Ford F-150 Lightning Range is 469 miles

[dsps70]

https://fordauthority.com/2021/10/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-lariat-live-photo-gallery/

Per article, while The Lightning range with the extended battery is 300 miles, this is with a 1000lbs payload in bed. Without the 1000lb payload is bed, the range apparently is 469 miles! If this is in fact true, would this sway anyone to the Lightning?

Sponsored

 

[aw113sgte]

https://fordauthority.com/2021/10/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-lariat-live-photo-gallery/

Per article, while The Lightning range with the extended battery is 300 miles, this is with a 1000lbs payload in bed. Without the 1000lb payload is bed, the range apparently is 469 miles! If this is in fact true, would this sway anyone to the Lightning?

There is no data supporting the 469 mile claim. (Or at least none listed). Do not believe everything on the internet.

Yes this could be true but extremely unlikely.

 

[DucRider]

https://fordauthority.com/2021/10/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-lariat-live-photo-gallery/

Per article, while The Lightning range with the extended battery is 300 miles, this is with a 1000lbs payload in bed. Without the 1000lb payload is bed, the range apparently is 469 miles! If this is in fact true, would this sway anyone to the Lightning?

Nothing to indicate this other than an extrapolation from a snapshot look at a guess-o-meter.
No way is Ford putting out a 300 mile number with the real range 50% better.

 

[brianmartin]

thats BS. at best, ford is slightly under-rating it like the Mach-E. It may get 320 miles or so, but the "469" mile thing is a garbage number extrapolated from Marques Brownlee's first look video last year where he just randomly looked at the guess-o-meter right after the truck rolled off the transport rig. so obviously, the truck had been driven around at 5-10mph at the staging area, causing the guess-o-meter to calculate quite a long range based on minimal power consumption. Marques Brownlee's viewers are so gullible that in the comments, thousands of people repeated the lie and clearly have no idea how EV range is actually calculated.

 

[Blur1t]

https://fordauthority.com/2021/10/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-lariat-live-photo-gallery/

Per article, while The Lightning range with the extended battery is 300 miles, this is with a 1000lbs payload in bed. Without the 1000lb payload is bed, the range apparently is 469 miles! If this is in fact true, would this sway anyone to the Lightning?

Nope still not swayed. Glad I got my money back.

 

[Sully151]

The F-150 is more of a brick than the R1T. In order to get that mileage with the battery it going to have, wouldn’t it need to be crazy aerodynamic?

 

[SeaGeo]

The F-150 is more of a brick than the R1T. In order to get that mileage with the battery it going to have, wouldn’t it need to be crazy aerodynamic?

Yes. It's not getting that 450+ miles, and 1,000 lbs of payload on the bed isn't going to effect range by 150+ miles. It would need something like a 200kwh battery. That number was from a GOM on a truck that had been driven around at low speeds.

 

[Temerarius]

Yes. It's not getting that 450+ miles, and 1,000 lbs of payload on the bed isn't going to effect range by 150+ miles. It would need something like a 200kwh battery. That number was from a GOM on a truck that had been driven around at low speeds.

Agreed.

1,000 pound difference is not giving you over 50% range.

That whole Marques Brownlee thing was just stupid, and most likely the result of recent usage figures (favourable). It's like looking at the instant MPG in your car while going down hill, "Hey look, 99MPG! I can drive 2,623 miles on this tank of gas!"

...yeah... no.

The MachE is averaging 3 miles per kWh (293-325 Watts per mile depending on setup). If, IF the F150 had the exact same aero it would need a 156kWh battery. However, it has the same aero as a barn door.

The R1T (smaller, more aero truck) is sitting at about 2.2 miles per kWh (450 watts per mile), so for even it to do the 469 miles, it would need a 213kWh battery.

So... unless the "base" 300 mile F150 has a 230+kWh battery in it, and Ford really sucks at advertising, I call BS.

Nothing against @dsps70, he's just passing along the article, but that article is shit and the writers need to be beaten with cluesticks.

 

[Temerarius]

Ugh... I made the mistake of looking at the Comments.

I just... can't... so much ignorance... in one statement.

 

[SeaGeo]

Ugh... I made the mistake of looking at the Comments.

I just... can't... so much ignorance... in one statement.

I mean, with a 500 kwh battery @<150kw and the legendary 80%+ mach e taper, he's not wrong. ?

 

[ATL_Canes]

No way is Ford putting out a 300 mile number with the real range 50% better.

This. I remember saying it at the time of the MB video… in a world where range is king, why the hell would they undersell it by 50% when revealing it to the world? If it really got 400+ miles, they would lead with that.

 

[cc84]

https://fordauthority.com/2021/10/2022-ford-f-150-lightning-lariat-live-photo-gallery/

Per article, while The Lightning range with the extended battery is 300 miles, this is with a 1000lbs payload in bed. Without the 1000lb payload is bed, the range apparently is 469 miles! If this is in fact true, would this sway anyone to the Lightning?

To answer your question, everything else to the side.......most definitely. I don't believe it to be true, but yes I would switch immediately.

 

[DB-EV]

To answer your question, everything else to the side.......most definitely. I don't believe it to be true, but yes I would switch immediately.

First answer to the question award : )

 

[Sgt Beavis]

Marques Brownlee was the first to report that range but he’s certainly not the only one. Several others have noted the much higher range reported by the infotainment screen. IMO, the real issue is Ford being coy with that reported number and not getting out front and saying something like the real world range is going to be at least 300 miles but not more than XXX miles.

With that said, I agree with most here. There is no way the truck will have that much range. I’d be happy to be wrong.

 

[mgc0216]

No I would not switch, not solely based on that. I am not a “truck guy” - hell I am not a “car guy” - my most expensive vehicle purchase was a 2020 cross trek before that a $17k used car. The only other new car I ever bought was a 2012 Honda Fit.

The Rivian to me isn’t about empirical data, it’s about the mission of the company and the joy that truck unleashes. An electrified Ford that looks just like a normal one? I couldn’t be much less excited than I am.

And I can’t really think of many cases where 300 (I know it’s less than that if you’re being practical with charge levels) miles of range is going to hinder me. A drive to the coast and back is less than 200 miles. Over to Bend or up to Seattle - 99% of the time I am staying the night. Road trip to Disneyland? I will budget the extra 4 hours and I am too old to straight shot that anyway. The only place I can see an issue is if I want to tow a lightweight travel trailer - but that’s not in surmountable.

Sponsored