New Ford 150 Lightning

Post by **lincolnmania** » Thu. Feb. 29, 2024 10:32 am

Forgot to mention when I was in high school I had a 78 cougar xr7 with a 351w with a crane econopower cam and a holley intake and 4 barrel carb. That car got 25 mpg highway but 10 mpg in town lol. I also had a 68 torino sedan with a 289 2barrel that got 25 mpg consistently.

Post by **k-2** » Thu. Feb. 29, 2024 12:28 pm

All the hype and demand over the Ford electric truck sure seems to have fizzled out.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/ford-f-150-lightn ... on-report/

Post by **warminmn** » Thu. Feb. 29, 2024 4:21 pm

Who'd think? lol Hybrids are next and they might actually sell. Dont tell Tesla I said that.

Post by **SMITTY** » Fri. Mar. 01, 2024 1:00 pm

If our government had half a brain amongst all of them, they'd have been pushing hybrids YEARS ago. If they really, actually cared about the environment, this would be the stepping stone to reduce emissions.

Full electric makes absolutely ZERO sense ... unless your goal is to cripple the American People, and have them beholden to your every whim.

Post by **BigBarney** » Fri. Mar. 01, 2024 2:08 pm

Hybrids are crap... Why go half way when the alternative is already here...

Hybrids should get 0 ev credits since their not ev's...

Worst of all worlds with no redeeming value... Still need oil haul the battery around...

Will still be beholden to the oil companies... Break their hold...

BigBarney

Post by **warminmn** » Fri. Mar. 01, 2024 3:04 pm

Living here in the real world I'd be a lot more interested in a hybrid if I was going to waste money on a new or modern car. 2 forms of energy instead of one... If one quits you can still get home, if you cant recharge for some reason you can still use it. Cant get gas, same thing.

Tesla stocks are going to start tanking soon when hybrids hit the market in a bigger way in the near future. Why latch onto the electric past when you can have the hybrid future? lol I wouldnt be surprised if Tesla even starts making hybrids. Gotta stay current and relevant. Otherwise they could become the modern Edsel.

Post by **SMITTY** » Sat. Mar. 02, 2024 1:46 am

If you truly believe that Barney, there's no helping you. GOOD LUCK! You're gonna need it.

Post by **BigBarney** » Sun. Mar. 03, 2024 5:47 pm

Only have electric cars and have had them for 8 years...

Over 100+ mpge all the time..

Zero repair or maintenance in 8 years..

BigBarney

Post by **SMITTY** » Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 2:31 am

LOL - how do you figure "MPG" when there are ZERO gallons used? That's a good one ...

So, you put 40 miles on in 8 years?

I ain't buying that. I've worked on cars for too long, and continue to communicate with colleagues still in the field - NOTHING is that reliable today. NOT ONE THING.

Post by **Richard S.** » Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 10:19 am

They use MPGe. It's a comparison using the BTU content. A gallon of gas has about 120K BTU's so an electric vehicle might travel 80 or 100 miles on electric with same BTU content. Electric vehicles are very efficient at using stored energy.

The problem with this is the efficiency hit occurs during power production and transmission. Gasoline has similar energy expenses for refinement and transport but it's no where near the losses for power production. The newest combined cycle gas plants at best when being used for base load operate around 60%.

Post by **SMITTY** » Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 2:06 pm

Ahh, gotcha. Learn something new every day with this crap, lol.

Post by **waytomany?s** » Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 3:41 pm

Richard S. wrote: ↑Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 10:19 am They use MPGe. It's a comparison using the BTU content. A gallon of gas has about 120K BTU's so an electric vehicle might travel 80 or 100 miles on electric with same BTU content. Electric vehicles are very efficient at using stored energy.

The problem with this is the efficiency hit occurs during power production and transmission. Gasoline has similar energy expenses for refinement and transport but it's no where near the losses for power production. The newest combined cycle gas plants at best when being used for base load operate around 60%.

Am I wrong feeling this is not an apples to apples comparison? How about comparing how much electricity a gallon of gas can produce in such and such and then use that. There needs to be a closer clearer comparison.

Post by **SMITTY** » Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 4:09 pm

100%. I think it's a steaming pile of BS designed to make EV buyers feel good about their purchase.

Post by **Richard S.** » Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 6:59 pm

waytomany?s wrote: ↑Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 3:41 pm Am I wrong feeling this is not an apples to apples comparison? How about comparing how much electricity a gallon of gas can produce in such and such and then use that. There needs to be a closer clearer comparison.

It's a fair comparison when comparing the efficiency of vehicles by themselves. If you were doing cost comparison for fuel ideally you would want the kWh/mile but the MPGe could be used too. Those only cover the efficiency part of the calculation.

The issue is the gasoline engine is burning the fuel directly so the inefficiency of burning that fuel is included. By offsetting the fuel burning to the power plant the inefficiency of burning that fuel is not included with the electric vehicle. It's misleading to consumers because they think they are using fuel more efficiently.

Post by **Hootyburra** » Mon. Mar. 04, 2024 8:19 pm

Pay attention to Edison Motors out of Canada.

In my opinion they have it figured out and I hope they succeed in the long term.