RIDE THE LIGHTNING!

[AutobahnSHO]

Government allowing industry to self attest is a plague. Bad incentives abound.

Naaaah, I see no problems there

[Laconian]

Mike, do you have an OBD reader? If you want stats for nerds then you can use your smartphone to get the raw data. Most/all of the info can be read in its raw, standardized form.

[MrH]

Mike, do you have an OBD reader? If you want stats for nerds then you can use your smartphone to get the raw data. Most/all of the info can be read in its raw, standardized form.

Yeah.  It just reads pure kWh's remaining in the battery.  That's basically just your percentage spit out a different way.  It's just lame there's a range estimation in giant font above it that is comically wrong all the time.

[Rich]

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2023-ford-f-150-lightning-xlt-yearlong-review-update-6/

[Laconian]

Yeah.  It just reads pure kWh's remaining in the battery.  That's basically just your percentage spit out a different way.  It's just lame there's a range estimation in giant font above it that is comically wrong all the time.

Yeah that's bullshit. It should be illegal.

[MrH]

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2023-ford-f-150-lightning-xlt-yearlong-review-update-6/

I saw that. That all started with a post on the Lightning forum. Shame it's really ugly and expensive. And probably won't add much range

Also, Ford changed up pricing for 2024 model year. I was debating going for a Flash trim 2024 instead. Good thing I didn't.

Prices for Lariat went up $2k, Flash went up $3.5k. So I ended up getting all the luxury features of the Lariat over the Flash, and it was $15k cheaper than if I waited for a 2024. All for not getting a heat pump. Definitely was the right move.

[AutobahnSHO]

Nice!

[MrH]

Ok, so I'm not going crazy.  Motor Trend saw the exact same thing that I did that makes zero sense. I've reduced my limit charge to 80% for at home charging, let's see if that fixes it.

Here's something else odd we noticed: If we charge our F-150 Lightning to 100 percent on a Level 3 DC fast charger, we'll usually get an estimated range in the ballpark of 230 to 245 miles, depending on how we've been driving the truck lately. However, if we run the battery down slightly to 99 percent and plug into a Level 2 AC charger or Level 1 wall outlet, by the time the battery hits 100 percent again, the range-to-empty will display between 320 and 326 miles. Surely that 1 percent jolt of AC juice isn't good for an extra 81 miles, is it? What gives?

A spokesperson told us that in the spring Ford had "updated how range is displayed to our customers above 80 percent state of charge [on] Level 1 and 2 [chargers], to show what range is possible for long trips according to the EPA standard.... As the battery energy depletes, the range figure will update according to the conditions and driving style. "  It's worth noting that EPA range is based on a mix of 55 percent urban and 45 percent highway driving.

In other words, if you plug your F-150 Lightning into a Level 1 or 2 charger and charge it above 80 percent, the truck's range meter will display an unrealistically high range estimate.

[Laconian]

I haxored Ford and found this:

estimate.c:
...
  // this is a hack, jim farley made me do it
  // TODO: revisit this later (probably never)
  if (source != SOURCE_LEVEL3) {
    range *= 1.5;
  }
...

You can't argue with the algorithm. That's like arguing against science itself.

[Laconian]

You should be doing 80% anyways, NMC chemistry doesn't enjoy being topped off.

[MrH]

You should be doing 80% anyways, NMC chemistry doesn't enjoy being topped off.

Ford has a big buffer already on the battery.  131 kWh usable, but it's 143 kWh gross.  90% charge is like 82% charge of gross.

Ford recommends 90%, but now that I know this dumb calculation happens, maybe they realized the true EV people who want the cold hard truth would charge to 80%.  The simpletons who don't understand and want the EPA range to show on the display charge to 90%.

[Laconian]

Same here then, the EV6 has a gross battery size of 77.4kWh but only 72.6 is usable.

[MrH]

I need to just stop thinking about it.  Seems like if I just charge to 80%, it's a lot more accurate.  Realistically, even driving with the heater blasting, going 75-80 mph on the highway, this gets more range than the Bolt.  I'll get 180 miles of range worst case with an 80% charge.

A few more things to bitch about, then I'm done.  I'm overall thrilled with the car. It's really impressive and it surprises me every day with how certain things are designed, but there are some real head scratchers.

They put in a beautiful LCD screen for digital gauges.  It's big, bright, fast refresh, etc.  But you can't really configure it much?  Standard display is charge/power & battery on the left, digital speedometer with a ring around that lights up as you go, but isn't really labeled?



You can change the middle to show trip info, power distribution, driver aids, etc.  But that's it.  Left and right side are set.

There is one mode called "calm mode" that simplifies it all.  Speed readout in the middle, minimal everything else.  When you use blue cruise though, look at this layout disaster



Why are the graphics so tiny of the truck?
Why is the speed spaced further to the right than the battery info is to the left?  Why is this so asymmetrical when there's so much space?

I'm just shocked this kind of weird stuff makes it through UX acceptance.

[r0tor]

It's like they digitized an old Focus dashboard

[CaminoRacer]

Is that screen larger than the Mach-E? I think the Mach-E looks similar but it's a pretty small screen in front of the driver. Definitely looks strange on a large screen.

[Laconian]

Does Blue Cruise render nearby cars? A small depiction of your own truck isn't a bad idea if it frees up real estate for showing the traffic around you.

IMO for the home charger folks, range is a pointless stat not worth worrying about it so long as it's good enough for 95% of one's driving needs.

DCFC dependency obviously changes things but I probably wouldn't buy an EV if I was in that boat. Even a Tesla - the Prius has a lower cost per mile on gas than the Model 3 does on SC, and can go far longer between refueling stops.

[MrH]

Is that screen larger than the Mach-E? I think the Mach-E looks similar but it's a pretty small screen in front of the driver. Definitely looks strange on a large screen.

Yeah, that's definitely it.  Mustang Mach-E has a 10.2" screen that's really wide.  Lightning has a 12" screen that has a more normal ratio.  It looks like they just ported it right over and didn't scale or redo the layout.

Does Blue Cruise render nearby cars? A small depiction of your own truck isn't a bad idea if it frees up real estate for showing the traffic around you.

IMO for the home charger folks, range is a pointless stat not worth worrying about it so long as it's good enough for 95% of one's driving needs.

DCFC dependency obviously changes things but I probably wouldn't buy an EV if I was in that boat. Even a Tesla - the Prius has a lower cost per mile on gas than the Model 3 does on SC, and can go far longer between refueling stops.

Just shows a vehicle in front of you if you're locked onto something in traffic.

It's kind of silly to show traffic on your gauge cluster?  You can just look out of the window and see it too.

[Laconian]

I agree, but it's one of the things Tesla's done for years that's just expected nowadays. On the EV6 you see a formation of marshmallows moving around the car when you drive on the highway. I guess it's nice for planning a lane change, it's more nuanced than the blind spot alarm.

[MrH]

I agree, but it's one of the things Tesla's done for years that's just expected nowadays. On the EV6 you see a formation of marshmallows moving around the car when you drive on the highway. I guess it's nice for planning a lane change, it's more nuanced than the blind spot alarm.

Tesla also crashes into stuff and kills their customers.    It gives people a false sense of security IMO

[Morris Minor]

Tesla also crashes into stuff and kills their customers.    It gives people a false sense of security IMO

And they catch fire. Every burning car you see is a Tesla, whether it's a Tesla or not.

Also all of them are recalled every week. And there are no dealers to take them to to get the fixes done.

[MrH]

And they catch fire. Every burning car you see is a Tesla, whether it's a Tesla or not.

Also all of them are recalled every week. And there are no dealers to take them to to get the fixes done.

Well, you aren't wrong.  They do catch fire a lot.  Some interesting comparisons:

Tesla:
218 confirmed fires
80 fatalities

Ford Pinto:
38 fires
27 fatalities

Granted, Tesla has sold something around 5 million total vehicles.  The Pinto was around 1.5 million.  Adjusted for volume...

Tesla:
1 fire for every 23k vehicles
1 death for every 62.5k vehicles

Pinto:
1 fire for every 39.5k vehicles
1 death for every 55.5k vehicles

So definitely higher absolute numbers for Tesla.  Higher rate of fires for Tesla.  Higher death rate for Pintos.

Keep in mind, this is a user compiled database for fires and deaths with Tesla, with sources cited for every single entry.  Tesla has dramatically underreported to NHTSA already.  The number is definitely not all inclusive.

[MrH]

Been sick since last week.  Finally drove into the office today in the winter tundra.

A few things:
- Efficiency is in the dumpster   Still plenty of range for my daily commute with only charging to 80%, but I'm glad I got the extended range. It's a big truck.  Huge weight to lug around, huge interior to keep warm, huge batteries to keep warm. 

The Bolt really is kind of special in their design approach.  Tons of stuff was done to maximize efficiency, and it pays dividends with EVs.  There's a lot of diminishing returns when you keep scaling the battery bigger and bigger. 1 kWh of battery added adds less and less range.

- I was charging the Lightning with my old Bolt charger.  Dealer asked if I could throw it in with the car.  I originally forgot it, and figured they'd just send it to auction anyways, but since they asked, I returned it.

- I opened the Ford Mobile Charger that was included with the truck.  Apparently it only supports 32 amps.  The Bolt charger did 40 amps, so charging is a bit slower.

- The massive 80 amp wall charger is getting delivered today.  Need to get an electrician out to install it, but it will be nice to be able to top up fast if needed.

[MrH]

Ordered a tonneau cover.  Researched for awhile and picked one.  Turns out, it's the same one my boss, and 2 others at work went with too.

[AutobahnSHO]

I like the soft rollup. Still have full use of the bed, unlike the hard trifolds.

[Eye of the Tiger]

TUNDRA has a rollup tonneau. Hook & loop around the perimeter. Works nice as fuck

[MrH]

It's technically a hard roll up I guess.  It has aluminum slates the entire way, so you can't cut into it and it can have snow on it without sagging, etc.

It's locked too when it's rolled down.  You open the tailgate and pull a wire to unlock it and roll it up.

The trifolds are kind of a mess.  When you fold them up, you can't see out of the back.  The retractable ones requires a massive cannister that takes up a lot of bed space.  This seems to be the best compromise of all the designs I've seen.

[veeman]

Ordered a tonneau cover.  Researched for awhile and picked one.  Turns out, it's the same one my boss, and 2 others at work went with too.

Your boss and two colleagues all have Ford Lightnings?  Or just 1/2 ton pickups?

[Eye of the Tiger]

You could go full grandpa

You cannot view this attachment.

[AutobahnSHO]

It's technically a hard roll up I guess. 

Love it!

I'm guessing more than the $400 for our regular soft rollup. (Fordpass points paid for half though)

[CaminoRacer]

I like those rollups. Looks like the best compromise