Damn shame. I don’t own one myself but owners that I’ve spoken to seemed genuinely pleased with it.
They promised us $45k trucks and delivered $100k trucks. No kidding it didn’t sell well.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Ford literally produced the vehicle because of subsidies.
If they could get a portion of the EV tax breaks, they wanted it.
Now that the current administration is obviously still obsessed with burning oil, it no longer matters.
Large, heavy electric vehicles don’t make a lot of sense. The F-150 lightning was a neat idea, but smaller EVs make far more sense for personal vehicles.
Electric vans would be much better as a work vehicle.
Electric work trucks aren’t ready yet.
I own one, and my experience disagrees with your conjecture.
That torque though
Lots of people need a truck, not a van. You can’t haul a couple cubic yards of top soil or gravel in a van. I see dozens of Lightnings in my area.
This is a common argument, but the vast majority of people at home do not carry gravel or sand on a weekly basis. What they need is a rental truck for those items. The cost of 100k is ludicrous. Comparing to a rental truck you would need to be carrying raw material like that on average 2x a week to even break even with the payments.
I’m talking about contractors, trades people and people who do this for a living.
So 1% of pickup buyers. OK.
Some people actually work for a living, they don’t spend the day replying to email.
For that you use a $1500 trailer. The bizarre justifications for pickups are hilarious.
If the F-150 Lightning wasn’t terrible and expensive, I might have bought one.
What I wanted was a nice little ranger style truck - 2 seater, can pick up some lumber, decent sized bed, for in my garage. What they made was a giant crew cab monstrosity that takes up 2 parking spaces and costs 2x what I would have spent.
Car companies keep trying to tell us customers what we want then are surprised when we don’t buy.
You might be interested in the slate auto truck
