OFFICIAL: Ford F-150 “Lightning” EV

Series drive turbine electric plug-in hybrid. Run it on anything you like for the most part. Should be able to get enough power out of a small turbine to generate enough electricity to move the truck/trailer with 0 battery. :LOL:
Turbine is dead, people tried and found them impractical for variable small load, even drones don't use them and pick piston engines instead.
 
Yeah but a turbine powering a small genset for a range extender would be doable, though costly. small diesel extender could be attractive, though idk if air cooled motors reach the efficiency needed.. all of the sudden, a range extender is 10k$
 
I think the ranger would be the smarter choice for electrification. Rangers probably don’t get nearly the towing market for distance travel as the f150s do, but do perform all of the commuting and weekend hardware runs around town that an electric would excel at. but, Ford knows that the biggest splash will be the 150, so to be a viable return on their development, gotta start there.

i have no doubt the f150 will sell.

my 2.7 2018 supercab 4x4 XL was 42k list. It came with bucket seats, floor mats, 36gal tank, sync3 and power locks/windows and AC. Compared to everything else out there, it is basic. But, man, compared to what I had as a kid, this sucker is loaded. I was sad that buying the first car I ever got to just choose myself without ”familial opinion” (long story) NEW, I learned that colors cost, so I did compromise on color, inside and out (sigh). Green on tan would have added 20k to the price tag. all that to say, if I can get all those same “basic” features for 39k in the electric, or equivalently equipped at tomorrow’s equivalent of 42, I could totally see it happening.

of course, when yota comes out with an electric Tacoma, that buying frenzy could be a sight to behold.
 
Turbine is dead, people tried and found them impractical for variable small load, even drones don't use them and pick piston engines instead.
Chrysler, of all people, managed to figure it out by 1963 and sent a fleet of 50 out to the public for them to try 3 months at a time. Turns out people loved them. Biggest complaints were fuel economy, noise, and “unimpressive” acceleration. I think with modern manufacturing, the advances we’ve had in turbines since the 60’s, and vastly improved transmissions they could get decent fuel economy and acceleration out of a turbine car.

 
Chrysler, of all people, managed to figure it out by 1963 and sent a fleet of 50 out to the public for them to try 3 months at a time. Turns out people loved them. Biggest complaints were fuel economy, noise, and “unimpressive” acceleration. I think with modern manufacturing, the advances we’ve had in turbines since the 60’s, and vastly improved transmissions they could get decent fuel economy and acceleration out of a turbine car.


That sounds like a prove that it is not doing well if fuel economy, noise, and acceleration aren't there. We've gotten piston engine with turbo good enough for everything else plus the above 3, that we need to add fake engine noise to spice things up. Turbine cars probably feels very well like an EV in terms of vibration profile (none), so it is a bit too late to the market for that now.

How many mpg will turbine car has to go to compete today to justify the investment? 40mpg? If they cannot compete with 13mpg cars back in the 60s they won't be able to compete with hybrid today.
 
Turbine powered car might be good to keep tailgaters off the rear by melting the front fascia of the tailgaters. :D
 
That sounds like a prove that it is not doing well if fuel economy, noise, and acceleration aren't there. We've gotten piston engine with turbo good enough for everything else plus the above 3, that we need to add fake engine noise to spice things up. Turbine cars probably feels very well like an EV in terms of vibration profile (none), so it is a bit too late to the market for that now.

How many mpg will turbine car has to go to compete today to justify the investment? 40mpg? If they cannot compete with 13mpg cars back in the 60s they won't be able to compete with hybrid today.
I found some figures, they said acceleration was more like having a 318 V8 under the hood, which makes sense seeing as it only had 130HP but 425lb ft of torque. They also said it averaged 14.5mpg, but could hit 18-19 on the highway when burning No.1 diesel though it could run on just about anything. Which honestly for 1964, isn’t bad.

But you’re correct, I doubt they could get fuel economy high enough and emissions, especially NOx, low enough for a production car at modern standards.
 

Microturbines are available in sizes ranging from 30 kW up to 400 kW. Beyond that conventional gas turbines take over. There are, in addition, much smaller microturbines aimed at the domestic market. These have electrical generating capacities of 1 kW to 10 kW. All microturbines operate at extremely high speed, with rotational speeds often in excess of 60,000 rpm. The smaller the turbine, the higher the speed. Electrical efficiency of these small machines is relatively low with a 30-kW machine typically capable of around 23% efficiency. Larger machines are slightly more efficient. CHP efficiency is much higher and a 30-kW microturbine might achieve 67% CHP efficiency.



The larger 1.3-liter Atkinson cycle engine uses a high compression ratio (13.5) and all the same engine innovations to achieve thermal efficiency of 38 percent.


So basically your 40HP micro turbine is only going to land your 23% efficiency vs 38% in a Prius.

Yup, turbine is dead.
 
Interior pic of the entry level 'pro' model. I'd take it. Looks to have everything I'd want judging by that pic. The vinyl seats don't bother me, and I'm sure the floor is as well, which a carpet kit could take care of.

$50,000 for the Pro model with an upgraded battery.


22_FRD_F15_BEV_53725_16x9-1440x810.jpg



"The Lightning Pro comes standard with a Sync 4 infotainment system, which can help drivers manage range and find nearby charging stations if their truck needs to be juiced up during the workday. Aside from that, fleet managers will love the various telematics solutions Ford is offering. They can remotely monitor vehicle utilization, odometer readings, warning lights and any diagnostic trouble codes. Beyond that, they can keep track of their Lightnings on a live map, which also features geofencing. They can also monitor trip histories, drive events, energy usage and much, much more.

Aside from the aggressive pricing and those work-oriented features, the Pro variant provides the same benefits of higher-end Lightning trucks. It offers fast recharging times, standard Co-Pilot 360 driver assistance technology, a 4G LTE modem and Enhanced Pro Power Onboard, which provides up to 9.6 kW of juice, enough to run a construction site for days or rip up to 25 miles of plywood with an electric saw. Additionally, this truck comes with Ford's Mega Power Frunk, or front trunk. This lockable, weather-tight storage space clocks in at about 14 cubic feet and can support up to 400 pounds of cargo, making it a great place to stash certain building materials, tools or other valuable items out of the elements and away from prying eyes."

Yep, I think this is 'just enough' truck without spending many thousands more for the XLT.
 
especially NOx
Is NOx a problem on turbines? I thought it was a problem with compression engines--I'm not sure what kind of pressure develops inside of the turbine.

The larger 1.3-liter Atkinson cycle engine uses a high compression ratio (13.5) and all the same engine innovations to achieve thermal efficiency of 38 percent.
Don't forget, Atkinson keeps the intake valve open past BDC and so it bleeds off compression. It's like it shortens the intake stroke while lengthening the power stroke--like giving it extra time/space to expand. The static compression ration is busted by this though. [I suspect some VVT engines can wander into Atkinson mode too.]

I watched a Weber video on the eCVT and it indicated that the Camry's A25A engine is can hit just shy of 40%. Not bad. Needs a CVT to keep it around the sweet spot though. [Wife has put only 1,500 miles onto her new Camry but it's indicating over 60mpg average for those miles.]
 
Is NOx a problem on turbines? I thought it was a problem with compression engines--I'm not sure what kind of pressure develops inside of the turbine.


Don't forget, Atkinson keeps the intake valve open past BDC and so it bleeds off compression. It's like it shortens the intake stroke while lengthening the power stroke--like giving it extra time/space to expand. The static compression ration is busted by this though. [I suspect some VVT engines can wander into Atkinson mode too.]

I watched a Weber video on the eCVT and it indicated that the Camry's A25A engine is can hit just shy of 40%. Not bad. Needs a CVT to keep it around the sweet spot though. [Wife has put only 1,500 miles onto her new Camry but it's indicating over 60mpg average for those miles.]

Nox is a problem of air fuel ratio and combustion heat, regardless of engine type.

Yes the atkinson cycle in Toyota's hybrid work like that, not a true atkinson but close enough (different compression and exhaust volume), supposedly more efficient but also reduce the practical power per displacement. In other word that 1.8L Prius engine output less like a Corolla 1.8L but more like a 1.5-1.6L Yaris engine (with better efficiency).
 
Just putting aside the electric Innovation for a second, that's crazy storage space that's so versatile. What a great work truck this will be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4WD
Additionally, this will push the need for infrastructure improvement. Jobs jobs jobs!
Eaveryone benefits. America leading the world once again!
 
Electric F150 is not creating new jobs, only transferring from gas F150 and other pick up truck production. If anything I am willing to bet that due to production efficiencies and being electric, the net effect will be a loss of jobs.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top