Bill Ford Hints At Future Pure Electric Ford F-150


Hmm … will it truly come to be? Perhaps, but it won’t be this Rivian electric truck disguised as an F-150.

We’ll be more than honest to say that we don’t have too much to go on here. Additionally, this has all been talked about before, not unlike a Chevrolet Silverado PHEV, not to mention the upcoming highly capable, 400-horsepower, all-electric pickup truck from Rivian Automotive (which will make its debut at the Los Angeles Auto Show soon, and we’ll be on hand soon for the pre-premiere in Michigan). There’s also lots of talk about the Tesla pickup truck (which we’re confident will come at some point down the road).

Now, with those interesting disclaimers out of the way, let’s just say that as Ford transitions to primarily pickup trucks and SUVs, a hybrid pickup truck is reportedly coming soon (2020 though, and we truly hope it’s not another of the 48-volt mild-hybrid variety). Moreover, a Ford all-electric pickup truck is surely a possibility around the same time, at least according to information that Green Car Congress recently gleaned.

Bill Ford recently spoke at the Ford Rouge facility in Dearborn, Michigan for a 100th-anniversary celebration. He confirmed that the famed Rouge plant will surely build the 2020 Ford F-150 Hybrid. Keep in mind that this may be built in 2020, but the plans are actually for a 2021 model. More interestingly, he teased the potential for an all-electric F-150. Ford shared (via Green Car Congress):

[The 2020 Ford F-150 Hybrid is] going to be a truck that takes you farther without sacrificing power and a truck that helps you do more when you get there, with electricity for everything from your tools to your camping gear.

And then we’ll keep innovating. When it comes to building the best trucks in the world, we never rest. Whether they’re gas, diesel, hybrid—or when the time comes, fully electric—we will ensure they power the world in a sustainable way and remain Built Ford Tough.

Source: Green Car Congress

Categories: Ford

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

95 Comments on "Bill Ford Hints At Future Pure Electric Ford F-150"

newest oldest most voted

I will see your “At some point down the road,” and raise you a “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”

“Time will tell.”

“It’s never too late.”

Perpetually “three years from now”.

“When a pro-EPA President appears in the White House.”

From a very selfish standpoint, I really, really want lots of 48V PHEVs to be sold.

My 48V based cottage solar system would love a good supply of used batteries 😉

PHEVs? Mild hybrids don’t get a plug… They can’t drive on electricity alone, not even briefly.

When looking at the “off roading” article, it’s clear that the truck shown there is way more integrated than the one shown here. Almost too integrated for a platform mule. And it has a different suspension architecture.
I’d say there is a non-zero probability that Ford may be considering a supply deal with Rivian.

I saw the article interesting, from the standpoint of Workhorse. They were using Ford bodies (I think) for their W-15, before its deliveries to SCPPA and Duke fell off the map. That left behind a dangling “Why?” Here comes the rampant speculation, but is it possible Ford wasn’t providing bodies because it is accelerating plans for its own (~60KWh) PHEV?

I’m actually more interested in the PHEV, than the EV, and have no question it will do more for the environment. It will sell in greater numbers. No?


1. No. I don’t understand why we keep seeing suggestions that an EV startup would approach an auto maker for gliders just to build a few test mules. It is cheaper to buy salvaged vehicles with broken engines or the like, and that wouldn’t tip off the auto maker about their plans. That’s why auto maker startups never buy gliders to use as test mules.

2. No. PHEVs are only a transitional tech, whose only value is to extend the range of an all-electric car beyond its battery-powered range. As batteries continue to come down in price and the range of BEVs continues to increase, the market for PHEVs will gradually dwindle away to, at best, only a tiny niche market. It may even disappear entirely.

It’s charging or Iced the spot?

Who will Ford contract to build and manufacture a massive battery supply, to actually make these potentially future EV F-150s?


We’ll see what ‘s Tesla battery capacity in 2020.

Solid state batteries.

Or Graphene

Ford’s minces words while other companies move product development forward.

“Whether they’re gas, diesel, hybrid—or when the time comes, fully electric—we will ensure they power the world in a sustainable way and remain Built Ford Tough.”

Hi Bill, how are gas trucks sustainable?

Profits trump sustainability, in the near term, especially in Fords successful and highly profitable ICE F-series truck segment.

Ford is Forward thinking, in competing in a profitable EV Future?

Not so much.

Practicality is also important. So far there’s no evidence that anyone can build a proper EV pickup truck with today’s technology that has the same performance and near same price as a gas version. From initial reports not even Rivian is going to do so, although they may be reasonable for some people who buy compact or midsize. Probably a reason why the Tesla Pickup is unlikely to be around until at least 2023.

And no 0-60 and “torque” are way down the list of performance requirements for a truck.

I agree though that this sounds more like a “at some point down the road option, not something coming out in the next couple of years.

Torque is pretty high up the list, really–that’s a big part of why diesel trucks exist.
And performance wise, it’s already easily possible to build an all-electric truck today that can match or beat internal combustion trucks in every way. The sticking point is cost: Trucks aren’t all that aerodynamic, and towing drags down efficiency further. EV trucks will need lots and lots of batteries, and right now those are expensive. But with battery costs plummeting, it’s only a matter of time.

There’s a difference between just a torque number and actual usable torque, hence my use of “”. It’s all very well having huge torque numbers but it’s pretty irrelevant if the towing capacity is still the same based on other factors. Having 1000ft/lb of torque is not really going to make much difference in the real world to a diesel having 450ft/lb of torque if the towing capacity is 12,000lb, based on other factors, just as acceleration becomes a point of diminishing returns past a certain point (i.e. a 4 second 0-60 is better than the 5.5-6 seconds of current ICE trucks, but in the real world that benefit is way down on the list of requirements). And yes, it’s easily possibly if you then affix a lot of caveats, which is the point I’m making. Currently you either need to severely compromise range or increase the GVWR way past current half ton trucks, the power density of batteries is just too low at this point in time. Build me a Crew cab 1500 series truck (so 7000-7500lb GVWR) with a towing capacity of around 10,000lb, hauling capacity of 1,500-2000lb with a range of around 600 miles, or 400 miles… Read more »

torque in an ICE engine is radically different than torque in an electric motor.
Basically, torque on electric IS the same in the lower 3/4 of the speed range.
As to towing capacity, that is based on the frame combined with … wait for it… TORQUE FROM A MOTOR.

The EV truck will outdo a diesel/gas truck in terms of performance, as well as costs.
The ONLY place that it will lose is range. These trucks will probably get 400 MPC, without a trailer.
And you do not need 600 MPC with a trailer.

Yes, I understand how torque is different between an EV and an non EV (well, a diesel, a turbo gas and a NA engine, they all have different torque characteristics), HOWEVER it’s pretty irrelevant to the point being made. Torque in modern trucks is not the limiting factor for towing. Tongue weight, axle strength, brakes and a myriad of other factors usually are. The increase in torque from say a V6 twin turbo or a diesel to a BEV may be significant, but from a practicality standpoint it’s minimal. Yes, it’s great when playing performance top trumps, or on the drag strip, just like those 0-60 figures that are constantly banded around, but from a real world perspective it means little. You’re obviously not understanding this and seem to be fixated on the raw numbers from your comment above? Now lets go back to the comment at hand, great, you have 1000 ft/lb of torque, but you have so much battery weight that you only have 800lb of tongue weight. So your 1000ft/lb monster can tow a trailer of around 6000-8000lb, instead of the 12,000lb load that 3.5 Ecoboost can. Oops. That’s one example of the myriad of factors that… Read more »

Andy is talking. Do not confuse him with facts.

Here you go, I found the perfect gift for you.

It goes well with you “facts”. 😉

They could build a perfectly capable F-150 Pick up for $200K right now.

really? Torque is not important to a truck owner.
Ok, what exactly do you think are the ‘performance requirements for a truck’?

Towing capacity and hauling capacity are the two big ones, and additional torque is not going to change that much in something like an F-150 where the limits are also related to tongue weight, axle and tyre rating and brakes to name a few. All those will be heavily affected by the significant increase in weight of an EV powertrain in a 1500 sized pickup with a reasonable range. Yes, pickups with 200 miles of range will sell (and probably quite well to some fleets), but they certainly aren’t going to sell well with the general public/smaller companies that need to rely on one or two vehicles. I’ll give you a real world scenario. I have a 5.0 V8 F-150 – why did I buy it? Because it had the largest hauling capacity and it would be able to do 400+ miles without the requirement to refuel for a competitive price. Others I know bought their trucks to tow large trailers several hundred miles. If someone came out with a 1500 sized truck crew/extended cab with a 6.5′ bed and a range of 300 miles (in -30c, so summer range of around 600 miles), haul capacity of close to 2000lb… Read more »

And to drive the point home with actual facts, have a look at Fords F-150 brochure.

Now pay particular attention to the towing section. The new diesel engine should be a great tower, with all that low end torque compared to both the 5.0 V8 and the 3.5 turbo Ecoboost? Wrong. The problem is it’s a heavier engine, which means the dry weight of the truck is higher, which means the payload and towing capacity are reduced. Weight/Torque and payload/towing are compromises, trucks, especially the 1500 series are compromises between all of them – just increasing torque doesn’t mean you increase payload/towing capacity if you increase the weight of the drivetrain at the same time.

Not Necessarily true. The 3.0 Powerstroke diesel only ways 40 lbs more than the 3.5L Ecoboost. The Ecoboost however has a different powerband and generates more torque.

He means sustainable profits for Ford, at the expense of the world.

You can make a carbon-neutral closed loop system if you’re producing your gas by extracting carbon from the air and mixing it with water (obviously way more complicated than that.) Then gas can be thought of more as a battery – a place to store energy – rather than an energy source.

Not saying this should be done – it’s a lot less energy efficient than just using a normal battery – but it is a way of making it sustainable.

Gasoline no, but a B100 diesel would qualify as sustainable.

Unlikely. According to many (most?) estimations, growing dedicated oil crops is actually worse than burning fossils.

Semantics issue. When he says “in a sustainable way” he means “in a way that lets Ford stay in business”.

There are many, many decades of oil in the ground. It will never actually run out; it will eventually get prohibitively expensive for various uses at various price points.

It still burns, and our atmosphere really can’t absorb increasing pollution levels without consequences (and I leave the details to debate).

As exciting as I think the Model III is globally, an all-electric pickup truck, by any badge, will change the consumer market dramatically in N. America. When I see an all-electric for sale in Minnesota or driven around by a non-employee, non-fleet owner, I will need to find the superlative of excited. Fortunately for that, I have a few years to ponder my choice of words.

There’s really less than meets the eye here.

Just as IEVs makes the continual mistake of calling 100% Hydrogen Powered vehicles Electric Cars, they’re making the same mistake here: A HYBRID is a 100% ICE powered vehicle. In case the author needs a refresher as to what these vehicles are, there was a good article on hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and battery electrics in a recent article here.

Motors may take some of the interim momentum of the vehicles, but all the power eventually comes from fuel.

The fact that there will be “Plenty of Electricity for Tools or Camping” could be done by ANY totally ICE vehicle today with an inverter running off the 12 volt battery. When it is low, the engine is restarted to recharge it and prevents getting stranded.

Pretty sure he’s referring a PHEV hybrid, they’ve had that tech for quite a while and it works well. It’s common to refer to them as hybrids and drop the “plug-in” part of the acronym. Example: Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid.

Not quite. I have a 12V inverter on my F-150 and it’s good for laptops and recharging power tool batteries (Fords example). Ford are touting the hybrid (PHEV or not) as being able to run circular saws and other high wattage equipment. It’s a step up from what we have today, even if it’s not a PHEV (which lets still hope it is).

I’m still hoping for a PHEV with 50 miles of EV range for the same price and overall weight as the Diesel (comparable to the 3.5 Ecoboost would be better, but that’s even less realistic).

The hybrid is in fact a PHEV. I had a lengthy discussion with the marketing folks at a car show early this year.
They wouldn’t give up much in the way of details but they did say that
it is not a fuel economy play (although it may reduce fuel consumption)
it is about providing off grid power for camping, job sites etc. they did not confirm directly but smiled when I asked if it will offer 240V / 30A output for a welder. So that puts the output at about 7.2KW

Lets hope so, there’s been a lot of rumors recently that it is going to be a non plug in. Hopefully they’re wrong.

They have already announced the Lincoln Aviator SUV will be a PHEV with a 6 cyl and 30isn miles of EV range. It would make no sense for Ford to not use that in other vehicles of similar size like the F150.

I believe it’s a Plug-in too.
Anyone remember the Version 2.0 of the Ford Escape, that was never actually released?
It was heavily road tested and ready to go.
But, someone killed production.

Welders (with the exception of the brand new, expensive solid-state ones) are very non-sinusoidal loads, and they’re somewhat inductive to boot. A 240 volt welder with a 30 ampere plug on the end does not draw 7200 watts, although the apparent power may be this high. The vehicle only has to come up with the REAL power, since the DC LINK guarantees it.

PBS Expert Carpenter Norm Abram states the highest quality 2 HP (may run on 120 volts) cabinet grade table saws may not accelerate quickly, and larger rip jobs may require a slow hand, but they can do accurate, quality work ( one doesn’t necessarily absolutely HAVE to have 5 HP while doing field work), and if extreme precision is not required the ‘contractor saws’ on most job sites average 1800 watts.

Andy you talk as though your experience with inverters is limited to the 80 watt things they sell in the check out aisle next to “People” magazine.

Harbor “Junk” Freight Tools sells pretty good 2000/4000 watt inverters for $130 that are actually pretty good that I use for my home backup power. Haven’t tried it, but I’d expect their 5000/10000 watt inverter to actually be quite well behaved. I have ALL the smaller sizes and they work as advertised. The larger one will run ANY 120 volt power tool from ‘cabinet shop’ grade table saws and radial arm and chop saws, to lawn shredders and all but the biggest welders.

As for an ICE coming up with sufficient power, they have standard 150 amp and with any towing package you get 250 ampere alternators, and 450 ampere ones for police interceptors are commonplace.

As far as “HYBRID” goes, I would think they’d specify if they are doing a PLUG-IN.

Suppose they wanted to bring out a ‘REAL HYBRID’ such as the next Mustang was supposed to be? If the big-experts here think that means PHEV, what terminology do you suggest they use? Non-electric-electric? Non-Plug-In-Hybrid?

I believe the inverter in the F-150 is 400W. It was more a commentary on battery capacity than anything else. I don’t believe standard car batteries (even larger ones in trucks) will be able to run, more powerful tools for very long, even if they can provide the necessary power to do so. Could be wrong though.

While I agree with the sentiment in general, I don’t actually see anything in this article suggesting that a plug-less hybrid would be considered an EV?…

Yes, anything to keep more oil being burned.

I am normally pro-BEV only, but I really think that PHEV is the sweet spot for many pickups.

If you are towing, for example, that takes massive amounts of energy. No way around that. Makes it difficult to use a BEV truck in such a case and get the long range customers expect. PHEV would offer a no compromise solution to customers that have that use case. 95% of the time they are on EV power, as many of them commute in their trucks, and it still does all the long range hauling stuff they expect.

The truck customer is different, and I think PHEV is the best way to introduce them to the wonderful world of driving EV.

Yeah, I agree that with current tech, a PHEV pickup would be a lot more practical and/or affordable than a BEV pickup. That is, assuming they want to build a practical workman’s truck, and not an “urban cowboy” truck that’s just for show, never used for hauling heavy loads or towing.

Hopefully Workhorse’s W-15 PHEV pickup will debut next year. Tesla’s BEV pickup… probably not for another 2-4 years.

I totally believe him. It just won’t be called F150, but simply “truck”, and will look awesome.

Oh, and it will be manufactured by Tesla.

Tesla has to release the Y first, the Ford 150 PHEV would be out years before Tesla could get around to it. Although we all know it would be awesome,expensive,but awesome.

It could happen today if automakers would start intoducing economy of scale by actually manufacturing batteries in any appreciable amount.

Since batteries are still too expensive an electric F150 built today would be $100,000.

The the handwave, when the time is right. It could be 10 years before batterie’s are cheap and light enough for a full sized pickup. In the interim an EREV done right gives you 90% of what a pure EV does.

Show your work please. How do you get to $100,000? What is the base price, without battery, of an F-150 EV? How many kWhs of battery do you assume it would need? What price will Ford pay for batteries per kWh?

Rivian say their (possibly Ridgeline/Colorado sized, perhaps why they used such a short bodied F-150 on their mule) pickup will cost around $90,000 for a 180kWh battery with around 450 miles of range. So a larger pickup like the full sized F-150 could easily be in the range of $100k for something comparable to a standard F150 Crewcab XLT, which comes in at around $35-40k. Worth bearing in mind that any EV’s currently available with anywhere near 100kWh of battery (the S, X, iPace, E-Tron) are not far off, or more than $100k. A 200-300kWh battery is going to cost $30-40k alone assuming $130 at the pack level (based on Tesla’s price and the usual assumption that other manufacturers would be paying more). The 5.0 and 10 speed transmission in an F-150 retails at around $7k, so ford probably pay <$5k for both and probably make somewhere in the region of $10k profit on each F-150, so that comes in at around $25k for the body of the XLT Crew sans drivetrain. Add the batteries and motors to that price and you're looking at around $70-75k cost to Ford, which with 20% profit margin leads to a retail price of… Read more »

That subculture you are looking for is called “businesses” who will look at the bottom line.

When an EV pickup comes that will save them money in TCO, they will buy them in droves just like the Tesla Semi.

Assume you meant to reply to the comment below?

Agreed though. Style is subjective, and irrelevant to TCO so a pickup with better aerodynamics will sell well for those. Those that really prefer the boxy shape will probably be the last to swap over anyway as they’ll most likely be the ones requiring their V8 be pried from their cold, dead fingers.

“Progress happens one funeral at a time.”


I still think pure electric is just not a good idea for these big boxy trucks. They will either cost $100K+ plus or they’ll have terrible range.

They need to either go with PHEV or redesign some trucks to actually be aerodynamically somehow. The latter will require a culture shift in attitude among a crowd that still wants to burn coal, so that’s gonna be tough. But I’m sure there is a sub-market of folks looking forward to an aerodynamic pick-up. Start building them and people will adapt.

There are two big aerodynamic drags on a pickup – the boxy front, which could be modified to be more aerodynamic styling, but the second big aerodynamic kicker is the flat back of the cab and the tailgate. The only real way of getting rid of that is to get rid of the bed – the bit that makes it a pickup.

I’m all for aerodynamics, it’ll create a quieter ride as well, but unfortunately pickups are, by their very nature, unaerodynamic.

And(y)….they said the same thing about the Semi until Tesla proved it could be both Aerodynamic and efficiently haul loads.

Still doesn’t mean that a pickup is not less aerodynamic by it’s very nature than other vehicles on the road. It’s never going to get to the same aerodynamic efficiency as a Model X for example unless you curve the rear end more and turn it into an SUV.

I agree that Tesla’s pickup will almost certainly have higher drag than the Model X, but that doesn’t mean Tesla can’t improve aero drag significantly over, for example, the Ford F-150.

It wouldn’t be hard. Domestic pickups are about the least aerodynamic vehicles on the road! Just look at the ROTW pickups as an example.

Considering the scale of a semi vs a pickup truck, a Semi is vastly more aerodynamic than a pickup. Afterall, the more efficient a semi is, the more profitable it is for its owner/operator.

Pickup drivers only ask that their trucks looks menacing. No one buys one pickup truck over another because of its mpg.

Tesla has proved very little with their semi efforts, even industry leaders Daimler are only beginning in EV semis.


That’s thinking inside the box.Tesla has definitely shown it can think outside the box for reducing aero drag, as it’s already demonstrated with the Tesla Semi Truck prototypes.

I expect similar innovations with their Pickup. Who says the rear has to be flat, and who says the pickup can’t come with a roll-up tonneau cover as standard equipment?

The rear not being flat would cause havoc for a lot of uses. A toneau cover as standard equipment wouldn’t be ideal for all those that use after market equipment, which is why tonneau covers are usually aftermarket products. They’re pretty cheap too so there’s no real excuse not to have one.

Rivian pickup starts at $50k

For a 200 mile range in what may well be something more akin to a Ranger/Colorado/Ridgeline sized vehicle.

Mazda working on a Range Extender engine, like the BMW i3 REX.
Could be used in this application too.

If it’s an electric powertrain, who GAF what size the vehicle is? If it’s the size of a Ranger but can tow 50,000 lbs. (obvious exaggeration), who cares? That’s the thing about the electric powertrain… it’s a lot smaller and won’t require such large, hulking behemoths on the road.

The powertrain is one small factor in the towing capacity of a vehicle, in fact the extra weight og the batteries may well reduce the towing ability, even if the vehicle has more power. Look up GVCR for more information for example.

The size is also important for many. North American full size pickups don’t need to be that big to do what they do (look at the international market for examples) but many buy them for their practical size alone (I bought my full size because a smaller Colorado/Tacoma sized vehicle didn’t have the bed length I require, so for me a Ridgeline/Colorado EV pickup is worthless unless it has a 6.5′ or longer bed, which none have).

Really, where can I purchase one? Vaporware doesn’t count.

Wow! We have only very recently seen spy photos of Rivian’s development mule pickup, and you’re already calling it “vaporware”?!?

You clearly don’t know the meaning of the word. Try looking it up.

Old men in Detroit thinking old ways. They resist EVs much to their long term detriment

Their near term bottom line, in cost competitive ICE vehicles, unfortunately hand ties, and negatively dictates their long term EV switch over, with the appropriate capital outlays necessary to make the change to EVs. This “resist” double edge sword, cuts both ways with the ICE OEMs.

Bill Ford has a long history of making green forward looking statements.
If Bill Ford were CEO this would be meaningful.

Why hint. Build it or go out of business in 10-15 years.

Ford has lately been in disfavor from Wall Street. I would imagine Hackett is trying to do things as economically as possible. Bill Ford’s real estate buying spree of late I’m sure has caused some consternation internally.

I’m sorry but other than PLENTY of conjecture here, and, in view of Bill Ford’s plain speaking statements, I see no mention of a PHEV F150 for the time being. BEV SUV for China? Yes… Some PHEV models? Yes… But Plug in F150 although I’d love to see it, I’ve seen no real evidence of that.

Ford is usually the ‘also ran’ – they let others develop anything remotely costly. They did take a gamble with the aluminum chassis that is true, – but I would expect Ford to come out with a plug-in AFTER someone else did, and I don’t see ANYTHING on the market in the near future. Small manufacturers count only if they can make something profitably, and in fair numbers. If they sell, I’m sure Ford will try conversions first as they did with the ill-fated ‘Transit Connect EV’.

When was the last time Ford produced an electric pickup and what was it like?

After Tesla starts production.

It’s always a head-shaker; good news about future EVs (or possible future EVs) is always met with suspicion and doubt from those with “superior knowledge” of manufacturers and the market. It’s almost as though EV fans don’t REALLY want any EVs from the legacy manufacturers.

Ford making F Series Hybrid is confirmed. Will they make a plugin with some 30 mile range or multiple ranges since the truck is already configured as Regular cab (3 seater), Quad cab (6 seater), 2WD, 4WD and so on.

Chevy has made significant improvement in Silverado by offering a * trim with 4 cyl engine
* cylinder deactivation system where the truck can run on 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 or 8 cylinders depending on load.
* usage of aluminum and magnesium parts to reduce weight.

Ram trucks have mild hybrid trim.

And Ford will certainly like to offer hybrid/plugin to be ahead in the game and also ahead of the upcoming Tesla pickup.

Hint Hint Bill…

You better bring it while you can !

We used your Rivian F150 photo (with the watermark!) on our Top 10 Reasons Why Real Truck Guys Will Want to Ditch Their Gas / Diesel Engine For Electric Thanks!

A little bit off-topic, but your headline is inaccurate. The F-150 Hybrid is a 2021 model, NOT a 2020. What I don’t understand is why other Americans (on average) cannot figure out from their own automakers, that the model year system, often necessitates a new vehicle will typically be launched in the previous year of the corresponding MY.

The new Ranger that launched this month as a 2019 model is the exception to the rule. This year of 2019 is mostly 2020 models. “In” 2020 refers to the actual year of 2020, meaning it’s a 2021 truck. However, many websites cannot put two and two together, yet opt to misinform people instead, versus being more on the ball. I can’t fault Inside Evs for their thirdhand finding, but more so the brodude at

However, pay some due diligence to get it right. People shouldn’t be made to expect something this year, even if Bill Ford mistakenly mentioned 2020 like a MY. P702 is due in 2020 itself.

Correct, but the direct quote says 2020. Since we are sharing a direct quote, it’s not really right to assume he meant something different and then change his words. I’ll clarify in the article. Thanks.