[pbmonster]

That's probably a quick way to do it, but considering that using a miller cycle means we're going to want the turbo version of the engine, that alone is going to cost like $4k on Fords end. Add a 100kW+ generator with the power electronics to charge while driving, fuel system, exhaust system and cooling system, and we're probably approaching $10k upcharge for the customer.

Gotta remove a whole lot of batteries from that car to make it cost competitive again. Realistically, with an engine this powerful, we can probably cut down to like 30kWh of total battery capacity, which gets us back to where we started financially. And 30 kWh is enough to drive 70 miles all electric, which should pretty much should cover most daily use for people who charge at home.

Now, the questions if we can do that cheaper with a much smaller engine. Ford has a 1 liter inline 3 in the Fiesta and Focus that makes half as much power. Should be enough...

[rootusrootus]

The dreamers amongst us have noted that Ford has a patent (at least an application for one, I don't recall if it was granted) for putting an EREV generator under the bed near the back of the truck. Since it can be a smaller engine and does not require an attachment to the drivetrain, maybe this is feasible.

If they did that, it would remove one of my reasons for not being too interested in the Lightning EREV -- the anticipated loss of the frunk. It still introduces a bunch of mechanical bits and associated maintenance requirements, that is unavoidable, along with a substantial increase in cost.

I bought my Lightning with the intent of keeping it 7-8 years, and it meets my needs very well, so this is mostly just navel gazing for me. The EREV version would have more range that I would rarely benefit from, and be substantially less powerful, which is also a negative from my perspective, in addition to costing a bunch more. My current truck is by far my favorite so far. I hope when I'm finally ready to try something new, there are better options. It's a high bar.