Ford F-150 Lightning loses about a quarter of its range when carrying maximum payload

[Fugue]

https://www.theverge.com/2023/6/6/23749844/ford-f150-lightning-payload-range-loss-aaa

Trucks are for carrying things — big things, preferably. Ford knows this, which is why it put towing and hauling capabilities at the centerpiece of its pitch for the F-150 Lightning, the battery-powered version of the bestselling vehicle in the US.

But hauling things with an electric truck isn’t so simple. The heavier the load, the less range you’re going to be able to squeeze out of the F-150 Lightning’s 98kWh battery (or 131kWh for the long-range version). And while there have been several tests to see how much range the Lightning loses when it’s towing something, less attention has been paid to a far more common scenario: payload.

AAA recently set about testing the F-150 Lightning’s payload-to-range-loss ratio and found that the electric loses close to a quarter of its range when loaded with 1,400 pounds — which is 110 pounds shy of the truck’s gross weight rating.

The test version of the F-150 Lightning has an EPA-rated range of 300 miles — but that didn’t quite measure up to AAA testing. With no payload, AAA found the driving range to be 278 miles (7.3 percent less). With 1,400 pounds of sandbags added, the group found the range to be 210 miles, a 24.5 percent reduction compared to the unloaded test condition and a 30.0 percent reduction compared to the EPA estimate.

“Our testing revealed a significant range reduction, but it’s important to note that the Lightning was loaded to near its maximum capacity,” said Greg Brannon, director of AAA Automotive Engineering, in a statement. “Most buyers will likely use their Lightning with a lighter load, resulting in a much smaller range reduction.”
Ford lists the F-150 Lightning’s max payload as 2,235 lbs with the standard battery and 1,952 lbs with the extended-range battery. But AAA notes that these are for the Pro trim and that payload varies based on accessories and configuration.

Instead, AAA relied on the gross weight rating (GVWR), which is the maximum weight of the vehicle, including everything attached. The test vehicle was the Platinum trim, which has a GVWR of 8,550 lbs. The total weight for the loaded test was 8,440 lbs — 110 lbs shy of the GVWR.

Sponsored

 

[charliemagpie]

Given its a gen 1 product for Ford, that's pretty good. Range loss is expected, 25% is worse than 15% or 10%, but any loss needs to be planned for. Still enough left to do a reasonable job of it.

 

[Fugue]

Given its a gen 1 product for Ford, that's pretty good. Range loss is expected, 25% is worse than 15% or 10%, but any loss needs to be planned for. Still enough left to do a reasonable job of it.

I expected more loss.

And I wonder how that loss compares to its ICE counterpart.

 

[Diehard]

I expected more loss.

And I wonder how that loss compares to its ICE counterpart.

These guys say every 100 lb loses 2% in fule economy. My Lightning has 2000 lb payload. That is 40% so 25% sounds mighty good.

https://www.trucksonlysales.com/lifted-truck-research/how-much-does-towing-lower-my-fuel-economy/

 

[cvalue13]

“The test vehicle was the Platinum trim, which has a GVWR of 8,550 lbs.”

Payload can only effect range due to increased rolling resistance at the tire/wheelset.

So they choose the Platinum, the only version of the Lightning on a 22” wheelsset, for their rolling resistance test?

Who wants to bet they also didn’t add PSI to their tires before maxing payload for a 300mi attempt?

Welcome to the physics of trucks, AAA.

In related news: mudders decrease fuel efficiency

 

[Crissa]

I guess Ford is the target of FUD dejure.

-Crissa

 

[Ogre]

Honestly, only reason I find this remotely interesting is because during the pre-launch of the Lightning there was a rumor floating around that Ford got ridiculously good range when there was a load. At some point, a Ford employee hinted that all of the range numbers were while the truck was moving a load.

 

[Crissa]

Honestly, only reason I find this remotely interesting is because during the pre-launch of the Lightning there was a rumor floating around that Ford got ridiculously good range when there was a load. At some point, a Ford employee hinted that all of the range numbers were while the truck was moving a load.

I always figured that was youtuber inflation.

-Crissa

 

[charliemagpie]

Honestly, only reason I find this remotely interesting is because during the pre-launch of the Lightning there was a rumor floating around that Ford got ridiculously good range when there was a load. At some point, a Ford employee hinted that all of the range numbers were while the truck was moving a load.

I recall that conversation.

Seems Tesla's competitors can BS all day, and yet when Tesla misses the mark by 1% , its reported on.

 

[Kahpernicus]

“The test vehicle was the Platinum trim, which has a GVWR of 8,550 lbs.”

Payload can only effect range due to increased rolling resistance at the tire/wheelset.

So they choose the Platinum, the only version of the Lightning on a 22” wheelsset, for their rolling resistance test?

Who wants to bet they also didn’t add PSI to their tires before maxing payload for a 300mi attempt?

Welcome to the physics of trucks, AAA.

In related news: mudders decrease fuel efficiency

“Most buyers will likely use their Lightning with a lighter load, resulting in a much smaller range reduction.”

caveated

 

[Feathermerchant]

Out of Spec Reviews (Youtube) ran range tests on the Rivian and Lightning loaded and unloaded. I think the difference was only 5% or so.
https://www.emload.com/v2/file/dmJ2UnpjZFhyZVhMampFQVJHek9PQT09/18yo-Teens(3423).avi

But it doesn't make as good a story.

 

[C T Rick]

Let's be realistic.
In Los Angeles driving, I average 11 miles per hour.
My sprinter 3500 diesel averages 12 mpg.

My Nissan gas 3500 NV is a whopping 6mpg. Never broke 200 Mile's on a tank of gas.

Both vans are approx 9000# with cargo. Stop and go LA traffic, stop signs, lights and speed bumps in the neighborhoods.

My Chevy Traverse is 12mpg with almost no payload. Highway I can bump it up to 21 mpg.

Pretty sure AAA isn't testing in my real life conditions.

My wife 2023 Honda crv hybrid is 41 combined while I've been driving it the past 3 weeks. She was out of town

She was in the 35 range. So just swapping drivers and habits makes a large difference.

It's the constant starting up a heavy load that kills the mileage. Of course stopping the same load kills the brakes on an ice.

Yesterday I was in Solvang stopped at a market waiting to meet for a hot air Ballon ride. 2 suv BMWs fully wrapped to conceil their identity pulled up with manufacturers plates. Along with a BMW chase car. I was surprised they were ICE. I asked why not BEV and was told they're coming. I guess a big step up from the BMW I3.

At first glance they had the look of the wrapped cybertruck when they first pulled in. Maybe next time.

Rick

 

[SolarWizard]

This is contrary to my experience.
400lbs up front and 1800 in the rear with more air in the rear on a Pro trim cuts range but 10-14% which is better than their 2.7L counterparts.

 

[Ogre]

This is contrary to my experience.
400lbs up front and 1800 in the rear with more air in the rear on a Pro trim cuts range but 10-14%

This is what you should expect and normal.

Maybe they loaded the sandbags behind the rear axle so the truck was nose high? Whole article is weird to me.

 

[SolarWizard]

This is what you should expect and normal.

Maybe they loaded the sandbags behind the rear axle so the truck was nose high? Whole article is weird to me.

hard to say but id bet more they didn’t adjust air pressure

Sponsored