Ford F-150 Lightning Charging / Highway Efficiency Logged In Our 10% EV Road Trip Challenge
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 05. 2024
- Join Ryan as he takes the Ford F150 Lightning Lariat on our 10% Challenge. Be sure to visit outofspecstudios.com/10-chall... to see the results for yourself!
Shoutout to our sponsors for more information find their links below:
- Star Charge:
www.starcharge.com/charging?i...
We would really appreciate it if you subscribe to our channel! The more subscribers we have, the more awesome opportunities we will be able to bring to you!
Find all of our Amazon must-haves here:
www.amazon.com/shop/influence...
Kyle on Twitter: @itskyleconner
Kyle on Instagram: @Virtualkyle
For more behind the scenes content:
Twitter: @Out_of_Spec
Facebook: / outofspecreviews
Instagram: @OutofSpecReviews
Inquiries: info@outofspecstudios.com
Tesla Referral Code: www.tesla.com/referral/kyle92049
TeslaFI Referral: www.teslafi.com/signup.php?re...
If you liked this video, we recommend checking out some of our other channels!
Out of Spec Motoring: / outofspecmotoring
Out of Spec Reviews: / outofspecreviews
#ford #f150 #lightning - Auta a dopravní prostředky
“15 Minutes of Charging Challenge” seems more accurate. Def a helpful real-world test.
Its the best roadtrip test. Needs a better name for sure!
Ooooo I wanna see a Silverado do this!!
Stay tuned!
That’d be, what, a 4 hour video? :-P
Big battery, big charging, send it!!!!
I cant wait to see what Ryan looks and sounds like when he gets comfortable on camera, good job Ryan! I'd be interested to see how the silverado and the new RAM EV do with this test
Great job, Ryan! You are concise, but thorough, I hope you make more videos.
Thank You folks for All that you are doing for our Planet Earth.... Peace.. Shalom.. Salam.. Namaste 🙏🏻 😊 🌈 ✌ ☮ ❤
Interesting, I love seeing this data, thanks! I like how you explain the procedure on your website, but I suggest you add the reason/purpose for setting up the test like this. I think Kyle said in one of the videos something like: To gives us an idea how well each car does during roadtrip travel by simulating mid-trip stops.
Based on some of the Lightning road trips I've seen, I'd expect this to get about 60-65 miles of range added.
7:27 Yeah, buddy! BTW, I feel like 1.8 mi/kWh is excellent for a fullsize truck at 80 mph. My rule of thumb is to expect 1.5 mi/kWh at fast freeway speeds, but of course, I'm open to being pleasantly surprised.
Thanks Ryan. Nice video and honest evaluation. What the Lightning truly needs is 800v charging so that it would gain so much more range in that 15 minutes of charging.
And thank you for updating the Out of Spec Studios charging graphs page with all the updated truck information. By the way, is there a way for you to add a time component to the SoC graph so that we can see how long it took them to get to their particular SoC as it goes along, similar to the way you have it on the "70 Mph Range Added" when you scroll the pointer along the graph line? That would really make it out of this world.
Thanks again for all your hard work on those pages.
When did you do the lucid 10% challenge!? It shows up on your spreadsheet but I can't find the video.
Glad it didn’t randomly die on you, great video!
Thanks. I've had my SR Lightning for 8 months and never hit 80 mph. Even at 70 mph, don't think mine will het over 180 miles of range. Still love the truck and hardly ever get in the Model 3.
Honestly I think 1.8mi/kWh @ 80mph for such a massive vehicle is not bad. It just could use a little faster charging is all (especially after 10 minutes boost is over).
Yeah for 80MPH, 1.8 mi/kWh seems pretty great to me. I wonder what is limiting the charge rate below 50% SOC. If it's just Ford being cautious, perhaps they'll increase it via a software update. The Lightning charge-curve is uniquely flat, so a similar "50% challenge" would certainly move it up in the rankings.
I agree except that I'd say "a lot faster charging" if we're talking about being a road tripper. But, the current generation of Lightnings simply aren't road trippers. I think that's ok. I don't road trip my R1S and I have no intention to.
Interestingly, the CZcams sponsor of this video was VinFast. 😊. Thank you for the Lariat test data, well done.
Edit: to clarify, VinFast was the advertiser provided by CZcams’s apparent algorithm.
Sponsor or do you mean there was an ad?
@@AaronStarkLinux Vinfast was the CZcams provided advertiser.
Love the review and special dinner short at the end. 😂
Lightning should only be compared to other same type trucks since their shape are totally different to smaller & lighter cars that were created aerodynamically in the first place.
My Lightning in I95 in Connecticut does fine (2.1-2.4 miles per kilowatt) since speed limit is 55 mph and I do 60+mph on the right lane while others drive @ 70 mph on the left lane.
Thank you for sharing your findings at those speeds 👍🏼
The charge cycle looked to be a fair representation of how the truck typically charges.
At 80 mph, your chart is going to very closely match an inverse of the aerodynamoc coefficient. normallzing for that would do more to identify vehicles that overperform or underperform, relative to their aerodynamics.
It will be fun to watch as you post other EV trucks. The Rivian should do a bit better, the CT a bit worse (until charging improvements roll out) and the GM trucks with worse efficiency, but better charging.
The Silverado EV with ~180 kWh battery should be the winner in the truck category.
I have a bolt and I have remote start so I remote start the car without turning it on and I get either hot or cold depends on the weather I don't know if you can use that for a test instead of starting the car
Nice
I need to see the new taycan doing the 10% challenge. With the new 312 kWh charge it’s gonna be awesome
Efficiency matters. It is amazing how much more real world range you get out of 15min of charging the RWD model 3 vs the F150.
Afternoon Ryan
Tableau game strong! Do y'all publish to the server?
I own a lightning. I love it. I need a truck for a truck. Rivians are just too small. I commute locally and run about 20000 miles a year. Road trips in it are going to be awful. My wife has an ICE SUV that we will use for that. As a note, I i put a leveling kit and 35 inch tires on it to make it look like a truck. It took 20% of the range away.
Do you guys know if you still get the time boast beyond 80%? I know OOD & Kyle and Tom doing their 1k trip and OOD & Jordan doing the cross-country trip and they wouldn't go beyond 80% do to it ramping down.
No boost over 80%. Not even a “relative boost”. Once you hit 80%, you’re limited to the curve it wants regardless on if you plugged in at 0%, 70%, 80%, or 90%. And IIRC, the boost lessens if you plug in >70%, so you don’t get as much benefit from the boost, since it does have an “absolute kW cap” it has started to ramp down at 70%.
You forget to eat at Buckeees!
I can't believe it's still snowing there.
Eye candy
Can you do a mach-e RWD
I'm always surprised at just how inefficent trucks are. 1.8 miles per KWh means a 7.2KW home charger only geta you about 13 miles of highway driving per hour of charging. If you haopen to get stucks in an area that only has a crappy 50kw charger you only get 90 miles sitting around for an hour... Hopefully a better charger is around so you can just charge enough to get there.
It a surprise really? They’re heavy and shaped like a brick. An EV pick up like the F150 is a pretty dumb idea. Whenever you use an EV truck for tasks that trucks are designed to actually do like haul, heavy loads, tow, etc. makes no sense to have an EV. Not sure why he’s so disappointed at the results, it’s a truck! If you want efficiency in a full size truck buy a diesel!
@@toddkovalcik332 Well, I guess not that much of a surprise, but I just looked at fueleconomy.gov and comparing something like a ICE Honda Accord to the 3.5L F150 it's a difference of 37 and 24 mpg highway (54% better mileage). If you compare a Model 3 LR to the Lightning 4WD ER it's 126 MPGe VS 63 MPGe or almost exactly double the efficiency or if you do it by kWh per 100 miles it's 26 vs 48 or about 85% more energy.
Maybe it's just the vehicles I picked but I figured about 50% more usage would be about standard, not nearly double.
@@Snerdles There is also a trim with only 18' wheels that should have better efficiency than this. Also, no heat pump means more battery power used for preconditioning.
So do you drive 80 Mph to Home Depot? Using these speeds to measure an EV’s true usefulness is not realistic.
@@kmf2153 If there is a highway between me and the home depot, then yes. Do you never drive anywhere? Being a delusion EVangilist doesn't help people come around to EVs.
Highways exist.
finally a real test at 80 mph, a speed that is more realistic than the 65 or 70 I see all the time
Depends on where you are. 80 MPH is useful for many people, but many other people live in areas where 70 MPH is a much more reasonable number. (Places with ≤65 MPH speed limits, where going above 70 will absolutely get you pulled over, which covers a lot of the population of the US.)
@@AnonymousFreakYT yeah you know I've driven all over this country and pretty much everywhere I go. You get ran over if you're doing 75 so I'm sure you're not wrong but has not been my experience
Kiddo it’s shaped like a brick, you have to be good with 1.8 KWH considering it’s a full size truck. Wait till you drive the hummer 😂
Do people really drive 80 mph regularly? 😮 Even on road trips with 80 mph posted speed limits in the desert I tend to stay around 75, no matter what drive train is in my vehicle.
I drive 80 all the time. These tests are really useful for me since most EV content is 70 at best and often slower to make the car look better.
There are big stretches of the Western US with absolutely nothing for many miles, with 75-80 (and even a couple 85!) speed limits, and in many of those areas, if you’re going 80, you’re the slowest vehicle on the road. Going 75 would be an actual hazard. (I’m looking at you, rural Texas between El Paso and San Antonio, where I got a flat tire and had to drive 55 for 300 miles on my donut spare before I got to a town with a tire shop that carried my tire size.)
Thanks for providing shorter videos that still provide great content. Hopefully we'll see more shorter videos to coincide with the gargantuan epic tales.
I agree. I think the some of the long videos lately felt a little forced as opposed to before they just felt like they were based on the amount of info. Could just be my imagination, who knows lol 😆
honestly, i just want to see kyle & alyssa in _out of spec review_ videos.
no one comes close to kyle in enthusiasm & knowledge.
any video on this channel that doesn't include kyle hurts the channel.
Hmm. So I think the piece that's missing here is that I'm not getting engaging updates as the test is going. Kinda takes any of the drama away from it. More of a straightforward video. Good stuff overall, though. Knowledge acquired
Wear shades or shoot a video. Don't do both. Thanks for sharing!
Testing trucks at 80 mph and saying this is typical road trip practice makes these tests useless for most people. Maybe for Kyle who is always in race mode, but I like to relax and enjoy the trip during a vacation.
I was interested in this video, but it was too hard to watch.
Clean Cars get better range
80 mph is way too fast for good economy, especially in a truck. Most trucks will be around the F-150 except for the Chevy since it can charge much faster. But its efficiency at 80 mph will be around the same. The model Y on 19” rims didn’t do much better.
🤓
Please please please please please please please make a much better effort to differentiate between highway and city range ratings. EVs should be getting highway and city driving ranges just like ICEs get highway and city mpg ratings. I know that the Lightning was rated around 280 highway range. If any company is either flat out not having the range rated in both scenarios, or is making that info very difficult to ascertain, then CALL THAT OUT instead of blaming the vehicle itself for not meeting a number. Thank you.
In other news, night follows day follows night…..jeez!
Format of this test is silly and unrealistic…. Nobody other than Kyle when “racing” hops from charger to charger…. It literally makes no sense… it seems more like an underhanded or deceptive way to manipulate the results based on knowledge of the charging curves of different vehicles…
Also, testing an F150 or Silverado or R1T or CT at 80mph is silly… anyone worried about range is certainly gonna back the speed down to reduce the effect of wind resistance that these trucks struggle with….
Results in these “tests” are pretty much predictable and predetermined IMHO. Not very useful for the average person and potentially detrimental to someone trying to decide what to buy.
It's not surprising that an EV doing 80mph gets terrible mile/kw. This is what I would find more useful. For a 500 mile trip using the 10% to 80% portion of the battery what is the optimized velocity for minimized total time (driving + charging) starting at 100% ? I'm gonna guess it's 65mph, but it would be great to see a real word test. Sounds like an excellent calculus 1 problem. :)
Range is a problem future EVs will need to fix. Definitely don't want to drive 65mph when others are doing 80mph around you. Really hoping future F150 EVs are capable of doing 400 miles.
@@pt6998 I agree that battery density is a problem that needs to be fixed. I just kind of find this data not useful, but I'm not really interested in driving 800 miles in a day. I'm pretty much done at 500 mile. I charge my lightning to 100% and drive ~70mph. It'll do ~275m and then I need to charge. I'm wondering is 70mph optimal or 65 or 75 or 80? Maybe it is 80mph because that's the speed they drove cross county. Whatever the answer, the only parameter that's not variable is time. That's why I'm suggesting the data would be more useful if it was normalized down to time rather than distance.
@@scottbalak7123the slower you go the more efficient it will be. I agree with the reply that I don’t want to go 15 mph slower than other cars just to be more efficient. If you want to go as far as possible in a day, go as fast as you can and just add more charging stops. Charging is still so much faster than the additional energy used by driving faster.
Here’s a suggestion::: in the titles plz don’t say “I” did this or that unless it’s Kyle. Otherwise just say the reviewers name such as “Ryan drives a Cybertruck to mars” etc. more clarity is good. Great video Ryan!!
I 100% disagree. That not only dilutes the brand, that adds confusion to new viewers. I don't know who Kyle is, I don't know who Ryan is. You just miiiiight know who OOS is.
You would never see TFL listing the specific reviewer, would you?
This isn’t “Kyle O’Connor’s channel”, this is “Out of Spec Reviews”. “I” covers anyone at OoS.
Most who have followed oos for a long time think of it as Kyle. He has added less quality hosts to get the clicks.
@4rwayner7 There's no way that Jordan, Max, or Ryan 'get more clicks' than Kyle, so that's a strange motive to attribute. They need a team because one person can only do so much. I get it - I find Kyle's videos more engaging, but there's no real need for him to always be the host for basic testing templates like this.
@@otm646 The people that watch TFL even probably the casual viewer absolutely know who those people are. The fact that TFL is on Chevrolet’s website says a lot.
I do agree it shouldn’t be in the title because of confusion for OOS viewers and I think Kyle said they are up to 17 channels so far which should be scaled back but then again people complain if it’s long form content or doesn’t match with what the viewer wants.
My wish for 2024 is for the love of God please use some type of gimbal mount for Kyle’s iPhone. His editing can stay non fancy as it is but sometimes the shakiness gets to me.
I'm wanna do this with my car Tesla M3LR 2021