5 ms·

It's a novelty. This is the wrong tool for anyone who actually needs a truck.

mc32 4y ago
I mean, sure, you don't wanna pull a boat, if you're not close to shore. But probably works for construction sites where you might be towing, but not for long distances. Possibly, for smaller site it may mean not having to being your Ingersoll-Rand.
- yourapostasy 4y ago
  That's an awful lot of money for such a niche tool. I can see it happening regularly and the numbers penciling out if a company regularly worked on say, large commercial projects on large lots. Similar to how the very large trucking companies getting a yard truck for their big trailer yards, for example. Personally, I'd have to be convinced that these amounts of capex could be amortized over a commensurately longer time period to balance out more traditional solutions.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    E150 - $56k Gas - $3.29 gallon F150 city fuel economy - 20 mpg. So if you drive your F150 320k miles in-town, the gas pays for the E150. This ignores electricity costs, but that makes it worse. So it's not quite worth it yet to buy an E150 to supplement an F150.
    - mc32 4y ago
      150,000mi is approx break-even, taking the price difference into account.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        That's assuming you never need the range/capacity of the bigger truck (which may be the case if you have multiple trucks).
Enginerrrd 4y ago
I'm not sure I totally agree. I have a truck, and you're right, for most of my truck use-cases this won't work, primarily due to range issues and lack of ability to quickly top up. However, for some of my uses where I'm driving a lot of relatively close forestry roads and just hauling survey/engineering gear and the like, it's basically got enough range although it might get tight every once in a while. But it's got the 4wd ability, it can tow a modest trailer, etc. The lack of ability to top off at some rural gas station though is still kind of a deal breaker. For short duration / light-weight hauling/towing in town, I think this would do fine. Combine the truck with a gasoline range-extender and it would probably work for me though.
tashoecraft 4y ago
no. You're just wwrong. It's the wrong tool if you need to tow for more than 100 miles in a single day. It's become very political tool to state that if electric vehicles cannot be better than gas/diesel at every single metric it's a failure. All the reviews are glowing about electric vehicles. Every manufacturer is scrambling to produce one. Demand is insane. Performance is better than anything comparable, and event to things incomparable. A Lucid air performance is faster than a Bugatti Chiron in the quarter mile. Also I believe 90% of truck owners only use their truck bed once per year or less. Is it stupid they want trucks? Probably, but that's the way it is.
- kdkdkdl 4y ago
  Where'd you find that usage data on trucks? I'd love to see it, especially if the people running the study broke down the usage of the truck by commercial vs residential ownership and rural vs urban location. Would you mind linking it? You don't want people thinking that you just made up a number
  - bombcar 4y ago
    > According to Edwards’ data, 75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less. And a full 35 percent of truck owners use their truck for hauling—putting something in the bed, its ostensible raison d’être—once a year or less. https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz... So they're close on towing but way off on the bed. It also overlooks that people who only buy ONE vehicle are best off buying a truck or largish SUV so it can do "all they ever need" - to have a small car you kind of really need to have a second vehicle that's larger, or it gets quite annoying.
    - estebank 4y ago
      The thing I don't get is that a common retort to critiques of the usage patterns is "who can afford to buy two vehicles!?", but if you look at the cost of these trucks, and the number of comfort features they are marketed with, the market could provide a work truck at a lower price point with enough left over for a comfortable more reasonably sized vehicle. And that's what tradespeople in other countries (where purchasing vehicles is usually felt more in the purse) do: own a base model work van and an everyday car. But people who work in offices that own trucks? Those are purchased not to move the odd couch while also giving a lift to 6 people, it is pure cosplay.
randomdata 4y ago
I think it would be the perfect farm truck. The bed to move things, like fuel, seed, chemicals, and tools, from field to field, the cabin to move people from field to field, and electricity to power things, like welders or motors, in the field. You don't need much range and you've got tractors (field or highway) around for when you need serious towing capacity. The price is a little much for a farm truck, granted.
- RhysU 4y ago
  Don't the agricultural diesel subsidies Bork the economics on this specific use case?
  - randomdata 4y ago
    The only diesel "subsidy" I am familiar with is colored fuel, which exempts the road tax for off-road vehicles. A pickup truck would not be eligible to use such fuel as it is deemed an on-road vehicle. Maybe there is some other subsidy in your jurisdiction?
    - bombcar 4y ago
      They're probably imagining a truck that never leaves the farm but even then in most jurisdictions you can't run red-dye in it (though nobody will ever catch you). And if you never leave the property than you can get one of those electric cart things I guess.
      - RhysU 4y ago
        That was indeed what I meant. Lightning vs old red-dye rust bucket farm truck never on the road (wink). The latter seems like it has to be wildly more economical over a full lifetime.
        bombcar 4y ago
        The rust bucket is gonna win every single time no matter what, because it already exists and is cheap as hell, so even if it has more costs and emissions when running, it still will be a win over a brand new truck.
mrexroad 4y ago
Curious why you say that? I’m seriously considering an EV pickup in next few years. I currently am using a minivan with seats removed for most of my construction and hauling needs (fwiw, I beefed up brakes, monitor tranny temp w/ heavy loads, etc). I don’t usually travel more than a 30mi radius in a day so an EV would be ideal; throw in features like 120/240v or compressed air hookups and I even start rethinking workflows. For now my minivan gets it done as long as I’m careful. If we’re just making flippant generalizations, I’ll throw out that most people driving brodozers don’t actually “need” a truck and just enjoy the novelty.

mc32 4y ago

I mean, sure, you don't wanna pull a boat, if you're not close to shore. But probably works for construction sites where you might be towing, but not for long distances. Possibly, for smaller site it may mean not having to being your Ingersoll-Rand.

yourapostasy 4y ago
That's an awful lot of money for such a niche tool. I can see it happening regularly and the numbers penciling out if a company regularly worked on say, large commercial projects on large lots. Similar to how the very large trucking companies getting a yard truck for their big trailer yards, for example. Personally, I'd have to be convinced that these amounts of capex could be amortized over a commensurately longer time period to balance out more traditional solutions.
- bombcar 4y ago
  E150 - $56k Gas - $3.29 gallon F150 city fuel economy - 20 mpg. So if you drive your F150 320k miles in-town, the gas pays for the E150. This ignores electricity costs, but that makes it worse. So it's not quite worth it yet to buy an E150 to supplement an F150.
  - mc32 4y ago
    150,000mi is approx break-even, taking the price difference into account.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      That's assuming you never need the range/capacity of the bigger truck (which may be the case if you have multiple trucks).

Enginerrrd 4y ago

I'm not sure I totally agree. I have a truck, and you're right, for most of my truck use-cases this won't work, primarily due to range issues and lack of ability to quickly top up. However, for some of my uses where I'm driving a lot of relatively close forestry roads and just hauling survey/engineering gear and the like, it's basically got enough range although it might get tight every once in a while. But it's got the 4wd ability, it can tow a modest trailer, etc. The lack of ability to top off at some rural gas station though is still kind of a deal breaker. For short duration / light-weight hauling/towing in town, I think this would do fine. Combine the truck with a gasoline range-extender and it would probably work for me though.

tashoecraft 4y ago

no. You're just wwrong. It's the wrong tool if you need to tow for more than 100 miles in a single day. It's become very political tool to state that if electric vehicles cannot be better than gas/diesel at every single metric it's a failure. All the reviews are glowing about electric vehicles. Every manufacturer is scrambling to produce one. Demand is insane. Performance is better than anything comparable, and event to things incomparable. A Lucid air performance is faster than a Bugatti Chiron in the quarter mile. Also I believe 90% of truck owners only use their truck bed once per year or less. Is it stupid they want trucks? Probably, but that's the way it is.

kdkdkdl 4y ago
Where'd you find that usage data on trucks? I'd love to see it, especially if the people running the study broke down the usage of the truck by commercial vs residential ownership and rural vs urban location. Would you mind linking it? You don't want people thinking that you just made up a number
- bombcar 4y ago
  > According to Edwards’ data, 75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less. And a full 35 percent of truck owners use their truck for hauling—putting something in the bed, its ostensible raison d’être—once a year or less. https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz... So they're close on towing but way off on the bed. It also overlooks that people who only buy ONE vehicle are best off buying a truck or largish SUV so it can do "all they ever need" - to have a small car you kind of really need to have a second vehicle that's larger, or it gets quite annoying.
  - estebank 4y ago
    The thing I don't get is that a common retort to critiques of the usage patterns is "who can afford to buy two vehicles!?", but if you look at the cost of these trucks, and the number of comfort features they are marketed with, the market could provide a work truck at a lower price point with enough left over for a comfortable more reasonably sized vehicle. And that's what tradespeople in other countries (where purchasing vehicles is usually felt more in the purse) do: own a base model work van and an everyday car. But people who work in offices that own trucks? Those are purchased not to move the odd couch while also giving a lift to 6 people, it is pure cosplay.

randomdata 4y ago

I think it would be the perfect farm truck. The bed to move things, like fuel, seed, chemicals, and tools, from field to field, the cabin to move people from field to field, and electricity to power things, like welders or motors, in the field. You don't need much range and you've got tractors (field or highway) around for when you need serious towing capacity. The price is a little much for a farm truck, granted.

RhysU 4y ago
Don't the agricultural diesel subsidies Bork the economics on this specific use case?
- randomdata 4y ago
  The only diesel "subsidy" I am familiar with is colored fuel, which exempts the road tax for off-road vehicles. A pickup truck would not be eligible to use such fuel as it is deemed an on-road vehicle. Maybe there is some other subsidy in your jurisdiction?
  - bombcar 4y ago
    They're probably imagining a truck that never leaves the farm but even then in most jurisdictions you can't run red-dye in it (though nobody will ever catch you). And if you never leave the property than you can get one of those electric cart things I guess.
    - RhysU 4y ago
      That was indeed what I meant. Lightning vs old red-dye rust bucket farm truck never on the road (wink). The latter seems like it has to be wildly more economical over a full lifetime.
      - bombcar 4y ago
        The rust bucket is gonna win every single time no matter what, because it already exists and is cheap as hell, so even if it has more costs and emissions when running, it still will be a win over a brand new truck.

mrexroad 4y ago

Curious why you say that? I’m seriously considering an EV pickup in next few years. I currently am using a minivan with seats removed for most of my construction and hauling needs (fwiw, I beefed up brakes, monitor tranny temp w/ heavy loads, etc). I don’t usually travel more than a 30mi radius in a day so an EV would be ideal; throw in features like 120/240v or compressed air hookups and I even start rethinking workflows. For now my minivan gets it done as long as I’m careful. If we’re just making flippant generalizations, I’ll throw out that most people driving brodozers don’t actually “need” a truck and just enjoy the novelty.