Electric pickup trucks are hard, mostly because they need to fill an imaginary, or aspirational use case. More than 99% of the pickup truck miles in the US could be filled by an electric truck with a 150 mile range that people charge at home. But no one will buy that truck because of the desire to take long trips, and potentially tow a long distance.
The driving and ownership experience of electric vehicles is MUCH better, but it is hard to convince buyers to try it out.
>The driving and ownership experience of electric vehicles is MUCH better
Until EVs solve the cost problem as well as the "tracking device" and the "I have 8 iPads built into the dash" problems I'm not very excited.
The Slate looks pretty exciting in this regard but I'm worried it will ever exist, or if it will fall badly short of cost estimates. It's already slipped to ~$27.5k due to the expiration of the EV tax credit. In practice, whenever a car says "starting at $xx it's usually impossible to find that model and you can only get the midrange models which are $5-$10k more than the base price.
[edit]
Interestingly as well, the Slate sidesteps the towing problem by refusing to attempt to tow. It's rated to tow 1,000 lbs, which is effectively nothing. It's still got a respectable payload, though, so it does work as a truck.
I live in a two car household, and I need one vehicle that is comfortable on long trips, and one to handle truck jobs like hauling brush, firewood, oversized items and 3 bikes. My wife, daughter and myself vastly prefer our electric car (IONIQ 6) around town, but even as a big fan of the car I am still uncomfortable using it on long trips, so our truck (Honda Ridgeline) is still a gas vehicle.
I predict that EV trucks with a range extender will do very well in the US, and will be the catalyst behind the move to electric trucks. Once people get the experience of an electric truck they will love it, but the option to dump in gasoline and drive 400 miles without charging is an imaginary barrier that stops most customers from giving it a shot.
Personally, I would love to see an electric truck that can be charged while driving by an external generator, possible mounted to a trailer.
I was going to make a similar point - the math changes quite a bit if you're a multi-car household - in that case it absolutely makes sense to have at least one vehicle that's a short-range EV.
My household is a newer hybrid Ford Maverick and an older ICE Impreza (that gets worse fuel economy than the Maverick) - if we were replacing the Impreza today we'd probably go for a 2026 Leaf or a used Chevy Bolt.
Not for nothing but this is also one of the reasons electric motorcycles are lagging.
A HUUUUUGE number of motorcycles never go more than 50-75 miles in a day. CycleTrader is awash with 3,4,and 5 year old bikes that have barely been ridden. A 100 mile range electric bike (e.g., the Harley Livewire) would 100% fill those needs.
But people think they're gonna go on long trips, or whatever, or ride more, and they scoff at a bike you can't ride all day even though they'll never actually ride a bike all day.
I think you’re way off tbh. Something like 85% of the motorcycle market is for pleasure. Plenty of those bikes have a range of only ~100 miles as it is. Stopping is not really the problem. The problem is the charging infrastructure does not exist and the charge times are way too long.
Do some motorcycle owners commute on their bikes? Of course, but that’s clearly the minority of the market. The reason cycle trader is full of low mileage bikes is that the whole activity is kind of a pain in the ass when you think about it. Add charging to that and it’s just too much to bear.
Pleasure riders often ride on nice sunny sundays in groups to ruralish areas where it’s scenic and the roads are winding with few traffic lights etc. they need to be able to “gas up” a significant number of bikes quickly. And that shit is a pain to organize so they do it like twice a year. Hence the low mileage.
Electric motorcycles really are a super hard sell. The stark varg makes way more sense cause that’s a type of motorcycle that gets carried to the destination most of the time anyway. So the range thing is way less of an issue and the upsides stand out way more. That’s probably why I see way, way more Vargs or bikes like them than live wires.
My dad has been telling the same story for ten years. He wants to take a trip around US national parks, sleeping in the back of the car, under the stars, which is why his car needs a 500-mile range and must be fueled by gasoline. This conversation always comes up at family gatherings when he asks how I like my electric car.
He's in his mid-80s with prostate problems. He has never taken the trip.
IF you do this even once a year you don't really have any other option. Finding a rental truck that allows you to tow is hard. The vast majority won't allow it. When you do find one it is generally in an inconvenient location and very expensive. I can justify keeping my truck (long paid for) just because just 2 trips a year need a truck and so it is cheaper overall to just own the truck (tax and insurance is low) than to rent.
I'd love to have an electric pickup truck. It'd primarily be for farm use, so no long distance concerns, and being able to bring electricity to the field would be a huge boon. It is really the perfect package.
But I wouldn't buy one for the same reason I won't buy an ICE truck right now: They are way too overpriced — costing around 300% more than the truck I currently have cost when it was new, even though inflation is only 40% over the same period.
Cost is a concern, and there will be a cost penalty at purchase time for a while. That will impact some people, but there is still a big market for expensive trucks.
This made me realize that another set of batteries should be installed in the boat trailer (etc), rather than carrying them around every day when not needed.
The charger station situation will probably need to be figured out however.
When a new truck is $80k, it has to do everything becuase its an only vehichle. If they made $20k-$30k trucks, then its alot easier to justify it as a second vehichle that isnt required for long trips.
That's very true. I bought a quad-cab midsize truck and it feels like the ultimate compromise:
- Not amazing at hauling people
- Only OK payload
- Not the best gas mileage
- Too expensive (but still cheaper than other midsize trucks -- $36k)
With how much everything costs this truck really _had_ to be a compromise. It had to be able to do everything. I'd have much rather had an old crappy truck and then a normal family car, but those seem to have all been priced out.
Beyond that, there's a huge culture/propaganda problem for the demographic. Electric vehicles are gay, for sissies, we run on gas like my grandpappy did, climate change is fake, toaster on wheels, Joe Biden wants to take our trucks away, etc. Also the legitimate repair complaint: joe redneck can easily get parts for his 1998 F150 and fix it himself. There is no EV repair culture yet.
I'm 35, don't own a vehicle, and have never owned a vehicle. I live in SF. I think I'm finally getting to the point in my life where, maybe, I want a vehicle. I'd use it to take myself to camping music festivals and Burning Man. That's about it. Oh, I'm sure I'd find other uses for it, helping friends haul stuff, etc... but, practically speaking, most of my needs are consistently addressed by public transit and/or Waymo.
I guess what I'm trying to say is - literally the only time I feel like I'm missing out on a vehicle is when I have a need to transport a large amount of stuff a large amount of miles into desolate environments.
Does that mean my desire for a truck is imaginary/aspirational because, if I were to own it, 99% of the time I'd be content with a low range battery? I can see why people would think that, but, to me, it seems more like the 1% is the rationale for owning the vehicle.
/Owning/ the truck would be imaginary/aspirational as you imagine yourself using it often enough to justify the expenditure. If it's for trips that are 3~4 times a year it probably makes more sense to rent.
Best car for you is a used beater. It'll be fun for road trips, and then when it rots all year unused in a parking garage you shouldn't feel too upset about it because it was shitty to begin with.
Why would you buy a car to use it thrice a year? You'll end up paying a thousand dollars a trip, amortized, on the sticker cost alone. Multiples if you buy a new top-line pickup? Let alone the maintainence nightmare from leaving your poor clunker sitting around for months.
Also, you must understand that your use case here isn't even remotely the norm.
I don't think people who can meet there needs with public transit are the target market of many car manufacturers. Most truck miles are driving to work and the store. Your use case sounds like it would be perfect for renting a vehicle, especially since it would save you from storing and insuring it an extra 300 days per year.
I agree with you and made a comment in another related thread. I think there’s just a subset of people online who don’t realize it’s a value judgement or just take issue with others judgement of value in owning a truck.
Still wonder when Ford can bring back at least one damn sedan in the lineup.
It’s embarassing that https://www.ford.com/cars/fusion/ has a link to “explore all sedan vehicles” that dumps you right into the exciting selection of SUVs.
Does anyone make an electric Sedan for sale in the US? I'm starting to look and all I can find are SUV - I own a truck already, I want back in a car. Preferably something without too much power (My kids will be driving age soon).
They pulled back out of the EU and other markets like South America and BYD opened up an assembly plant in Brazil.
Turn back the clock and Ford ruled the EU with saloons like the Escort, Mondeo and later the Focus - they were caught unawares with shift to compact SUV's and had the popular Ecosport but never invested in the product line and it was left to wither and die.
They are teaming up with Renault to use their EV platform to
maintain a token presence in the EU but consumers today are smarter and more informed and will not buy badge engineered Fords.
The formula is so simple, but complicated to achieve underneath: sell the best products.
That’s all you have to do. But so many companies resort to financial games and short term business gimmicks rather than believing that they can make the best products and putting focus and drive into that goal (not just money!)
Stellantis can make great products but for the most part they just won’t. They actively refuse to. Same deal with Ford.
GM is doing well with EVs because they actually make good products. The Silverado EV is the best EV truck on the market, Cadillac makes the best luxury EVs on the market[1], and the Honda Prologue (made by GM) is a sales star because it’s a good product that knows its market. Even the Chevy Trax is a great product because of the sheer impossibility of its value proposition: nobody can compete with the amount of things that vehicle gives you for the price.
Ford half-assed their sedans and bowed out of that market and now their supposed focus on SUVs is not good enough because none of their SUVs, gas or electric or hybrid, give you any reason to buy them. They are half-assing all their vehicles until they reach their inevitable demise.
Why is anyone buying an Expedition over a Telluride, Grand Highlander, or Chevy Suburban derivative?
Why is anyone buying an Explorer over a RAV4, CRV, etc.
The only thing Ford makes that’s any good is the F-150, Maverick, Bronco and Mustang (very niche). This means they have basically zero cars to sell outside the US.
[1] Yes, better than Tesla and Lucid: more luxurious and isolated with better interior materials, fewer reliability problems, better ergonomics and physical controls, stronger dealer and service network.
I mean, the reduction of industrial subsidizes for EVs globally [0] along with recent supply chain scares [1] have made the economics for EVs much more difficult recently [2].
This should not be construed as "EVs are dying" but as I keep saying, EVs are going thru the same cycle that Hybrid ICE went thru 15 years ago.
Assuming a 0 to 100% EV transition would happen globally in a handful of years is dumb. Heck, even Chinese automotive manufacturers primarily export ICE vehicles globally [3]. The transition will happen both slower than EV fundamentalists and faster than ICE fundamentalists assume.
The issue is, that rate of growth globally is not enough to sustain the capex spent on building EV manufacturing capacity in 2019-24.
Much of that growth was itself due to China, where EV sales growth is starting to taper down making the financials difficult [0].
Growth alone is not enough - what matters is margins. If the rate of growth cannot sustain COGS, then production is right-sized.
Heck, even back in China a major reason BYD has been so successful is because it was able to subsidize it's initial foray into EV vehicles by becoming the primary smartphone battery vendor for Apple, Samsung, and other vendors in the 2000s.
Traditional automotive majors lacked similarly high margins businesses to help cushion the upfront cost of building out capacity.
This isn't to say EVs are "dead", but the transition will not happen overnight. It took Hybrid cars 10-15 years to go mainstream, and imo EVs today are in the same position where Hybrid cars were in the 2013-16 period.
A lot of shifts are happening in battery chemistry (eg. solid state battery manufacturing capex becoming mainstream) along with component manufacturing (eg. Capex for mass producing EESMs). I remain optimistic, but the histrionics some EV fanatics make is equally as grating/annoying as ICE fanatics.
Readit News
The driving and ownership experience of electric vehicles is MUCH better, but it is hard to convince buyers to try it out.
Until EVs solve the cost problem as well as the "tracking device" and the "I have 8 iPads built into the dash" problems I'm not very excited.
The Slate looks pretty exciting in this regard but I'm worried it will ever exist, or if it will fall badly short of cost estimates. It's already slipped to ~$27.5k due to the expiration of the EV tax credit. In practice, whenever a car says "starting at $xx it's usually impossible to find that model and you can only get the midrange models which are $5-$10k more than the base price.
[edit]
Interestingly as well, the Slate sidesteps the towing problem by refusing to attempt to tow. It's rated to tow 1,000 lbs, which is effectively nothing. It's still got a respectable payload, though, so it does work as a truck.
Are these problems exclusive to EVs?
I predict that EV trucks with a range extender will do very well in the US, and will be the catalyst behind the move to electric trucks. Once people get the experience of an electric truck they will love it, but the option to dump in gasoline and drive 400 miles without charging is an imaginary barrier that stops most customers from giving it a shot.
Personally, I would love to see an electric truck that can be charged while driving by an external generator, possible mounted to a trailer.
My household is a newer hybrid Ford Maverick and an older ICE Impreza (that gets worse fuel economy than the Maverick) - if we were replacing the Impreza today we'd probably go for a 2026 Leaf or a used Chevy Bolt.
or you just felt that those needed to be two separate posts?
A HUUUUUGE number of motorcycles never go more than 50-75 miles in a day. CycleTrader is awash with 3,4,and 5 year old bikes that have barely been ridden. A 100 mile range electric bike (e.g., the Harley Livewire) would 100% fill those needs.
But people think they're gonna go on long trips, or whatever, or ride more, and they scoff at a bike you can't ride all day even though they'll never actually ride a bike all day.
Do some motorcycle owners commute on their bikes? Of course, but that’s clearly the minority of the market. The reason cycle trader is full of low mileage bikes is that the whole activity is kind of a pain in the ass when you think about it. Add charging to that and it’s just too much to bear.
Pleasure riders often ride on nice sunny sundays in groups to ruralish areas where it’s scenic and the roads are winding with few traffic lights etc. they need to be able to “gas up” a significant number of bikes quickly. And that shit is a pain to organize so they do it like twice a year. Hence the low mileage.
Electric motorcycles really are a super hard sell. The stark varg makes way more sense cause that’s a type of motorcycle that gets carried to the destination most of the time anyway. So the range thing is way less of an issue and the upsides stand out way more. That’s probably why I see way, way more Vargs or bikes like them than live wires.
He's in his mid-80s with prostate problems. He has never taken the trip.
on the plus side you stand to inherit a fairly lightly used truck in a few years
IF you do this even once a year you don't really have any other option. Finding a rental truck that allows you to tow is hard. The vast majority won't allow it. When you do find one it is generally in an inconvenient location and very expensive. I can justify keeping my truck (long paid for) just because just 2 trips a year need a truck and so it is cheaper overall to just own the truck (tax and insurance is low) than to rent.
But I wouldn't buy one for the same reason I won't buy an ICE truck right now: They are way too overpriced — costing around 300% more than the truck I currently have cost when it was new, even though inflation is only 40% over the same period.
The charger station situation will probably need to be figured out however.
- Not amazing at hauling people
- Only OK payload
- Not the best gas mileage
- Too expensive (but still cheaper than other midsize trucks -- $36k)
With how much everything costs this truck really _had_ to be a compromise. It had to be able to do everything. I'd have much rather had an old crappy truck and then a normal family car, but those seem to have all been priced out.
Deleted Comment
I'm 35, don't own a vehicle, and have never owned a vehicle. I live in SF. I think I'm finally getting to the point in my life where, maybe, I want a vehicle. I'd use it to take myself to camping music festivals and Burning Man. That's about it. Oh, I'm sure I'd find other uses for it, helping friends haul stuff, etc... but, practically speaking, most of my needs are consistently addressed by public transit and/or Waymo.
I guess what I'm trying to say is - literally the only time I feel like I'm missing out on a vehicle is when I have a need to transport a large amount of stuff a large amount of miles into desolate environments.
Does that mean my desire for a truck is imaginary/aspirational because, if I were to own it, 99% of the time I'd be content with a low range battery? I can see why people would think that, but, to me, it seems more like the 1% is the rationale for owning the vehicle.
Also, you must understand that your use case here isn't even remotely the norm.
It’s embarassing that https://www.ford.com/cars/fusion/ has a link to “explore all sedan vehicles” that dumps you right into the exciting selection of SUVs.
Ford also makes parts for Mazda and is letting them expand in that field. If you want a Ford Sedan then get a Mazda 3
edit: actually that's not true anymore, glad I checked.
but the Mazda 3 is a pretty solid replacement for a Fusion or Focus
They pulled back out of the EU and other markets like South America and BYD opened up an assembly plant in Brazil.
Turn back the clock and Ford ruled the EU with saloons like the Escort, Mondeo and later the Focus - they were caught unawares with shift to compact SUV's and had the popular Ecosport but never invested in the product line and it was left to wither and die.
They are teaming up with Renault to use their EV platform to maintain a token presence in the EU but consumers today are smarter and more informed and will not buy badge engineered Fords.
That’s all you have to do. But so many companies resort to financial games and short term business gimmicks rather than believing that they can make the best products and putting focus and drive into that goal (not just money!)
Stellantis can make great products but for the most part they just won’t. They actively refuse to. Same deal with Ford.
GM is doing well with EVs because they actually make good products. The Silverado EV is the best EV truck on the market, Cadillac makes the best luxury EVs on the market[1], and the Honda Prologue (made by GM) is a sales star because it’s a good product that knows its market. Even the Chevy Trax is a great product because of the sheer impossibility of its value proposition: nobody can compete with the amount of things that vehicle gives you for the price.
Ford half-assed their sedans and bowed out of that market and now their supposed focus on SUVs is not good enough because none of their SUVs, gas or electric or hybrid, give you any reason to buy them. They are half-assing all their vehicles until they reach their inevitable demise.
Why is anyone buying an Expedition over a Telluride, Grand Highlander, or Chevy Suburban derivative?
Why is anyone buying an Explorer over a RAV4, CRV, etc.
The only thing Ford makes that’s any good is the F-150, Maverick, Bronco and Mustang (very niche). This means they have basically zero cars to sell outside the US.
[1] Yes, better than Tesla and Lucid: more luxurious and isolated with better interior materials, fewer reliability problems, better ergonomics and physical controls, stronger dealer and service network.
This should not be construed as "EVs are dying" but as I keep saying, EVs are going thru the same cycle that Hybrid ICE went thru 15 years ago.
Assuming a 0 to 100% EV transition would happen globally in a handful of years is dumb. Heck, even Chinese automotive manufacturers primarily export ICE vehicles globally [3]. The transition will happen both slower than EV fundamentalists and faster than ICE fundamentalists assume.
[0] - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/global...
[1] - https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-tightens-rare-eart...
[2] - https://www.spglobal.com/automotive-insights/en/blogs/2025/1...
[3] - https://www.reuters.com/investigations/china-floods-world-wi...
What? Global EV sales are up 21% in 2025. Maybe lightning sales are down, but not overall EV sales.
The issue is, that rate of growth globally is not enough to sustain the capex spent on building EV manufacturing capacity in 2019-24.
Much of that growth was itself due to China, where EV sales growth is starting to taper down making the financials difficult [0].
Growth alone is not enough - what matters is margins. If the rate of growth cannot sustain COGS, then production is right-sized.
Heck, even back in China a major reason BYD has been so successful is because it was able to subsidize it's initial foray into EV vehicles by becoming the primary smartphone battery vendor for Apple, Samsung, and other vendors in the 2000s.
Traditional automotive majors lacked similarly high margins businesses to help cushion the upfront cost of building out capacity.
This isn't to say EVs are "dead", but the transition will not happen overnight. It took Hybrid cars 10-15 years to go mainstream, and imo EVs today are in the same position where Hybrid cars were in the 2013-16 period.
A lot of shifts are happening in battery chemistry (eg. solid state battery manufacturing capex becoming mainstream) along with component manufacturing (eg. Capex for mass producing EESMs). I remain optimistic, but the histrionics some EV fanatics make is equally as grating/annoying as ICE fanatics.
[0] - https://www.eiu.com/n/blogs/auto-2026-outlook/
Soybean car https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soybean_car
Were they corrupted by oil and war to sell it?
0. https://www.topgear.com/car-news/video/everything-you-need-k...
The Chevy Silverado EV truck wins at towing but not being towed, FWIU.
They could have won with a bad EV platform to have just used the existing F-150 part streams.
Did GM intentionally or accidentally squander EVs with the EV1?
How could firms encourage EV conversions of trucks in order to get this solved?