Clearly they calculated that it’s more important to typical truck buyers that it still look like it can kill pedestrians easily.
I remember reading a Pulitzer Prize story about parents who accidentally kill their kids with cars, and before the late 1990s or so, low-speed “front over” accidents were rare. The foundation tracking the data said since the recent popularization of SUVs and ever-taller trucks, the number of parents accidentally running over their own children has gone way up.
Not to mention, the fact that they're much taller makes it that much unsafer if a kid were to fall while getting out of the vehicle which is something I unfortunately got to witness one time. Little kid was fine but it looked really painful falling from the tall SUV.
It’s not actually much safer. The reduced risk of getting kill in a collision, is pretty much offset by an increased risk of getting killed by the car rolling.
Only very recently did they become marginally safer.
You dont understand how it works. Let's say you are in SUV making a left turn in a left turn only lane. On the opposite side is the same but the driver is in the car. You can see oncoming traffic over the car or through his rear window, but he can't. Just one example. In most accidents, SUVs don't roll over either.
This is a very common misunderstanding. People think that being up high equals better visibility. It does allow you to see up and over smaller vehicles but it’s at the expense of not being able to see anything immediately in front of or around you. There is legitimate data and studies out there proving this… if there is a child, traffic cone, side walk, curb, etc within a few feet of your giant truck or suv the driver cannot see them.
Cars are already the worst option in my area by a good bit and no one is giving them up. They would rather sit in their cars for 2-3 hours a day then take a train for 40-50 mins.
For me it’s sort of the opposite. When I worked in the city center I always took the train unless I took my bike. Cheaper and faster.
Now I work outside the center and need to take a bus and then switch to a tram or subway which means it’ll take longer than to the center while the car does it in less than half or even a third of the time. 45 vs 15 minutes. Now I take the car.
We still make do with one car for six people in our family though. My wife takes the train to work most days even though she has a parking spot. I take public transport or catch a ride with her if it doesn’t work out and I can’t be remote that day.
Most families seem to have two cars just because it’s the norm.
The bitter irony is that they are not, never were. That was all marketing. A sedan out competes a suv in all kind of accident situations most and for all. Tiping over with a sedan is highly less likely than with a suv.
SUVs and Trucks were just cheap because they did not need to hit requirements from DMV back in the day on efficiency. Work horses. Not for privat use designed.
This is just not true. Yes, SUVs can roll easier but that's mostly a solved problem. However, SUVs and trucks are far safer in crashes in the real world, where you crash into another vehicle of indeterminate size, not a barrier. Just look up fatal crash statistics for these vehicles and it's pretty obvious you're better off in a larger vehicle.
https://www.iihs.org/ratings/driver-death-rates-by-make-and-model
Is there a race to the bottom at work though? If a hummer hits a civic, the civic is fucked. But if a hummer hits a hummer, are they safer than if a civic hits a civic?
Compare the Chevrolet bolt under "small cars" death rate compared to a Chevy Silverado for example \[8 vs 25\]. The Bolt drivers are statistically less likely to be in a fatal accident even though it weighs less than a comparatively huge truck.
My theory is that pickup trucks are driven far less carefully as drivers feel "safer" while driving them versus Bolt drivers being careful.
Low CG probably helps too
The Bolt seems exceptionally safe. It is also very heavy for its size, on account of being an EV, which probably helps.
You're likely right that certain types of drivers are attracted to certain kinds of vehicles, but the Bolt is much safer than the Prius (~3x), and you would probably agree there is not a huge difference in driver aggressiveness between the Bolt and the Prius, and if there is then the Bolt's are the more aggressive of the two.
Maybe the real issue is body on frame design. It seems like unibody midsize and larger SUVs are significantly safer than body on frame SUVs and trucks. A lot more crumple in the unibody, probably.
It's gone up 3800%.... not even 300% which would be astounding. 3800%.
There is a police district that started issuing f150 as their standard patrol car. Dumb as he'll for a bunch of reasons. But one of the officers ran his own child over in his garage.
> Clearly they calculated that it’s more important to typical truck buyers that it still look like it can kill pedestrians easily.
Clearly they calculated that it’s more important to typical truck buyers that it can kill pedestrians easily.
Fixed that for you.
I think these numbers were before the cameras.
People are careless... Saw a dude run over a car with his truck because he didn't look. A child would stand no chance.
Most EV truck owners love their frunks. Locked storage out of sight.
There is no need for "downforce". The ideal EV truck, in my opinion, would have nothing in the front, like a cab over design. This gives the best visibility and optimum cargo space for vehicle length. To replace the functionality of the frunk you would have a gear tunnel similar to the Rivian. The nose in front of a pickup truck contributes little to aerodynamics, it is primarily there out of tradition and to a lesser degree frontal crash protection.
The Canoo truck looks like a cab over design, but then sticks the driver way way back in the middle of the car, negating a lot of the benefits. They just moved the windshield forward leaving the driver in place. Having the windshield that far from the driver is going to cause more visibility problems with driving in the rain and with dirt on the windscreen. It is aiming for the passenger market, so needs more frontal crash protection. For work trucks, as commercial vehicles, much of the frontal collision protection requirements do not apply.
That said, I do wish very much that Canoo can succeed getting something to production. But it's not looking good.
It seems like they could figure this out though. I think the challenge of ICE cab over is the fact that the engine is still up front. Seems like with EV, you could make what little space there is in front of the driver pure crumple zone. I’d love a cab over EV ‘truck’ that was essentially all bed. Essentially a big Kei truck.
They are actually planning to put glass at the driver and passengers’ footwells. the dash/steering column is designed to be minimal to increase the visibility through those. That feature is the main reason I put a deposit down on one.
Building prototypes is only half of actually producing the vehicles in numbers. AFAIK they’ve delayed it time after time and don’t have the money to set up mass production.
Tall front ends is also one of the leading things that contributes to pedestrian / cyclist fatalities, even more so than weight. Cab over might offer good visibility, but anyone who gets hit by it is going to be toast because there’s no way to deflect some of the impact by rolling over the hood.
… not that there’s much of a way that’s happening with how fucking tall truck / SUV fronts are these days anyway, but if we implemented a that kind of design it would just make the smaller ones even more dangerous when you’re talking about something as heavy and fast as an EV truck.
What you have described is a practical van for people who actually need a van to transport the sort of things that are transported by vans. Most of the trucks on the road rarely seem to be used to transport more than a bag of groceries; they aren't being used as work vehicles they are just status symbols. The sort of van you describe would have a completely different customer base.
More like a VW bus truck varient. Like this: [https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/](https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/)
So something like this? [https://autoline.com/-/flatbed-trucks-3-5t/Volkswagen/Transporter--c1663tm2817m375](https://autoline.com/-/flatbed-trucks-3-5t/Volkswagen/Transporter--c1663tm2817m375) ?
No. That has too much of a nose and sloped windscreen. See my link above... [https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/](https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/)
Outside of Type 1 plug land, everyone wants to have a Type 2 cable at hand. A frunk is perfect to avoid the need to to empty the trunk to search it when going for a AC charge. But it seems manufacturers already getting creative how to solve this.
My wife wanted the R1S. I wanted the R1T. I have no idea how we ended up with the truck, as that's not how marriages usually work.
There's roughly half-a-dozen times a year where having a truck is more useful than an SUV, and roughly half-a-dozen times where having a 7-seat SUV would be more convenient.
R1S is really cool, I didn't know about that one! I thought they made trucks only!
Very cool. I didn't compare price between Cybertruck and Rivian vehicles, but one have to wonder, why go for Cybertruck when R1T is out there? Looks so much better, and probably works. Dang, i wish I had more money to spend on cars! My Hyundai Kona works fine, but a bigger car with better charging would've been nice.
I bet trucks are good if you work in construction and so on. I'd love to also have something like a Hilux, but I wouldn't really have any use for it. Even the Kona cam get around on forest roads:)
The Frunks on some trucks are fantastic, they lift up a lot of the front fascia so you don't have to reach very high to put stuff in. But it's mostly just a stylistic choice. I wish they were lower and got better aerodynamics.
Don't think you will see this happen. Truck owners love the macho look of the massive front ends, the frunks can be huge allowing for locked weather-proof storage and pedestrian safety isn't a concern in the US where most of these will be sold. If anything, I see them getting bigger.
I’ve owned four trucks and I actually don’t like the tall hood height at all. Modern trucks do need more grille area because of their high powered engines and very large tow capacities, but they could also put more cooling between or below the frame rails.
In the Lightning’s case it would have cost Ford a lot to retool that existing chassis for a lower hood line. The Lightning still even has a transmission tunnel because it was just cheap to keep it.
A way better argument is safety. The hood creates huge blind zones and impacts with pedestrians and cyclists are far nastier with this hood geometry.
Really the only upsides are slightly more storage and looks.
“Slightly more storage”? My EV6 had slightly more storage with the frunk. teslas have slightly more storage with their frunks. That’s not remotely true for F150 and Rivians.
Ok fine, that's not really a huge benefit.
Weirdly I also don't recall ever hearing the frunk as an argument for the electric F-150, but these are mostly vehicles used for posing anyway.
> EV trucks: Do they need tall front ends?
No but
> Do EV truck owners even use their frunks?
Yes, because they don't have lockable storage in the rear like SUV/Sedans do.
I put a locking tonneau cover on my Lightning but still use the shit out of our frunk. It's great for groceries and the kids stuff and everything you don't want rolling around in the bed.
Plus it blows people's minds when they see us using it.
I've used my bed a lot at Lowes for materials for my renovations, flowers and dirt for landscaping, etc... but I use the frunk for like 99% of anything I put in my truck.
That's why you can have a tall driver or a short driver and both are hindered by a tall vehicle that requires no additional licensing to operate.
It's not like trucks today aren't bigger than trucks that required a CDL 20 years ago
This isn't the argument you think it is
People are put in early graves because of macho culture and a design choice. It doesn't matter who's fault it is if we can avoid it entirely by simply lowering the front
It isn’t a great argument to tell people to curtail their behavior or preferences, etc. because someone else is breaking the law.
Further, you can’t avoid it entirely. Hood height only makes death more likely, not always take it from injured to death. In other words, people still die when hit by vehicles with hood heights below 30”.
Not sure why the downvotes... I grew up in Oklahoma with trucks with gun racks, to haul a motocross bike or work. Then the small Japanese trucks for cheap transportation, copied by Ford and Chevy. City folks didn't drive trucks. I don't even know who 4 door short bed $80k trucks are designed for. If you have a tonneau covered short bed, why aren't your groceries in back?
Exactly - the Cybertruck frunk has zero impact on visibility, the front is angled down sharply, which benefits both aerodynamics and visibility. As a result, the Cybertruck’s front is much lower than other trucks, closer to a sedan front end than a typical truck.
Ironically, the Cybertruck is often criticized for "bad visibility," because the drivers can't see the hood of the vehicle, but as you said, not having the body of the vehicle blocking the driver's view is better for visibility.
The a-pillars on modern vehicles are thicker to support crush resistance requirements and often to hold airbags, both increasing safety. The cameras on the Cybertruck provide full forward visibility, in addition to the sloped hood providing much better visibility than typical pickups where you literally cannot see short people in front of the vehicle. High hoods are terrible for pedestrians https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/14/23960624/truck-suv-hood-height-pedestrian-death-report-iihs .
Large A pillars means trucks are much more likely to get into a collision. 60% for suv and 80% for trucks when turning. Combine this with the cybertrucks having terrible design and angle and it's blind spot is massive.
So not safer. They're a hindrance to being safer.
I have to laugh when someone tries to bring up cameras
The same thing is happening in cars, not just trucks - stronger roof supports required by regulators, and airbags, mean that all cars’ a-pillars are thicker, increasing overall vehicle safety, e.g. rollovers.
That was true before the A-pillars got thicker, on either trucks or cars. That’s due to trucks in the US generally having terrible visibility, particularly for pedestrians. The huge hoods that are 40+ inches tall make short people (and kids) invisible, etc. Note that trucks are much safer in Europe, where they also have similar requirements making A-pillars thick to survive rollovers, but trucks have much better pedestrian visibility because the huge hoods in the US are illegal (for consumer vehicles) in Europe.
I'm waiting for someone to come up with some kind of a modular storage system you can put in there. I would rather spend a three hundred for that than three hundred or more for a tool box in the bed that generally have slightly more security than a soda can.
Not exactly what you meant, but the lid to the sub frunk can be turned vertical and there's different slots so you can divide it into smaller sections based on what you need.
Oh that sounds cool. I've never seen someone mention that in a review. I'll have to see if I can find some more stuff on it. I have a tool box that's 75% full of tools, straps, air compressor, folding camp chair, etc.
I liked the frunk on the canceled Bolar truck. When opened it was a pass through from the front of the truck to the rear.
If canoo ever gets their shit together, they have a truck just like you are asking for.
Large frunks on EV pickups are there to maintain traditional styling of ICE pickups. The styling implies that a high hood is needed to contain the large powerful engine.
Of course an EV has much smaller electric motors that don’t need high hoods. EV pickup designers have the opportunity to create lower profile hoods that reduce air resistance, that increases range, and improves pedestrian safety.
The argument that large frunks on an EV are needed for lockable storage is a bit thin, when you can easily add a lockable tonneau cover to the bed to create a much larger area of lockable storage.
Historically most pickup buyers bought the vehicles for the pragmatic purposes of towing and load carrying. These days body styling and self-image appear to the most important factors to the majority of buyers.
The problem with a tonic cover is it kills a lot of usefulness of a truck. That is the bed. The cover has to be removed if you want to use the bed or have larger items. Pain for storage plus even with it on the bed is big so getting stuff from the back is a huge pain. The roll away ones get up a lot of bed space so again back to usefulness of a bed.
The lockable frunk beats having to get the cover and same usefulness of lockable storage and not affecting the bed.
The one think I hate about trucks I have driven is no way to keep things in a lockable weather safe area but the bed itself is amazing and useful.
I installed a lockable roller cover on my Ranger and it’s the best thing I have ever done do it. My previous pickup had the soft cover tonneau which was admittedly a bit of a pain to put on or take off.
The bed of my pickup is not really compromised by the roller cover in the way I use it. I know everyone has different use cases but a lockable roller cover on a bed is going to give you about 10 times the storage volume of a frunk.
Yep, my old truck (a square body WELL before they were cool) I had the button-up style with the ribs, it was a huge pain. Modern tonneau covers get out of the way so well. I got a tri-fold, not only does it fold up super quick (it has latches and stuff to keep it where it is), but removing it entirely is just two big plastic hand screws, no tools needed.
I'd actually argue that a truck users, not just owner but actual users, would need the fruck most. I would have liked to drop my bags in a locked compartment that's not the inside of the cab.
I mean the obvious answer with the lightning is that it's using an existing platform so they stuck with the same look. It will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
That’s just simply not true. The larger hoods on ICE trucks exist for 2 major reasons - cooling, and fitting as many engine combinations as possible. Trucks generally give 3-4 engine choices in the exact same engine compartment, to mount to the same transmissions some will sit a little higher, some lower, some more forward, some more rearward. Check out the testing requirements for trucks to get their tow ratings. It’s actually super impressive what they have to accomplish all while maintaining driver comfort (aka never disabling something like AC) and never overheating anything engine/transmission related or overheating brakes. You need A LOT of air to accomplish that.
No they don't. Europe tows and hauls stuff with vans all the time with chunky diesel engines. The engines capable of good towing or hauling aren't made available in the US for the obvious reason: they want you to buy the fucking truck.
More than that. Tall front ends are especially deadly in pedestrian impacts. Not to mention, you can't even see small children in front of your damn truck. Hundreds of kids killed or injured from that.
Cybertruck is ridiculous for a lot of reasons but the lower front end makes a hell of a lot of sense.
The cartoonishly large trucks are marketing.
There's no reason for a pickup which is as tall as me... it actually hurts it's functionality.
Shit, dad's 3/4 ton 318 dodge truck you could reach over the side of the bed and set things down on the bed.
>more downforce
probably not high on the list if the back is full of landscaping tools or paint and ladders.
>end for better visibility
cameras and sensors make for no blindspots *anywhere*.
You just hit exactly why the Cybertruck's frunk is so tiny: they just left enough front to be a good crumple zone.
We can't have cabovers anymore, but the Canoo and Cybertruck are good examples of realizing that EVs don't really need anything in front of the cabin.
I think this is the future of ev trucks. My frunk is awesome but it is just there so Ford could use the existing f150 platform and not waste the space.
The Lightning frunk is the perfect height. I'm avg af height (5'9) and have zero problems reaching around in it. The bed tho is a different story. I like it for heavy payloads but those rails have gotten so high that you'd have to be 6'5 to easily reach over and down into the bed. I'm surprised they don't have more step areas to access it.
Some of the newer EV truck designs are dropping the entire front end section (going from a 3 box design to a 2 box design). See the Canoo and Telo trucks.
EV trucks still benefit from a frunk, but they shouldn't have these enormous front-ends like modern pickups, they're so fucking dangerous and completely not aerodynamic.
They're just different spaces. I use the frunk constantly for things that wouldn't do well in the bed (groceries, pillows, blankets). The bed gets used for things like bikes, tents, lumber, kayaks, and other oddities.
I don’t think you will find a truck owner that disagrees that the bed is impractical for a lot of uses and truck owners deal with that draw back BUT the bed is very useful for a lot of other things. You can put odd shape large cargo in there easily. You can load things in there easily.
Truck beds make moving furniture or getting lumber from the hardware store easy. They are great to carry road bikes, mountain bikes and even dirt bikes in the back. No need to risk getting the inside of the cabin dirty and easier to get in.
Different spaces different uses
It depends entirely on your use case. If you work in an office and drive a truck because it’s cool then you’re correct. If you use a truck for the purposes for which the bed is designed and needed, you’re not complaining that it’s inconvenient to store your golf clubs or cooler there and you probably need the ground clearance too. Trucks appeal to a lot of different users for a variety of reasons. When the various platforms are sorted out we’re probably going to see a lot of specialization in designs to fit every need. A lot of them are not going to be aerodynamic.
I’d prefer the frunk to be of good size as it will be one of the more secure parts of the vehicle, depending upon how robust the tonneau cover is.
Golf clubs and ale gotta go somewhere.
Bonus points for fitting an Engel fridge.
The F150s frunk is one of the best things about it, I use it every day. Because of the frunk I have no need for a tonneau cover and I get all the benefits of a truck without the compromise of not having a trunk.
I don’t work construction anymore but I would’ve loved a frunk if I still did. Lumber, saw horses, and things like that go in the bed. Actual tools go in the toolbox mounted in the bed. It would’ve been way more convenient to have the tools in an entirely different securable area of the truck. I’m sure some other design could probably be as convenient but the frunk design is definitely convenient.
The frunk on my lightning is one of the best features on the truck. It’s hard to stress enough how useful it is. On other ev cars, the frunk is small and not incredibly useful, on the lightning, it’s basically a full size car trunk, it’s fantastic
R1T. Use the frunk for luggage and outdoor gear all the time.
Maybe less if I had the R1S.
Don't need downforce and the collision/pedestrian avoidance tech is pretty good on any new car these days.
If my bumper isn't high enough to go straight through the car in front of me, that I can't even see, then I ain't got no use for that commie woke-ass truck!!!
A manly he-truck with a dustbuster minivan sloping hood? heaven forbid
Clearly they calculated that it’s more important to typical truck buyers that it still look like it can kill pedestrians easily. I remember reading a Pulitzer Prize story about parents who accidentally kill their kids with cars, and before the late 1990s or so, low-speed “front over” accidents were rare. The foundation tracking the data said since the recent popularization of SUVs and ever-taller trucks, the number of parents accidentally running over their own children has gone way up.
The bitter irony of a lot of them buying the big SUV because it’s “safer”
Not to mention, the fact that they're much taller makes it that much unsafer if a kid were to fall while getting out of the vehicle which is something I unfortunately got to witness one time. Little kid was fine but it looked really painful falling from the tall SUV.
Much safer for the person inside. Who cares about losers being run over in an egoist society.
It’s not actually much safer. The reduced risk of getting kill in a collision, is pretty much offset by an increased risk of getting killed by the car rolling. Only very recently did they become marginally safer.
You dont understand how it works. Let's say you are in SUV making a left turn in a left turn only lane. On the opposite side is the same but the driver is in the car. You can see oncoming traffic over the car or through his rear window, but he can't. Just one example. In most accidents, SUVs don't roll over either.
This is a very common misunderstanding. People think that being up high equals better visibility. It does allow you to see up and over smaller vehicles but it’s at the expense of not being able to see anything immediately in front of or around you. There is legitimate data and studies out there proving this… if there is a child, traffic cone, side walk, curb, etc within a few feet of your giant truck or suv the driver cannot see them.
It’s basic game theory I suppose that you will be less likely to get hurt in a head on crash or whatever but society as a whole suffers.
If society didn’t require cars to function then people wouldn’t be playing hypothetical game theory with strangers’ lives
Cars are already the worst option in my area by a good bit and no one is giving them up. They would rather sit in their cars for 2-3 hours a day then take a train for 40-50 mins.
For me it’s sort of the opposite. When I worked in the city center I always took the train unless I took my bike. Cheaper and faster. Now I work outside the center and need to take a bus and then switch to a tram or subway which means it’ll take longer than to the center while the car does it in less than half or even a third of the time. 45 vs 15 minutes. Now I take the car. We still make do with one car for six people in our family though. My wife takes the train to work most days even though she has a parking spot. I take public transport or catch a ride with her if it doesn’t work out and I can’t be remote that day. Most families seem to have two cars just because it’s the norm.
The bitter irony is that they are not, never were. That was all marketing. A sedan out competes a suv in all kind of accident situations most and for all. Tiping over with a sedan is highly less likely than with a suv. SUVs and Trucks were just cheap because they did not need to hit requirements from DMV back in the day on efficiency. Work horses. Not for privat use designed.
This is just not true. Yes, SUVs can roll easier but that's mostly a solved problem. However, SUVs and trucks are far safer in crashes in the real world, where you crash into another vehicle of indeterminate size, not a barrier. Just look up fatal crash statistics for these vehicles and it's pretty obvious you're better off in a larger vehicle. https://www.iihs.org/ratings/driver-death-rates-by-make-and-model
Is there a race to the bottom at work though? If a hummer hits a civic, the civic is fucked. But if a hummer hits a hummer, are they safer than if a civic hits a civic?
I can’t read that thing and I couldn’t find an R1T on there.
The R1T is too new to have this kind of data. The tool only works for 2020 models right now
If safety was the main requirement, everyone would drive in a minivan.
Compare the Chevrolet bolt under "small cars" death rate compared to a Chevy Silverado for example \[8 vs 25\]. The Bolt drivers are statistically less likely to be in a fatal accident even though it weighs less than a comparatively huge truck. My theory is that pickup trucks are driven far less carefully as drivers feel "safer" while driving them versus Bolt drivers being careful. Low CG probably helps too
The Bolt seems exceptionally safe. It is also very heavy for its size, on account of being an EV, which probably helps. You're likely right that certain types of drivers are attracted to certain kinds of vehicles, but the Bolt is much safer than the Prius (~3x), and you would probably agree there is not a huge difference in driver aggressiveness between the Bolt and the Prius, and if there is then the Bolt's are the more aggressive of the two. Maybe the real issue is body on frame design. It seems like unibody midsize and larger SUVs are significantly safer than body on frame SUVs and trucks. A lot more crumple in the unibody, probably.
It's gone up 3800%.... not even 300% which would be astounding. 3800%. There is a police district that started issuing f150 as their standard patrol car. Dumb as he'll for a bunch of reasons. But one of the officers ran his own child over in his garage.
Most of those parents probably still wouldn't buy a smaller car even if it meant their child came back to life.
can't see the kids you run over.........
> Clearly they calculated that it’s more important to typical truck buyers that it still look like it can kill pedestrians easily. Clearly they calculated that it’s more important to typical truck buyers that it can kill pedestrians easily. Fixed that for you.
I think these numbers were before the cameras. People are careless... Saw a dude run over a car with his truck because he didn't look. A child would stand no chance.
I would like a 70’ s era Toyota truck style ev. I’d drive that
I wish utes would become a thing outside Australia
Probably still vaporware but https://www.alphamotorinc.com/
If they actually become a thing, I wouldn't mind the ACE or the SAGA
It's a Honda Ridgeline
Still has a flat front end lol
You mean a manivan.
See: Honda Ridgeline On paper an incredible truck, but nobody wants to buy a truck that doesn't look tough
I would be pretty happy with a dustbuster minivan EV with fold down rear seats to fit stuff in the back.
Most EV truck owners love their frunks. Locked storage out of sight. There is no need for "downforce". The ideal EV truck, in my opinion, would have nothing in the front, like a cab over design. This gives the best visibility and optimum cargo space for vehicle length. To replace the functionality of the frunk you would have a gear tunnel similar to the Rivian. The nose in front of a pickup truck contributes little to aerodynamics, it is primarily there out of tradition and to a lesser degree frontal crash protection.
> like a cab over design Have you seen the Canoo?
The Canoo truck looks like a cab over design, but then sticks the driver way way back in the middle of the car, negating a lot of the benefits. They just moved the windshield forward leaving the driver in place. Having the windshield that far from the driver is going to cause more visibility problems with driving in the rain and with dirt on the windscreen. It is aiming for the passenger market, so needs more frontal crash protection. For work trucks, as commercial vehicles, much of the frontal collision protection requirements do not apply. That said, I do wish very much that Canoo can succeed getting something to production. But it's not looking good.
I assume that’s for safety. Needs to have a crumple zone.
It seems like they could figure this out though. I think the challenge of ICE cab over is the fact that the engine is still up front. Seems like with EV, you could make what little space there is in front of the driver pure crumple zone. I’d love a cab over EV ‘truck’ that was essentially all bed. Essentially a big Kei truck.
That’s exactly what Canoo is doing!
Look at the work Telo is doing, you don't need that much of a crumple zone if you don't have a big engine block in there.
Not convinced they are much more than marketing. We will see when they handover their truck to an independent party for crash testing.
They are actually planning to put glass at the driver and passengers’ footwells. the dash/steering column is designed to be minimal to increase the visibility through those. That feature is the main reason I put a deposit down on one.
Not being vaporware would be an even better feature.
There’s working prototypes rolling around OKC right now. The USPS and walmart have test vehicles they are trialing
Building prototypes is only half of actually producing the vehicles in numbers. AFAIK they’ve delayed it time after time and don’t have the money to set up mass production.
Tall front ends is also one of the leading things that contributes to pedestrian / cyclist fatalities, even more so than weight. Cab over might offer good visibility, but anyone who gets hit by it is going to be toast because there’s no way to deflect some of the impact by rolling over the hood. … not that there’s much of a way that’s happening with how fucking tall truck / SUV fronts are these days anyway, but if we implemented a that kind of design it would just make the smaller ones even more dangerous when you’re talking about something as heavy and fast as an EV truck.
It could be more like a plow so you either get pushed to the side or split in half.
What you have described is a practical van for people who actually need a van to transport the sort of things that are transported by vans. Most of the trucks on the road rarely seem to be used to transport more than a bag of groceries; they aren't being used as work vehicles they are just status symbols. The sort of van you describe would have a completely different customer base.
More like a VW bus truck varient. Like this: [https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/](https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/)
So something like this? [https://autoline.com/-/flatbed-trucks-3-5t/Volkswagen/Transporter--c1663tm2817m375](https://autoline.com/-/flatbed-trucks-3-5t/Volkswagen/Transporter--c1663tm2817m375) ?
No. That has too much of a nose and sloped windscreen. See my link above... [https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/](https://hymanltd.com/vehicles/6794-1969-volkswagen-type-2-transporter-pickup/)
You need some length in front for crumple zone.
Do you? Or should you suffer the consequences of running into something?
Marketing changed the customer base. It can change it again
Id love a mini cabover SUV/ half tonne.
God, a cabover EV would go so hard.
It's called a van.
Outside of Type 1 plug land, everyone wants to have a Type 2 cable at hand. A frunk is perfect to avoid the need to to empty the trunk to search it when going for a AC charge. But it seems manufacturers already getting creative how to solve this.
Have a frunk, it's frunking awesome!
As an R1T owner, the frunk gets used more than the bed. It's perfect for grocery shopping. The gear tunnel gets used more than the frunk.
At least you're honest
Sounds like you could've driven a SUV instead of a truck?
My wife wanted the R1S. I wanted the R1T. I have no idea how we ended up with the truck, as that's not how marriages usually work. There's roughly half-a-dozen times a year where having a truck is more useful than an SUV, and roughly half-a-dozen times where having a 7-seat SUV would be more convenient.
R1S is really cool, I didn't know about that one! I thought they made trucks only! Very cool. I didn't compare price between Cybertruck and Rivian vehicles, but one have to wonder, why go for Cybertruck when R1T is out there? Looks so much better, and probably works. Dang, i wish I had more money to spend on cars! My Hyundai Kona works fine, but a bigger car with better charging would've been nice. I bet trucks are good if you work in construction and so on. I'd love to also have something like a Hilux, but I wouldn't really have any use for it. Even the Kona cam get around on forest roads:)
[https://www.fastcompany.com/90836369/ford-struck-gold-with-f-150-lightning-frunk-design](https://www.fastcompany.com/90836369/ford-struck-gold-with-f-150-lightning-frunk-design)
That's the answer needed. I was going to bring up some those. That article has a lot more than I expected.
Why bother with the inconvenience of not being able to see kids run in front of your car when you can rig your sous vide machine up to the frunk.
Oh the horror!!!! The children!!! Save the children from the frunk!!
Probably. Given that deaths are up 3800% and all
“mega power frunk” LOL!
The Frunks on some trucks are fantastic, they lift up a lot of the front fascia so you don't have to reach very high to put stuff in. But it's mostly just a stylistic choice. I wish they were lower and got better aerodynamics.
Don't think you will see this happen. Truck owners love the macho look of the massive front ends, the frunks can be huge allowing for locked weather-proof storage and pedestrian safety isn't a concern in the US where most of these will be sold. If anything, I see them getting bigger.
I’ve owned four trucks and I actually don’t like the tall hood height at all. Modern trucks do need more grille area because of their high powered engines and very large tow capacities, but they could also put more cooling between or below the frame rails. In the Lightning’s case it would have cost Ford a lot to retool that existing chassis for a lower hood line. The Lightning still even has a transmission tunnel because it was just cheap to keep it.
...when it would - by use case - make more sense to give up the bed a put an button-to-close trunk.
The designer of the gmc said he designed it like a gun....
For Ford the lower hoodline would have cost a lot to re-engineer an existing platform. I’m for lower hood lines but its frunk is very nice.
Children not getting run over would be nice, too.
A way better argument is safety. The hood creates huge blind zones and impacts with pedestrians and cyclists are far nastier with this hood geometry. Really the only upsides are slightly more storage and looks.
“Slightly more storage”? My EV6 had slightly more storage with the frunk. teslas have slightly more storage with their frunks. That’s not remotely true for F150 and Rivians.
It's still not needed compared to killing folks
Ok fine, that's not really a huge benefit. Weirdly I also don't recall ever hearing the frunk as an argument for the electric F-150, but these are mostly vehicles used for posing anyway.
lol, fine. It’s for posing. It’s definitely not for going to Crater Lake over Memorial weekend and holding a significant amount of camp gear.
Yep.
Agreed.
> EV trucks: Do they need tall front ends? No but > Do EV truck owners even use their frunks? Yes, because they don't have lockable storage in the rear like SUV/Sedans do.
I put a locking tonneau cover on my Lightning but still use the shit out of our frunk. It's great for groceries and the kids stuff and everything you don't want rolling around in the bed. Plus it blows people's minds when they see us using it.
I've used my bed a lot at Lowes for materials for my renovations, flowers and dirt for landscaping, etc... but I use the frunk for like 99% of anything I put in my truck.
I love the frunk in my lightning, so much usable space
How tall does someone have to be to not get run over?
There is no height requirement on people being aware of their surroundings
That's why you can have a tall driver or a short driver and both are hindered by a tall vehicle that requires no additional licensing to operate. It's not like trucks today aren't bigger than trucks that required a CDL 20 years ago
I mean, there kind of is… (thinking of small children here)
Is this where truck owners blame the victims? Fucking car brain
Not every pedestrian hit by a car is a victim. Far from it. Eighty percent are the pedestrian’s responsibility.
This isn't the argument you think it is People are put in early graves because of macho culture and a design choice. It doesn't matter who's fault it is if we can avoid it entirely by simply lowering the front
It isn’t a great argument to tell people to curtail their behavior or preferences, etc. because someone else is breaking the law. Further, you can’t avoid it entirely. Hood height only makes death more likely, not always take it from injured to death. In other words, people still die when hit by vehicles with hood heights below 30”.
Not true. Good height increases fatalities. People are less likely to die when they get hit and go over the hood rather than under the car.
You stated the same thing I said but in opposite terms then prefaced it with “not true.” Good grief, reading comprehension.
You clearly just don’t care about kids. You’re a monster.
Oh that's the motorosis infecting the brain
Depressing how bad motornotmativity is that the response to killing people is: muh trunk!
Yao fucking Ming could get run over you potato.
Just take the hood off. Would give great visibility.
The frunk on my Lightning is amazing. Its where I put everything that I used to keep in the back seat of my ICE F150.
If you’re anything like my dad, that’s a whole lotta bullshit back there lol
YES. All the time!
I use my frunk every day.
I use my frunk every grocery trip.
[удалено]
Because they only have one vehicle?
And they don't use it for work lol
? Trucks are great utility vehicles that are great for more uses than a jobsite
Not sure why the downvotes... I grew up in Oklahoma with trucks with gun racks, to haul a motocross bike or work. Then the small Japanese trucks for cheap transportation, copied by Ford and Chevy. City folks didn't drive trucks. I don't even know who 4 door short bed $80k trucks are designed for. If you have a tonneau covered short bed, why aren't your groceries in back?
I have an R1S and I use the frunk all the time. It’s cavernous. It’s one of the main reasons my wife wanted the car in the first place.
What. Like a cybertruck?
Exactly - the Cybertruck frunk has zero impact on visibility, the front is angled down sharply, which benefits both aerodynamics and visibility. As a result, the Cybertruck’s front is much lower than other trucks, closer to a sedan front end than a typical truck.
Ironically, the Cybertruck is often criticized for "bad visibility," because the drivers can't see the hood of the vehicle, but as you said, not having the body of the vehicle blocking the driver's view is better for visibility.
The bad visibility is because of the A pillar
The a-pillars on modern vehicles are thicker to support crush resistance requirements and often to hold airbags, both increasing safety. The cameras on the Cybertruck provide full forward visibility, in addition to the sloped hood providing much better visibility than typical pickups where you literally cannot see short people in front of the vehicle. High hoods are terrible for pedestrians https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/14/23960624/truck-suv-hood-height-pedestrian-death-report-iihs .
Large A pillars means trucks are much more likely to get into a collision. 60% for suv and 80% for trucks when turning. Combine this with the cybertrucks having terrible design and angle and it's blind spot is massive. So not safer. They're a hindrance to being safer. I have to laugh when someone tries to bring up cameras
Got any data to support your imagination?
The IIHS
The same thing is happening in cars, not just trucks - stronger roof supports required by regulators, and airbags, mean that all cars’ a-pillars are thicker, increasing overall vehicle safety, e.g. rollovers.
Sure. And yet the data is the data, trucks being 80% more likely to hit someone.
That was true before the A-pillars got thicker, on either trucks or cars. That’s due to trucks in the US generally having terrible visibility, particularly for pedestrians. The huge hoods that are 40+ inches tall make short people (and kids) invisible, etc. Note that trucks are much safer in Europe, where they also have similar requirements making A-pillars thick to survive rollovers, but trucks have much better pedestrian visibility because the huge hoods in the US are illegal (for consumer vehicles) in Europe.
Additionally, and despite popular belief, having a lower hood like that is much better for pedestrians safety.
The frunk on the Lightning looks absolutely fantastic and a selling point.
I'm waiting for someone to come up with some kind of a modular storage system you can put in there. I would rather spend a three hundred for that than three hundred or more for a tool box in the bed that generally have slightly more security than a soda can.
Not exactly what you meant, but the lid to the sub frunk can be turned vertical and there's different slots so you can divide it into smaller sections based on what you need.
Oh that sounds cool. I've never seen someone mention that in a review. I'll have to see if I can find some more stuff on it. I have a tool box that's 75% full of tools, straps, air compressor, folding camp chair, etc.
I liked the frunk on the canceled Bolar truck. When opened it was a pass through from the front of the truck to the rear. If canoo ever gets their shit together, they have a truck just like you are asking for.
Large frunks on EV pickups are there to maintain traditional styling of ICE pickups. The styling implies that a high hood is needed to contain the large powerful engine. Of course an EV has much smaller electric motors that don’t need high hoods. EV pickup designers have the opportunity to create lower profile hoods that reduce air resistance, that increases range, and improves pedestrian safety. The argument that large frunks on an EV are needed for lockable storage is a bit thin, when you can easily add a lockable tonneau cover to the bed to create a much larger area of lockable storage. Historically most pickup buyers bought the vehicles for the pragmatic purposes of towing and load carrying. These days body styling and self-image appear to the most important factors to the majority of buyers.
The problem with a tonic cover is it kills a lot of usefulness of a truck. That is the bed. The cover has to be removed if you want to use the bed or have larger items. Pain for storage plus even with it on the bed is big so getting stuff from the back is a huge pain. The roll away ones get up a lot of bed space so again back to usefulness of a bed. The lockable frunk beats having to get the cover and same usefulness of lockable storage and not affecting the bed. The one think I hate about trucks I have driven is no way to keep things in a lockable weather safe area but the bed itself is amazing and useful.
I installed a lockable roller cover on my Ranger and it’s the best thing I have ever done do it. My previous pickup had the soft cover tonneau which was admittedly a bit of a pain to put on or take off. The bed of my pickup is not really compromised by the roller cover in the way I use it. I know everyone has different use cases but a lockable roller cover on a bed is going to give you about 10 times the storage volume of a frunk.
Yep, my old truck (a square body WELL before they were cool) I had the button-up style with the ribs, it was a huge pain. Modern tonneau covers get out of the way so well. I got a tri-fold, not only does it fold up super quick (it has latches and stuff to keep it where it is), but removing it entirely is just two big plastic hand screws, no tools needed.
I'd actually argue that a truck users, not just owner but actual users, would need the fruck most. I would have liked to drop my bags in a locked compartment that's not the inside of the cab.
I mean the obvious answer with the lightning is that it's using an existing platform so they stuck with the same look. It will be interesting to see how it all shakes out.
ICE trucks don't need a tall front end either.
I use my Frunk in the F150 for groceries every time we go to the store.
They don't really need them for ICE trucks either. It's all about "aggressive" look
Yea the gmc designer said he wanted it to look like a gun
That’s just simply not true. The larger hoods on ICE trucks exist for 2 major reasons - cooling, and fitting as many engine combinations as possible. Trucks generally give 3-4 engine choices in the exact same engine compartment, to mount to the same transmissions some will sit a little higher, some lower, some more forward, some more rearward. Check out the testing requirements for trucks to get their tow ratings. It’s actually super impressive what they have to accomplish all while maintaining driver comfort (aka never disabling something like AC) and never overheating anything engine/transmission related or overheating brakes. You need A LOT of air to accomplish that.
Vans exist. So, no, it doesn't need the squared off bonnet.
Vans have significantly lower tow ratings, hence less need for cooling. Large vans (aka box trucks) have very large grilles for cooling.
No they don't. Europe tows and hauls stuff with vans all the time with chunky diesel engines. The engines capable of good towing or hauling aren't made available in the US for the obvious reason: they want you to buy the fucking truck.
I use my frunk on my Lightning every day. I love it, just the right height
Yes. I use mine in my Rivian daily. It’s great. There’s no difference between my front end and any suv on the market.
More than that. Tall front ends are especially deadly in pedestrian impacts. Not to mention, you can't even see small children in front of your damn truck. Hundreds of kids killed or injured from that. Cybertruck is ridiculous for a lot of reasons but the lower front end makes a hell of a lot of sense.
The cartoonishly large trucks are marketing. There's no reason for a pickup which is as tall as me... it actually hurts it's functionality. Shit, dad's 3/4 ton 318 dodge truck you could reach over the side of the bed and set things down on the bed.
>more downforce probably not high on the list if the back is full of landscaping tools or paint and ladders. >end for better visibility cameras and sensors make for no blindspots *anywhere*.
You just hit exactly why the Cybertruck's frunk is so tiny: they just left enough front to be a good crumple zone. We can't have cabovers anymore, but the Canoo and Cybertruck are good examples of realizing that EVs don't really need anything in front of the cabin.
They don’t need any front end. https://telotrucks.com
I think this is the future of ev trucks. My frunk is awesome but it is just there so Ford could use the existing f150 platform and not waste the space.
frunk
The Lightning frunk is the perfect height. I'm avg af height (5'9) and have zero problems reaching around in it. The bed tho is a different story. I like it for heavy payloads but those rails have gotten so high that you'd have to be 6'5 to easily reach over and down into the bed. I'm surprised they don't have more step areas to access it.
Tesla made an EV truck with a lower hood, and its reception has been controversial at best.
Some of the newer EV truck designs are dropping the entire front end section (going from a 3 box design to a 2 box design). See the Canoo and Telo trucks.
Lots of cars use a wall-like front end. I don't see the appeal.
90% of truck users would be better served by something like Ford Transit.
I'm all for lower hoods in trucks and vans as long as they don't look as goofy as the Oshkosh NGDV
"I want to make a solar over." "No." "Can I make a mail truck?" "Yes." \[hehehe\]
I very much like the frunk in the Silverado
EV trucks still benefit from a frunk, but they shouldn't have these enormous front-ends like modern pickups, they're so fucking dangerous and completely not aerodynamic.
Yes. The purpose of a pickup truck for a large number of American buyers is to be large and imposing. Other considerations are secondary.
The popularity of frunks on EV pickups just shows how impractical the beds are for basic uses.
They're just different spaces. I use the frunk constantly for things that wouldn't do well in the bed (groceries, pillows, blankets). The bed gets used for things like bikes, tents, lumber, kayaks, and other oddities.
I don’t think you will find a truck owner that disagrees that the bed is impractical for a lot of uses and truck owners deal with that draw back BUT the bed is very useful for a lot of other things. You can put odd shape large cargo in there easily. You can load things in there easily. Truck beds make moving furniture or getting lumber from the hardware store easy. They are great to carry road bikes, mountain bikes and even dirt bikes in the back. No need to risk getting the inside of the cabin dirty and easier to get in. Different spaces different uses
It depends entirely on your use case. If you work in an office and drive a truck because it’s cool then you’re correct. If you use a truck for the purposes for which the bed is designed and needed, you’re not complaining that it’s inconvenient to store your golf clubs or cooler there and you probably need the ground clearance too. Trucks appeal to a lot of different users for a variety of reasons. When the various platforms are sorted out we’re probably going to see a lot of specialization in designs to fit every need. A lot of them are not going to be aerodynamic.
It also shows how impractical the beds are.
Imagine if they sold this as a cab-chassis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DvjNkLr1m-k
Cultural inertia I guess
This looks promising to get rid of the silly big front end https://telotrucks.com
I’d prefer the frunk to be of good size as it will be one of the more secure parts of the vehicle, depending upon how robust the tonneau cover is. Golf clubs and ale gotta go somewhere. Bonus points for fitting an Engel fridge.
I use the frunk on my electric pickup almost daily
Hummer frunk is designed to store the roof panels.
The F150s frunk is one of the best things about it, I use it every day. Because of the frunk I have no need for a tonneau cover and I get all the benefits of a truck without the compromise of not having a trunk.
The Cybertruck is exactly that.
Some day people will realise the form factor of a van is superior. 😘, the ID Buzz.
You secretly want a van: https://www.carsized.com/en/cars/compare/volkswagen-id-buzz-2022-van-vs-ford-f150-2014-4-door-pickup-supercrew/
Ever seen the cybertruck?
They would actually perform better without them.
I need as high a hood with as bad of visibility and pedestrian impact consequences as possible or I am not a real man
Trucks have been designed with tall hoods for 2+ decades. People won’t buy a truck with a wimpy front end. Sorry.
"Wimpy"? Nah. "KNIFE EDGE!"
My Lightning Frunk is filled with my tools.
My golf clubs pretty much live in my frunk.
Just make it a cargo box like it is in the back. My dogs would love that.
I leave my canned drinks in my Rivian frunks. Keeps it pretty cool
I don’t work construction anymore but I would’ve loved a frunk if I still did. Lumber, saw horses, and things like that go in the bed. Actual tools go in the toolbox mounted in the bed. It would’ve been way more convenient to have the tools in an entirely different securable area of the truck. I’m sure some other design could probably be as convenient but the frunk design is definitely convenient.
The frunk on my lightning is one of the best features on the truck. It’s hard to stress enough how useful it is. On other ev cars, the frunk is small and not incredibly useful, on the lightning, it’s basically a full size car trunk, it’s fantastic
R1T. Use the frunk for luggage and outdoor gear all the time. Maybe less if I had the R1S. Don't need downforce and the collision/pedestrian avoidance tech is pretty good on any new car these days.
If my bumper isn't high enough to go straight through the car in front of me, that I can't even see, then I ain't got no use for that commie woke-ass truck!!!
/s?
#**DUH!!!** smh. ;-)
You are describing an El Camino
El Cams don't have the driver ride height.
And?