This is where manufacturers should have started years ago.
It’s annoying as ford has repeatedly stated they won’t being the plug in hybrid ranger that gets 30 miles on a charge to the US because it will cannibalize sales from the maverick and f150 lightning….
I agree. Finding a car that is front wheel drive and not 1000 hp is ridiculous.
That’s the thing, most of these trucks were ~$50,000. But people see the ~220 mile range on the base truck and overdid it on range anxiety and blew the problem way out of proportion.
I think they overestimated their market. I think the Lightning was the perfect truck to spearhead the EV transition. It looks, drives, and feels like a normal (yet powerful) truck. Being the highest volume seller, electrifying the F150 made sense on paper.
But that’s where it really stops.
The kind of person that buys a 4x4 F150, is not the same demographic that wants to be seen in an EV. As childish as the mentality sounds, that’s the demographic.
Where they sell 70,000 F-series (150 through 550 I think super duty’s included until dump beds), they only sold ~1,500-2,000 lightnings a month. Which honestly isn’t that bad for such a niche product.
I think the move to give it a plug in hybrid style powertrain will help sales as our travel charging infrastructure is still garbage. But try and tell people that they can just charge at home with an L2 and they freak out. It’s also frustrating that most people who are against EV’s just don’t understand technology in general.
In contrast, Ford sells about 15,000 mavericks a month. More when it was newer, same with the Lightning.
I do agree with your points and that Ford isn’t happy, and they could have handled the whole situation a little better.
Don’t forget about insurance and property tax. The monthly payment isn’t all you have to spend.
Registration fees too.
I had never paid much attention to Kimmel, (or any late night host personality) but sure I’ll watch Kimmel now.
Well, honestly they’re not really good for anything. Most manufacturers use a bake type method, which is not in anyway comparable to a house engulfed in actual flames.
As a general consumer, this is about the best you can do. Put whatever in a “fireproof” bag inside a “fireproof” safe and you might save your data in the event of a fire.
It’s the same thing about gun “safes”. They’re not really safes unless you spend big money. Like $10,000+. Otherwise they’re categorized as “residential containers”.
I should have clarified whether or not my answer was in response to “is it possible” instead of “is it recommended”.
I think they mean if you’re using removable media that is easily portable then the answer to your question about fire proofing is doable.
You can store them in a fire safe when not actively backing up or need constant access.
I think it’s in the pipeline, and we can only hope. And if ford doesn’t do it, hopefully the Slate Truck gains traction.