Ford broaches the e-crate fray with F-100 Eluminator concept

[Hagerty]

Ford is charging headlong into the silent, torque-rich arena of electric crate motors. Meet the F-100 Eluminator concept, an electrified take on a classic 1978 F-100 pickup with Mustang Mach-E GT Performance running gear stuffed under its workmanlike body and frame.
https://www.hagerty.com/media/news/ford-broaches-the-e-crate-fray-with-f-100-eluminator-concept/

[hyperv6]

I can enjoy sorting the problems of installing a flat crank Coyote V8 here with much more satisfaction. 

If you want to play with electric and sort out issues wire more outlets in you garage. 

With my Coyote I would leave you behind. Especially on the Hot Rod Power Tour. 

[JagManBill]

reviewing the comments, I'm pretty sure this product is falling on deaf ears...

[hyperv6]

You just don’t offer vegetarian to a steak eating crowd. 

[PAL]

"The setup is good for the same 480 hp and 634 lb-ft of torque, although purchased a la carte the Eluminator crate motor will make 281 hp and 317 lb-ft." So what does this even mean? So the set up is good for x amount of hp & torque but if someone buys it via crate you're going to get roughly 59% of the hp and half of the torque? Why? And I'm with everyone else; the huge tablet thing sticking profusely on the dash is beyond hideous.

[Eric]

The concept truck uses two Eluminator motors, and the way it's tuned, total system power tops out at 480 hp. Bought as a single crate motor, the Eluminator makes 281 hp.

[Srmert]

It means a single motor does 281. That truck has two, one for each axle.

[Tim]

I think it means that this setup has dual motors like the Mach-E GT, but if just one crate motor gives the lower amount of power. (I should have refreshed before posting to see this was already answered.)

[DT]

Here is my take on that. The F-100 Eluminator contains the same drivetrain from the Mach-E GT Performance within its custom chassis, which is essentially an Eluminator electric motor with 240 HP on each axle. The E-crate setup is one motor with 281 HP.

[JBaguley]

I recognize the practicality, and somewhat understand the simplicity and reliability that drive the motivation to electrify vintage iron. But I think there can never be the passion inspired by a true classic powered by the roar and purr of long-dead dinosaurs. Vintage Detroit muscle with an artificial heart, high spirited LBC's tamed by silent motors. No, nothing here to inspire or excite.

[Srmert]

Very few classic LBCs ever had 281 HP! Let alone the torque. That’s close to modern 3 liter German power. That’s going to bend the flexible frame of an LBC (TR, MG, JH) like a pretzel!

[erne75]

Boring!!!

[Zephyr]

Rather than retrofit a classic car I think this would work better as a built from the ground up hot rod - i.e. - a brand new frame from one aftermarket company, a body from another, etc. . It seems inevitable that people will start selling kit cars, ready to drop in the electric set-up of your choice. Electric Caterham anybody?

[Gary]

While I'm not thrilled with the idea of electric I'm not thrilled with the filling up with gas at $4.00 a gallon and getting 10-12 mpg either. I see a lot of cars I would love to have but remember filling up those 25 gallon gas tanks back in the 60-70's and think what it would cost me today. A real turnoff. I find myself not driving my cars, I have 8 older collectors, and driving my newer Camry hybrid ,51-58mpg. I'm just not going to throw my money away to the big oil companies. P.S. my 2021 Camry is my first not American family car, I held out till I was 72. At least it is built here.

[BMD4800]

10-12 miles per gallon? 70s malaise cars, yes, but that was pretty easily corrected then and now.

With a bigger cam, more compression, heads, and a well tuned Quadrajet I could knock down 17 mpg with 2.73 gears. Once I swapped out to 3.90s, then I was in the 14s.
Most non solid-lifter, big block muscle cars were mid teens or better. A lot of the 10 mpg myth comes from folks who (still) don’t know how to properly set ignition timing or adjust the distributor curve, or driving with too much go pedal. Either way, it is largely false.

As to the price of fuel, if one is commuting everyday at $4.00 per gallon in a big block car, maybe that’s a choice. But $100 on 25 gal of fuel is nothing. I spent $85 on 5 gallons last Saturday.

[Gary]

Well I tried just about everything on my new 77 Ford 150 4x4 with 351m and I still only got 10-12mpg I loved the truck but was disgusted with the mileage. I was thrilled when I bought my new 99 Dodge Dakota 4x4 and was getting 17-18 mpg, however, today that is not even good enough. Trying to figure out how I can bring that up to around 23-24mpg. Any ideas? Oh, I do get better than 16mpg on my 64 corvette. I plan on putting a 5spd in it next summer and believe that should put me up to 20 or better.

[MATTMERICA]

Gary, I like your choice of vehicles, and I certainly appreciate your thriftiness on the gas, but your mileage isn't that bad. I have a 2020 sports sedan that has well over 500hp and it gets 16 mpg in the city, maybe 23 on the highway. And that is premium fuel. And it is fun as hell to waste gas in that thing 🙂

[BMD4800]

Gary,

On your 351m, it has a lazy ignition curve, especially for a low compression engine.  You’ll need to tinker with springs and weights, maybe take it to a shop that can recurve it if you’re not comfortable yourself.  What initial and total amounts as well as rate depends on your gearing and transmission.   2V Cleveland’s and M’s have big chambers and low compression.  This generally requires more advance for peak efficiency.  In the 70s, in an effort to control NOx emissions total timing, initial and mech advance, was pulled way back.   Again, each combination has its own sweet spot, but generally speaking you need more.  You want to have a decent amount of initial, 10-16, then the rest in the distributor.  Low-speed load vs total demand drives that amount as well as the rate of increase.  So, testing is key.  If you’re gonna carry a heavy load, you can always back 4 degrees out to be safe, but if you’re getting all your advance through the distributor you’ll suffer the common 70s Ford excess cranking and poor starting performance with little to no advance.  I love around 14 degrees of initial advance.  Makes the engine real snappy and starts like a dream. 

Also, I’ve found in non-performance engines with less than 10:1 compression and a good cooling system, 89 octane is the best.  
What carb are you running?  
Connect your vacuum advance to a ported, not full manifold, source.  Also, if you have cold weather performance problems installed a thermal vac switch, it will prevent advance when cold.  Make sure the carb is tuned properly.  Especially in steady-state.   Part throttle excessively rich is pretty common and will kill fuel economy.  

For the Dakota and the Ford, exhaust efficiency is a problem.  Increase the efficiency there, you won’t see much in power, but your mileage will jump.  

hope that helps.  

[TA76]

With all the profits going to Japan. And why not drive the collectors cars what else are you going to do with the money you earned? Just saying . . . .

[Gary]

And where do you think all the oil profits go?

[Cornbinder]

Three years ago,it was North Dakota and Texas.

[KenBoss]

I would LIKE to not see a electric anything and stop ruining classics.

[red-on-red]

Electrifying vintage cars ranks right up there with cloning sheep.
You have proven that it can be done, but why would you want to do it ??

[Christopher66]

This makes me sad.

[xployalist]

The real news IMO is the price of the motor: only $4000. This is cheaper than the cost of EV conversion-focused motors like the NetGain HyPer 9 that have about half as much torque. While the dash job on the interior is hideous, there's some real potential for a "budget" EV hot rod build of about $20k in parts, depending on how much the motor controller and batteries cost. Thankfully plenty of idiots wreck their Teslas and other EVs, so the price of used batteries is being driven down.
To answer some discussions about range, some of the earlier commercial EV conversions were body-on-frame pickups, specifically S-10/Sonoma and Ranger, as you could shove lots and lots of lead acid batteries under the bed on the frame, and the truck was already designed for the extra weight. You could do something similar here with a modern LiFe-based battery pack. This has the benefit of putting more weight on the rear wheels while also allowing a useable bed.
I think EV conversions could be a great idea in the future for restos. Less mechanical parts and lack of gas means less worries on startup after a long time sitting.
The only other shame is so many of these pro conversions omit a transmission entirely. I know it's not necessary, but I want to shift things, even if it's just a glorified lo-hi.

[Studenorton]

"Batteries not included." Way to ruin Christmas morning, Ford.

[TA76]

Nor are the computers to run it.

[merlebalke]

Love this Ford EV. From the pictures I've seen it looks very well constructed. Ford built millions of these things and the world won't end if a few are turned into EV's.

[BMD4800]

I’d like a short bed, in-line 6, 3 on the tree so I can teach my kid to drive something that requires skill and understanding of a complex machine.  Proper execution of a 2-1 downshift, while turning a corner in a non-power steering pickup, on a snow-covered street is the real driver’s test.  

[2manyprojects]

I can't help but wonder how the comments about this article (and any other about EVs) compare to what people said in the late 1880's as Karl Benz introduced the horseless carriage: "Wait a second, what do you mean the motor/horse is behind me?", "It won't be any fun if I can't see the tailpipe".
Relax. It took 60 years to get from the Model A to the Mustang. Things will get better... eventually.
That being said, I'm not a pickup guy - I can't stand having to help all my friends move.
And that tablet thing is hideous.

[BMD4800]

You can say no.

[F360Spider]

I just can't see spending all that money and effort into removing the very soul from a classic car.

[WayneG]

In the email description of the F-100 it states it's a 1976. In the article it is stated the truck is a 1978. Neither is correct. The rectangular headlights were fitted to the 1979 Ford trucks, round headlights adorned the 1978 "pregnant grille" pickups. (This may be a '78 with '79 headlights.)

[Cornbinder]

Round headlights were only on 1978 bare bones Custom series. Ranger's, XLT's and higher trim levels got rectangular headlights, going to all rectangular for 1979.

[Ajakeski]

Somehow, it will leak oil.

[Vcdoorco4]

Seems like a show pony to fill floor space and retain a few interns. I’d much prefer a 429 swap. But, I can see some potential for cars like an old XJ-6. Limited range probably not an issue, it would actually start most days, and you’d save a ton on oil dry for your garage floor.

[Studenorton]

Would have to be Lucas, though. And, positive earth. Probably something like 36 volt.

[Maestro1]

Nathan, as I've said before about issues electric this was inevitable. I am on the Left Coast and there is a lot of interest out here regarding conversions. There's even a group of us who are interested in restoring the cars so that the exterior and interior look like a an accurate representation of the car's era and doing an electric conversion. I am in the Hobby because I really like old cars, but I'm thinking about picking one (I have a reluctant Plymouth in the barn that doesn't respond well to therapy so we're not talking to each other) and buying an electric conversion for it.
Three reasons I can't now: There's no infrastructure here for charging and no one here can fix the thing if it fails for some reason. And electric cars do fail. The third is price; if one waits for a while market forces will push acquisition costs down. Another factor regarding prices will be volume: Hopefully prices will recede as more units are produced and competition enters the marketplace.
Anyway, thank you for this and stay well.

[Bostwick9]

Don't forget regular high $ battery packs every 8-10 years.
And there is no plan afoot currently that will supply all the power these electric dreams will need. Especially not if there's a ban on coal and oil. Wind and solar won't be cutting it, not now and they still won't in 2035 no matter how much banning of ICE our betters do and demand for renewable alternatives.
You won't be going anywhere. Unless it's on the bus.

[DaveP]

OK – All well and good, but I’d prefer if Ford would just re-issue an 8 ft Styleside bed for my old 71 F250! (I NEED one that isn’t Swiss cheese!)
BTW we have a work vehicle that is a plug in EV and it is sort-off fun to drive (for work) – it really accelerates but can get a bit squirrely when you put the petal to the metal.
If I want an EV I would buy a new one (If I had the $$$) and NOT electrify my Vette, bike, F250, 37 Nash Lafayette or my wife's Karmann Ghia.

[Srmert]

The real issue all of us have is that the EPA and the federal government may eventually kill the ICE. We then get stuck with doorstops, maybe even fined or taxed. No second amendment protecting your right to classic or muscle cars. We may not like it, but hell, they want to get rid of cows over the methane they emit.
Rather have it electric than crushed!

[BMD4800]

“ No second amendment protecting your right to classic or muscle cars.”

Good luck taking them. Either of them.

[MATTMERICA]

When the refrigerator was invented, many ice companies went under. But you can buy ice pretty much anywhere these days, and people still use it/need it.
When the horse was displaced by the auto, it didn't simply go away. You can still get horse feed very easily.
"They" can't take away guns, and "they" won't be taking away gas. At least for 75 years or more.

[tigercat]

No thank you, for distance, availability of fuel and much better torque and horsepower numbers I will not change over from superior fossil fuels. Government mandates, involvement and encroachment into our daily lives and into the hobby we all have our hearts in while still offering a less competitive product at what I am sure are currently astronomic prices is a no sale. I will continue to drink at the horse trough until they take away my right or the water runs dry.

[VetteKid56]

Why ruin a perfectly good vehicle to turn it it to a very limited use item?

[Tim]

It seems most people are put off by replacing a gasoline engine with an electric motor in a classic vehicle. I agree that for some vehicles, that is blasphemy. But for some classics, the original engine wasn't anything more than a means of propulsion. Those giant motors sucking a gallon of gas every nine miles are good candidates for replacement. How about a '60s Lincoln Continental? The electric motor would provide that smooth, quiet glide that Lincoln wanted without any of the drawbacks of keeping the old motor on life support.

[Gary]

I always thought about putting the 2.3 eco that mustang claims 300hp and 30mpg into a nice 60 thunderbird. It would make a great affordable driver.

[Bostwick9]

Someone did that with a 59 Edsel, Gary.
I loved it. What a clever idea. Always prepared for the next gas crisis.

[Bostwick9]

Except when the time comes to replace the battery packs....and the cost... Yard ornament.
And that old Lincoln engine can still get you 900 miles in a day unlike an electric which takes hours to charge.

[OkJustOneMore]

Nah I'll pass on the electric thank you. Old truck looks good. You see the market on electric motorcycles haven't taken off either. Got to have a personality, soul, vibe, sound, feeling, heartbeat. These aren't disposable phones Detroit.

[67StangGirl]

I would love to see it in a 67 Stang. It would be cool to sit next to the new EV Stang with the old girl showing of her shiny new Eluminator.