Hacker News Reader

The biggest by far IMO is its ability to power high voltage high draw tools at the jobsite.

I have a TIG welder and a solid state linear amplifier that I'd love to be able to power from my truck instead of from a generator.

To be fair, some of these features are available on the recently released hybrid, as well.

What I would like to figure out is if it can actually backfeed the home with 240V split phase power. That would be a seriously big deal if it could, it's not a common generator feature as it is. I'm skeptical, but they did claim it could transition from charging to supplying the house and back to charging when the power returned. Probably some fine print there where they say "only with the 120V charger". Otherwise, that would just be killer. An automatic whole-house UPS that can easily support all your needs for hours or even a couple days in a pinch.

Backfeeding houses with generators is indeed a killer feature... but not in the way you mean. It can be done safety, but when done incorrectly (if the house isn't removed from the grid first) it can kill linemen. It's a good thing most generators a homeowner might causally buy at the hardware store don't have this feature. Unfortunately I've seen male-to-male extension cords sold online for this purpose. I think these are actually illegal, at least in some places.

https://www.cdc.gov/disasters/elecgenerators.html

Yes you definitely have to get it installed by a licensed electrician (and possibly approved then by the local utility) if you are going to backfeed your own house.

It is good that people are aware of the risk, but in reality the risk is quite low. It is standard procedure for a lineman to ground a line he's about to work on, to mitigate the risk of any power source feeding it. But I'd never advocate a DIY setup. But damn near everyone I know with a portable generator has a suicide cord and just flips the mains. Ah well.

I do hear this kill a lineman a lot as soon as any talk goes into backup power.

How many linemen are killed a year in the US due to backup generators or similar? Are there no procedures they can do to work on lines safer?

Are GP mentioned, the safety procedure to protect you from a line you're working on becoming inadvertently energized is temporary protective grounding. A grounding jumper is connected to each phase of the power line near the work location so that the worker touching the line works in a zone of equipotential. Because everything the worker is touching bonded together, if the line becomes energized the worker's hands and feet are elevated to the same voltage simultaneously, so there is no potential difference across the body and no current flows through the worker.

But since lives are at stake here, we prefer to have layers of protection rather than just one thing. Grounding jumpers can fail if not properly connected (a large mechanical force will be applied to the jumper when the phase-to-ground fault current flows through it).

Bottom line, respect the electrical code and connect generators through a transfer switch. These rules are in place for a reason.

Could an isolating transformer be an alternative to connecting generators through a transfer switch?

Transformers only block DC. Unless your house is wired for that (pretty rare in almost every country) You'll backfeed AC which will go through transformers.

In fact it's likely the transformer on the street between your house and the network that's responsible for the death of the linemen. IIRC that's a step down transformer (so step up when run backwards like this.)

Shouldn't this be called a "homicide cord"? It's the unsuspecting lineman that'll be harmed, not the homeowner, right?

I assume Ford’s lawyers are all over this, as the liability is immense, and Ford has deep pockets.

> Backfeeding houses with generators is indeed a killer feature...

oh, you mean like solar PV on-grid setups ...

All of the grid tied solar systems are able to conform to the IEEE 1547 standard. Amongst the particulars are a 300 second reconnection time if there's an interrupted grid to protect utility workers. Most (all?) USA utilities mandate this standard.

Some battery systems, like the Tesla Powerwall include a contactor that allow their microgrid battery systems to conform to the standard without a loss of power to the site they power.

https://standards.ieee.org/standard/1547-2018.html

Your basic solar inverter monitors the grid voltage, and if the grid goes down it stops generating.

Needless to say, if you're looking for a backup power source this isn't a property you want.

People with generators and suicide cables know to shut off the main breaker. Per my buddy who is a lineman in a rural area, DIY solar systems in cabins and such are much more of an issue.

d'oh. i'm an idiot.

(an idiot who the state of NM certified last year to install his own on-grid solar PV system, so doubly an idiot!)

Yeah, our local utility won't let you feed the house from panels without grid power unless you also install a battery.

Those are generally fine because they are generally installed and configured by licensed electricians. Generators with suicide-cables installed by homeowner Joe Blow are the problem.

Close. It's not the electricians qualifications that make it safe, it's a feature in generating home inverters called 'anti-islanding'.

A correct install is of course also required as it's possible to screw up and unintentionally cripple this important safety feature.

The language on the site talks about requiring a whole house manual or automatic transfer switch. Plus the thing has a 240v outlet. (presumably split phase, 240v single phase is not common in US residential settings).

I wonder if the wiring is basically plug the 240v split phase into a special outlet in the house that feeds the transfer switch. The 80amp charger is then just a charger.

Could be completely wrong though. We'll know more at launch.

That is basically how generators work.

Right. The backup function will require the house be set up with a transfer switch and the appropriate inlet setup, just like a whole house generator. The interesting bit is just the fact that the truck has a 240v split phase inverter built-in and ready to go.

>vehicle launch

Product launch is when something is released and you can buy it, not when someone published plans and best wishes.

Äh I have to disagree. This is far, far, far less of a game changer compared to the Cybertruck.

It basically worse and more expensive at everything and its very unlikely Ford can build close to as many as the Cybertruck. Simply because of batteries alone and other production capacity as well (a lot is shared with the other F150s).

Its really slow charging considering the time it will come out. If you want to use this to transport anything its range is worse compared to the Cybertruck and its gone charge much slower.

This will likely sell well and they will likely sell as many as they can make. But that doesn't make it a game changer.

This will sell well but

Yes I'm sure ford will struggle as they only make 4+ million plus vehicles a year, nowhere near teslas bumper crop of 180k a quarter...

Oh this old bad argument warmed up again.

Remember when 5 years ago people claimed that as soon car companies make electric cars they would outsell Tesla?

Well the fact is that Tesla sells more EV by far then even VW by a large amount.

Scaling BEV production is hard, and just because for produces lots of ICE cars does not mean they can magically produce lots of EVs.

Do yourself a favor and actually learn about BEV production and supply chain issues.

> Remember when 5 years ago people claimed that as soon car companies make electric cars they would outsell Tesla?

Remember 5 years ago when Telsa fans claimed BEV range and acceleration wasn't possible for legacy automakers?

Ford sell more F series vehicles per year than all tesla models combined - why are you assuming they need to pivot asap to EV only?

> Remember 5 years ago when Telsa fans claimed BEV range and acceleration wasn't possible for legacy automakers?

No, I don't. Its the opposite, most people were saying that legacy makers could do it eventually but they need to make massive investments in EV production, and guess what, they did.

Tesla fan were actually right, it took way longer then people said for real mass market EV to come out.

But of course Tesla got the lead and they are not just outselling everybody else and are still among the leaders in performance and efficiency.

> Ford sell more F series vehicles per year than all tesla models combined - why are you assuming they need to pivot asap to EV only?

They don't but in a few years EV version will outperform the alternative ICE version along pretty much every dimension and there will be huge demand for EV trucks.

The question is if you at that point have the capacity to produce them in accordance with demand.

> The biggest by far IMO is its ability to power high voltage high draw tools at the jobsite.

The hybrid F-150 could already do that.

Not for 40k

game changer It is as it is not a truck but a Mobile power source.

The features and specs feel mediocre compared to CyberTruck. The only thing that looked perhaps better was the frunk size and access but everything else CyberTruck is clearly better even price and most definitely on the most important spec of all, range.

The Cybertruck is coming from a leader with a history of hasty, half baked communication. If you think the Cybertruck will be out this year or exactly as pictured and specified... well I think that is extremely unlikely.

A production prototype doesn't even exist yet.

The Cybertruck is going to end up being a sales disaster after the initial sensationalism rapidly wears off. Sales will fade, it'll end up as a gimmick. Large numbers of consumers don't want to drive/use/own something that looks like that, they want something that looks like a normal truck.

Cybertruck is Musk's equivalent of the Mac G4 Cube ego mistake, except far worse. He understood that electric vehicles should look like existing conceptions of vehicles, things people can easily identify with as being vehicles they'd want to drive, but electric and maybe sexy + better in various boring functional ways. He abandoned that with the Cybertruck, and it'll bomb accordingly over time. Meanwhile Ford will sell a bazillion electric trucks, and humiliate Tesla's efforts in the space (in his inability to be humble, Musk will fall back on claiming Cybertruck is superior, even as it doesn't sell very well).

Tesla should have acquired Ford in a stock swap, left it an independent operating entity, and electrified their trucks; or acquired a huge minority position (in a stock swap) if the Ford family wouldn't go for a full acquisition. They should have done that years ago. They were too self-absorbed to see the obvious opportunity. The electrified trucks would be enormous profit centers. Now, instead, Tesla will almost entirely miss out on the zillion dollar electric truck market, which they could have had a big slice of. Tesla's only shot is to abandon Cybertruck and build a normal looking truck, which they won't do for several years until the pain from the embarrassment overwhelms Musk's ego problems (otherwise they'll just leave Cybertruck as a low volume trinket in their lineup, or abandon the space entirely).

I believe Tesla will sell the initial batch of trucks, with crazy futuristic styling, while improving their production scale at a high premium to the early adopters. Once they have the factories/scale setup, they will just re-skin them with a non-futuristic/conventional body and be able to mass produce (at Tesla levels) the trucks to the wider audience that F-150 owners would buy. And at a more reasonable price as well since they early adopters would have already paid the ramp-up cost. This is similar to the first launch of the high performance Tesla series and makes sense overall. I personally would love to have an electric F-150 for the reliability that they could have with the years of experience Ford has had in the market. Job site users would be all over this.

Cybertruck preorders have passed 650,000 units. While a lot are definitely just doing it for "fun" since it's refundable, it's still an insanely impressive number.

It's not impressive specifically because it won't follow through. There will be an initial sales surge (which will be very loudly touted), and it'll rapidly implode because it's a ridiculous vehicle that the masses of consumers will not want. The curiosity and gimmick of its look / design will implode very quickly, as is always the case and without exception when companies do things like that. It'll melt down to being a low volume sales space for Tesla, until or unless they do a normal or quasi-normal looking truck (and by that time they'll be running from behind).

I don't know but... I want a goddamn car that looks like it's from the future. Car companies always build the coolest looking prototypes then dress them down and make them ugly.

I have a pre-order Cybertruck and may or may not be in a position to buy one when they land in Australia (if they land at all) but man it's cool.

Think of the Lamborghini Countach [0], it was designed decades ago and it still looks like it's from outer space!

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamborghini_Countach

EDIT: Saying that, if this new F150 came to Australia (or say an all electric Raptor) I'd probably go for the Ford. I currently drive a 2019 Hilux and it's a very handy do everything car, but the F150 is quite a lot larger and not really suited to the (very few) Australian cities.

I thought Tesla was primarily a battery company?

Tesla doesn't make batteries. Panasonic does.

Then why is it selling cars for a loss?

This same old story gets warmed up ever fucking time. With the Model S, with the Model 3. Its so fucking tiered.

Even at 20% conversion of preorders (and that is way lower Tesla usually gets) they have plent for the first 1-2 years of production and that is assuming that they don't get more orders (again as they did with ever other car).

This is just your personal taste and you have formed your opinion on that 100%. Not a single actual state about the Cybertruck or its release indicates anthing like what you suggest.

> humiliate Tesla's efforts in the space

Ford wins in a space Tesla doesn't have a product in. Wow. Amazing.

> Tesla should have acquired Ford in a stock swap

That you believe that shows how you have absolutely no understanding of the car market. That the worst possible idea.

> Tesla's only shot is to abandon Cybertruck and build a normal looking truck

Or you know if your outrage claims are actually true, they could build a 'normal' turck and the Cyberturck. Crazy that a company could produce two different trucks.

The battery availability is the fundamental constraint.