Elon Musk certainly hasn’t been kind towards Ford in the past, talking about how the Dearborn truck plant is like a morgue. It’s a bold move considering his cars are assembled outdoors in a tent, but that hasn’t stopped the Twitter man from tweeting. He even recently claimed the Tesla all-electric pickup truck will be as good as Ford’s truck but also be able to tow 300,000 pounds.

Yes, that’s a totally ridiculous number and there’s no way the truck will tow that much in the real world, under the SAE J2807 standard. That’s assuming, of course, the Tesla pickup even exists. While Musk has long teased the truck, we’ve yet to actually see it in any physical capacity. It’s easy to say (or joke) your truck can tow 300,000 pounds when it doesn’t actually exist.

Ford is also working on an all-electric pickup truck. Today the company released a video of that development process, including the vehicle towing rail cars weighing over 1 million pounds. Not only is that 700,000 pounds more than Tesla’s claim but, since it’s a real truck that really exists, we can actually see it do it. 

Of course, this is a publicity stunt from Ford. In any normal world, we’d just share the video and move on with our lives. But in a world where Tesla and its CEO like to throw as much shade as they can, it’s significant Ford countered the talk with a video. Also, it confirms that Ford’s EV truck is coming along and likely to go on sale much sooner than Tesla’s offering — if the Tesla truck goes on sale at all.

No, the Ford electric pickup won’t be rated to haul 1,000,000 pounds. But electric torque means it’ll probably be able to tow quite a bit. What I’m most curious about on the Ford EV pickup is not what it’ll tow, but how much electric range there will be when attached to a trailer. That’ll be what makes or breaks the electric pickup.

Customers in the market for an electric vehicle would never be interested in a pickup truck. I honestly could not see a pickup truck owner interested in this type of vehicle. Truck owners want to portray a tough image that is contradictory to the image an electric vehicle conveys.

aker, this proves that electric cars in their current form really are a symbol of the virtue signaling types located along the left and right coasts and university towns. It’s all about maintaining that smug image. I would say you are incorrect. – An electric p/u for localized fleets that travel during the day and charge at night during low grid demand are an excellent set-up for many operators.

@CaddyDaddy: Almost certainly this will be the way the electric pickup will break into the market; the perceived cost savings alone would be remarkable as few fluids would ever need replacing and electric motors tend to run ‘forever’, even under load.

The first contractor/subcontractor that manages to come to my house and NOT drop fluids all over my brand new concrete driveway, gets my business.

I’ve met plenty of wealthy conservatives who drive a Tesla Model S because a) it’s more enjoyable than an S-class or 7-series and b) it’s equally effective at projecting “I have FU money.”

Yup there are a lot of fleets that will love the EV-150. Always full when it leaves for the day of work and no time wasted on fueling.

Oh, I think they’ll get there, but it’s not right around the corner. At the start, electric pickups will be useful as local parts chasers, used by pest control companies, etc.

I disagree, akear. An electric pickup with 1,000-lbs. payload for use within a 20-mile radius would suit my company just fine. I am paying very close attention to the offspring of the Rivian/Ford deal.

You would be staggered by the number of pickups, vans, and small flatbeds that come in and out of my business and my neighbors’ between 7am & 5pm every day. None get used after 5. They are a logical extension of electric forklifts which have been used successfully for decades.

@akear: That’s what you think. Imagine being able to drive with a fuel cost equivalent of 80mpg or more with that kind of pulling power. Imagine no longer needing DEF to get the most torque for towing and hauling. Imagine never having to stop at a gas station again for daily driving. There’s almost every reason in the world to be interested in an electric pickup truck. The only possible drawback would be the range on battery power but even there, would it really be that much worse, even when towing? Remember, towing any real weight even with a big diesel tends to cut fuel economy in half, especially when it’s a slab-nosed trailer taller than the truck itself (including 5th-wheel campers.)

So as far as I can see, the issue is not so much whether they would be interested but rather whether or not the truck would meet the buyer’s needs overall and I think it could.

Some folks like to categorize people, Vulpine. It’s easy. In this case, it’s “if you drive a Tesla, you must be a left wing tree hugger.” It’s a common refrain around here, and it’s complete bulls**t.

Agreed, FM. But I also know that a paradigm shift is also resisted by nearly any means until it becomes ubiquitous. I’m not old enough to actively remember the old, “Get A Horse” meme or the almost-as-old, “If Man were meant to fly, God would have given us wings” argument. This is just another effort to deny a sea change in transportation that will make lives easier over time.

Agreed along with certain cars leading to left wing generalizations there are others that lead to right wing generalizations. I have a hybrid and an HD pickup in the driveway. I wish we still had the Miata to really confuse people. In any case I’d love to have an electric pickup so I could daily without the gas penalty and still haul 4000 lbs in the bed now and then Not sure how an electric is going to plow snow for 12 hours though.

I’d be very happy if the smug Prius (and other hybrids) and Tesla owners were a little more respectful on the road of people like me who commute on foot or by bicycle. “Left-wing” environmental “concern” is most often hypocrisy at its finest when it comes to the convenience of personal transport. The sell of the electric truck is obvious, as was pointed out about electric forklifts. Hard to believe that snow plowing is big part (albeit not minor) of the overall pickup utilization picture.

“Imagine being able to drive with a fuel cost equivalent of 80mpg or more with that kind of pulling power. Imagine no longer needing DEF to get the most torque for towing and hauling. Imagine never having to stop at a gas station again for daily driving. There’s almost every reason in the world to be interested in an electric pickup truck.”

Anything that uses that kind of pulling power, which is also to say anything that uses DPF, will also use more battery than can reasonably be carried on a LD chassis, or afforded in anything other than a PR stunt.

The Tesla X is smaller, lighter, and more aerodynamic than anything that could reasonably be called a pickup truck, the battery pack alone weighs 1500 pounds and costs in the order of $20,000, and towing anything bigger than a popup drops the range to double digits.

Put two of those packs in your electric truck, which now weighs four tons on E rated tires with the smooth ride of a F350 and a six figure price tag, and you might be able to pull a real trailer for two hours between charges.

@Dan: Anything that uses that kind of pulling power, which is also to say anything that uses DPF, will also use more battery than can reasonably be carried on a LD chassis, or afforded in anything other than a PR stunt.

On what hard, verifiable data do you draw that conclusion? The Tesla Model X can realistically tow a 10,000# trailer, though it is rated for 5,000# due to its relatively lightweight structure (no steel frame and proper support structure for a heavier load over time.) The range loss is roughly equivalent to a pickup truck with similar capabilities (5000# rated towing) at about 40%. With the new batteries used in the Model 3 (as compared to the older versions in the Model X) the truck can probably carry twice as many batteries in the pack, achieving a 400+ mile unladen range and a 200+ mile range while towing. I admit we don’t know what kind of range the trucks will actually get but if a Tesla truck can get 140-200kWh, then unladen should get 440-580 miles of range.

Lots of people live off-grid and light their homes with solar-electric. Ask them how they heat water or cook and the answer is usually “propane”. I wonder why?

“Ask them how they heat water or cook and the answer is usually “propane”. I wonder why?” — When it comes to cooking, gas offers more control and more even heat in a burner than electric coils which are typically on/off circuits. Even better, a gas-fired on-demand water heater is quicker and more efficient than electric because you don’t have to wait for the elements to get to operating temperature, which demands both high voltage and high resistance to get to that 300°-500° flash temperature such cookers and water heaters would require.

“The Tesla Model X can realistically tow a 10,000# trailer, though it is rated for 5,000# due to its relatively lightweight structure (no steel frame and proper support structure for a heavier load over time.)”

In the same way that this Ford can realistically tow a train, but anyhow the point is how far it can tow 10,000 (5,000, 3,000, etc.) pounds and the answer is not very. Google brings up greenbeans keeping it under 50 (YGTBSM) and turning off their air conditioners (YGTBSM again) to make their 2 hour hops with baby trailers.

“The range loss is roughly equivalent to a pickup truck with similar capabilities (5000# rated towing) at about 40%.

“With the new batteries used in the Model 3 (as compared to the older versions in the Model X) the truck can probably carry twice as many batteries in the pack”

Sorry, I disagree. I’m a pretty accomplished DIY person who uses his truck for both commuting and hauling yards of stone. I’d be happy to find something more efficient and responsible when my 2009 finally gives up the ghost.

@akear: “Customers in the market for an electric vehicle would never be interested in a pickup truck.”

I believed each one was the right tool for my needs when I bought it. My needs have changed as my living situation has changed.

My driveway currently has two spots: 1) An efficient highway commuter car. 2) A large family hauler. We’re a family of 5.

I’ve suffered a career setback, so my plans to replace car #1 with a Tesla Model 3 and car #2 with a PHEV Crysler Pacifica or Explorer PHEV are delayed.

I’d consider an EV F-150 for the large family hauler slot once the youngest of my 3 kids can sit in a forward facing carseat, and once I get my career back on track. The reason an F-150 is that I have a hobby which involves towing and building things — and, with a little engineering, a electric F-150 could be used to drastically reduce costs complexity in the sport. I guess I’m not so different from the guys who tow bass boats with their F-150s, except that I’d like an HVDC PTO plug.

Well on the Hybrid and Plug in Hybrid versions they are planning on a 110v outlet that can power larger loads like power tools. So it wouldn’t be surprising to see it on the EV version too.

GM sold two generations of hybrid pickups, I think I see 50 times as many Quadra-steer trucks as I do the hybrids.

I actually saw a Quadrasteer truck the other day, the first one I’d seen in awhile. The last Two-Mode Hybrid I saw (a Tahoe) was maybe a month ago. Owners must like the hybrids, because they always seem to be clean and straight, and box stock (not wearing 28s, or lifted).

I see the Quadra steers fairly regularly at least a different one every other week at minimum. Sometimes 3-4 in a single day.

Those “mild” hybrids were not worth the money. An “opposite of mild” (ferocious?) hybrid makes more sense. There is room for batteries.

GM (and ChryslerCo) introduced the 2-mode system with 40% efficiency gains and everyone slammed it for being too expensive and undesired for that segment (I can link to the TTAC articles from that time if there are doubts).

Now many people are stating that electrification or full BEV is the best way forward for trucks and SUVs.

@thelaine: Not really. If gasoline sits too long in the tank, fuel lines, etc., they start to get a varnish build up which will damage the engine and coat the spark plugs, making it more problematical and require more maintenance than an engine that gets used on a daily basis.

Has anyone had any problems with the GM Voltec system’s practice of the car choosing to fire the engine up at random intervals to cycle the fuel in the system though?

All the plug in Hybrids I’m aware of will run the engine just to use up gas if it has been in the tank too long. It takes a fair amount of time before the gas gets old enough that it will damage the engine, and it will never “coat the spark plugs”. The gas in my pickup is 6 months old and didn’t cause an issue when I drove it the other day finally to the point where the low fuel light is on. It will get some Techron when it gets filled up tonight.

Volt drivers don’t seem to have a problem with it. It is nice to not have to charge if it is not convenient or is impossible.

That’s why most PHEVs have a metal, pressurised fuel tank. It preserves the fuel far better than normal fuel tanks.

It’s not as if it makes a meaningful difference if I use up that small tank of gasoline every once in a while just to fill it up again with a fresh tankful if I’ve been driving on full electric for a very long time. It’s still a lot more eco-friendly than driving around with stupidly large and massively heavy battery pack all the time, every day.

I disagree, Lockstops, but it’s up to the individual. As long as each driver gets what they WANT, then I can’t argue. The thing is, not everybody knows what they really want until they see it (quote ascribed to Steve Jobs.) I disagree that having a full-time gasoline backup is more efficient. Honestly, I disagree that even having a part-time gasoline backup is more efficient. Gasoline engines only offer 25% efficiency while battery electric offers 85% efficiency and more. Even the best hydrogen fuel cell, when taking cracking the hydrogen into account, offers only about 60% efficiency (about 75%-80% if you ignore the manufacture of the hydrogen.)

In my viewpoint, gasoline is no longer necessary for everyday driving. For us private vehicle owners, our average daily driving is well under 100 miles. A BEV on a single charge can handle two- to five days of daily driving but by a simple plug in each evening, you have a ‘full tank’ every time you go out. Your ‘fuel’ costs are only a fraction of what you were paying for gas and as they become more prominent, maintenance costs should also be a mere fraction of what you were paying before. Electric motors last practically forever simply because they have only three moving parts–the rotor and two bearings. TCO (total cost of operation) will be less than an ICEV from beginning to end.

Oh, I know that ICEVs are cheaper today–that’s because the cost of changing over to BEV construction is higher today. That will change as we can already see the costs are coming down while the cost of ICEVs is going up. Another few years and their prices will be equivalent, like for like. In time, ICEVs will be the niche vehicle, as the only purpose they’ll have is in places where electricity is scarce or operational durability requires extended running times. And most of those will be covered by fuel cell vehicles, as will most heavy-duty demands. 18-wheelers, railroads, numerous other heavy vehicles, even ocean-going vessels will running on hydrogen, not refined petroleum oil. The only reason hydrogen won’t work for personal vehicles is that the fuel cells are too big and heavy for light-duty use. Even in a pickup truck it’s so large it takes up almost a third of the truck’s carrying capacity and still only offers about 200 horsepower equivalent. Larger vehicles have the capability without losing too much capacity.

The physics says that end-to-end electric is the most efficient means, even if the batteries are heavier. Today’s cars and trucks are already as heavy as they were back in the ’60s, and nowhere near as large. Full-sized pickup trucks are heavier. And the most efficient gasoline-only vehicles can only just manage 40mpg–in a vehicle so small and light that it’s impractical for any purpose outside of city transportation. Oh, I understand the PHEV but as you already said, you pretty much have to waste the gas–intentionally burning it off–when you don’t need to.

On a recent long-distance trip, I charged next to hydropower stations and one solar installation. About a 250-mile round trip using hydro and solar.

Batteries are getting lighter too. I think 300 Wh/kg is in mass production now (vs about 160 Wh/kg or something like that on the 1st gen leaf) with 500 on the horizon. In a few years, we’ll probably be past the 1000 Wh/kg mark. Some manufacturers are saying 1000 Wh/kg with a 3C charge rate in 2024.

With lighter battery, you need less battery capacity for a given range and the smaller battery effectively decreases the charge time for a given range. The first 2-speeds drives for EVs will first make their 1st appearance on the Taycan and will probably go mainstream in a few years. Again, it allows manufacturers to go with less battery capacity and gives them another effective increase in charging speeds and effectively lowers the cost of the battery for a given range.

At any rate, that’s my best guess on BEV evolution into the mid-2020s. Given that scenario, hybrids make even less sense. 1000 Wh/kg means (if my math is correct) for less then 250 lbs of cell weight and an efficiency of 6 miles per kWh, you’d get 600 miles of range. The cells for a 50 kWh battery on a 7 mile/kWh car might only weigh 125 pounds and would take you 350 miles. Disclaimer – just guessing about the efficiency of an EV with a two speed and lighter battery, so I’m not really sure – and my math might be wrong.

Is it Ironic that Musk associates the Rouge as a morgue, yet assembles Teslas in a parking lot tent storing parts in rented trailers? I interpret that assembling cars in a tent and storing the parts in trailers is akin to a makeshift morgue after a disaster / catastrophe. To CaddyDaddy, this is the perfect metaphor to Tesla in summation.

Does anyone know how much FCA is paying Tesla for CAFE credits? (a BS Fiat market decreed by Govt. edict). Tesla only survives by stealing the productive profits of taxpayers and other manufactures. The true cost of production would never survive in the marketplace and is doomed to fail.

Tesla isn’t stealing anything. Your elected representatives chose to tilt the market this way. FCA is choosing to pay their fees, rather than pour billions into development of EVs like Tesla has.

@CaddyDaddy: What’s a “Rouge”? As for the rest of the question, the reasoning is quite logical–urgent need for more covered floor space at the lowest possible cost. While the building has been called a ‘tent’ ever since its construction, it’s a true building with soft walls. The framework is either steel or aluminum and can probably stand for years without weakening. The covering is a cheap replacement over the short term until they make enough profit to put permanent walls up.

As for the FCA/GM CAFE/CARB credits… According to several articles, including a previous one here on TTAC, it was expected to run about $2B from FCA and an undisclosed, ongoing amount from GM.

The Rouge River Complex is where the F-150 is built. IMO it is the foremost industrial complex in the history of the planet. It’s where iron ore, raw coal etc came in and finished Model Ts and countless other models rolled off the line almost continuously for almost 100 years!

Never paid much attention to where they’re built unless they were within a stone’s throw of me (VW plant in Chattanooga while I still lived there, Chrysler plant in Newark, DE when I moved up (now gone.))

I agree with CaddyDaddy. The Rouge plant was the definition of vertical integration in the flesh…a true monument to the maximization of the Industrial Revolution.

I toured the Rouge plant as a young kid – going by CaddyDaddy’s link it must have been just before the first round of tours ended. The whole operation made a huge impression. I especially remember the steel rolling operation – hot enough to give off photons and moving at incredible speed by the end.

I blame that trip (Henry Ford Museum, Greenfield Village, Rouge Plant) for some of my poor life choices.

Yes it changed the world. One of those changes was to take craftsmanship largely out of the hands of the individual.

0. There is more to towing than just engine output. This Ford EV is still on a half-ton chassis and most renderings I’ve seen of the Tesla truck look Ridgeline-sized. Even with HD levels of torque it is unlikely it would be safe to tow 30k with either.

1. It is surprising that Ford could make a viable BEV F-150 but hasn’t been able to make a viable BEV ‘anything else’, which would likely have a (much) smaller battery and more moderate driveability requirements. This of course assumes that the F-150 EV is a viable, profitable product and not just a CA-only limited-production marketing exercise, which we all know Ford loves.

The reason the pickup makes sense is volume and margin. This will have the volume to spread amortization and trucks have higher margins than cars. As soon as they open the fleet order form gov’t agencies across the country will be throwing down orders left and right ensuring a reasonable volume even if they don’t sell many at retail.

I don’t know but x% of F-150 sales is going to be a lot higher than x% of one of their cars, at least when they still had them.

I think the govt fleet angle is key to a minimum volume since many agencies have alt fuel vehicle mandates of one sort or another.

Reminds me of the Chevy commercial with a ’72 C-20 towing a American Airlines 747. IIRC, the truck was built with a 454, Turbo 400, 4WD, and 4.11 gears.

But you can use a Nissan Frontier to stand in for the front landing gear of your plane: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nWZKnzwG48

Economic reasons abound for developing an electric pickup, PROVIDED THE BATTERY ISSUES CAN BE OVERCOME.

Now that Ford, Rivian and VW are working together, it’s a WHEN, not an if. And WHEN people begin to buy, and become comfortable with, an electric F-150, mass adoption of electric vehicles shall follow.

Back when The Beach Boys were singing about 409s and Little Deuce Coupes, loud meant performance and a set of Cherry Bombs or Thrush mufflers were the way to go.

But toward the end of the 60s, GM developed a “turbo” muffler for Corvairs that provided better flow in street applications…and was QUIET.

People who actually know about designing efficient-flowing exhaust systems for street use will choose one of the now-many mufflers that may be louder than stock, but are much quieter than a Cherry Bomb or similar.

Unless you’re on a racetrack where the rules about exhaust flow are different because you’re running at the upper end of the RPM scale, LOUD no longer equates to PERFORMANCE.

It simply means loud. And those who’ve equated loud with tough are really about 50 years out of date.

“Now that Ford, Rivian and VW are working together, it’s a WHEN, not an if. And WHEN people begin to buy, and become comfortable with, an electric F-150, mass adoption of electric vehicles shall follow.”

It doesn’t take a Captain Obvious to conclude that General Mismanagement has been a Major Disaster.

@dantes…: GM has had its good years and its bad years; right now I think they’re somewhere on the low side but certainly not at their extreme of the ’90s and ’00s. They’re still making mistakes but more because of efforts to be fiscally conservative compared to their decades of being innovative. The ’50s, ’60s and even early-to-mid ’70s saw some decent progress, before they started cost-cutting rather than really producing cars people wanted to own. Ford at least built cars people wanted, even if their overall durability was questionable. I own a GM now because it is the best product available for my needs NOW, after waiting more than five years for something closer to what I WANTED. I actually considered the Ford Ranger instead, until they announced its single engine choice.

Somebody get the fat people on annoyingly LOUD Harleys off the road – there are better ways to compensate for phallic insufficiency.

Rivian and VW have nothing to do with this at all. The agreement with VW is for European vehicles and just happened. While the Rivian investment is a little older, the EV-150 predates that and won’t have an effect on the upcomming EV-150.

This looks like an opportunity for Smart. Just add reduction gear and then run an ad of the Smart car pulling a train bigger than that…

Thanks to collective action with the urgency and energy of an avalanche…..a world where a car salesmen simply cannot recommend a vehicle with an internal combustion engine is nearly upon us. Manufacturers, dealerships, governments….you can either ante up or be relegated to the annals of history.

I’m relieved that Ford has embraced the obvious benefits of EV locomotion and lament the fact that this author decided to construct a controversy around a simple display of physics.

I’m no expert on commercial trucks, but I don’t think it’s too hard to come up with a business case for an electric truck, as long as electric prices are low.

They don’t travel a lot of miles (the trucks don’t travel any further than Menards), but they do require the capacity and versatility of a real pickup truck.

Also, the groundskeepers go home at the end of the day, leaving the trucks parked for 16 hours every night.

And besides, they’re paid for with unlimited student debt backed up by the taxpayers. Who cares how wasteful they’d be!?!?

Maybe I lack vision, but I think a lot of you guys are putting the cart ***WAY*** out in front of the horse here.

I’ve been impressed by what Tesla has been able to do, the EVs I’ve experienced have been good, and there is a ton of industry money flowing into the segment’s development. OTOH, the entire PHEV/EV segment moves volume about equal to the Toyota Tacoma, growth outside the Model 3 is non-existent, and even well-received EVs are being regionally sales limited by their manufacturers.

Right now Ford has a prototype and Tesla has a vision. EV trucks could certainly take over the market some day, but I think it is way too early for anyone to claim massive success as a forgone conclusion.

Clearly Ford – the market leader in pickups – sees commercial value in electric pickups, and if that’s the case, I’ll take their word for it.

I don’t mean to be a Luddite here. I think electrics are a significant part of the vehicle landscape going forward. However, I also think that pickups will be among the last market segments to convert, and I think the timeline for that to happen is measured in decades rather than years.

This is ultimately a cheerlead as FreedMike says, and shouldn’t be taken as any indication of where the market is headed in any type of near future. Let’s not forget that earlier this year Ford introduced a new big block V8 for truck use, which should be considered an equally valid indication of where they see the market heading.

I don’t think this is a binary, all-electric or all-gas question, and clearly Ford doesn’t either. I think there’s room for a pickup with a big, honkin’ V8 and one with an electric motor. I don’t see why it has to be one or the other.

But where are the subsidies for E85 made from waste? That’s better for the environment at least in most climates, or at least makes a lot of sense to get the waste products converted instead of letting them release that same CO2 or even methane in to the atmosphere with no use taken out of it.

But no, it’s just binary ‘EV = clean’ and ‘not EV = the devil’ BS which is absolutely untrue…

For instance, the trucks that operate mostly off-grid for instance (ranchers), or which spend 24 hours a day on the highway (those RV relocation service trucks that I see on the highway) should probably burn the dead dinosaurs in order to maintain their current capabilities.

Trucks that don’t go very far should almost certainly be electric — like the maintenance and groundskeeper trucks at my university.

To pick some numbers out of the air, a world in which 30% of the trucks are electric, 40% are PHEV, and 30% are straight dino-burners sounds pretty good to me. It would create a drastic reduction in oil usage, avoiding a lot of military/environmental/climate costs that we are all paying one way or another. And the vocal change-resistent folks who swear up and down that an EV will never work for them can keep doing things the old way. Sounds like a better world to me!

Detroit Electrics were produced from 1907 to 1939 so I imagine they were profitable at least during their peak years in the 1910s.

At first I was like “Ford is investing one million pounds to take on Tesla in the UK or something? U wot M8?” :-D

The one thing that Tesla has proved is that there are enough people who will buy electric to make the development of such products worthwhile; Tesla still has not proved the business case for any electric vehicle since they have yet to produce a REAL profit and to sell their vehicles without having to send 70% back to a yard to have the OBVIOUS quality issues addressed.

I am not fan of Elon Muskrat, but he has done some of the work against the headwind of common thinking and has created a tiny opportunity for a COMPETENT company to make mainstream and practical products at a reasonable price in any market.

Ford’s venture into the pickup market is not risky at all – this is a huge market filled with huge profit potential; unlike their domestic and foreign coward competitors, Ford has shown it will risk it all by going nearly all aluminum on the bodies and has done so with a remarkable effort; now that there is an opening for innovation in a rather stodgy market, Ford is now leading the way to an electric truck thanks to its partnership with someone who has yet to actually build one. Even if only 1% of F-150’s were to be all electric, that would do more than to make it a gimmick; the electric F-150 would create its own market that will only grow as gasoline prices increase and those who use trucks for personal situations continues to be available for truck purchases.

This exact reasoning is why I lambast GM for that hideous and unremarkable Corvette C8 – it is old school – old thinking – and is not innovative. They did all of this with the Pontiac Fiero and did it half-way. An all electric Stingray would have been innovative and would have allowed the product to be a halo one that would compete against Tesla and others who will eventually go into that market. Rather than saying you are building the cheapest mid-engine product, GM could have said we are building the world’s fastest production electric car that out handles even the best performances cars available. Stingray would have a new meaning and could be used to sell along with the C7 as a bridge to the past allowing the C8 to be the premium offering in the “corvette” brand. Alas, GM has screwed this up and is offering yesterday’s wishful thinking into a very limited market with no upside. Aside from better weight distribution, there is no net performance gain simply by moving the engine.

I’m gonna disagree with your take on the Stingray – there’s ballsy, and then there’s stupid ballsy. A mid engined Corvette is the former (look at all the pushback they’ve gotten from the “but…but…but…it’s not front engined – HERESY!!!!” crowd), and for now, an electric one is the latter.

@FreedMike: Unofficially, there is. A third party will build you an electric ‘Vette on demand. According to a review I read recently, it’s quite potent and rides decently. The only things I don’t know are the cost and who is doing it.

“But it wouldn’t surprise me if an electric ‘Vette was in the works.” Yeah, but wouldn’t they have registered the name as trademark by now if they were going to do that? Uhh, wait a minute. Whats this?:


Elsewhere in the recent past I read that hybrid and all electric powertrains for the C8 are possible.

GM was clearly working within a hard $60,000 cap…because they know their competition…with the C8 no rational being is going to buy a GT350 over a mid-engine vette…zero…

I love what I’ve seen of the C8 as much as anyone, but plenty of rational beings might make a back seat, a manual transmission and an 8200 RPM redline higher priorities than the last 5% of at the limit performance.

Hilarious. Ford drops this the day before Tesla’s earnings call! Maybe they do have a sense of humor somewhere in the company.

Tesla uses Ford F250 pickups for its own pickup/delivery services…as illustrated in this pic I took on US101 in Oxnard, CA:

Sure, I will grant you that Teslas are great toys for the eco-minded rich guy. At the end of the day though, it appears that a good ole dead-dinosaur powered F250 must be called upon, in all its CO2 belching glory, to get the Green Goddess back home.

–Isn’t it ironic that Tesla isn’t using some sort of alt-fuel vehicles for its own fleet? Is it possible, just maybe, that Elon Musk is a “green believer” only insofar as it burnishes his eco-cred?

So…Musk and Tesla buyers are (fill in the blank here with whatever moderately derisive term you want) because Tesla doesn’t use an as-yet-nonexistent electric truck to haul Teslas around with?

Of course they do for now, just like Ferrari needs Ford pickups to haul Ferraris around in – after all, Ferrari doesn’t make a pickup.

Regarding my obviously obtuse responses above–not personal! The overarching point is that while BEVs will certainly have their place in our automotive marketplace, they will NEVER replace ICE powered vehicles–NEVER. As such, I have found the BEV-centric fervor, much of it emanating from Musk, to be silly.

That said, I applaud much of what TESLA has accomplished. The Model S is fantastic looking and great to drive. Teslas are made in USA (to the extent CA remains in USA). The innovation and tech implementation is great.

I think you’re right that EVs will never fully replace conventionally powered vehicles, but for a very big piece of the market, they’re a better mousetrap. A Model 3 would look just fine in my garage (now that I have one).

And if you’re looking for silly PR stuff coming from the mouths of auto execs, you’ll find that in PLENTIFUL supply. Musk is just carrying on a grand tradition.

Messages communicated by Ford in this promo piece: – Electric motors have a torque advantage (i.e., Musk is fundamentally correct) – Metal wheels on metal rails offer low rolling resistance (trains are better than trucks for hauling heavy freight) – Our products of the past 42 years are incredibly heavy (we realized this and switched to aluminum but managed to lose most of the weight savings) – Our existing customers are suckers, we are a transnational company, and women are superior to men

When you are Coca-Cola, you are not supposed to acknowledge the competition, much less mention them by name (except that in 2019, people realize that Coca-Cola’s core product is largely obsolete and even they are floundering around introducing alternatives).

“except that in 2019, people realize that Coca-Cola’s core product is largely obsolete and even they are floundering around introducing alternatives”

Coke doesn’t release by-product sales numbers, but “sparkling beverages” was 50% of their net sales last year, and I:IRC not under 60% of sales by *volume* worldwide.

What little I can find suggests that Coca Cola (“Classic”) is the biggest seller in that category in most if not all markets, and often a strict majority of sales.

Everyone’s trucks were heavy, and Ford made its trucks … slightly less heavy with aluminum bits.)

The weight argument makes no sense, I want the most weight possible in a truck if I’m towing, or hell even surviving a crash. We should commend companies for adding weight not deriding them. The heavier the better, unless we’re talking nimble sports cars which we are not.

Way to miss my point – but since you bring it up: – All markets for Coca-Cola are not equal. In the leading developed markets, ‘Classic’ and ‘Diet’ sales are both declining and have been for several years. At least one source indicates that ‘Diet’ has surpassed ‘Classic.’ – Global revenue in total has declined for six straight years. – Google “BCG Matrix” – ‘Classic’ is clearly in the “Cash Cow” quadrant – relatively large share of a declining segment. – Review this morning’s Q2 earnings call transcript – I assure you that CEO James Quincey is quite concerned with developing/acquiring alternative product lines to make up the deficit from traditional “Coke.”

In these for better or for worse times of racial and gender awareness, I had to wonder why Ford didn’t select a tough guy burly man representative rather than an asian female for this demo.

It’s hilarious that blogs like this think Tesla is in any way a threat to real automakers. Ford could care less what Tesla is doing because Tesla is insignificant.

Also, is this similar to the Raptor ads that ford put out and then when people emulated those ads their “built ford tough” trucks broke in half?

Lastly how ironic this comes out a day after a $1.2 BILLION dollar lawsuit comes out against ford for lying and cheating on fuel economy tests.

(I say this as someone ambivalent about Ford trucks; I own an ’07 SuperDuty, and it’s basically a good truck qua truck.

In the US market, Tesla is outselling Cadillac, Chrysler, Mitsubishi, Acura, Volvo, Infiniti, Lincoln, Land Rover, Porsche, Mini, Jaguar, Genesis, Alfa Romeo, and Fiat.

Industry analysts who track sales have shown where the Model S outsells the Mercedes S class and the Model 3 is outselling equivalent models from EACH of the brands mentioned (and in some cases, the entire brand), at least in the US. This isn’t repeating Elon’s statements, this is repeating studies made by independent reporters such as Automotive News, Wards Intelligence and other publications.

Musk doesn’t get to make up other mfr’s sales numbers, and the SEC has an interest in accurate reporting by all of them.

Please re-evaluate your statement. It would be great if you rephrase it and/or add in very necessary information. As it is, your statement is incredibly fraudulent (for a lack of a better word), and is clearly made to give a false impression. If you don’t, and you seemed to have doubled down on it once already, then you’ll suffer this as proof of your integrity and honesty.

If BMW Had not sold any cars except highest-price 5, 6, 7, 8 and X5-series for over 5 years and just now for the first time in 5 years brought to market the 3-series sedan again, leaving out the 1-, 2-, 4-, X1-, X2-, X3-, X4-, i3-, Z4-series then would the 3-series sedan sales be higher in the first year than the numbers for the 3-series sedan is now?

That shows what an absolutely despicable lie your’e trying to push, as if the market was a simple 3-series sedan vs. Model 3 fight when BMW manufactures multiple times the amount of vehicles in that very same class and when 3-series sales have PURPOSEFULLY been split into all those very very many different models precisely because it was growing too popular and was starting to suffer from that.

When the 3-series started regularly beating cars like the Ford Mondeo in sales it was in trouble of becoming too common for a premium brand or too common just in general, so they split that car’s sales into a larger lineup. At the same time that meant that they could satisfy their customers’ demands far better as they had a larger lineup to choose a car that suited their needs and wants the best. Tesla has barely got one bare-bones model into the showro… no wait into their website, with practically zero customisation options.

Just because Tesla is such a failure why would that mean that BMW has to be compared as unfavourably as ever possible? Why don’t you just go for an even longer nose and compare only certain colour, base model 3-series against Model 3 sales since even of the 3-series a very large amount is in a completely different category and isn’t offering exactly the same?

Hey, I guess Model 3 is a better sales success than anything the VW Group has achieved too since VW doesn’t produce more similar-sized RWD or AWD sedans under 4,7m?

“3-series sales have PURPOSEFULLY been split into all those very very many different models precisely because it was growing too popular and was starting to suffer from that”

I’d buy your argument if these cars shared platforms, pricing, or market niche with the 3-serries sedan, but they don’t.

BTW, I mentioned the 3-series because it is the BMW most often compared to the Model 3. Now that 3-series sales have dropped 56% in 4 years and the Model 3 is killing it, you want to deflect the comparison.

Care to comment on how Cadillac is deliberately diversifying its lineup because they’re too successful?

It’s a simple fact that Tesla shoehorns all its customers into 2 models, one of which has two bodystyles. BMW spreads its massive amount of customers into at least 6 different models that come in over a dozen body styles. And they have a whole other brand, Mini, that also takes away a couple of sales. In the USA the 3-series is severely limited as it only comes in

And then, you slimy bottom-feeder have the gall to ‘forget’ the fact that the Model 3 has conveniently been at its PRIME as it is A BRAND NEW MODEL at full availability _after not having been available but hyped with basically no other options to go to_.

And what’s the situation with the 3-series: oh yes, it has been at the BOTTOM of its model cycle since the new model is basically NOT AVAILABLE, with no cars at dealerships!!! People physically can not see, try and buy a new model 3-series. The only sales must be those few who have bought the old model which is an old model at the time they pick it up at the dealership, and a handful of early orders of specifically the 330i?? Even today when you look at the 3-series offering there is ONE engine variant available and ONE bodystyle! 330i is all you can get. BMW makes the 3-series worldwide in 316i, 316d, 318i, 318d, 320i, 320d, 330i, 330d, 330e, 340i, 340d of which the offering in the US is already severely restricted.

So you despicable excuse for a human being are saying that a brand new fully available model’s (of which the brand has only two other alternatives at a much higher price point) sales figures are comparable to the sales figures of a car you can’t buy while the salesman is actively steering you towards the X1, X2, X3, X4, 2-series, 4-series, 5-series, i3 which are located in the showroom or saying that wait a bit and you can buy a 340i next month!?

Why is BMW 5-series outselling Tesla Model S over 3:1 even without taking into account 7-series sales and 8-series sales (which is only now going to start kicking in)?? I thought Teslas outsell all the luxury cars of Mercedes, BMW and lord knows who else combined??

Why is BMW X5 sales absolutely MURDERING Tesla Model X sales even without taking into account X6 and X7?? Why is the foreign car beating the American car on its own soil?? I thought Tesla is production-constricted and only booming upwards in growth, sales, everything and everyone only wants Teslas?

Why is BMW X5 beating Tesla Model X 5:1 in Europe??? Even with Tesla getting massive subsidies in almost every country and with Norway practically paying for all the Teslas their citizens buy?? How can that be with Tesla being such a clearly better car in every way???

Let me guess, uh does it have something to do with the fact a 5 Series costs $20,000 less than a Model S?

Wait, I got fooled by the stupid “potential savings” price. The S actually costs $25,000 more than a 5 series. So, your question is why does a car outsell a car that costs almost 50% more? That’s not difficult for most people to figure out on their own rather than posting the question on an automobile blog.

You did not answer this question yet: “If BMW Had not sold any cars except highest-price 5, 6, 7, 8 and X5-series for over 5 years and just now for the first time in 5 years brought to market the 3-series sedan again, leaving out the 1-, 2-, 4-, X1-, X2-, X3-, X4-, i3-, Z4-series then would the 3-series sedan sales be higher in the first year than the numbers for the 3-series sedan is now?”

You’re providing excuses for BMW, for reasons I don’t understand. The hypothetical scenario you describe can’t be answered; I’m just citing actual sales numbers, not what-ifs.

And the only 3-series cars are the ones whose names start with “3” or “M3”. The others you mention are not 3-series vehicles.

Not sure why you’re doubling down on the BMW 3-series subject; I named a host of other mfrs that Tesla is outselling – my original point being that Tesla really is a mainstream mfr.

Looking at the biggest pickup truck makers in the U.S according to TTAC comment section #1 Toyota selling 350,000 Tundra/Tacomas a year definitely puts it at the top spot #2 Ford 900,000 Fseries almost as many as Trucks as Toyota #3 RAM 600,000 that interior just makes me want to touch myself. #4 Hyundai doesn’t actually build a pickup, but they did show off the Concept Santa Cruise that counts #5 Mercedes recently dropping the Model X in Europe caused it to lose the #4 spot. #6 Honda selling 22,000 Ridgelines puts it in a virtual dead heat with Mercedes #7 Nissan 100,000 Titan/Frontier sold well back in the pack #999 GM only selling 1 million trucks a year don’t even know why they even bother building trucks at all. If they weren’t a U.S. company I wouldn’t have even bothered to include them. If they didn’t have the Escalad

Together about 3 million pickups are sold annually in the U.S. When Tesla builds its truck it will cut into everyone’s sales not only Ford. There going to need at least 2 more Gigafactories, and hell of a lot more tents if they want to compete against Ford.

All it has ANY chance of doing at the whole-market level is slightly increasing the speed at which Ford and GM release their electric or heavily-hybrid trucks*.

* I think an all-electric truck is stupid as hell for *almost all use cases*, but I’d love to have a hybrid drivetrain in my F250. That makes *sense.)

AFAIK, Tesla has brought to market everything it has promised. I have far more doubts about the viability of Level 5 Autopilot than I do about their pickup.

I would not bet against the Tesla truck existing. The grand prize question though is what kind of sustainable volume it will have.

As much as I’m rooting for the EV pickup market, I’ll believe it’s viable when Wyoming ranchers are buying them for daily work use.

There’s not a lot that’s expected from 1/2 tons, especially fleets, utilities, gov, cops, fire, infrastructure subs, etc.

Field techs, foremen, supervisors, captains, etc, can do most of their work out of sedans, CUVs and whatnot, but in a pinch, the nearest 1/2 ton can fetch large/greasy parts/tools, backhoe buckets, pumps/generators, fuel, and many more, and save the operation/project hundreds of dollars per minute.

Plus a bench or table is just a drop of a tailgate away. But look around where ever you’re at today at all the Plain Jane 1/2 ton pickups you never notice, just blending into the scenery, not really performing any real “work”, with or without a name or seal on the doors, maybe not even a tiny “UNIT XXX” on it somewhere.

The thing is the Wyoming ranchers are just a small segment of truck buyers. So many go to gov’t agencies that never take them out of their sometimes quite small geographic area. Lots of delivery services, like for example auto parts stores, have a very limited radius of operation.

So just because they don’t work in the winter in Wyoming where it is 100 mi to the store, doesn’t mean they won’t be viable for many other users.

Most of the city and university F-150s in my city should probably be electric. They cover short distances each day, but the services provided are important. It’s a very different duty cycle than what the farmers use. And that’s OK!

“Horses for courses”, “use the right tools for the right job”, or whatever glib proverb comes to mind.

Tesla seems to have a problem with failed suspension pieces on cars running mostly on smooth roads driven by fan boy owners who treat them like classics. I see trouble for them when they get in the pickup market, especially commercial duty.

I see several Teslas on the road every day and none of them seem to have suspension issues. There have been no reports of the Tesla semi having issues either. If one had, photographers would have been all over it.

My Tesla owning friend had several air suspension issues with his first Model S. You don’t see them on the road because they aren’t drivable with the suspension collapsed, and it usually happens overnight in the owner’s driveway.

Of course, this is nothing specific to Tesla, air suspension in general tends to be problematic no matter the brand. Though most cars need a lot more age and miles on them before the trouble starts.

That’s the Model S. The Model 3 seems fine. Even with the 3, if I get one, I’ll upgrade to one of the aftermarket coilover suspensions available for it. Actually, I did that with my BMWs (Bilstein PSS-9), so it’s nothing new for me.

Yeah, air suspensions do seem to have issues on all makes. Usually there are aftermarket kits to replace them and a quick look online shows they have them for the Model S.

Good thing you were being sarcastic, indi. Because the ones that see failed suspensions are those whose suspensions are worked beyond their limits in hard driving. Those smooth-road ones have achieved over 400,000 miles without a suspension repair.

Isn’t that suspension problem something that was fixed years ago? IIRC, it was the early Model S with this issue, and some were pretty bad.

I’d be interested in a Ford EV F150 for the same reason I’d be interested in a Rivian. Get me, my family, and four mountain bikes to a trailhead a few times a week, maybe a bit of camping here and there, pick up some lumber or a few yards of material a few times a year…Current trucks actually feel like overkill for that kind of stuff. I’m a one vehicle guy – I need some versatility.

Traditional truck buyers are not the slightest bit interested in electric powered vehicles. The typical joe six pack that buys a truck will more likely add options like a gun rack and an American flag decal on the rear window. The flatbed makes a perfect place to store supplies along with buck and moose carcasses. These type of customers actually will go out of their way to avoid an electric vehicle.

Right, but traditional “electric vehicle” buyers might want a pickup. Or they’ve avoided electric vehicles since none of them are pickups.

Except “traditional” pickup buyers might only be half of pickup sales or less, after fleets and whatnot. They just make the most noise and must draw attention to themselves.

10ton Bottle Jack With Safety Valve

Ydraulic Floor Jack, Hydraulic Garage Jack, Hydraulic Bottle Jack, Scissor Jack - Luxin,https://www.lxjack.com/