⚡ Ford Lightning Forum ⚡ banner

Commuter Review

1719 Views 11 Replies 6 Participants Last post by  twooaksdesign
I just wanted to throw up some pictures I took today. Took delivery on Saturday the 16th and today was the first day I drove it into work. Overall I was surprised by my usage this is because I didn't drive conservatively. I didn't pick the speed I normally do but I did 80mph on the highway. There is about a static 200 ft of elevation with my job and that can go up to maybe 400 or more at certain parts of the drive. To work is mostly downhill, from is mostly uphill.

  • I started the day at 80% @ 250miles estimated. (over the weekend I stayed in town and maybe 60/40 city to highway driving)
  • On the highway I started off by blowing around a model 3 and setting the ACC to 80.
  • About a couple miles down the road my usage was 1.9 mi/kWh.
  • After the main highway, I was on a smaller highway averaging 65-70 mph.
  • I got to work at 43 miles, 45 mins, 2.2 mi/kWh, 202 miles estimated, 66%
Communication Device Gadget Font Mobile device Display device

  • I started out doing about 75-80 mph.
  • After getting back on the smaller highway after getting off a major for about 1 mile, I noticed my mi/kWh was 1.8
  • I locked in 75mph
  • Back on the main highway I locked in around 75 and increased to 80 later.
  • Got home at 44.5 miles (I come back on a different back road so I don't sit at the light coming off the highway), 1.9 mi/kWh, 49 minutes. 136 miles estimated and 46% remaining.
Tire Car Vehicle Wheel Automotive design

So 14% down and 20% up which is roughly what I'd see in the Mach E as well. Winter driving in the Mach E I saw maybe up to an additional 5%, more so on the way back than down. (The percentage comparisons aren't the same, I think it is about 20% down and 25% back in the Mach E - Standard Battery). Maybe Friday I will drive conservatively to see if I can get above 2 on the drive back.

Driving was great and comfortable. Loved the windows down arm hanging on the door, great adjustable seating. I think I do need to move the pedals back just a bit. I wish the vehicle images were color matched :(

It is plugged in and charging to 80 with an estimated range of 231 which comes to 2.2 mi/kWh. This morning it would have been 2.3 mi/kWh.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 3
1 - 2 of 12 Posts
Those efficiency numbers are in line with how gas cars vs trucks compare.
My Tesla model 3 typically does 300 Wh/mi (that’s the old way of displaying it) which translates to 3.3 mi/kWh.
My gas F-150 gets about 16 mpg, and my gas car gets about 25 mpg.
So there is a 1.5x factor between “car” and “truck” no matter what your propulsion system is. I assume it all comes down to aerodynamics.
I don’t think the mi/kWh figures will improve dramatically in the future. What will certainly improve is battery density. So we’ll be able to carry a much higher charge as batteries improve. But that will start hitting the limitations of the grid, house circuitry, as well as the utility bill. Solar is going to become more widespread.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
I must be old school because displaying Wh/mi makes the most sense to me. It's an accurate, easy-to-understand efficiency figure. It's not hard to do rough conversion math in my head, but I'd prefer the seeing it displayed as an option.
I also prefer it.
1 - 2 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.