “gross polluters” for at least 10 years even if never charged. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stellantis is introducing a plug-in Dodge Hornet (later this week?) which suggests PHEV efforts have not been abandoned completely.  Preliminary specs and description are interesting in that it uses 90 kW motor to power rear wheels when operating as a BEV on short local trips, with small 1.3L turbo ICE powering front wheels through a 6-speed-automatic when needed on longer drives.

 

Electric range is limited, but battery weight is less than 300 pounds.  I’m curious to see what total weight and EPA ratings will be.

 

https://topelectricsuv.com/news/dodge/dodge-hornet-suv-plug-in-hybrid/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/3/2023 at 11:24 AM, Captainp4 said:

The weird thing to me is the extreme anti-EV people choosing to ignore that the market and manufacturers already made the decision before any mandate from the .gov. I'd understand the outrage if .gov came in and said next year ICE is banned, but it should be clear to anyone that follows the industry even loosely that EV is the future for the vast majority of use cases. There are and will be outliers on the extremes of use, but most of the anti-ev talking points you see on social media are just made up BS. Infrastructure in the middle of the country is a valid concern, there's parts of the country where you can run out of gas/diesel if not paying attention to the "last gas station for X miles" signs, not sure how charging stations compare out in the middle of nowhere.

 


This isn’t exactly true.  Ford, or any other manufacturer, have the ability to produce what they want, however due to long product development cycles the manufacturer is forced to hedge against the ever changing mpg and other environmental standards which are set by the government.  If not for these standards, would we even be debating this?   
 

Im not anti-EV and have no intention of debating the merits of government standards, but EVs are a direct response to government intervention and not free market dynamics IMO.  Now the manufacturers are faced with straddling the two technologies to meet consumer demand, which certainly looks like a slippery slope for them to me. 

 

Current EV capability does not meet my expectations because I want a zero compromise vehicle, but at some point those compromises are likely to be resolved and I will consider one. 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, PS197TT said:

I have.  It's common sense how a PHEV will reach a wider portion of the market when you take a realistic look at why people are not interested in EVs.  Range and availability of reasonable recharge options.


What you think and what is actually happening with the market are two completely different things. Don’t assume what you want is what the rest of the market wants. 
 

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, PS197TT said:

 

That absurd.


It’s at least partially true in Europe where stupid laws force PHEVs to run in charge sustaining mode to save the battery for use in city areas.

 

Otherwise they’re virtually the same as regular HEVs.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PS197TT said:

Ha!  Good one.  That's completely ridiculous but gave me a good laugh.

 

Glad you got a laugh, but smart automakers recognize that not only is an all-electric future not "completely ridiculous" (just the opposite), but that their long-term survival depends on exiting the ICE age. The sooner, the better IMO.

 

Ford Motor Company fortunately is committed to an all-electric future and made the following statement at the COP26 conference in 2021. At the rate of BEV adoption nowadays, I wouldn't be surprised if Ford has an all-electric vehicle lineup in its "leading markets" of North America, Europe, and China closer to 2030.

 

Ford has signed the ambitious RouteZero initiative which aims to reduce carbon associated with road transportation. We join more than 50 businesses, cities and regions that have pledged to work together toward 100 percent zero-emission cars and vans globally by 2040, and in leading markets no later than 2035.

Electrification represents the most transformative change of our industry in over 100 years and at Ford, we are leading the way in our ambition to create a sustainably profitable all-electric future. We’re doing this with both passenger vehicles and commercial vehicles, providing customer choice while delivering CO2 performance. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...