EREV Hybrid F-150 Lightning Announced!

[jkosh22]

Why not use their smallest engine? A 1.0l model from Europe perhaps? It’s only to generate power for the battery and doesn’t drive the wheels.

I would think it would have to have a specific torque output for certain conditions. Faster charging from more torque from engine.

I’m assuming since it hasn’t been released they are making a special ‘generator’ rather than use an existing ICE engine in the line up. But who knows.

They are teasing an entire cracker but only giving us crumbs.

Sponsored

 

[TremorDave]

No thanks, I want a F150 with a 5.2 SC Predator and factory warranty instead. (No, I don’t want a RaptorR)

 

[Suns_PSD]

It just makes sense to have a NA fixed rpm gasoline engine that runs on low octane fuel. Ideally, you'd fill it with ethanol free fuel as the fuel might sit for months.
No need to go super small as the savings would be minisucle but the loss of functionality would be significant. Like a 3L or so.

 

[Kodiak]

Farley says Going forward, the full-size F-150 will be offered with three options under the hood: a gas-only engine, a mild hybrid, and an extended-range electric vehicle (EREV) that runs on electricity but uses an onboard gas generator on long trips.

So the PowerBoost is sticking around along with the EREV.

Ford's electric hopes unravel as it pulls the plug on battery-powered F-150 after $19.5bn loss

That may be the game plan but sales will do talking. If the EREV's PPOB is at least as good as the PB and maybe even better, there really would not be much of a reason to take a PB over the new Lightning EREV.

Load capacity could be an issue, but I have to believe that the new EREV would at least have similar specs, if not better.
4x4 on a PB is optional but with the EREV it is all wheel drive all the time.
EREV = No transmission.
Now the PPOB for the PB is golden and if you keep the draw under 3500 watts the engine will cycle on for about 2 minutes and off for the next 8 or so. This is a gas sipping generator and not a guzzler. As long as the EREV's PPOB functions similar, the edge goes to the EREV.
EREV gives plug in at night, electric driving during the day. This will be a money saver for most areas of the country. This does have a cost so that could be an issue, but I believe unless the EREV is radically different from the PB as far as the PPOB goes, PB sales will dry up and the PB will become a collector's classic.

 

[Kodiak]

It just makes sense to have a NA fixed rpm gasoline engine that runs on low octane fuel. Ideally, you'd fill it with ethanol free fuel as the fuel might sit for months.
No need to go super small as the savings would be minisucle but the loss of functionality would be significant. Like a 3L or so.

I believe that the Ram 1500 REV was going to have a drive option for gas only. That way you could "burn" off any gas in the tank if it sat for too long. This would be a nice option and nice for the EREV Lightning too.

 

[Snakebitten]

If it turns out that we are hearing about this early after getting greenlit recently, then my sandbagging accusation wasn't accurate.

But if this was greenlit months/years ago, and they are now leaking what they are ready to tool-up for and produce in the next couple of years? Then they dang well have been sandbagging.

Regardless, the cat is out of the bag!

 

[Snakebitten]

By the way, I need it to have at least 8 lugnuts for it to be a truck that I no longer need to own multiple trucks. If you know what I mean.

Or put another way, for it to have a ~1500+ lb Payload in fully dressed up trim (KingRanch, for example), it'd have to be more frame and axle than any 1/2 ton Ford currently builds. I think that's exactly why the Ramcharger was seen with 8 lugs and an impressive Payload. (Although nobody has actually seen a real life yellow sticker on a dolled up Ramcharger)

 

[flixden]

Why not use their smallest engine? A 1.0l model from Europe perhaps? It’s only to generate power for the battery and doesn’t drive the wheels.

You need enough power for sustained charging under full load, at least close to it. For example when towing a travel trailer up a mountain pass.
Otherwise you risk having to pull over and wait until the battery re-charges with that small engine. Probably not something that Ford would want to see mentioned in the first real life tests and reviews.
(I'd be ok with that though, btw, because you could plan for a case like that and have enough charge on the battery before entering this rare and extreme towing up a mountain scenario. Especially if they provide a manual override to force charging from the generator).

 

[Eighthtry]

1. The chinese are already beating our butts on EV's. Tesla's market share is tanking. Rivian can't sell despite great technology. Absolutely no one else can make decent EV's at a decent price. Except the good old Chinese.

2. This concept seems much like it's too good to be true. Ford has not proven good at software, and this one will have a ----load of brand new software to write. And download updates. Then download an update of the last update. Then retry downloading updates that don't make it. On and on.

3. Allowing new owners the pleasure of pioneering final assembly.

4. I already had to buy a generator, so that aspect of it will not help.

5. I hope it works. As for me, I will continue with my under powered 21 5.0 for the next 10 years because I can 1) park it in my garage while awaiting new battery technology, and 2) find gasoline.

I can't believe it took Ford so long to spit out the Kool-Aid. They had a hell of a time designing and building the Lightning. To their credit, they maintained their gasoline truck lines.

The Lightning did not work as planned when they finally released it. The new owners had to help with the final assembly, mostly software.

Only now has Ford figured out that real truck and car owners are concerned about miles per power bank and where to find a charger.

The good news? New battery technology may be coming sooner than we think. If that is so, Ford and GM are probably well positioned to utilize it.

And I thought Mary Barra was an idiot buying into the electric BS. She lost money in the billions, but it ended up hedging her bets with her SUV and truck lines, and struck a PR home run with the new Corvette, WHICH IS MAKING MONEY. All they need to do is 1) gain control of their range of car models, 2) match what Ford and Dodge do on the MREV line, and 3) try to maintain their dealer community. Dealer numbers are already shrinking. If GM can't deliver cars the remaining ones can sell, then the damage will continue.

Gosh, in the good old days all we worried about was whether the engines would be getting bigger and more powerful. And the older we got we became concerned about stopping them.

 

[Gros Ventre]

You need enough power for sustained charging under full load, at least close to it. For example when towing a travel trailer up a mountain pass.
Otherwise you risk having to pull over and wait until the battery re-charges with that small engine. Probably not something that Ford would want to see mentioned in the first real life tests and reviews.
(I'd be ok with that though, btw, because you could plan for a case like that and have enough charge on the battery before entering this rare and extreme towing up a mountain scenario. Especially if they provide a manual override to force charging from the generator).

That's worth thinking about. On I-64 in Virginia or West Virginia, there is a 7 mile climb with no breaks along the way. It's fairly steep.

 

[powerboatr]

If it turns out that we are hearing about this early after getting greenlit recently, then my sandbagging accusation wasn't accurate.

But if this was greenlit months/years ago, and they are now leaking what they are ready to tool-up for and produce in the next couple of years? Then they dang well have been sandbagging.

Regardless, the cat is out of the bag!

my guess is they have been sand bagging
i say this based on very very limited adverts for the PB and all its glory
they cut way back on lighting as well over last 2 years, with almost none since January
granted ford always fails to advertise like the other guys, but this year the push has been more towards mach e , mav and ranger. ranger is a huge gain in capabilities, looks, etc
super duty has been quietly scooting along , 26s have minimal changes, most just colors and package adjustments. (cuts)
super duty 7.3 and 6.8 and the boss giant tq monster 6.7 are sort of floating along as well
the 6.7 has a few things they can do to drop emissions and boost lower combust temps and gain a few more getty ups
imo 27 my superduty is going to be some big bananas good stuff

he is talking late 26 or early 27 MY.. thats a big push if they are just at the point to let stuff out

 

[Snakebitten]

If 2026/2027 launches a:

Powerboost V2
Or
EREV of ANY kind
Or
SuperDuty with legitimate electrification

Then yeah, they have been sitting on something that has been stalled for whatever reason. That's sandbagging, in my opinion. Lol

 

[Samson16]

That's worth thinking about. On I-64 in Virginia or West Virginia, there is a 7 mile climb with no breaks along the way. It's fairly steep.

The 3.3L is a steady state rpm generator producing 50kw or so regardless of the grade. The battery handles the changing loads while the generator manages SOC.

 

[JExpedition07]

I think it’s a good idea, I didn’t mind the pure electric Lightning either but it did need better range which could have been solved in some other capacity. Nonetheless I like this solution.

 

[Henfield]

The ICE powerplant is going to be interesting. I doubt it has to be huge.
Would the 2.5 used in the smaller hybrids like Maverick be ok? Would it be the 2.7 V6? Please God NOT the 1.0 Ecoboost three cylinder. Those smaller EcoBoosts have been nothing but trouble.

The battery has to have a much bigger capacity than the powerboost does today. Guess that means the gas tank will be even smaller than the 26 gallon "Standard" gas tank.

Sponsored