Ford cuts prices of F-150 Lightening by 7-16%.
- Thread starter demarpaint
- Start date
wemay
Site Donor 2023
At least you now see it was. You're previous reply said it wasn't.
As for what you just quoted. I believe it was in response to the derogatory comments. But still childish, i agree. These threads are always toxic.
Last edited:
True, but considering how many replies it got and it being a controversial topic it has been pretty civil. Great exchanges imo.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
There will always some decent posts in threads that devolve. I agree.
Gotta address some of this, Overkill.
Can't split hairs over errors in Toyota vs Ford products. It's just that years of hybrid manufacture and receiving feedback has got to be more usable that what I've seen by other makers. I base this on numbers on the road.
The commercial reference was about all US makers claiming quality and failing to deliver. They operated in a bad culture. They made garbage. My word salad (love that, thanks) pointed directly to quality of cars which were actually competing with quality, not advertising budgets.
I don't think one could overlook one company's making more hybrids of sensible proportions vs fewer, more expensive super cars.
Don't know production numbers; again, going on what I see.
My question about sensible electric cars has nothing to do with what Mr. Musk developed. High end vehicles carry highr margins. I suspect that's why M he focused there....and that there's a reasonably comfortable demographic awaiting a stunning new toy.
Junkies riding ebikes (to be brief). Don't put that nasty dressing on my fresh word salad.
Markets might settle but manufacturers initiate a segment to a large degree. There's a big gap between a Tesla's acceleration and that of a Versa. The Teslas are just too much.
Thanks for the weight comparison correction and super-informative chart. I didn't know there were so many selections under $40K.
The foundation of my reasoning is the large proportion of undesirable vehicles they make. The premium vehicles aren't what you see people driving around. I made a small leap in assuming people (like me) don't want to spend $60K -$>$100K for a vehicle.
It's not what I think they should buy, it's what they seem to be able to fit into their budget...again, going on what I see on the street.
Can't split hairs over errors in Toyota vs Ford products. It's just that years of hybrid manufacture and receiving feedback has got to be more usable that what I've seen by other makers. I base this on numbers on the road.
The commercial reference was about all US makers claiming quality and failing to deliver. They operated in a bad culture. They made garbage. My word salad (love that, thanks) pointed directly to quality of cars which were actually competing with quality, not advertising budgets.
I don't think one could overlook one company's making more hybrids of sensible proportions vs fewer, more expensive super cars.
Don't know production numbers; again, going on what I see.
My question about sensible electric cars has nothing to do with what Mr. Musk developed. High end vehicles carry highr margins. I suspect that's why M he focused there....and that there's a reasonably comfortable demographic awaiting a stunning new toy.
Junkies riding ebikes (to be brief). Don't put that nasty dressing on my fresh word salad.
Markets might settle but manufacturers initiate a segment to a large degree. There's a big gap between a Tesla's acceleration and that of a Versa. The Teslas are just too much.
Thanks for the weight comparison correction and super-informative chart. I didn't know there were so many selections under $40K.
The foundation of my reasoning is the large proportion of undesirable vehicles they make. The premium vehicles aren't what you see people driving around. I made a small leap in assuming people (like me) don't want to spend $60K -$>$100K for a vehicle.
It's not what I think they should buy, it's what they seem to be able to fit into their budget...again, going on what I see on the street.
I never called him by a derogatory name. "Prick", "Clown", or "Idiot". Or had the censor filter asterik my content. Neither did Weaponoffreed. As I said, he's thin skinned and takes everything too personally.
That's not my problem. Everyone knows how these EV discussions always go. We've had dozens of them. Many worse than this that were locked up well before they ever got to 15 pages. Put on your big boy pants, or stay off the porch. This isn't kindergarten.
They already make an EV that doesn’t have 500 miles though. I know Toyota hasn’t jumped in like others have but they haven’t actually stayed out of the market. BZ4x is available now.
15 will give you 200 depending on the car. That push to 250 may be 25 minutes depending on the battery, but that’s close to full capacity of 272 for mine, so it would start backing off charge. A long range with 330+ capacity would see a better speed charge to get to 250.
If that’s where you want to go with this I was very plain about my speech well before it got to that point. You talk down to people and funny enough, people don’t like that. I explained what was wrong with your thought process and why it showed a distain for others you disagreed with. You said it was your opinion. You openly think less of people that made a different choice than you. That’s messed up.
This is the last reply I’ll ever make to you directly because it’s a waste of both of our time. I’ve tried to find a middle ground with you because I’m willing to give anyone a chance. I don’t know how to more plainly and politely explain why I had an issue with what you said. The way you assume people are ignorant is extremely ignorant on your part. We aren’t meant to see eye to eye or have civil conversation apparently. Good luck to you with that kind of attitude.
I couldn't agree more.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Nothing is free. I looked at a house in Florida with solar panels on the roof. I asked the broker what was the deal with them. She said I had to take over the lease at $75/month if I decided to buy the house. I don't recall for how long now, but IIRC it was quite a few years. Looking at the roof it appeared to have about another 5 years life on it, which imo represented a giant headache to anyone buying that house in another 5 years. Needless to say we walked away. Replacing a roof with solar panels on it in an area where a roof has about half the life expectancy as a roof where I live is a big no for me. My bet is when you replace the roof the solar panels go in the dumpster and you're left with a new roof with no solar panels or buying/leasing new solar panels.
Next time they come door to door pushing solar panels I'm going to ask what happens when I have to replace the roof. LOL I'd love to hear the answer.
People do all kinds of dumb stuff.
In my case I put a new roof on the house and did the panels the same week.
Roof was 30 years old and done. I was an expensive week of my life for sure.
Not sure why anyone would put working panels and inverter(s) in a dumpster but ok.
I cant imagine buying something like that from a door to door guy, candy or Girl scout cookies - sure.
I dont understand what you mean in your first sentence.
Lifespan sure it isnt infinite, but it's pretty long lived.
Package is rated for 25 years, and at the rate PGE is going I'll see break even at 5, which would give me 20 years of "paid for" (i prefer that to free) productivity.
That said I don't produce enough for infinite driving but it looks like I'll export about 3MW a year which would give me anywhere from around 6K miles in an electric truck to about 12K miles in a small sedan.
I worked with a guy today that originally had an order for a Lightning Pro. He said that its went up $20k since he put his order in and finally cancelled it a few weeks ago.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yes, Toyota has done well with their hybrids, but, interestingly, that has yet to translate into success with EV's, as the bZ4x has shown. Despite their stumbles, Ford has done better in the EV space so far.
The Pinto and Vega were cheap, low margin, cars. The Japanese were targeting cheap, fuel efficient, cars, did the Tundra or even Ridgeline exist at that point? Of course not. How about a large car that competed with something like a Regal? All the American manufacturers didn't take seriously that segment, quite similar to how all of the manufacturers, not just the American ones, didn't take the EV segment seriously over the last decade or so (if we are forced to draw a parallel to 50 years ago). And the Japanese cars suffered from horrific corrosion issues, despite being mechanically more dependable.
But then we aren't talking about Ford. Ford's hybrids were things like the Escape and Fusion, both reasonably small/practical vehicles. Their bread and butter has been trucks and SUV's (of various sizes) which is what they chose to focus on. The Mach-e is a CUV for example.
Well, this thread is about Ford and its supposed gaffe with the F-150 in trying to capture a share of a growing market, so I brought up the market leader, which is Tesla. The Mach-e targets the same demographic as the Model Y, which is by far the best selling EV CUV. Ford decided to be the first mover of the "big 3" in the EV truck space because their polling had shown this was a potential demographic to be tapped. It was also a demographic Tesla was targeting. Like with the Mach-e, this seems like decent reasoning in terms of market selection.
Your personal position on whether these are sensible entries or not is a separate discussion from whether they are reasonable, given the state of the market. "Sensible" is a very individual; a very subjective measure. Ford is trying to gain market share in a segment that's being dominated by Tesla, which doesn't sell "sensible" in the context in which it is being used in this discussion, which I'm sure we can agree.
So, while it may seem sensible for Ford to introduce something like a little electric Festiva, that's not what the market they are currently operating in is consuming in volume, and they are trying to get out of the low volume, low margin segments, that's why they exited the car market to focus on trucks and CUV/SUV's (despite the Focus being a decent little car IMHO).
It's the popular mode of transportation of choice (ebikes) for the "bad choices" crowd. It's no longer a clapped-out Cavalier, Tempo, Civic, Corolla or Neon.
Manufacturers respond to what they feel the market wants, sometimes they are wrong, sometimes they are right. If you are a first mover, others will then look to you to see what works and what doesn't. The Navigator/Expedition/Tahoe/Yukon are why we have the Wagoneer/Grand Wagoneer now. I'm sure you can think of other examples. You might personally think that Tesla has gone "too far" with their acceleration, but if that's what people are buying, that's what the other marques are going to do.
You are quite welcome. It's a bigger space than people think it is. Also, that table shows just how common the range estimates being out to lunch are.
Undesirable to whom though? Ford's product list isn't huge, they have been honing that, catering to what moves (hence their exit from the car space). If you aren't the person that would go out and buy a Model 3 or Y (the best selling EV's) then you likely aren't the slice of the pie Ford is trying to grab.
So, the people you see buying new vehicles (not used vehicles) are predominantly going for small, inexpensive cars? Because the majority of new vehicles I see around are CUV's, SUV's and trucks. The majority of EV's I see are Tesla Model Y's, followed by Model 3's, followed by Mach-e's and then the Hyundai/KIA EV's. I periodically see a GM Bolt, but I've seen more Lightning trucks (what this thread is about) than I do Bolts. I've yet to see a single Hummer.
I'd say the Nissan Leaf is probably the closest to what you seem to be describing. I see very few of those, and the number that were around locally appears to be in steep decline.
If you don't mind me asking, when was the last time you bought a brand new vehicle? What make/model was it?
I did a full reroof when I did the solar project, even though my roof was at perhaps half life. The cost was $12,400 and included high quality materials, better than what I had. Net cost after tax credit was $8,680.Nothing is free. I looked at a house in Florida with solar panels on the roof. I asked the broker what was the deal with them. She said I had to take over the lease at $75/month if I decided to buy the house. I don't recall for how long now, but IIRC it was quite a few years. Looking at the roof it appeared to have about another 5 years life on it, which imo represented a giant headache to anyone buying that house in another 5 years. Needless to say we walked away. Replacing a roof with solar panels on it in an area where a roof has about half the life expectancy as a roof where I live is a big no for me. My bet is when you replace the roof the solar panels go in the dumpster and you're left with a new roof with no solar panels or buying/leasing new solar panels.
Next time they come door to door pushing solar panels I'm going to ask what happens when I have to replace the roof. LOL I'd love to hear the answer.
I am not sure why anyone would install solar on a questionable roof.
Mine are warranted for 25 years. They will still generate after that, but not at full power. I can just pay the net difference, go back to no solar or do another project. Not sure if I will be alive in 20 more years, we will see. With CA energy costs which are likely to rise, solar is a huge no brainer around here.
My solar project was an investment with an expected return. Here are the numbers as of today.
My solar panels cost was $17,000; I researched solar for 2 years and talked with dozens of companies. I got a really good deal with state of the art materials. My cost was $11,900 net of tax credit. That was March 2018. I have been paying about $9 per month for electricity for 64 months.
Electricity around here is between $200 and $300 per month. So $12,800 to $19,200 for 64 months. I am pretty frugal so I would err towards the lower figure.
I have about 15K on the Model 3; the pandemic has cut annual mileage way back due to working from home.
My GS gets about 22 miles per gallon, so about 680 gallons @ $5 per gallon = $3,400. The Tundra gets 16 mpg...
Do the arithmetic. The solar project will easily show a ROI of over $100K over the 25 year lifetime. That assumes energy costs remain constant, which is not likely.
I checked a local Ford dealership's website yesterday - the Lightnings started at $82K and went up to $124K. Sales taxes would add 12%. C$, but that's what my savings are in.
Sure. I did the solar project, an investment with an expected ROI, based on our home's electricity consumption. I knew I would retire soon and would be using more energy. The ROI calc's at the time were based on the prior 3 years PG&E bills, making the numbers conservative.
Adding an EV to the mix accelerates break even and increases ROI. I did not think I would be getting an EV so soon. I did purchase more generation than was recommended because I figured an EV might be in our future, but more so because I sure as heck wanted to avoid annual true up bills. I'm glad I did based on horror stories I've heard around the Costco Sunrun kiosk.
Charging an EV helps maximize the asset value up to the level of energy generation. I love my solar.
@OVERKILL I appreciate your analysis, comments and thoughts on my solar project as I am not that well versed in materials used, kWh, etc. Your work has only made me more sure about the decision to invest in solar.
General thoughts on EVs:
If you live in an area like this, with expensive gasoline (and increasingly moreso, due to carbon tax increases) and cheap electricity, EVs make a lot of sense IF you drive enough.
We've driven 36K km over the last 28 months. Although the old van is pretty thirsty, we don't spend enough on fuel to justify an EV at this point.
If we go back to two vehicles, I could see one being a hybrid or even an EV.
Ultimately I would like to have an EV with an ICE range extender.
If you live in an area like this, with expensive gasoline (and increasingly moreso, due to carbon tax increases) and cheap electricity, EVs make a lot of sense IF you drive enough.
We've driven 36K km over the last 28 months. Although the old van is pretty thirsty, we don't spend enough on fuel to justify an EV at this point.
If we go back to two vehicles, I could see one being a hybrid or even an EV.
Ultimately I would like to have an EV with an ICE range extender.
Similar threads
