It seems like they're torn on what to do with it. The power usability, increased storage with the frunk, decent range, all seems to scream that it would be perfect for local jobsite utility, but the shortened bed really kills it for anyone who hauls building materials to site. The relatively short range also kills it for any type of oilfield work, where you can be expected to drive 300-500 miles quite regularly on a daily basis.
It’s aimed at the market that most trucks are sold to. The market for people who want a truck but don’t need a truck everyday.
They won’t have problems selling these. Especially at the prices they are offering. More so considering the tax rebate.
For the record I have a deposit on one. But I have had deposits on othet evs that I have canceled they didn’t live up to expectations.
Probably a base with extended range Lariat. Only if it lives up to what’s been announced.
Need to add tesla coils up the side of the cab where vertical exhausts would go, so when some idiot rolls coal they can "Lightning Storm".
Is it though? What's the starting price of Super Crew AWD ICE?
I'm way more impressed by this than I expected to be. I have decided to reserve just about anything interesting that comes along as soon as reservations open just because of the instant sellout and 2+ year waits that result. I had a reservation in as soon as they opened it up last night - Maybe 30s into the event I was done. Hopefully I'm reasonably early in line though people with confirmations 10+ minutes after me have lower reservation numbers so who knows.
I went into the reveal assuming I would just sort out what to buy later (this vs Cybertruck mainly) but based on what we've seen so far I will buy one as soon as my number comes up.
It's really hard to argue with the overall feature set and value. I'll probably end up with this plus a Cybertruck as the two daily drivers in the household.
Viper GTS
I'm totally not the market for this but it would be a nicer vehicle to drive if they moved the cab forward a bit and cut down the unnecessary bonnet a bit.
I mean I can see that they are trying to keep the aesthetic that they had before and I understand that, but not having a honking great ICE engine up front is an advantage that should be utilised.
Eh? A regular F150 presumably doesnt have a load of storage there and that sells ok!That secure storage is way too valuable to give up. Not to mention the impact absorbing capabilities. It's a vastly more useful vehicle with it than it would be without.
Viper GTS
My snap impression was this is a Cybertruck-killer, but the inferior range will cause some anxiety for cross-shoppers.Dunno, quoted from the article. Would be curious to see a 1:1 comparison. I'm honestly shocked at the $40k pricetag, that's a lot lower than I was expecting.
You assume people are rationale when they are buying vehicles. The very fact that pickups and SUVs (with much higher hoods and worse frontal blindspots) are the dominant vehicle sales in the US should tell you that it is far from that.I'm totally not the market for this but it would be a nicer vehicle to drive if they moved the cab forward a bit and cut down the unnecessary bonnet a bit.
I mean I can see that they are trying to keep the aesthetic that they had before and I understand that, but not having a honking great ICE engine up front is an advantage that should be utilised.
I get why they are doing it. It's just a shame that they have to do that because it would be a better vehicle in every way if they moved the cab forward.You assume people are rationale when they are buying vehicles. The very fact that pickups and SUVs (with much higher hoods and worse frontal blindspots) are the dominant vehicle sales in the US should tell you that it is far from that.
If rationality was a big selling point, most people would be buying compact hatchbacks, and vans and cab-over-engine designs would probably be favored for vehicles meant for commercial use.
My snap impression was this is a Cybertruck-killer, but the inferior range will cause some anxiety for cross-shoppers.
I wish they would have better frontal visibility, instead of a trend towards worse frontal visibility. I live in a more walkable neighborhood, and it's always a little scary to see these pickups - so high, they reach my shoulder (read: more dangerous in vehicle-on-pedestrian collision), and for smaller people, the person could be completely invisible in front.I get why they are doing it. It's just a shame that they have to do that because it would be a better vehicle in every way if they moved the cab forward.
Better visibility, better driving position, much more versatile layout behind the passenger area...
I'm totally not the market for this but it would be a nicer vehicle to drive if they moved the cab forward a bit and cut down the unnecessary bonnet a bit.
I mean I can see that they are trying to keep the aesthetic that they had before and I understand that, but not having a honking great ICE engine up front is an advantage that should be utilised.
The Canoo isn't a cab forward design, the driving position is the same a a regular truck.From what I read elsewhere, they are basically using the same frame as the ICE F-150 but reinforced, and this will somewhat dictate the overall dimensions. Using the same frame means shorter time to market, and lower development costs.
Plus when you sell the most popular vehicle in the country it makes a lot of sense to deliver your drive-train change in those VERY popular and familiar dimensions.
Plus, that front storage is major benefit. Sure current ICE F-150s don't have it and still sell well, but they often have to resort to using up bed space with aftermarket lock boxes for tools. This shows an advantage for the EV version.
Plus what first looks like very cab forward clean sheet EV designs ( See Canoo pickup), really just looks that way from outside. You still need a LOT of crumple zone, so the Canoo wastes a massive amount of space with a super deep dash inside, instead of lockable storage outside.
Maybe future generations after the ICE is gone, they can focus on reducing the nose, but for now, it probably just would have cost more to develop and cost them more sales. They made the right decision.
The Canoo isn't a cab forward design, the driving position is the same a a regular truck.
Surely a massive chunk of incompressible steel isnt counted as part of a crumple zone? If you take this huge mass out you should be able to save that space.Which is my point. They have no bonnet at all. Which is what you were calling for a reduction in, but they still need the significant crumple zone, so they just move the driver further back inside creating a lot of wasted space there, with a super deep dash.
If you look at pickup designs over the last 20 years, there has been a deliberate trend towards higher hoods which reduce frontal visibility. This is purely a design aesthetic; you can tell, because many of the similar platforms geared strictly towards commercial users still have the sloping hoods. They don't have to go full frontal seating position to improve visibility.Maybe future generations after the ICE is gone, they can focus on reducing the nose, but for now, it probably just would have cost more to develop and cost them more sales. They made the right decision.
Short bed doesn't bother me that much anymore. As long as the back window slides open, you can fit and carry 16 ft lumber and metals. My Tundra only has 6.5 ft truck bed, and occasional long lumber and metal pieces are no problem because of the open back window. And on most construction jobs, materials are all delivered to the job site so lot of constructions guys don't carry much other than tools. Small time construction guys and handymen are going to use trailer to transport materials if needed so shorter truck beds are not deal killer as well. People who really need to haul are not going to buy F150 anyway. They'll buy the bigger F550 or something similar with longer truck beds.I agree. 5.5' is pretty short. Hopefully we'll see longer soon (with bigger batteries to boot!). 230 miles in a truck would give me range anxiety. Half the reason I was willing to put down a deposit on the Cybertruck is because of the 500-mile battery option.
BTW, the 500+ mile Cybertruck is the Tr-motor version which starts at $70k. If you add FSD and taxes, you're looking at close to $85k drive out price on the Cybertruck. Are you really willing to spend $85k on a truck?
Shit I see so many lariat F-250 models out on the roads here in Texas, those are easily 85k optioned out. A basic optioned F-150 4x4 is around 45k these days.Short bed doesn't bother me that much anymore. As long as the back window slides open, you can fit and carry 16 ft lumber and metals. My Tundra only has 6.5 ft truck bed, and occasional long lumber and metal pieces are no problem because of the open back window. And on most construction jobs, materials are all delivered to the job site so lot of constructions guys don't carry much other than tools. Small time construction guys and handymen are going to use trailer to transport materials if needed so shorter truck beds are not deal killer as well. People who really need to haul are not going to buy F150 anyway. They'll buy the bigger F550 or something similar with longer truck beds.
I haven't watched the electric F-150 reveal presentation yet. But I'm looking forward to watching it soon. I'll reserve my judgement of the electric F-150 until then.
BTW, the 500+ mile Cybertruck is the Tr-motor version which starts at $70k. If you add FSD and taxes, you're looking at close to $85k drive out price on the Cybertruck. Are you really willing to spend $85k on a truck?
BTW, the 500+ mile Cybertruck is the Tr-motor version which starts at $70k. If you add FSD and taxes, you're looking at close to $85k drive out price on the Cybertruck. Are you really willing to spend $85k on a truck?
Shit I see so many lariat F-250 models out on the roads here in Texas, those are easily 85k optioned out. A basic optioned F-150 4x4 is around 45k these days.