And Super Duty which is an even bigger cash cow than F150. plus globally, Transit, Transit custom and T6 Ranger which are all strong profit earners.   Ford plays fast and loose with TNGA, all of those so called platforms are more akin to Engineering cost centers but the point is still there, a well planned and centralised engineering and development strategy. The original C1 platform which became C2 and incorporation of larger mid sized vehicles was still a cluster because, heavily limited budget requiring each successive vehicle project to justify costs for developing its unique features. I can’t imagine Toyota’s global vision having such impediments for what should be shear pragmatism.     Once you get away from the primary profit earners, every decision seems rather short sighted that either opens Ford manufacturing to unforeseen or unplanned disruption, mix that with everything set up as just in time delivery and you have a recipe for disaster.     How many goes has Ford now had at trying to crack India, I count three and all have ended without any significant impact. Seriously, Ford is totally inept with international set ups and production, can’t see the Forrest for the trees. Here they have a golden opportunity to Leverage China and expand Thailand with C2 products and…zippo.   Toyota is running rampant in Australia and I assume most other regional Asia Pacific and African/Middle East markets. Ford can’t catch up because they don’t know where to begin to get a toe hold and then keep it. All their brilliant engineers that used to develop global stuff on the smell of an oil rag have been let go, and US engineers are next to useless on the important international stuff.

With regards to F150 EREV, it’s clearly going to be a way for Ford to be ahead of the curve with being CAFE compliant until BEV is ready to go.   The biggest problem with BEV is when used for heavy towing which often requires three times the energy when used for regular driving, be that in the form of triple the fuel used or triple the electric power used, that’s where  the main issue shows with the Lightning’s heavily reduced range when towing.   The big question for F150 EREV is how much ICE and how much battery. I have a feeling that if Ford wants this to be wildly popular, they’ll have to make it differnt enough from the hybrid and the basic ICEs to attract buyers.    

I can see that.    This video is on topic, especially since I shared it at the 30 second mark to avoid his monologue.

The Electric Viking is an Elon Musk fan-boi....thinks nothing Elon does is wrong....blah, blah, blah....

Generating  75KWh, with a moderately efficient ICE, would consume 7.7 Gallons of Gas. MATH Gallon of Gas = 33.56KWh 29% efficent ICE =1/.29 x 75KWh =258.62 KWh  258.62 KWh / 33.56Kwh = 7.7 Gallons of Gas

Weight isn't as much of an issue for Pickup Trucks.    If you watch the Video, they don't have an issue with towing and charging. There are issues with the Chargers.   Using the Engine to charge the battery is very inefficient, which may be why the real-world EREV mileage is so poor. 

I don't get it. 

Just a little napkin math, a 200 HP engine (which is about what the Ford 3.3L makes at peak torque of 4000 RPM) makes about 149,000 Watts of power.  So, assuming lossless charging, which I know is not the case, you could add about 75kWh to a battery in 30 minutes.   Now, I know there are lots of things at play here and this is more of an ideal calculation, but if you cut everything in half, you add 75kWh to a battery in 60 minutes.  In our Mach E, we can drive over 200 miles on 75kWh.

Yes, the big question is at what rate will the ICE generator be able to recharge the batteries.

Oh, goodie...another Musk fan-boi video....