Tom/Mods if posting my own video isnt allowed, Im sorry. Just trying to get some coverage of the truck.

 

Get a neck ache trying to watch it, the video is sideways.

 

Fixing it now, sorry about that. Tomorrow morning the fixed version will be uploaded neckbreak free!

 

Thanks for the video, Matt! I enjoyed your thoughts. The new cottage industry of YouTube video reviews is great, but these people usually earn a living from their reviews and don't use them on a daily basis. Lots of good info in your video, and I agree with most of your criticisms.

I think adding a 6.5-foot bed would be tough within the next couple of years because it would add cost and complexity to an already-strained manufacturing line that can't keep up with demand. I'm a nerd who loves big screens, but throwing commonly-used features such as climate onto those screens makes them really counterintuitive to use while driving. I don't think screen failure is something they plan for, though. If they did, you'd have a much bigger problem if your digital instrument cluster failed.

I think they're planning for a refresh around 2025, and I'd like to see the Lightning integrated as just another powertrain configuration with the rest of the F150 linup. Give us more cab choices, trim packages, bed lengths, and the option of the center front seat. It'll take time for these to go mainstream, but I think it's coming sooner than most people think.

 

Thanks for the video. I agree with most of what you are telling Ford. The motors on tailgate, front trunk and gear shift. I am going to call them trinkets. I wonder it they are on the Pro.
Putting more or just battery in the front trunk may not be a good idea. It may move the center of gravity to high or maybe too far forward. Or may make the truck too front heavy. Just a guess.
The A/C and heat controls are on the screen. I don't much care for the idea of driving into one of those quick summer thunder storms and having to scroll thru settings with the cruse set at 70.
That screen is powerful big.

 

Yeah, I think there are a few reasons why that wouldn’t work. Batteries are heavy and expensive. It’s a $10K upcharge to go from a 100 kWh battery to the 130 kWh extended range pack. Based on published specs, the 77 kWh battery in my car weighs 1,052 lbs. So a prospective buyer would be faced with the choice to spend another $10K to add a 400-lb weight in place of a frunk that many of us would find useful. The existence of the extended range pack means there’s room underneath for those who want to spend the money; I don’t see many people looking to spend even more to lose the frunk.

I think a more useful battery system improvement would be to switch to an 800v architecture so you could charge faster. My current car is one of the few that has one, and being able to go from 10-80% in less than 20 minutes is worth more to me than a larger battery. Just my thoughts.

 

10-80% in less than 20 minutes I did not know that was possible.

 

@Tom , I have seen you mention charging "up to 80%" on your EV6. Do you tend to stop there because the time to charge up to 100% increases incrementally? Is it something as simple as normally when you return to the charging station the EV6 is ~80%?

Or, is it something I had not even considered?

I get it that while you are home the EV6 likely get a 100% charge, but I suspect your mentions of 80% are while you are traveling or running errands.

 

It is, and the difference is huge. I really hope the Lightning goes to 800v for the next refresh. This was from my last trip in my EV6 a couple of weeks ago.

 

Ford EV Batteries Will Switch Over To Lithium Phosphate Soon (fordauthority.com)

 

Yup, the charge rate for most EV batteries declines significantly as the percentage creeps up. It’s also thermally limited to keep the battery from getting too hot. The Lightning, like all modern EVs, uses a liquid-cooled battery, but they must be kept a lot cooler than a gas engine operates at. My EV6 cuts the charge rate substantially when the pack gets around 135º, and I believe the Lightning does similar. Both my Tesla, my current car, and the Lightning use the A/C compressor to help cool the battery during rapid charging.

For those reasons, you’ll rarely want to charge above 80-90% when road tripping because of how fast the charge rate declines. My Tesla would throttle more aggressively than my current car, but I only see about 110-120 kW above 70%. Above 90% and it’s cut in half, and then again above 95%. For comparison, I peak around 250 kW below 70%.

Nope, I only charge to 100% when I’m about to leave for a trip. I have the max charge limited to 90% when charging at home because it’s better for long-term battery life. That applies to all lithium-ion batteries. Darren Palmer is an executive within Ford’s EV division and mentioned in an interview that they are thinking about ways to warrant the pack for longer than 100K if owners primarily charge below 100%.

Relevant portion starts around the 27:00 mark:

 

Very informative video. I'm suprised they even mentioned the Silverado ev and that it has the 800v system. I have a reserve on one but don't remember them mentioning it.

 

Thank you Tom. Admittedly my knowledge in battery specifications characteristics is in ICE automotive applications, 5th wheel/travel trailer, UPS applications and the occasional large scale system for a telephone switch.

I am researching the up and coming EV battery technologies in an effort to make an informed decision when it comes time to purchase, but your repeated statement about percentage peaked my interest.

 

Peak charge percentage isn’t as big of a deal as some make it; more of a “best practice” than a required thing to have your battery last a long time. Elon Musk has said this repeatedly, and older Teslas with 2-300k+ miles seem to do pretty well regardless of how their batteries were treated. The charging systems are really sophisticated, which is why charge rate throttles as the battery fills up. They make it virtually impossible to hurt a modern EV battery.