Steel Body for F-150 EREV?

[fordmantpw]

6 hours ago, akirby said:

I thnk EREVs are perfect - for a few hundred drivers.  I think most would prefer a HEV or BEV.

 

Why do you think someone would prefer HEV over EREV?  I know a few reasons to prefer BEV to EREV, but why HEV?

[jpd80]

20 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

 

I completely misread it and plugged in "F-100" because of the Tennessee Truck plant line.   They're likely mixing rumors.

 

I find it incredibly hard to believe that they'd have a separate steel-bodied F-150 - regardless of plant - just for the EREV model.....for one, weight savings to help the battery power goes out the window, and it also completely eliminates economies of scale they'd already have with a single body production across all F-150s (and Cabs further spread out with Super Duty).

 

 

This rumor to me means there'll be an F-100 (Ranger replacement) EREV at TTP.

 

 

...........actually you know what, this leads me to 2 thoughts:

 

1) now that we've heard this rumor plus thinking about Farley's statements about a "different kind of truck" at TTP.......I wonder if this F-100/Ranger will be EREV only ?   That's pretty "different" while still being a traditional truck body style.  Then Maverick and Ranchero can divvy up the small truck market hybrid/BEV, Bronco truck can handle ICE/hybrid (presumably) midsize truck customers, and this new EREV can slot underneath F-150's ICE/Hybrid/EREV models, and appeal to a different customer than Ford currently targets.

 

2)...or....taking this thought a step further, what if there is no "F-150" Lightning EREV (F-150 continues as ICE/hybrid only), and they're instead doing the EREV as something closer to midsize as F-100??

 

This last idea doesn't necessarily make the most sense, as there's the talk of EREV Super Duty (at least I think there was), so why would you skip F-150?

 

 

 

This would be stupid, IMO.

Well thought out arguments for both ways..

 

If the Ranger is redesigned as an F Truck, the body must become wider and fill out the wheel wells better like F150 does.
If Ford can do that and make the styling similar to other F Trucks and more of a light full size then I think adding those

sales to F Series would be more justified than say, badge engineering Ranger Super Duty.

 

I like your earlier thoughts on rumours getting mixed up and that could definitely be part of this,

maybe adding to a. Confused message is all part of Ford’s drip feed, get people interested before

they ever actually say much…..

[Sherminator98]

2 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Why do you think someone would prefer HEV over EREV?  I know a few reasons to prefer BEV to EREV, but why HEV?

IMO with heavier products you don’t see the increase in MPGs like you see in say midsized and below products. 

[fordmantpw]

34 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

IMO with heavier products you don’t see the increase in MPGs like you see in say midsized and below products. 

 

In which, HEV?  I would agree with that, which is why I'm curious why someone would prefer HEV over EREV.

 

Or are you saying the fuel economy for an EREV won't be that great?

[akirby]

3 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Why do you think someone would prefer HEV over EREV?  I know a few reasons to prefer BEV to EREV, but why HEV?

Cheaper, lighter, simpler, don't have to plug in.

[rmc523]

15 hours ago, morgan20 said:

 

EREV is a flawed compromise by definition, tow vehicles or not. For a next gen Ford F-100 or F-150 Lightning to be introduced in the late 2020s, the proper approach would be to take advantage of continuous improvement in pure EV design and engineering so that a single propulsion element, the electric motor, is tightly integrated with more efficient utilization of battery cells, which extends electric range, which obviates the need for a Plan B, an internal-combustion engine range extender. As costs for batteries continue going down and EV charging infrastructure continues to expand, the case for EREV keeps gettin' weaker and weaker.

 

Even in China, the only market where EREV ever came close to being considered a "success" thanks to government incentives from them Commies, the direction is clear:

 

In 2024, EREV sales [in China] exceeded one million units, with 23 brands offering models. However, in 2025, growth has slowed. Li Auto, the brand largely credited with popularising the EREV approach in China, has seen its sales fall sharply for five consecutive months and has now shifted focus toward pure electric vehicles. 

 

The decline in EREV sales is closely tied to improvements in pure electric vehicles (EVs). Three main factors are contributing to this trend:

•     Longer EV range – The average range of newly launched EVs in 2025 exceeds 500 km, with some models surpassing 600–700 km, approaching the range of conventional fuel vehicles.
•     Expanded charging infrastructure – By the end of 2024, China had 12.82 million charging units, representing a 49.1% year-over-year increase, with fast-charging stations of 120–180 kW becoming increasingly common.
•     Lower battery costs – Goldman Sachs projects that battery costs will fall to 99 USD/kWh in 2025, 40% lower than in 2022, allowing EVs to reach cost parity with fuel vehicles without subsidies.

As a result, the core advantage of EREVs, mitigating range and refuelling concerns, is diminishing. While EREVs may continue to serve areas with limited charging infrastructure or users who prioritise “absolute range freedom,” their role may increasingly become a niche choice. Future developments in solid-state or sodium-based batteries could further reduce the relevance of fuel-based range extenders.

 

 

 

Ok, but what products were being discussed there for China?  Were they pickup trucks?

 

Or is the comparison not valid because they're talking about cars, whereas Ford is taking the EREV approach on the trucks?

[Sherminator98]

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:

 

In which, HEV?  I would agree with that, which is why I'm curious why someone would prefer HEV over EREV.

 

Or are you saying the fuel economy for an EREV won't be that great?

 

HEV isn't worth it for larger products because it just adds complexity for no real world MPG gain. Yes as a power adder or in Ford's case for Pro power or whatever its called.

 

EREV is an imperfect solution since battery tech isn't there yet for EV trucks to meet some end user requirements.

 

You can't force a product on people that they don't want to buy. 

[fordmantpw]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Cheaper, lighter, simpler, don't have to plug in.

 

OK, but as mentioned by Sherm, it doesn't do much appreciably for MPG in larger vehicles.  Plus, you don't HAVE to plug in an EREV.  To get the full benefits, yes, but you don't have to.

 

14 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

HEV isn't worth it for larger products because it just adds complexity for no real world MPG gain. Yes as a power adder or in Ford's case for Pro power or whatever its called.

 

EREV is an imperfect solution since battery tech isn't there yet for EV trucks to meet some end user requirements.

 

You can't force a product on people that they don't want to buy. 

 

I agree with you on the first part.  HEV is best for power adders and pro power onboard in larger vehicles.

 

I think the battery tech is fine if you can get 100-150 (unloaded) miles on a charge in an EREV.  The battery tech not being quite there is the REASON to have an EREV.  The concern I see is the efficiency of the generator and it's ability to supply enough power, especially while towing.

 

With an EREV, I don't think you are forcing a product on people at all.  You are giving them the ability to have a BEV (nearly) without the drawbacks.

[Sherminator98]

1 minute ago, fordmantpw said:

With an EREV, I don't think you are forcing a product on people at all.  You are giving them the ability to have a BEV (nearly) without the drawbacks.

 

No that isn't what I meant by that-the issue is the BEVs aren't selling, thus why EREV might sell better for the reason you stated.

 

I should have said you can't force BEV trucks on the market that aren't selling. Thus the pivot to EREV, even though from a purely engineering perspective they are more complex and expensive. 

[morgan20]

1 hour ago, rmc523 said:

 

Ok, but what products were being discussed there for China?  Were they pickup trucks?

 

Or is the comparison not valid because they're talking about cars, whereas Ford is taking the EREV approach on the trucks?

 

Products from BYD, Li Auto, Leapmotor, Changan, XPeng, Seres Auto/Huawei among others encompassing cars, SUV/crossover, minivans, and trucks. Changan's Hunter, introduced in 2023, claims to the be world's first EREV pickup truck.

 

 

For light duty trucks (like Changan Hunter and future Ford F-100 and F-150 Lightning), the comparison is valid because the compromises and complexity inherent to EREV aren't mitigated by compelling benefits for customers or the manufacturers. As I mentioned earlier, a commercial grade truck like Super Duty might be better suited to EREV in certain applications.

 

One of them Chinese automakers that has rejected the EREV approach is Nio, which promotes battery swapping. One of the big shots at Nio said:

 

Shen Fei, Nio‘s Senior Vice President and CEO of its Onvo brand, stated that given the increasingly mature charging infrastructure, large-capacity battery range extension represents a significant waste of resources. Not only do these systems occupy valuable cabin space, but the range extender unit itself, which adds an extra 15,000 yuan (2,100 USD) to the cost, also creates an unnecessary financial burden for both manufacturers and consumers.

[rmc523]

23 minutes ago, morgan20 said:

 

Products from BYD, Li Auto, Leapmotor, Changan, XPeng, Seres Auto/Huawei among others encompassing cars, SUV/crossover, minivans, and trucks. Changan's Hunter, introduced in 2023, claims to the be world's first EREV pickup truck.

 

 

For light duty trucks (like Changan Hunter and future Ford F-100 and F-150 Lightning), the comparison is valid because the compromises and complexity inherent to EREV aren't mitigated by compelling benefits for customers or the manufacturers. As I mentioned earlier, a commercial grade truck like Super Duty might be better suited to EREV in certain applications.

 

One of them Chinese automakers that has rejected the EREV approach is Nio, which promotes battery swapping. One of the big shots at Nio said:

 

Shen Fei, Nio‘s Senior Vice President and CEO of its Onvo brand, stated that given the increasingly mature charging infrastructure, large-capacity battery range extension represents a significant waste of resources. Not only do these systems occupy valuable cabin space, but the range extender unit itself, which adds an extra 15,000 yuan (2,100 USD) to the cost, also creates an unnecessary financial burden for both manufacturers and consumers.

 

I think it's pretty established that the Chinese market has its own automotive criteria that western companies of all origins are increasingly unable to decipher for whatever reason.

 

Point being, I don't think we can point to something that works (or doesn't work) there, and automatically apply it to the US market, assuming the result will be the same.

 

That said, maybe buyers don't wind up liking EREV either, and automakers have to pivot another direction....we'll find out!

[fordmantpw]

6 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

That said, maybe buyers don't wind up liking EREV either, and automakers have to pivot another direction....we'll find out!

 

Which is why I think it's imperative that Ford extends the cost savings and what they've learned with CE1 to other vehicle types (HEV/EREV/ICE/etc.), as well as making the platforms more powertrain agnostic.  It allows them to pivot to other types of propulsion without the cost of an entirely new platform.

[Texasota]

4 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

IMO with heavier products you don’t see the increase in MPGs like you see in say midsized and below products. 

Not sure if the F-150 falls into the heavier products category, but the F-150 4WD Powerboost’s EPA numbers are 22/24 (city/highway). The F-150 4WD 3.5 Ecoboost is 17/23.

 

That’s 22.7% better in the city for the Powerboost. Highway is only better by 1 MPG.

[Texasota]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

Cheaper, lighter, simpler, don't have to plug in.

I would add to that:

 

1) The HEV is going to have better highway MPG than an EREV when the battery is depleted.
 

2) An EREV like the RAM REV is going to fall on its face towing a heavy trailer when the battery is depleted.

[jpd80]

7 hours ago, Texasota said:

I would add to that:

 

1) The HEV is going to have better highway MPG than an EREV when the battery is depleted.
 

2) An EREV like the RAM REV is going to fall on its face towing a heavy trailer when the battery is depleted.

The whole point of selling an EREV is to meet compliance in places like California and the 18 aligned states.

with a home charge setup, it’s easy to recharge an EREV overnight which is valuable in commutes situations

Not the best reason for owning one but it a window into the future, places like Australia are quickly switching

to electrified vehicles and those hour or two hour commutes become less expensive for electrified vehicles.

Edited July 4 by jpd80

[Sherminator98]

19 hours ago, Texasota said:

I would add to that:

 

1) The HEV is going to have better highway MPG than an EREV when the battery is depleted.
 

2) An EREV like the RAM REV is going to fall on its face towing a heavy trailer when the battery is depleted.

 

It all depends on the use cases-any vehicle is going to have shitty MPG towing anything-its about compromises. The EREV gives better overall use for customers that are commuting to work and need to tow something heavy more then 50 miles or so vs using an BEV

[akirby]

Another drawback for longer trips is having to both fill up with gas and charge the battery for max range.  I doubt the range will be more than 200 miles on just a tank of gas with no battery.

 

I still think folks who aren't crazy about BEVs will prefer ICE and BEV fans who don't tow long distances would prefer the simplicity of a BEV.  Leaving a very small slice of the market for BEV fans who tow long distances.

[Texasota]

5 hours ago, Sherminator98 said:

 

It all depends on the use cases-any vehicle is going to have shitty MPG towing anything-its about compromises. The EREV gives better overall use for customers that are commuting to work and need to tow something heavy more then 50 miles or so vs using an BEV

Yes, but my thoughts regarding my “falling on its face” comment was not about MPG. It was about being severely underpowered (at least in the case of the RAM REV) once the battery is depleted.
 

You have a heavy pickup (7500 lbs for RAM REV) that is going to struggle with a 3.6 V6 Pentastar even without a trailer. Add a heavy trailer (RAM is boasting 14,000 lb tow limit) and it will be a miserable towing experience. Likely 45ish max MPH on flat roads and much worse climbing a grade. Pulling a trailer across the plains of Nebraska and then attempting to climb the Rockies is going to be horrible in the RAM REV. 
 

The F-150 Powerboost will handle the above scenario very well and why a HEV will be far superior to an EREV. I think Akirby is correct, HEVs will be the preferred choice when the EREV false compromise is understood by truck buyers.

Edited July 4 by Texasota

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Texasota said:

You have a heavy pickup (7500 lbs for RAM REV) that is going to struggle with a 3.6 V6 Pentastar even without a trailer. Add a heavy trailer (RAM is boasting 14,000 lb tow limit) and it will be a miserable towing experience. Likely 45ish max MPH on flat roads and much worse climbing a grade. Pulling a trailer across the plains of Nebraska and then attempting to climb the Rockies is going to be horrible in the RAM REV. 

 

Actually this isn't true because the engine is not driving the wheels - it's charging the battery so you get the same performance as when it was on a fully charged battery.  I expect the engine to run while the battery is depleting so that you lose the charge more slowly as opposed to waiting for the  battery to discharge then firing up the ICE.  Sort of like emptying a 55 gallon drum with a 1/2" hose while filling it with a 3/8" hose. It just empties a lot slower.

[Texasota]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

 

Actually this isn't true because the engine is not driving the wheels - it's charging the battery so you get the same performance as when it was on a fully charged battery.  I expect the engine to run while the battery is depleting so that you lose the charge more slowly as opposed to waiting for the  battery to discharge then firing up the ICE.  Sort of like emptying a 55 gallon drum with a 1/2" hose while filling it with a 3/8" hose. It just empties a lot slower.

Yes, but the points I was making were about what is going to happen once that 55 gallon drum is empty. And that will happen relatively quickly when towing across the plains of Nebraska and then you hit the foothills and Rocky Mountains. 
 

It’s irrelevant if that Pentastar is driving the wheels or not. Once the battery energy obtained from the garage wall plug is depleted, then the ICE is supplying 100% of the power to move a heavy truck and trailer while at the same time suffering the inefficiencies inherent with a series hybrid system.
 

The inevitable result is slow towing speeds that will be unacceptable to many (probably most) truck owners.

Edited July 4 by Texasota

[Sherminator98]

5 hours ago, Texasota said:

The F-150 Powerboost will handle the above scenario very well and why a HEV will be far superior to an EREV. I think Akirby is correct, HEVs will be the preferred choice when the EREV false compromise is understood by truck buyers.

The issue is that I’m guessing that the use case of towing is “limited” to a point. 
 

I haven’t seen a comparison of ICE vs hybrid when it comes to towing. Ford pairs the power boost with the 3.5L ecoboost already, which already have plenty of power to tow with but doesn’t really improve MPGs over say the 2.7L on the EPA cycle. I know if I was running fleet that the F-150 met my requirements for towing, I’d prob go with the 5L V8. 
 

But I’m going to assume that with a pickup being used as transportation device, a EREV will do better MPG wise then a hybrid. It’s better choice overall MPG wise. 

[Texasota]

25 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said:

Ford pairs the power boost with the 3.5L ecoboost already, which already have plenty of power to tow with but doesn’t really improve MPGs over say the 2.7L on the EPA cycle. I know if I was running fleet that the F-150 met my requirements for towing, I’d prob go with the 5L V8. 

The Powerboost (22/24) is still better than the 2.7 (18/23). That is 22.2% better city. The F-150 Powerboost puts up impressive numbers for a full sized truck.

[akirby]

3 hours ago, Texasota said:

Yes, but the points I was making were about what is going to happen once that 55 gallon drum is empty. And that will happen relatively quickly when towing across the plains of Nebraska and then you hit the foothills and Rocky Mountains. 
 

It’s irrelevant if that Pentastar is driving the wheels or not. Once the battery energy obtained from the garage wall plug is depleted, then the ICE is supplying 100% of the power to move a heavy truck and trailer while at the same time suffering the inefficiencies inherent with a series hybrid system.
 

The inevitable result is slow towing speeds that will be unacceptable to many (probably most) truck owners.

I still don't think you lose speed - I think you just run out of range.  Guess we'll have to wait for the tests.

[jpd80]

Happy 250th to all my American friends,

hopefully the recent lowering of gasoline and diesel prices gives all of you

some decent relief from escalating prices. During peak prices in Australia

diesel got to $3.00/ liter which is about usd$7.70/gallon, gasoline a little cheaper.

As a result of that, many Aussie buyers are turning their backs on legacy brands 

and embracing the 4 or 5 major Chinese brands we have in Australia and Tesla too.

 

All types of electrified vehicles now on sale from BEV to PHEV to HEV and the truth

is that buyers need to make up their own mind what works in their situation.

What is being revealed is how much change is coming form gasoline side versus diesel.

although the Shark 6 is now making serious inroads into sales. Unless people really need

the towing capacity of a mid sized diesel pickup, those folks are voting with their wallets

and switching to electrified Chinese vehicles. Japanese and Euro car brands are taking

the brunt of the attack while the Koreans ae holding their own thanks to having hybrids

and elecric vehicles…….the changing iod the guard with brands is quite breathtaking

Edited July 5 by jpd80

[CurtisH]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I still don't think you lose speed - I think you just run out of range.  Guess we'll have to wait for the tests.

Help me out here.  Let’s say you run out of range and fill up with gas.  You still have a depleted battery.  Does the electric drive train run in a low power mode so the engine can provide enough of a charge to the battery?  Based on your description, the engine cannot adequately charge the battery to provide full power.  So what actually happens?  Seems to me that the engine would need to be big enough to provide as much charge to the battery as the motor needs.