balthazar

It'll break down to see the specific numbers. Frankly, being in the industry, I think the marketing push to show the truck as a 'power outlet' is over-wrought; people aren't doing so now and getting their jobs all done. But for those that suddenly are going to switch back to all corded tools against the tide of cordless... they would then be relying on their truck's motor for BOTH transportation and a day's worth of power draws. I doubt that'll ever be widely practical, and I don't see anyone 'downgrading' their tools just to plug into their pickup. Range degradation is going to be a new, key factor for BE trucks, one that isn't nearly as significant as in BE cars/SUVs... that never carry the payload a truck does.

I think it's fairly obvious that many limited / special / high end vehicles will have some collectibility. I believe the obsolete nature of many of their electronic systems will severely limit that vs. vintage autos, tho. My question is; will any BE vehicles today ever become appreciating collectibles?

24 MPG over 10K miles = 416 gal. At 3.09 = $1285 in fuel. I just saved myself $500! But it sure would be interesting to see a typical Lightning work day: fully charged, drive a half hour, load the frunk with 400 lbs of concrete mix, drive a half hour to the job site, run saws & other power equipment for 8 hours, drive 45 mins home. It’s got a lot less to do with the miles than it does with the kW draw. Turbo diesels don’t see nearly the same variation in usage demand, plus any electric draw (I do have a 110 V outlet in the bed) is immaterial; my battery is fully charged on the ride home.

Diesel in NJ right now runs about .30 cheaper/ gal than by you. And as I stated, I expect to settle in at more like 24 MPG. Some controlled testing has shown this engine getting 30 & 32 on highway trips. ? Both those factors will significantly drop your numbers. And seeing you use artificially low / partial tank/ pre-broken in MPG, what is your similar ‘adjustment’ to reduced range on the Lightning, due to weather or load or especially; running power equipment from this new ‘jobsite’ truck?? That ‘perfect unloaded world’ 300 may drop by more than half in actual use as portrayed by Ford marketing. Ford’s recent quality issues, plus the lack of a 6.5’ bed, ruled them out. Plus, I’m simply not interested in an electric vehicle. ? Oh, and electric in NJ is 13.42 cents/kW.

24 gal tank X rated highway MPG of 26. I do about 9500-10,000 miles usually.

I took delivery of the GMC with 110 miles on it. No doubt, it spent some time idling around the body shop, the dealer, etc... plus transport mileage. Anyhoo- then the 400-mile MPG window stated an average of 16.4 MPG. Miles have now doubled to 220, MPG is up to 18.8. Maintaining 65 on level highway, turning about 1250 RPM, instant average MPG hovers around 35. I don't do much highway miles but expect to settle around 22, and that's already 'gravy'. Of course- powertrain is still breaking in. BTW- tho I got it with a 'full' tank, I cannot verify as to the actual fuel level when I started driving it or how many miles was already on it when fueled. Anyway; I myself put 110 miles on it, and it reads I have another 398 miles of range left- that's 508. Calculated max range is 624 miles, so that's probably with no topping off (220 + 398 = 618 miles). Pretty awesome range- I should only be 'charging' my truck once every 20 days.

Just completed 3rd service visit here at Rancho Balthy on my buddy's '02 Infiniti QX4- replacing both front rotors / pads. 2nd visit was because LF wheel was getting overly hot, had to be either the caliper going bad or the bearings. Turns out the new pad backings' were a bit too long and binding- one pad was stuck at an angle. Has to grind the end tabs of the pads. 'New parts'. 3rd visit we replaced there bearings & seal on that side, wheel seems to rotate the same as the other side WRT resistance now (nissan has the front half-shafts and the transfer case engaged even if in RWD (has automatic 4WD drive), so it's constantly rotating a large mass of components- part of the reason is gets 15 MPG). Hopefully done now- I hate working on modern junk.

Very similar but up slightly in all dimensions: wheelbase is biggest jump; up 4” to 157”.

Reminder : that’s a 2500HD to the left, and a 1500 to the right.

I would've thought that would mean you could read thru that sort of fluff & misdirection.

To recap the timeline: signed numberless order form on 12/23/20, truck was delivered 4/29/21, couple things happened and I took delivery 5/20/21 : 21 weeks later. Whew.

Dealer had it so long the plates came in. i think I’ve only driven it 4-5 miles at this moment. So far, so good!

The Eagle has landed.

^ I would say I see roughly a 50/50 mix by me.

MAN!! is press release copywriting money well spent on you!! ?

Salesdude called today; truck is ready. Drove by this evening but didn't see it out; I'll bet they got it entombed for safety. Will dance tomorrow, see what I can get out of them.

Very sorry to hear. Hope you somehow find healing & peace.

I see Canoo is under a full SEC investigation...

Original Hummer H1 payload was 2200-2450 lbs. This is HUGELY disappointing to me; not that I was remotely considering getting one, but with the lofty HP/TRQ figures being splattered around, payload should've INCREASED, never mind stayed the same, NEVERMIND GET HALVED. Rivian R1T payload is still well down from IC at 1750 lbs, but that's still 400 lbs more than the Hummer. WTH.

The full-size 1,000 HP Hummer super truck has the same payload rating as a 260 HP Jeep Wrangler. Put 4 adults in the Hummer at 225 lbs each and you can only load in 450 more pounds of 'adventure gear'. Put 5 225 lbs adults in there and you can only carry another 225 lbs. Better get ice at your destination. Frunk is immaterial- you can't pack it & the bed without going over the GVWR. It's a monstrous Corvette. This is ANOTHER significant, unspoken aspect of the move to super-heavy BE's. Crash ratings are done according to vehicle weight classes- a sub compact with a 5 start frontal rating is measured against other sub-compacts; it's not going to 'perform' at a 5-star level against an F-250 crew cab. Now stage that impact with an F-250 weighing 2500 lbs MORE.

The black one is the Feds; the new 'black helicopter'.

Hmmm, GN was all Buick, but ASC/McLaren Performance were involved with upgrading the GN into the GNX. That's how they were all dyno'd; that didn't happen at Flint Assembly.

Restored bits collection keeps growing:

^ Interesting that 1 turbo replaced 3 camshafts, 2 cylinders and 110 CI - (every GNX was dyno-tested at ASC and averaged 350 HP.). Tho it's numbers are respectable (if slower), the MB is a bland, dumpy 4-door.

Some people appreciate learning new nuances about a subject they enjoy. You know; like about an '80-81 Pontiac Rallye IV rim. ?