Fords Game Changer LMR Battery

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Not my idea of tiny, at least not small enough to go even close to 200 miles Highway on 50 kWh battery.

I'd argue tiny is relative, the maverick isn't tiny compared to some sort of 90s 2- door ranger. But that ranger isn't tiny compared to a Japanese Kei truck. 

 

Imo, the size, power, style of a vehicle, should often be judged relative to whatever other vehicles are offered on the market at the same time. As such, while the maverick may not be the smallest truck ever, it is a tiny truck when compared to basically any other modern truck on the road. Every time I park my maverick next to any full sized, or even most mid-sized trucks, I'm blown away by how small it is relative to the other trucks you can buy. 

 

If the maverick was any smaller, it would be too compromised for most modern buyers who want a bed, but also a usable rear seat. It's about as small as it can be while still being a solid all around daily family vehicle. 

 

[DeluxeStang]

52 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Actually, a Smart car did not even reach the level of energy efficiency some of you want out of this new Ford truck.  Should keep expectations real, based on science, not marketing hype.  I fear a lot of you are setting yourselves up for disappointment.

I believe the slate with the smallest battery still has like 150 miles of range. Keep in mind Ford talked about how they gained 50 plus miles of range over a conventional looking truck by having far more advanced areo. So even if you take the slate's 150 miles and add 50 miles onto it with no other changes, that's 200 miles of range. 

 

But then factor in the fact that Ford's engineering seems to be far more impressive and advanced than what Slate is doing, and they're almost certainly finding other efficiency gains Slate engineers didn't both with. 

 

So I wouldn't be surprised if Fords EV truck had like 225 miles of range, which isn't awful for an affordable EV imo. Anything in the mid to high 200s and I would be pretty thrilled. 

[Rick73]

23 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I believe the slate with the smallest battery still has like 150 miles of range. Keep in mind Ford talked about how they gained 50 plus miles of range over a conventional looking truck by having far more advanced areo. So even if you take the slate's 150 miles and add 50 miles onto it with no other changes, that's 200 miles of range. 

 

But then factor in the fact that Ford's engineering seems to be far more impressive and advanced than what Slate is doing, and they're almost certainly finding other efficiency gains Slate engineers didn't both with. 

 

So I wouldn't be surprised if Fords EV truck had like 225 miles of range, which isn't awful for an affordable EV imo. Anything in the mid to high 200s and I would be pretty thrilled. 

The 50-mile driving range gain needs context.  There’s a world of difference between improving from 300 to 350 versus 150 to 200 miles.  Same 50-mile gain represents a much different reduction in drag as a percentage.  Do you have specifics?  I haven’t seen any projections at all thus far but look forward to it.  Unfortunately sometimes “correct” information is used to mislead by presenting out of context.  Not saying Ford is doing it here, but we need to consider all possibilities when speculating. 🤔 

 

The other important point is that we started discussing and or debating a battery capacity of only 50 kWh for this new truck because it has been assumed (by others) that a higher battery capacity would make the truck more expensive than targeted goal; often stated around $30k.  I’m not sure 50 kWh is still a valid limit given Bolt and Leaf EVs both exceed that battery capacity at a starting MSRP of around $30k.  Their capacity numbers are 65 and 75 kWh respectively IIRC so if they can make a profit, maybe the Ford truck will also have much greater battery capacity than 50 kWh.  Additionally, an inexpensive truck with only 50 kWh would not be able to tow much at all for any real distance, and would not go very far at 75 MPH Interstate speeds, relegating it to a city pickup for the most part.  I just don’t see Ford doing that.  Please keep in mind that much of my reasoning and speculation is based on real-world driving conditions and not just EPA ratings that can also be very misleading.

 

 

[Sherminator98]

8 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Additionally, an inexpensive truck with only 50 kWh would not be able to tow much at all for any real distance, and would not go very far at 75 MPH Interstate speeds, relegating it to a city pickup for the most part.  I just don’t see Ford doing that.  Please keep in mind that much of my reasoning and speculation is based on real-world driving conditions and not just EPA ratings that can also be very misleading.

 

Towing is going to be trade off in this EV pickup-its going to be a lifestyle vehicle, not a work vehicle. It will be able to say tow a small/light boat, ATV or Jet ski. 

but I guess we will see what Ford has planned. 
 

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

The 50-mile driving range gain needs context.  There’s a world of difference between improving from 300 to 350 versus 150 to 200 miles.  Same 50-mile gain represents a much different reduction in drag as a percentage.  Do you have specifics?  I haven’t seen any projections at all thus far but look forward to it.  Unfortunately sometimes “correct” information is used to mislead by presenting out of context.  Not saying Ford is doing it here, but we need to consider all possibilities when speculating. 🤔 

 

The other important point is that we started discussing and or debating a battery capacity of only 50 kWh for this new truck because it has been assumed (by others) that a higher battery capacity would make the truck more expensive than targeted goal; often stated around $30k.  I’m not sure 50 kWh is still a valid limit given Bolt and Leaf EVs both exceed that battery capacity at a starting MSRP of around $30k.  Their capacity numbers are 65 and 75 kWh respectively IIRC so if they can make a profit, maybe the Ford truck will also have much greater battery capacity than 50 kWh.  Additionally, an inexpensive truck with only 50 kWh would not be able to tow much at all for any real distance, and would not go very far at 75 MPH Interstate speeds, relegating it to a city pickup for the most part.  I just don’t see Ford doing that.  Please keep in mind that much of my reasoning and speculation is based on real-world driving conditions and not just EPA ratings that can also be very misleading.

 

 

Valid points friend. So as for towing, I believe there was some interview with an engineer who said towing wasn't a priority with this truck, my guess is it'll do about 2,000 lbs like my maverick hybrid. Which isn't stellar, but for towing smaller items, you should be fine. 

 

As for the full comment from Ford, I'll link it below. So I was wrong, I said it was a 50 mile range improvement due to aero and Ford could make other gains due to other efficiency improvements. It's 50 miles of range as a result of the aero and efficiency combined, so I apologize. 

 

They say Ford didn't compromise on it. To me, that means maybe a battery pack that's much smaller than what Ford currently offers, but with a range comparable to their mach-e and lightning. 

[jpd80]

On 9/26/2025 at 4:56 AM, DeluxeStang said:

Valid points friend. So as for towing, I believe there was some interview with an engineer who said towing wasn't a priority with this truck, my guess is it'll do about 2,000 lbs like my maverick hybrid. Which isn't stellar, but for towing smaller items, you should be fine. 

 

As for the full comment from Ford, I'll link it below. So I was wrong, I said it was a 50 mile range improvement due to aero and Ford could make other gains due to other efficiency improvements. It's 50 miles of range as a result of the aero and efficiency combined, so I apologize. 

 

They say Ford didn't compromise on it. To me, that means maybe a battery pack that's much smaller than what Ford currently offers, but with a range comparable to their mach-e and lightning. 

 

I think it’s a case of separating the actual objectives from marketing.

Ford is selling the smaller battery as a way of keeping prices down for buyers and profits up for itself.

They will offer a longer range battery for buyers but with the premium price to go with it.

 

Think back, all of Ford’s perceived mis steps with electrified vehicles has been because in the past,

it wrongly assumed something, there is no evidence that Ford’s thought processes have changed.

They now push plan B with its smaller lighter batteries because it’s cheaper for them to make

and are trying to sell near future buyers that this is all they need; all without understanding why

sales potential for Lightning and T3 collapsed (Ford’s own greed did that).

Edited September 26 by jpd80

[ScottLeonard]

On 9/25/2025 at 8:24 PM, Rick73 said:

The 50-mile driving range gain needs context.  There’s a world of difference between improving from 300 to 350 versus 150 to 200 miles.  Same 50-mile gain represents a much different reduction in drag as a percentage.  Do you have specifics?  I haven’t seen any projections at all thus far but look forward to it.  Unfortunately sometimes “correct” information is used to mislead by presenting out of context.  Not saying Ford is doing it here, but we need to consider all possibilities when speculating. 🤔 

 

The other important point is that we started discussing and or debating a battery capacity of only 50 kWh for this new truck because it has been assumed (by others) that a higher battery capacity would make the truck more expensive than targeted goal; often stated around $30k.  I’m not sure 50 kWh is still a valid limit given Bolt and Leaf EVs both exceed that battery capacity at a starting MSRP of around $30k.  Their capacity numbers are 65 and 75 kWh respectively IIRC so if they can make a profit, maybe the Ford truck will also have much greater battery capacity than 50 kWh.  Additionally, an inexpensive truck with only 50 kWh would not be able to tow much at all for any real distance, and would not go very far at 75 MPH Interstate speeds, relegating it to a city pickup for the most part.  I just don’t see Ford doing that.  Please keep in mind that much of my reasoning and speculation is based on real-world driving conditions and not just EPA ratings that can also be very misleading.

It's interesting to see Ford pushing the boundaries of what's possible with the battery, aiming to lower the cost of electric vehicles and increase their performance. I used to have a problem with this in general, but now my income has increased and I don't worry about the cost of the car. This came about after I found full PokiesPros guide on https://pokiespros.com/best-payout-pokies/ if you are interested in researching high-payout online games, you might find this helpful resource. It is always interesting to see how technological advances intersect across different industries.

 

 

Good points; you’re right, without context, a 50-mile gain can be misleading. Larger capacity seems realistic; 50 kWh feels too limiting for Ford’s goals!

Edited October 2 by ScottLeonard

[DeluxeStang]

9 hours ago, ScottLeonard said:

Good points; you’re right, without context, a 50-mile gain can be misleading. Larger capacity seems realistic; 50 kWh feels too limiting for Ford’s goals!

It's confusing, Ford's alluded to a battery that's 2/3rds the size of their current EVs, or rival products. But we don't know if they're referring to something like a mach-e with its bigger or smaller battery pack. I want to say the mach-e with a larger battery it's around 90 KWH.

 

So this truck would be about 60, which is far more believable than 50 imo. Especially if this truck had "Incredible range, and can power your house for 6 days" which is what Farley is claiming. 

[Rick73]

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

It's confusing, Ford's alluded to a battery that's 2/3rds the size of their current EVs, or rival products. But we don't know if they're referring to something like a mach-e with its bigger or smaller battery pack. I want to say the mach-e with a larger battery it's around 90 KWH.

 

So this truck would be about 60, which is far more believable than 50 imo. Especially if this truck had "Incredible range, and can power your house for 6 days" which is what Farley is claiming. 

Since Lightning is Ford’s only battery electric pickup, I assume the 2/3 reference may apply to it more than others, but we are guessing no matter what until Ford share information.  And if they offer a lower-cost bare-bones trim meant mostly to hit a certain price point for marketing purposes, I think 2/3 of Lightning would still be around 65 kWh IIRC, which isn’t that far off from a possible 50 kWh.

 

In one interview Farley stated that not everyone needs more than 300 miles of range, which makes me think that may be the upper limit or goal on range.  It would not surprise me at all if they go with two battery sizes, with smaller in 50~65 kWh capacity range and larger in 75~90 kWh range.

 

 

[jpd80]

10 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Since Lightning is Ford’s only battery electric pickup, I assume the 2/3 reference may apply to it more than others, but we are guessing no matter what until Ford share information.  And if they offer a lower-cost bare-bones trim meant mostly to hit a certain price point for marketing purposes, I think 2/3 of Lightning would still be around 65 kWh IIRC, which isn’t that far off from a possible 50 kWh.

Around mid 2022, reviews of towing tests revealed that Lightning’s range dropped to 100 miles

 the appeal for Lightning seemed to flat line overnight as a whole bunch of interested buyers

suddenly realised that Lightning wouldn’t do what they were expecting, regularly towing something.

 

Unlike selling a BEV Utility, many truck buyers see the above as a fatal flaw with owning a BEV pickup,

so I wonder how many buyers are going to be pissed all over again when Ford brings out its midsized 

BEV pickup with a proportionately smaller battery.

 

This may also be a double whammy for Ford if existing Lightning buyers decide to downsize to

the newer smaller BEV pickup, so is Ford about to trade one set of sales numbers for another?

 

10 hours ago, Rick73 said:

In one interview Farley stated that not everyone needs more than 300 miles of range, which makes me think that may be the upper limit or goal on range.  It would not surprise me at all if they go with two battery sizes, with smaller in 50~65 kWh capacity range and larger in 75~90 kWh range.

This is where a corporate like Ford runs into real trouble, rational thinking and deciding that buyers

only need a limited battery can be a fatal flaw, particularly if the competition offers more.

So I’m betting there will be an optional long range battery that may become the default for many buyers

and there goes the impressive, low price…

Edited October 3 by jpd80