While on vacation......

[3laine]

How much does an entry level Ford Lightning cost? Today it's as low as $55k bit probably more...And an entry level Ford F150 ICE? $38k

Right now, that difference in price - almost $20 grand at the base level - obliterates any savings in fuel, at least at the Ford pickup truck level.

Technically true, and available selection is for sure a big hurdle for EVs, still, but a $55k Lightning vs a $38k gas F-150 are two VERY different trucks.

~$55k, after available tax credit, is the base price for the Lightning XLT. That's a Supercrew 4x4 with 450hp/775ftlb, extra enclosed storage (frunk), standard power outlets, etc.

$38k MSRP for a gas F-150 gets you a regular cab short bed, RWD, XL-trim work truck with less power and way less torque and basically zero options.

Move up to a gas-powered XLT Supercrew 4x4, and now it's $54k MSRP without adding any options, and having the base 2.7L Ecoboost, barely any difference in price from the ~$55k Lightning.

So, if you're OK with a regular cab 4x2 work truck, you can definitely spend less money on a gas F-150 than a Supercrew 4x4 Lightning. But if you're comparing similar trim/features, the Lightning is often substantially less than $20k more expensive. In the case of the XLT, it's very competitive on price.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

This is the type of thing that electrics should hang their hat on. If you can develop a Toyota like reputation for lasting 400k plus miles..
Car experts make surprising discovery after examining high-mileage Tesla taxi: 'Degradation isn't an issue'
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/news/content/ar-AA1peDqx?ocid=sapphireappshare

 

[life_w_vagabonds]

This is the type of thing that electrics should hang their hat on. If you can develop a Toyota like reputation for lasting 400k plus miles..
Car experts make surprising discovery after examining high-mileage Tesla taxi: 'Degradation isn't an issue'
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/news/content/ar-AA1peDqx?ocid=sapphireappshare

Tesla isn’t writing checks for Consumer Reports yet.

Fundamentally EVs should be far more reliable and longer lasting than combustion, there is just way fewer parts to break. Then again combustion vehicles could also last a lot longer but is that profitable?

We get the “choices” we get based on quarterly earnings.

 

[ThundahBeagle]

Technically true, and available selection is for sure a big hurdle for EVs, still, but a $55k Lightning vs a $38k gas F-150 are two VERY different trucks.

~$55k, after available tax credit, is the base price for the Lightning XLT. That's a Supercrew 4x4 with 450hp/775ftlb, extra enclosed storage (frunk), standard power outlets, etc.

$38k MSRP for a gas F-150 gets you a regular cab short bed, RWD, XL-trim work truck with less power and way less torque and basically zero options.

Move up to a gas-powered XLT Supercrew 4x4, and now it's $54k MSRP without adding any options, and having the base 2.7L Ecoboost, barely any difference in price from the ~$55k Lightning.

So, if you're OK with a regular cab 4x2 work truck, you can definitely spend less money on a gas F-150 than a Supercrew 4x4 Lightning. But if you're comparing similar trim/features, the Lightning is often substantially less than $20k more expensive. In the case of the XLT, it's very competitive on price.

The issue is that the electric trucks dont even offer a base equivalent trim level. Excuse me: the one company that does offer a simple work truck trim - Chevy Silverado EV Work Truck - wants $62k for it, and they configured it like the Avalanche, so nothing a construction worker needs will fit on it without more specialized equipment. Oh, would you like a WeatherGuard diamond deck cross box tool box? Um, because of the sail panel angling into the fully attached bed, you need special rails and special tool box. How about a Leer Camper Shell. Yup, you guessed it, you get to pay more for a specialized one of those, too.

So a journeyman construction worker, electrician, or plumber just starting out in the world gets to over pay for the vehicle and every little thing that goes with it just for the privilege of buying a truck that still has less range and functionality than a $36k gasser provides...at least the Chevy EV truck is the one that comes closest to its full-charge range claims, but so what?! You erase those savings paying for the truck and everything else that costs more associated with it

 

[life_w_vagabonds]

The issue is that the electric trucks dont even offer a base equivalent trim level. Excuse me: the one company that does offer a simple work truck trim - Chevy Silverado EV Work Truck - wants $62k for it, and they configured it like the Avalanche, so nothing a construction worker needs will fit on it without more specialized equipment. Oh, would you like a WeatherGuard diamond deck cross box tool box? Um, because of the sail panel angling into the fully attached bed, you need special rails and special tool box. How about a Leer Camper Shell. Yup, you guessed it, you get to pay more for a specialized one of those, too.

So a journeyman construction worker, electrician, or plumber just starting out in the world gets to over pay for the vehicle and every little thing that goes with it just for the privilege of buying a truck that still has less range and functionality than a $36k gasser provides...at least the Chevy EV truck is the one that comes closest to its full-charge range claims, but so what?! You erase those savings paying for the truck and everything else that costs more associated with it

Ford and GM are not going to do anything to hurt their truck sales. There isn’t a technology problem prohibiting EV work trucks. The Lightning could have different cab and bed options, but it won’t. Got to protect those margins on combustion pickups.

 

[3laine]

The issue is that the electric trucks dont even offer a base equivalent trim level.

Not really true. There's a "work truck" trim Lightning Pro with vinyl floors in my garage right now. Ford won't let you custom order one this year unless you have a fleet account, but there are used and new ones available on cars.com.

So a journeyman construction worker, electrician, or plumber just starting out in the world gets to over pay for the vehicle and every little thing that goes with it

The Lightning Pro starts at $55k. After tax credit, that's $47,500. How much is a 2024 gas F-150 XL (work truck) Supercrew 4x4 with absolutely ZERO options? $47,500. Exact same price. And the operating costs will be lower for most people with the Lightning.

just for the privilege of buying a truck that still has less range and functionality than a $36k gasser provides...

The Lightning can use the accessories of the gas trucks, it has way more enclosed storage (huge frunk), standard power outlets in the bed, has way more power/torque, home charging convenience, etc.

Range is less, and for some people, that matters. For some it's an obvious dealbreaker. For others, the range doesn't matter at all, or it is a compromise, but for similar money up front, they get several notable advantages over the gas trucks and pay less for fuel.

For some, a regular cab work truck is all they want, and yeah, that CAN be cheaper, but when comparing apples-to-apples, there are many cases where the Lightning is very competitive on price with gas.

Buyers just need to run the numbers and pricing and operating costs and compare pros and cons to figure out what's best for them. Many will be surprised how competitive the pricing can be.

 

[ThundahBeagle]

Not really true. There's a "work truck" trim Lightning Pro with vinyl floors in my garage right now. Ford won't let you custom order one this year unless you have a fleet account, but there are used and new ones available on cars.com.



The Lightning Pro starts at $55k. After tax credit, that's $47,500. How much is a 2024 gas F-150 XL (work truck) Supercrew 4x4 with absolutely ZERO options? $47,500. Exact same price. And the operating costs will be lower for most people with the Lightning.




The Lightning can use the accessories of the gas trucks, it has way more enclosed storage (huge frunk), standard power outlets in the bed, has way more power/torque, home charging convenience, etc.

Range is less, and for some people, that matters. For some it's an obvious dealbreaker. For others, the range doesn't matter at all, or it is a compromise, but for similar money up front, they get several notable advantages over the gas trucks and pay less for fuel.

For some, a regular cab work truck is all they want, and yeah, that CAN be cheaper, but when comparing apples-to-apples, there are many cases where the Lightning is very competitive on price with gas.

Buyers just need to run the numbers and pricing and operating costs and compare pros and cons to figure out what's best for them. Many will be surprised how competitive the pricing can be.

Yes, lighting is built in a more traditional pickup truck style. That, I appreciate about lighting. But no way does a Ford base model work truck and the Lightning cost the same. And those tax credits can not be depended upon year after year, and certainly not once EV's take hold. MSRP of the lightning work truck is still more than that of the gasser. That's all

 

[ThundahBeagle]

Not really true. There's a "work truck" trim Lightning Pro with vinyl floors in my garage right now. Ford won't let you custom order one this year unless you have a fleet account, but there are used and new ones available on cars.com.



The Lightning Pro starts at $55k. After tax credit, that's $47,500. How much is a 2024 gas F-150 XL (work truck) Supercrew 4x4 with absolutely ZERO options? $47,500. Exact same price. And the operating costs will be lower for most people with the Lightning.




The Lightning can use the accessories of the gas trucks, it has way more enclosed storage (huge frunk), standard power outlets in the bed, has way more power/torque, home charging convenience, etc.

Range is less, and for some people, that matters. For some it's an obvious dealbreaker. For others, the range doesn't matter at all, or it is a compromise, but for similar money up front, they get several notable advantages over the gas trucks and pay less for fuel.

For some, a regular cab work truck is all they want, and yeah, that CAN be cheaper, but when comparing apples-to-apples, there are many cases where the Lightning is very competitive on price with gas.

Buyers just need to run the numbers and pricing and operating costs and compare pros and cons to figure out what's best for them. Many will be surprised how competitive the pricing can be.

Range is less, and for MOST people, that matters. And why should one have to be a member of a private club to get a base model vinyl floor truck? Odd

 

[ThundahBeagle]

Ford and GM are not going to do anything to hurt their truck sales. There isn’t a technology problem prohibiting EV work trucks. The Lightning could have different cab and bed options, but it won’t. Got to protect those margins on combustion pickups.

You have just typed nothing that disproves my points. And there is a tech problem with EV work trucks - range and charge time. Will the be cured? Eventually. Not now, though. And...The few that are out there are either not configured for workers, are too expensive, dont have the needed range, or cost too damn much.

With EV's being seriously 30 some odd years in development (if you take the GM EV1, the one that inspired the Tesla company before Musk ever got on board, as a modern starting point) I think they need another 10 years in this real world R&D before they match gasser price, performance and functionality.

GM has made missteps in the past. For example, 4 wheel steering, while cool, was not up to snuff to keep it in production. Thier EV Silverado Work Truck? That just isnt a work truck when every work accessory and tool of the trade absolutely will not fit on the truck.

You, simply saying differently, does not make something so.

 

[3laine]

But no way does a Ford base model work truck and the Lightning cost the same.

Yeah, when comparing base Lightning (Supercrew 4WD) vs the absolute cheapest gas Supercrew 4WD, the price is the same after tax credit : $47,500.

If we compare a 2-door 2WD truck to a 4-door 4WD truck, yes, the 2-door 2WD truck is cheaper (!!!), but even when we compare a 2WD 2-door to a 4WD 4-door, AND ignore the tax credit, it's still not a $20k difference.

For most reasonable comparisons (tax credit and not the 2-door 2WD work truck that Ford has greatly limited the options for because they're unpopular), they're VERY similar on price.

And those tax credits can not be depended upon year after year, and certainly not once EV's take hold. MSRP of the lightning work truck is still more than that of the gasser. That's all

We're talking about now, not some time in the future. If we want to talk future prices and credit availability, we'd also have to know a lot more about economies of scale for EVs, AND we can't even write off the possibility that Ford just lowers the price by an amount similar to the tax credit. MANY manufacturers have done that when their vehicles lost the $7500 tax credit: Chevy Bolt and, very recently, Hyundai, just to name two.

Range is less, and for MOST people, that matters.

Range matters to most people... to some level. For some use cases, specifically local fleets and commuter vehicles (owners take their SUV on family trips), range may not actually matter at all. For many use cases, range matters... to some level. If you're doing a typical "Long Trip" for Americans, you're driving ~280 miles each way. With a standard range Lightning, you'll have about 1.5 hours of charging to do, round trip. Reasonably, that's a net adder of about an hour on that trip, give or take, subtracting the time you would have stopped anyway for gas/bathroom/etc. A few hours per year for a normal use case isn't reasonably a dealbreaker. It should be considered a con and weighed against the pros: convenience of home charging, fuel savings of ~$800+ /yr for the average American, enough extra enclosed space in the frunk to hold the luggage for a family of 4, standard power outlets to power tools or essentials of your home in a power outage, better daily performance, etc.

For the huge number of people buying 4-door 4WD trucks, the Lightning can be VERY competitive on price and offer many advantages that should be balanced against the disadvantages.

Especially for work trucks/fleets where daily travel distance can be known to be under the range of the truck, it can be a very compelling option that's competitive on initial cost of ownership and wins in total operating cost when comparing 4-door trucks.

And why should one have to be a member of a private club to get a base model vinyl floor truck? Odd

You don't HAVE to be. I'm not a fleet owner, and there are several Lightning Pro (work trim) trucks available online.

 

[plainjaneFJC]

Ford and GM are not going to do anything to hurt their truck sales. There isn’t a technology problem prohibiting EV work trucks. The Lightning could have different cab and bed options, but it won’t. Got to protect those margins on combustion pickups.

Margin is margin- it doesn’t matter where they make it as a company.

 

[AbleGuy]

There have been a lot of strong interesting comments going back-and-forth here about whether having an EV truck really is practical for some people. A lot of folks have expressed their reservations and concerns about problems with charging times and range.

But just to show you that those concerns are valid, and more importantly are getting the attention of the industry, read the comments below from Honda about their awareness of those consumer concerns and their knowledge that those issues have to get resolved satisfactorily or EV sales are not ever going to really takeoff.


….”in a recent interview, two Honda executives explained the true reality of the EV market and why the company isn't getting more aggressive with its EVs.

'The customer is always right'​

In an appearance during Monterey Car Week, first reported by The Drive, American Honda President and CEO Kazuhiro Takizawa and Honda Global Executive Vice President Shinji Aoyama explained that while the sales of EVs are growing, the slowdown of sales growth is because of the infrastructure to support EVs is not growing alongside it fast enough.

In essence, customers will not be drawn to EVs, no matter how much of a discount automakers provide, if fast, convenient charging is either a hassle to find near their homes or workplace or leaves owners waiting on blood-sucking "charger hogs."

“You can’t force the customer to change their mind, really, and to some degree [you can incentivize] them but we just can’t force the people living in, say, the midwest, with no charging stations,” said Takizawa. “Even with incentives they will not change from ICE [Internal-Combustion Engine] to BEV [Bac. I believe it will be very difficult to force people to go for it. We need to prepare the ecosystem gradually and let them migrate little by little….”

The full article:

https://www.thestreet.com/electric-vehicles/honda-executives-reality-ev-market

(Pls pardon any confusion caused by voice to text issues)

 

[3laine]

But just to show you that those concerns are valid, and more importantly are getting the attention of the industry, read the comments below from Honda about their awareness of those consumer concerns and their knowledge that those issues have to get resolved satisfactorily or EV sales are not ever going to really takeoff.

It's important we differentiate a couple things, here:

-Buyer perceptions / timeline for EV adoption

-Facts about EVs and EV Infrastructure


As with all topics (even outside EVs), there's some level of disconnect between perceptions/preferences and facts.

Perception can be worse than reality or better than reality, but perceptions are not proof of objective facts.

Everyone could go out an buy an EV for their next car because they're convinced that will stop climate change. That doesn't mean it will.

Everyone could decide they're never buying an EV because they're convinced they cost way more, there's no place to charge them, they take 5 hours to charge on a trip, and the range is insufficient for their use case. That doesn't mean they're right.

 

[AbleGuy]

I’m not clear on what point you’re trying to make. I do agree with you that “there's some level of disconnect between perceptions/preferences and facts.”

Whether one likes it or not, and frustrating as it may be, misconceptions often can become the reality that some people wind up embracing. And at that point, for all intents and purposes that kind of perception will be the reality some are going to believe.

So perhaps that’s what the EV industry is going to have to deal with here, until reality succeeds in changing those perceptions.

Marketers and propagandists and political campaign strategists all well understand this conundrum.

And that perception = reality challenge seems exactly to be the case that the Honda honchos are lamenting:

“You can’t force the customer to change their mind, really, and to some degree [you can incentivize] them but we just can’t force the people living in, say, the midwest, with no charging stations [to change their mind about buying an EV],” said Takizawa

 

[ThundahBeagle]

It's important we differentiate a couple things, here:

-Buyer perceptions / timeline for EV adoption

-Facts about EVs and EV Infrastructure


As with all topics (even outside EVs), there's some level of disconnect between perceptions/preferences and facts.

Perception can be worse than reality or better than reality, but perceptions are not proof of objective facts.

Everyone could go out an buy an EV for their next car because they're convinced that will stop climate change. That doesn't mean it will.

Everyone could decide they're never buying an EV because they're convinced they cost way more, there's no place to charge them, they take 5 hours to charge on a trip, and the range is insufficient for their use case. That doesn't mean they're right.

But they ARE right. Those things are true. It is a very small (for now) group of people for whom an EV makes perfect sense. And theres another group of people with one foot on the boat and one foot on the dock...they would like to, or have switched, even though the benefits for them personally could go either way.

The people the EV industry needs to focus on now are people who are thinking about it, but are outside the current capacity.

Possession is 9/10ths of the law, and perception is 9/10ths of the truth. I gotta figure folks at Toyota and Honda have a better idea of all this than most of us here.