FORD to follow TOYOTA

[JSH]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Seems like an opportunity for Ford to sell more Rangers and Mavericks, not to mention the Maverick being already available in hybrid versions. Sometimes it seems quite surprising that Ford didn't release a hybrid AWD variant of the Maverick and Bronco Sport, considering they share most of their underpinnings with the Escape which is already available as such.

The Ranger likely hurts Ford's CAFE instead of helping. Almost the same mpg as a F150 but smaller footprint so higher MPG requirement.

The Maverick will help a lot especially now that the have scaled to 3 shifts per day. They have also added a Hybrid AWD version for 2025 but dropped the FWD Ecoboost.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a Bronco Sport Hybrid in the future and the new Maverick has a beefed up hybrid transaxle for the AWD version and mechanical AWD instead of electric.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

The Ranger likely hurts Ford's CAFE instead of helping. Almost the same mpg as a F150 but smaller footprint so higher MPG requirement.

The footprint-based regulations are somewhat pointless, and they might be the reason why most vehicles no longer have a convenient size for city traffic.

They have also added a Hybrid AWD version for 2025 but dropped the FWD Ecoboost.

In my country, the Ecoboost was only available as AWD.

I wouldn't be surprised to see a Bronco Sport Hybrid in the future and the new Maverick has a beefed up hybrid transaxle for the AWD version and mechanical AWD instead of electric.

Maybe a hybrid Bronco Sport would increase the marketing perspectives for export markets.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by JSH

Yes the Lightning is expensive but the average transaction price for a new full size truck is $65,000 today. I'd say the problem is range. People buy trucks today as all purpose family vehicles. They are likely the vehicle expected to be used for the family road trip and 200 miles of highway range doesn't cut it.

Well the average Lightning is well over $65k, but my point is feature, for feature the same, the Lightning is $10k more than the ICE version. Same awd, same cab size, same trim inside, same options.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

More than how much gas could've been bought with the price difference, the lack of proper charging infrastructure might also be much of a PITA...

[JSH]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

More than how much gas could've been bought with the price difference, the lack of proper charging infrastructure might also be much of a PITA...

Just going from fueleconomy.gov numbers using national averages for fuel the Lightning saves ~ $1500 a year in fuel. That $10K pays back in 7 years on fuel savings alone.

Using my fuel and electricity prices the Lightning saves $2400 a year in fuel.

Charging infrastructure is very location dependent in the USA.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by JSH

Using my fuel and electricity prices the Lightning saves $2400 a year in fuel.

You mean recharging at home, using a regular power outlet instead of a fast charger?

Charging infrastructure is very location dependent in the USA.

Not everyone would be OK using a regular power outlet for charging, sometimes not being able to drive back home before the battery dies

[JSH]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

You mean recharging at home, using a regular power outlet instead of a fast charger?

Not everyone would be OK using a regular power outlet for charging, sometimes not being able to drive back home before the battery dies

Yes, charging at home on a Level 2 charger - just like I charge my current Bolt EV. Public DC Chargers are only for longer trips - the vast majority of EV charging happens at home. If you can't charge at home there is no reason I can see to own an EV.

I just paid to use a public DC charger today for the first time in more than a year when my wife and I were out at the Oregon Coast. It was $0.49 per kWh so plugged in for 15 minutes, added the 50 miles of range I needed and then headed home to charge overnight at $0.08 per kWh.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by JSH

I just paid to use a public DC charger today for the first time in more than a year when my wife and I were out at the Oregon Coast. It was $0.49 per kWh so plugged in for 15 minutes, added the 50 miles of range I needed and then headed home to charge overnight at $0.08 per kWh.

What town did you visit?

I was in Seaside recently when I ran there for Hood to Coast, and the next day spent a few nights in Netarts with family friends.

How are you getting such low rates on PGE? I'm paying close to 13 cents these days, though Clark PUC (Washington) is still delivering better rates.

I drove to Netarts on a partial charge in the Tesla Y LR, filled up on L2 at the vacation house, then drove to Sunriver on a partial charge, and charged on L1 for 60hrs at that vacation house, drove home, then drove to McMinnville for an airshow, then drove home. Zero DCFC on any of the recent trips, and getting by on L1 at times.

[JSH]

We just went to Cannon Beach for a walk on the beach and a beer. It is an easy 140 mile round trip - well within the range of the Bolt but I left home with only 60% charge. When we got to Cannon Beach I had 93 miles remaining but I decided to top up a bit just to be safe and so I could cruise along at 60 - 65 mph instead of 55 mph.

The EVCS charging station in Cannon Beach is at a RV Park. The park store as snacks, bathrooms, and a pool table if you are going to be there longer than a quick top up.

We are on PGE Time of Day pricing. 9pm to 7am is 8.4 cents as is all day Saturday and Sunday

[freebeard]

That's a 5X difference.

Driving across the river into Eugene is only 2X.