When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I originally was building and shopping for a Lariat but when I added the options I wanted. It made sense to jump up to the Platinum. Sticker was 73k. I paid 68k.
I happen to think the B&O unleashed system is fantastic. Along with the active motion seats. I love my Platinum and would buy it again in a heartbeat.
My post wasn’t to change anyone’s mind. My post was just why I made the decision that I made. Not why anyone else should make whatever decision they decide to make. That is up to you or them to decide.
To each their own.
Originally Posted by vulnox
That tells me nothing though, really. Where do we see it doesn’t have power running boards? I swear the one that Andre toured in the TFL video had them. Just because it isn’t on that list doesn’t mean they aren’t there, I would assume.
It also pre-prod packaging, again, it makes sense to wait for the actual order guide.
For example, that Lariat+ says starting at $79k, KEEPING IN MIND, that is before $7500 tax credit, so really starting at 71500. My Lariat MSRP was around $72k. That doesn’t seem like that big of a gap, and mine doesn’t have the twin panel moon roof (don’t want it).
From what I read though, the Lariat+ won’t have the B&O Unleashed which I think sucks, at least as they stand you couldn’t pay me to drive a Platinum, ICE or EV, so I hope they correct that before order banks are open.
Anyway, what I am getting at by saying we don’t have the order guides, is I would have to believe there is something with that $10k gap between the Lariat and Platinum, because ugly wheels multi contour seats don’t quite cover it when those options on the ICE vehicle aren’t that big of a gap. Either someone at Ford is just high, and it has nothing to do with being an EV, or there is more in the details that we just don’t have yet.
So your post has done nothing to change my position that it’s too early, and likely isn’t the whole story. Because at least from what you posted, my Lariat and that Lariat+ package are pretty comparably priced. Because the part of the chart that was conveniently cut off in your post shows the after credit pricing.
I originally was building and shopping for a Lariat but when I added the options I wanted. It made sense to jump up to the Platinum. Sticker was 73k. I paid 68k.
I happen to think the B&O unleashed system is fantastic. Along with the active motion seats. I love my Platinum and would buy it again in a heartbeat.
My post wasn’t to change anyone’s mind. My post was just why I made the decision that I made. Not why anyone else should make whatever decision they decide to make. That is up to you or them to decide.
To each their own.
I have changed my opinion a bit on the running boards. I wonder if there is a limitation due to the new skateboard battery setup. I was going to tell you that even if they don't have it, given how it works on other F-150s it may be easy to add. But I am not so sure the more I think on how the skateboard is set up. It may be so low that there just isn't room for the traditional power running boards, since the armature on mine goes up under the body line, which I think would hit the batteries.
So yeah, if power running boards are a must have, the Lightning may not be the best path. Maybe they will pull something out before launch and are still working with a supplier, but at the same time a big strength of the Lightning compared to something like the Cybertruck is Ford is reusing every bolt, panel, and module they can from the standard F-150 to use the F-150s economies of scale to keep the price down. So sourcing a unique power running board probably won't fit into that. Maybe a late availability thing.
Still wait and see, but I am leaning more towards may not be there at all.
I agree to each their own, I know it seems my stance has been more adversarial in this, but I am just responding where I feel things need an asterisk more than being given something definite. I am well aware that the Lightning won't fit everyone, I have said as much multiple times in this threads and others. I think I only come off as contrarian on it because people seem to want to treat the Lightning and Mach E different than they would non-BEVs when it comes to discussing them. They say something like, "The Lightning range won't work for me, I may a bunch of trips, the range of EVs is a huge problem!". But they won't go around making similar comments about how an F-150 isn't a good option for TTs over 8,000lbs, and you should get a Super Duty, or that a Mustang isn't the best option for a family of four as a primary vehicle. The reason we have so many options is because different people have different needs or wants from their vehicle.
I don't consider the limited range of the Lightning or the longer charge times as an overarching deficiency, because for me and many others, it's more than offset by the advantages of having it charged every morning. But for others like you, that may not be enough. And that's fine. The technology will mature just like ICE engines have, and it will get there eventually. It's incredible the pace EVs have matured in just ten years. When you look back to the 1980s, even after decades of ICE development, we were only starting to get fuel injection in more vehicles. My dad had an '89 F-150 that had a badge that proudly proclaimed it had fuel injection, just like we have PowerBoost badges now. I also remember having a Ranger with a carb that refused to start on very cold winter mornings. ICE vehicles have even very recently had significant negatives with them, but the tech improved, just like EVs will. And EVs aren't benefiting from decades of constant R&D. I look forward to Ford, GM, everyone else, getting more into the market and pushing that competition so we get there faster.
Regarding power running boards: I installed them on my 2011 F150 and they are my short wife's favorite add-on. I saw a video shot by a dealer in Georgia(?) that showed fixed running boards that he said Ford said were designed for better aerodynamics. For an EV that means range. So we'll see...
Regarding improvements over time: I bought my Model 3 performance 08/2018 and we bought a Model Y 07/2020. In that short time, there have been many improvements. Tesla doesn't do model year improvements. They implement improvements continuously. The Y has the heat pump which increases range considerably in winter. They also changed the cooling system completely deleting the condenser and allowing the system to move heat around the car as necessary. Even though it is a much bigger car, it has about the same consumption per mile as my Model 3. And the Texas factory will produce Model Ys with castings in the front and rear and they will have the 4680 cells in the structural pack reducing weight.
Just to add another factor into the discussion (I didn’t see it mentioned earlier), what if the Senate-passed amendment, limiting the $7500 tax credit to EVs which cost under $40,000, gets codified? It also limits income at $100,000.
Just to add another factor into the discussion (I didn’t see it mentioned earlier), what if the Senate-passed amendment, limiting the $7500 tax credit to EVs which cost under $40,000, gets codified? It also limits income at $100,000.
1909-electric vehicles were fairly common, one really stands out: Already in 1899, two American engineers covered 100 miles (160 km) on a single charge. In 1909, Emil Gruenfeldt of the Baker Motor Vehicle Company covered 160.8 miles (259 km) on a single charge in his Baker Electric Roadster (illustration on the left). Two years later, he beat his earlier mark by travelling 201.6 miles (324 km) without recharging the batteries (source).
Of course roads weren't as good as they are now, and speeds common to the Vast majority of cars were slower than we drive now; however, it isn't as if more than (easily more than) one hundred years of history/development have preceded the current EVs.
These were sub-1000lb vehicles that carried batteries pushing them upwards of 3000lb for that kind of range, they maxed out around 15mph, and many of the motors of the day generated sparks that could ignite a ground fire, and sometimes would catch fire. About the only luxury was carriage appointment. No radios, no cruise control, no safety features, almost nothing in the way of adjustability. Cold as hell in winter, hot as hell in summer. The most luxurious of cars weren't as comfortable at 10mph as today's base economy cars at 70mph, on paved roads.
Originally Posted by vulnox
Many states already do this. In Michigan there is an added cost at vehicle registration on an EV to accommodate that cost. The gas tax or EV tax need to go anyway, they aren’t good representations of actual road impact and don’t make much sense.
Why is gas tax not a good representation of impact?
Weight impacts road wear, and also impact gas use. The more weight your vehicle uses, the more gas it consumes, the more tax you pay.
Sam for mileage... driving more miles means more gas, more tax.
Same would hold true for a tax on electricity. The heavier the vehicle, the more power it needs. The more miles driven, the more power. The only issue here is applying tax to home charging. Can be easily done, but will they? A registration tax on use would also work, but could come with some sticker shock. My registration for my 2015 was @$330 (thanks to Covid value retention ). The gas tax I've paid the past 12 months is @$250. While not a problem for many to pay, states better start offering easy online monthly payments if moving to a yearly tax on use or they are going to have a lot more unregistered vehicles on the road.
This is a very good point. There are so many things happening behind closed doors, we do not know who will be eligible or for how much. If they limit it to EV’s under $40K, or for households making less than $100k. This will change everything. None of the Lightning’s will qualify. Even the one for $39,990 won’t once destination charges and fees are added on.
Originally Posted by SoZoomMe
Just to add another factor into the discussion (I didn’t see it mentioned earlier), what if the Senate-passed amendment, limiting the $7500 tax credit to EVs which cost under $40,000, gets codified? It also limits income at $100,000.
Seems nonsensical to me. Are we in dire straits with climate change or not?
I guess I would be off the buyer list.
What do you guys think?
From the studies and reports I have seen, we are not the big climate ozone environment killers. So what we do over here in North America will make a minuscule difference if any in the overall climate/environmental/pollution problem.
Just to add another factor into the discussion (I didn’t see it mentioned earlier), what if the Senate-passed amendment, limiting the $7500 tax credit to EVs which cost under $40,000, gets codified? It also limits income at $100,000.
Seems nonsensical to me. Are we in dire straits with climate change or not?
I guess I would be off the buyer list.
What do you guys think?
Probably won't affect my decision much. If I really like the vehicle, and can justify the value (for my situation), I'll get it. Any credits that might happen are just gravy.
These were sub-1000lb vehicles that carried batteries pushing them upwards of 3000lb for that kind of range, they maxed out around 15mph, and many of the motors of the day generated sparks that could ignite a ground fire, and sometimes would catch fire. About the only luxury was carriage appointment. No radios, no cruise control, no safety features, almost nothing in the way of adjustability. Cold as hell in winter, hot as hell in summer. The most luxurious of cars weren't as comfortable at 10mph as today's base economy cars at 70mph, on paved roads.
Why is gas tax not a good representation of impact?
Weight impacts road wear, and also impact gas use. The more weight your vehicle uses, the more gas it consumes, the more tax you pay.
Sam for mileage... driving more miles means more gas, more tax.
Same would hold true for a tax on electricity. The heavier the vehicle, the more power it needs. The more miles driven, the more power. The only issue here is applying tax to home charging. Can be easily done, but will they? A registration tax on use would also work, but could come with some sticker shock. My registration for my 2015 was @$330 (thanks to Covid value retention ). The gas tax I've paid the past 12 months is @$250. While not a problem for many to pay, states better start offering easy online monthly payments if moving to a yearly tax on use or they are going to have a lot more unregistered vehicles on the road.
It doesn’t make sense because high weight vehicles aren’t always the main consumers of gas. Yeah an F-150 weighs more than a Civic, and F-150 owners pay more in tax than Civic owners, that is a simple and easy comparison and not huge issue with it, even if you can get into the argument that even F-150s do negligible damage, and Semis and other true heavyweight vehicles are doing more.
But your amount of tax isn’t based on vehicle weight, it’s based on consumption. A Mustang GT500 gets 18 MPG Highway, but weighs less than my F-150 that has a good deal higher fuel mileage. So they pay more road tax despite doing less weight based damage.
That is just one example, before someone says “WELL HOW MANY PEOPLE OWN GT500s?!”, I get it. But you can find that stuff in a lot of areas. There was mention earlier of Plug-in Hybrids. They have very low gas consumption, but weigh as much as my F-150 in some cases since they have ICE and heavy batteries and motors. If weight is the concern for road damage, they do more as well, despite paying the lowest average fuel tax. When we had our C-Max Energi, we only got gas every 3-4 months, but that C-Max weighed almost 1000lbs more than a 4 door Honda Civic that will use more fuel.
The comparisons go on and on. It should either be a flat amount we pay at time of registration depending on vehicle class, or it should be annual mileage based.
It’s not the worst system we have, far bigger fish to fry. But it’s still not a good one, and again that is before getting into issues with how most states aren’t ensuring the money goes to road works anyway.
). The gas tax I've paid the past 12 months is @$250. While not a problem for many to pay, states better start offering easy online monthly payments if moving to a yearly tax on use or they are going to have a lot more unregistered vehicles on the road.
