F-150 Lightning becomes an EREV

[mackinaw]

49 minutes ago, Biker16 said:

 

I don't think it will be a repeat of what happened to sedans. 

 

These big EVs are expensive but profitable. 

 

I think GM knows they can wait it out as battery prices continue to fall. 

 

Not at the meager volumes they're currently selling at.  Chevrolet sold a whopping ~9,500 Silverado EV's in 2025, which is less than 800/month.  The GMC EV model, sold even less.  Tesla sold more Cybertrucks than both of the GM twins, and the Cybertruck is considered to be a failure.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Biker16 said:

 

I don't think it will be a repeat of what happened to sedans. 

 

These big EVs are expensive but profitable. 

 

I think GM knows they can wait it out as battery prices continue to fall. 

It depends, it may be better to write down as much as possible now

because better battery tech and lower prices may be longer coming

than expected. GM could probably repurpose Ultium batteries to HEV

and PHEV as a way of getting a return on that production…

 

there’s always a way to recover costs after the press has their headlines.

[SoonerLS]

On 12/31/2025 at 9:02 AM, fordmantpw said:

 

Ummm, yes it is!  Ever heard of GVWR and how that affects how much you can haul/tow with your truck?  Weight is VERY important in pickup trucks!

 

Why do you think Ford put all the money and effort into switching to Al if weight isn't as issue.

Every pound of battery is a pound of payload you don’t get, and lots of F-150s max out on payload before they hit the towing limit. If you use it as a car, weight doesn’t matter, but if you bought it to use as a truck, it really does. 

[Biker16]

10 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

IDK if they're profitable man, they weren't for Ford, I'd be surprised if anyone is making money on these massive EVs right now. I agree there will be more profit potential in the future, but for right now, I don't see it manifesting. 

 

9 hours ago, mackinaw said:

 

Not at the meager volumes they're currently selling at.  Chevrolet sold a whopping ~9,500 Silverado EV's in 2025, which is less than 800/month.  The GMC EV model, sold even less.  Tesla sold more Cybertrucks than both of the GM twins, and the Cybertruck is considered to be a failure.

 

The majority of the costs of EVs are in the batteries, inverters, motors. Etc. or everything in the image below, makes up 50-70% of the costs of the EV.

 

 

GM ultium platform is shared by 17 vehicles 8 are higher price/premium nameplates including Hummer, Cadillac, and large pickup trucks.

GMs strategy was focused on cost reduction through platform volume, Ford couldn't do that with the Mach-E and F series, because they don't share enough to build an ecosystem of shared high value components. While not profitable today GMs strategy can lead to profits sooner and far fewer losses going forward. In the near term ford has no plan to expand their EV lineup or introduce refreshed models

 

 

With the introduction of the affordable new BOLT GM is well positioned tor growth.

[akirby]

24 minutes ago, Biker16 said:

 

 

The majority of the costs of EVs are in the batteries, inverters, motors. Etc. or everything in the image below, makes up 50-70% of the costs of the EV.

 

 

GM ultium platform is shared by 17 vehicles 8 are higher price/premium nameplates including Hummer, Cadillac, and large pickup trucks.

GMs strategy was focused on cost reduction through platform volume, Ford couldn't do that with the Mach-E and F series, because they don't share enough to build an ecosystem of shared high value components. While not profitable today GMs strategy can lead to profits sooner and far fewer losses going forward. In the near term ford has no plan to expand their EV lineup or introduce refreshed models

 

 

With the introduction of the affordable new BOLT GM is well positioned tor growth.

 

Selling in volume helps amortize development costs and fixed overhead but not so much variable costs until you hit hundreds of thousands or a million units.  And having so many different tophats each with relatively low volume increases fixed costs.  
 

All is not rosy with Ultium either.

 

https://insideevs.com/features/709703/gm-ultium-problems-software-batteries/

[Biker16]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

 

Selling in volume helps amortize development costs and fixed overhead but not so much variable costs until you hit hundreds of thousands or a million units.  And having so many different tophats each with relatively low volume increases fixed costs.  
 

All is not rosy with Ultium either.

 

https://insideevs.com/features/709703/gm-ultium-problems-software-batteries/

 

But GM, like VW, has been able to weather the storm of bugs, mistakes, and the learning needed to sustain their electric vehicle platforms and launch improvements and increase affordability.

 

No pain, no gain.

 

Learn to Crawl before you walk. 

 

There are no short cuts in Life or EVs

Edited January 2 by Biker16

[morgan20]

19 minutes ago, Biker16 said:

There are no short cuts in Life or EVs

Yea, exactly. Hopefully the outsiders that Doug Field brought to Ford’s skunkworks will teach that concept to the Ford big shots whose mode of thinking is “short term and shortcuts”.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, morgan20 said:

Yea, exactly. Hopefully the outsiders that Doug Field brought to Ford’s skunkworks will teach that concept to the Ford big shots whose mode of thinking is “short term and shortcuts”.

The biggest plus those outsiders bring is challenging the historic construction process and order of assembly. The advent of Gigacastings transforms the body shop operations, a lot of efficiency and speed could be achieved by this process, even for ICE construction.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Biker16 said:

 

But GM, like VW, has been able to weather the storm of bugs, mistakes, and the learning needed to sustain their electric vehicle platforms and launch improvements and increase affordability.

 

No pain, no gain.

 

Learn to Crawl before you walk. 

 

There are no short cuts in Life or EVs

The biggest hurdle is convincing enough buyers to buy a BEV but yes,

that is also intertwined with the cost and battery density (size weight).

 

My observation is that BEVs seem to be attraction the entry price point 

and the premium flagship buyers, the middle area Tesla made a splash

but feels like that is waning as BYD comes to the fore in China and Europe.

[DeluxeStang]

3 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

The biggest hurdle is convincing enough buyers to buy a BEV but yes,

that is also intertwined with the cost and battery density (size weight).

 

My observation is that BEVs seem to be attraction the entry price point 

and the premium flagship buyers, the middle area Tesla made a splash

but feels like that is waning as BYD comes to the fore in China and Europe.

I believe a large part of why EVs are far more successful at lower price points is because people are more open to trying a new experience out at a more reasonable price. It's kinda like how most people aren't gonna go to an unknown restaurant if it's gonna cost them $500, but will if it's $50. People will take a chance on a new 30k vehicle because at the end of the day, if they end up hating the experience and sell it a year later, they're only out a couple of grand. Whereas with more expensive vehicles, people tend to be drawn to known experiences more, the majority of people I've met only want to spend 80k on a vehicle if they know going in roughly what to expect, and that they'll enjoy it, they don't want to gamble 80 grand on an experiment. 

[Biker16]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

The biggest hurdle is convincing enough buyers to buy a BEV but yes,

that is also intertwined with the cost and battery density (size weight).

I have been thinking about this. 

I have an unpopular opinion that buyers buy what they can, and choice is an illusion for most buyers.

To Be Clear, when most buyers need a car, they go to the Dealership and choose from whatever they have available, whether that is a new Version of their current vehicle or an "upgrade" to a new format or class. 

With a New product like an EV, there is risk for the buyer and the salesperson. It's much easier to sell a more familiar product with less risk of a confused or disappointed Customer than a new "riskier" EV. 

To your point, buyers need to be convinced, and not scared by the technology. This starts with convincing the dealers and salespeople that EVs are a good fit for most buyers. 

This will happen naturally over time as more normies live with EVs and the perceived penalties are reduced and eliminated. Right now, making EVs affordable is the best way to increase sales.

No matter the Backwardness of the US, all Automakers have no choice but to drive the costs out of EVs; global competition gives them no other choice. 

 

[akirby]

3 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

I believe a large part of why EVs are far more successful at lower price points is because people are more open to trying a new experience out at a more reasonable price. It's kinda like how most people aren't gonna go to an unknown restaurant if it's gonna cost them $500, but will if it's $50. People will take a chance on a new 30k vehicle because at the end of the day, if they end up hating the experience and sell it a year later, they're only out a couple of grand. Whereas with more expensive vehicles, people tend to be drawn to known experiences more, the majority of people I've met only want to spend 80k on a vehicle if they know going in roughly what to expect, and that they'll enjoy it, they don't want to gamble 80 grand on an experiment. 

I don't think that's it.  I think it's much simpler.  Start with 100 people who can afford a new car at $25k.  Only 75 can afford a $35k car.  Only 40 can afford a $45k car.  Every $5k in price reduces the pool of available buyers.  That's why for cars and SUVs the volume is inversely proportional to price.  
 

Want to increase sales?  Drop prices.  Not unique to EVs.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Biker16 said:

I have been thinking about this. 

I have an unpopular opinion that buyers buy what they can, and choice is an illusion for most buyers.

To Be Clear, when most buyers need a car, they go to the Dealership and choose from whatever they have available, whether that is a new Version of their current vehicle or an "upgrade" to a new format or class. 

With a New product like an EV, there is risk for the buyer and the salesperson. It's much easier to sell a more familiar product with less risk of a confused or disappointed Customer than a new "riskier" EV. 

To your point, buyers need to be convinced, and not scared by the technology. This starts with convincing the dealers and salespeople that EVs are a good fit for most buyers. 

This will happen naturally over time as more normies live with EVs and the perceived penalties are reduced and eliminated. Right now, making EVs affordable is the best way to increase sales.

Regarding most new vehicle buyers, I think that there’s just no compelling reason to own

a BEV plus those people are not ready to give up on ICE and various hybrids.

This issue is exacerbated in places like North America where the cost of fuel is still 

relatively cheap….

 

[jpd80]

16 minutes ago, akirby said:

I don't think that's it.  I think it's much simpler.  Start with 100 people who can afford a new car at $25k.  Only 75 can afford a $35k car.  Only 40 can afford a $45k car.  Every $5k in price reduces the pool of available buyers.  That's why for cars and SUVs the volume is inversely proportional to price.  
 

Want to increase sales?  Drop prices.  Not unique to EVs.

Some of your posts should be required reading…

[DeluxeStang]

28 minutes ago, akirby said:

I don't think that's it.  I think it's much simpler.  Start with 100 people who can afford a new car at $25k.  Only 75 can afford a $35k car.  Only 40 can afford a $45k car.  Every $5k in price reduces the pool of available buyers.  That's why for cars and SUVs the volume is inversely proportional to price.  
 

Want to increase sales?  Drop prices.  Not unique to EVs.

While a higher price does add additional barriers to entry, I believe if that was the main thing that mattered, we wouldn't see anywhere near as many large full-sized SUVs and well equipped trucks as we do. Given how expensive they are, things like well equipped expeditions or suburbans are incredibly popular, same with a lot of nice f-series. 

 

I believe it's because there's a sense of familiarity there. A 2025 expedition is going to be more refined and advanced than a 2015 expedition by a very sizable margin. But the way it drives, what it's like to maintain and live with, is probably pretty similar. You have to adapt to the new features and so on, but there's still some points of comparison. People feel more comfortable with it because it's what they know. 

 

Whereas transitioning to an EV, you have to adapt to an entirely new maintenance and charging experience, with a driving experience unlike what many have experienced. I believe a lot of people find that too off-putting, and aren't prepared to spend serious money on a vehicle unlike anything they've owned before out of fear that they'll hate the ownership experience. 

Edited January 3 by DeluxeStang

[DeluxeStang]

14 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Regarding most new vehicle buyers, I think that there’s just no compelling reason to own

a BEV plus those people are not ready to give up on ICE and various hybrids.

This issue is exacerbated in places like North America where the cost of fuel is still 

relatively cheap….

 

When it comes to affordable vehicles, I think the main appeal of EV tech is it'll make cars feel a lot more premium. The refinement, smoothness, lack of noise you get with an EV, that makes a 30k EV feel like a high end gas powered vehicle. Whereas a lot of 25-30k gas powered vehicles can feel a little harsh, or buzzy, even a maverick hybrid which pains me to say as an owner of one. It's usually fine, other times it feels pretty suspect. 

 

For buyers who just want the nicest feeling, most reliable, lowest maintenance vehicles, affordable vehicles with the fewest compromises, EVs are gonna be the future there. 

[akirby]

52 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

While a higher price does add additional barriers to entry, I believe if that was the main thing that mattered, we wouldn't see anywhere near as many large full-sized SUVs and well equipped trucks as we do. Given how expensive they are, things like well equipped expeditions or suburbans are incredibly popular, same with a lot of nice f-series. 

 

I believe it's because there's a sense of familiarity there. A 2025 expedition is going to be more refined and advanced than a 2015 expedition by a very sizable margin. But the way it drives, what it's like to maintain and live with, is probably pretty similar. You have to adapt to the new features and so on, but there's still some points of comparison. People feel more comfortable with it because it's what they know. 

 

Whereas transitioning to an EV, you have to adapt to an entirely new maintenance and charging experience, with a driving experience unlike what many have experienced. I believe a lot of people find that too off-putting, and aren't prepared to spend serious money on a vehicle unlike anything they've owned before out of fear that they'll hate the ownership experience. 

2 separate things.  Buyers either want or are willing to live with EV limitations or not.  For the ones willing to purchase an EV they might not be able to afford what they want or what they want might not be available yet.

 

Look at large suv monthly sales and compare it to small cars and suvs.  Out of 100 potential buyers almost all could afford a small car but only 10% could afford a new Expedition.   As price goes up you lose potential buyers.  That's why having a lower priced EV that can be sold at a decent profit is so attractive.  That's where the biggest volume is.  The challenge in the past was it was difficult to compete in that space and make healthy margins.  That's where ce1 has the potential to be a game changer.

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

2 separate things.  Buyers either want or are willing to live with EV limitations or not.  For the ones willing to purchase an EV they might not be able to afford what they want or what they want might not be available yet.

 

Look at large suv monthly sales and compare it to small cars and suvs.  Out of 100 potential buyers almost all could afford a small car but only 10% could afford a new Expedition.   As price goes up you lose potential buyers.  That's why having a lower priced EV that can be sold at a decent profit is so attractive.  That's where the biggest volume is.  The challenge in the past was it was difficult to compete in that space and make healthy margins.  That's where ce1 has the potential to be a game changer.

I'd say this is one of those situations where we're both right. I agree that the desire to own EVs, especially amongst younger consumers, is there, but that high prices are gatekeeping those buyers from getting into new EVs, we agree on that. It's just that most consumers who have the level of income and assets needed to afford these massive, expensive EVs, tend to be on the older side.

 

In terms of tech perception, a significant portion of older consumers just don't like EVs, it's too different from what they know, they're often skeptical of new technology and adopting it unless they have to. Generally speaking, a lot of people as they age kinda settle into things, they don't want to have to relearn, and adapt to something drastically different than what they already know, unless it's absolutely necessary. A 70 yr old doesn't want to be stuck at a charging station in the middle of winter at night trouble shooting a sketchy charger when filling up for gas is something they've done for decades and can do effortlessly.

 

This doesn't apply to everyone, there are wealthy young people and tech savvy old people, but just as a general rule that's what I've observed. Again, it's a case of both of us being right, EV adoption is struggling because the people who want EVs, often younger, can't afford most of the ones on sale, and the people who can afford them are skeptical of the tech and don't want to embrace it. CE1 shifts towards EVs that will actually have demand.

[morgan20]

13 hours ago, DeluxeStang said:

For buyers who just want the nicest feeling, most reliable, lowest maintenance vehicles, affordable vehicles with the fewest compromises, EVs are gonna be the future there. 

 

Of the several Ford F-150s I've owned over the years, my current 2022 F-150 Lightning is by far the nicest feeling, most reliable, lowest maintenance, affordable vehicle with the fewest compromises. That's why Ford needs to ensure that next generation F-150 Lightning family includes a pure battery electric version in addition to the EREV they already announced. EREV is, by definition, a compromise.

[jpd80]

7 hours ago, morgan20 said:

 

Of the several Ford F-150s I've owned over the years, my current 2022 F-150 Lightning is by far the nicest feeling, most reliable, lowest maintenance, affordable vehicle with the fewest compromises. That's why Ford needs to ensure that next generation F-150 Lightning family includes a pure battery electric version in addition to the EREV they already announced. EREV is, by definition, a compromise.

It’s a shame that the REVC couldn’t do both, keep on building Lightning

with all the TE3 drive and battery upgrades plus making the EREV F150

Think about that, F150 would then cover all options from straight ICE to hybrid to EREV to BEV.

and all of them safely tucked under the wing of F150 program.

Edited January 3 by jpd80

[Captainp4]

On 1/2/2026 at 9:38 PM, akirby said:

2 separate things.  Buyers either want or are willing to live with EV limitations or not.  For the ones willing to purchase an EV they might not be able to afford what they want or what they want might not be available yet.

 

Look at large suv monthly sales and compare it to small cars and suvs.  Out of 100 potential buyers almost all could afford a small car but only 10% could afford a new Expedition.   As price goes up you lose potential buyers.  That's why having a lower priced EV that can be sold at a decent profit is so attractive.  That's where the biggest volume is.  The challenge in the past was it was difficult to compete in that space and make healthy margins.  That's where ce1 has the potential to be a game changer.

For me personally, it is towing capacity and range holding me back from jumping to BEV for my work truck. I'm just barely into needing a 250 class vehicle. The 150s will technically/legally tow my 26ft enclosed with lawn equipment, but I tow essentially 100% of the time with my work truck and I think we all know if you're almost at max capacity all of the time things are going to start breaking down pretty quickly. 

We did make the jump on my gf's commuter to bev and went with a new model Y a few months ago and even with all the classics/custom builds I own, it is one of the coolest cars I've ever been in and it just keeps getting over the air updates to make the FSD and UI better. Quieter than her previous MKC, though on very rough roads I notice it struggles a little more controlling the NVH. Fast af too. Not going to put that shit eating grin on my face like 7.3psd turbo noises or a big block 460 screaming at 6k rpm (but putting the hammer down legit makes me giggle lol), but objectively it is an amazing car for people that just want to go a-b with little or no maintenance. Price is definitely a barrier for most now, especially with the tax credit going away - we pulled the trigger because it was, not because we were having any issues with the mkc.

As far as an EREV, it defeats the purpose for me. Delete the engine for batteries, then put the engine back in and add all that complexity back in. Might work for some people and might even sell better than a pure BEV, but I'm not interested. I'll wait until battery tech improves. If Tesla can do it with Semi someone can do it with a pickup that needs to tow around 10k every day. 

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:

As far as an EREV, it defeats the purpose for me. Delete the engine for batteries, then put the engine back in and add all that complexity back in. Might work for some people and might even sell better than a pure BEV, but I'm not interested.

To me an EREV only makes sense if you normally drive less than 100 miles per day empty but occasionally need to take a long trip or tow something.  Otherwise it's essentially a powerboost hybrid.

[jpd80]

5 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

As far as an EREV, it defeats the purpose for me. Delete the engine for batteries, then put the engine back in and add all that complexity back in. Might work for some people and might even sell better than a pure BEV, but I'm not interested. I'll wait until battery tech improves. If Tesla can do it with Semi someone can do it with a pickup that needs to tow around 10k every day. 

 

3 hours ago, akirby said:

To me an EREV only makes sense if you normally drive less than 100 miles per day empty but occasionally need to take a long trip or tow something.  Otherwise it's essentially a powerboost hybrid.

EREV is an interesting vehicle and from what I’ve seen, Ford tends to

tip a PHEV with slightly larger battery into the EREV category.

 

While the benefits of more on site power is there, I think the real point

is to add enough electric range to get around some of the tougher

government rules, like California and aligned states.

Maybe I’m on the wrong wavelength with this but seems like a compliance

 vehicle but with enough power and features to avoid being branded a slug.

[Texasota]

17 hours ago, jpd80 said:

EREV is an interesting vehicle and from what I’ve seen, Ford tends to tip a PHEV with slightly larger battery into the EREV category.

I hope you are right. This sounds more promising to me than the direction the Ram 1500 REV (formerly called Ramcharger) has gone with a 3.6 Pentastar V6 and a large/heavy battery pack. The Ram 1500 REV will weigh 7500 pounds (2200 pounds heavier than the ICE Ram). To put that 2200 pounds in perspective, it would be like having 11 big guys riding in the ICE Ram.

 

https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/pickup-trucks/2026-ram-1500-review-a6774701775/

Edited January 5 by Texasota

[Texasota]

Interesting article on the direction Volvo is going with PHEVs. The article describes how Volvo's approach is a conventional PHEV with a battery range competitive with an EREV. The efficiency penalty for an EREV (a series hybrid) at highway speed is too costly. This is the direction I think @jpd80was suggesting Ford may be going with the F-150.

 

https://insideevs.com/news/785349/second-generation-volvo-plug-in-hybrids-erevs/

Edited January 24 by Texasota