Connect with us

News

I took a Ford F-150 Lightning to Tesla Superchargers: The Good and Bad

Published

on

Update 4:33 pm: Charge rates updated for accuracy. FordPass statistics were incorrect. Added paragraph 7 to add detail regarding use of Ford App to charge.

Ford and Tesla unified the electric vehicle community by announcing a strategic decision to collaborate.

Last month, Ford gained access to Tesla’s Supercharger Network, giving non-Tesla EV drivers their first opportunity to charge at its piles across North America.

Ford was pleasant enough to send an F-150 Lightning to my house, drop it off, and allow me to drive it for three days. They also sent a Charging Adapter, which was necessary for using Tesla Superchargers.

The truck arrived at my house early Monday morning, and I was sure to take it for a spin to deplete some of the range before I drove it to my nearest V3 Supercharger. This was my first bit of criticism, as the closest Supercharger that would enable the F-150 Lightning to charge was around 45 minutes away. It is not the closest Tesla Supercharger to me, as there is one just ten minutes away, but its V2 capabilities would not allow me to charge a non-Tesla EV.

Ford announces Tesla Supercharger access to F-150 Lightning, Mustang Mach-E drivers

Advertisement
-

The truck was great, but that’s another story altogether.

First Impressions

I arrived at the first Supercharger on Monday evening, ready to give this a first go. I pulled into a spot in a row of unoccupied superchargers; the Lightning’s charging port is located just behind the left front tire, so you need to take up two spots, something that Tesla is working on.

I logged into the Ford app and selected the charger in front of me. This ” unlocked” the Supercharger, enabling me to grab the cable and attach the adapter. Charging was ready, and it was as simple as plugging in and sitting back in the driver’s seat, where the heads-up display told me my current percentage, and an estimated time to 90 percent state of charge.

It was super tight to get the cable to reach. I had some room to pull forward, admittedly, but I was driving a truck that I didn’t own, and I didn’t want to take the chance of scraping the underbody of the vehicle. Even with repositioning myself and trying to angle the truck in order to reach the cable comfortably, it was hard to get the cable to get to the connector.

A few extra feet would help even the most cautious drivers charge more easily, which I believe is important.

Overall, it was a good experience. My charging statistics for this session were:

Advertisement
-
  • Charging Power – 106 kW
  • Energy Added – 37.4 kWh
  • Time Charged – 21 minutes
  • Distance Gained – 96 miles
  • Cost – $21.16

It was not an overwhelmingly time-consuming process. It was quick, it was easy, and it was nice to have access to a Supercharger. When I have Ford EVs, I usually have to charge at my local grocery store on a low-speed Volta charger, which will give me around 10-12 miles per hour.

Second Charging Session

My second session was much better. I was able to get into a Supercharger stall that was put on the side of the spot as it was an end space, so it was easier and much more reasonable to pull into.

There was significantly less tension on the Supercharger cable, which I think will increase longevity and keep the number of operable stalls up.

This session was smoother in terms of pulling in and charging. While longer cables will eliminate a lot of the problems I had during the first charging session, Tesla’s end-spot Superchargers are super ideal for non-Tesla EVs. This was my preferred space, and I would have used it the day prior if another vehicle wasn’t already utilizing it.

My charging stats for this session were:

  • Charge Power – 106 kW
  • Energy Added – 48.3 kWh
  • Time Charged – 33 minutes
  • Distance Gained – 115 miles
  • Cost $22.08

Quality of the Adapter

The adapter Ford sent along was super quality, solid, and heavy. It felt like a piece of necessary equipment that is designed to last several years and won’t break on you due to inferior quality.

It was packaged nicely and included a nice message from CEO Jim Farley. It simply attaches to the Tesla Supercharger Cable and goes into the Ford EV, locking in place:

I was impressed by the quality of the adapter and I believe it would last years for Ford EV owners who plan to use it to access Superchargers.

Final Thoughts

Ford EV drivers are going to use Tesla Superchargers for years to come, and I think that what I experienced was a good start of the overall charging experience.

Everything was high-quality, fast, effective, and easy to use. It felt nice to roll into a Tesla Supercharger and gain adequate of range in a short period of time, and it was something that I feel a lot of EV drivers will appreciate, even if it is a tad pricey at this point in time.

I think that the lengthening of Supercharger cables will pay dividends, but I also think that Tesla could build new Supercharger stations with mandatory end spot positioning. This enables easier access to the Superchargers for non-Tesla EVs.

Advertisement
-

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming

Tesla’s Cybercab line now builds robotaxis faster than Tesla can deploy them, Lars Moravy says.

Published

on

By

Tesla’s Cybercab line in Texas can now build the two seat robotaxi faster than the company can put it into service, according to Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering. “We don’t run every day because the line can run so fast. It’s currently outpacing our deployments,” Moravy said in a new Cybercab deep dive from Munro Live. “So, it’s a bit of a race right now. Who’s going to go faster? Right now the manufacturing line’s ahead.”

Tesla’s official Robotaxi account shared a Cybercab analysis video on X on Monday, calling it a “Cybercab engineering deep dive.” Moravy’s comments go further than what he told analysts on the Q3 earnings call last week, when he said the Cybercab line’s listed capacity of more than 125,000 units a year undersells what it can actually run.

The tour shows where that speed comes from. Tesla’s unboxed process splits the Cybercab into front, rear, side and center modules that are built and tested on their own before they meet on a short final line. That final line has just 25 fully automated stations, which Tesla’s team estimated is a fifth to a tenth of what a Model Y needs. The full line is about 78% automated, the framing line is already at 100%, and the layout uses roughly 50% less floor space per vehicle. The stated goal is “100% automation in 10 second cycle time,” or one finished Cybercab every 10 seconds.

Tesla also deleted the paint shop. Only the side modules are coated, and the exterior panels get their color inside the molding machine. Engineers said the car is designed to run at least 500,000 miles, which matters for a vehicle that will spend most of its day carrying riders.

The battery got the same treatment. The Cybercab uses an 88S6P pack of 4680 cells in a steel enclosure, a first for Tesla, with each module potted separately so a single failed module can be swapped instead of the whole pack. Wireless battery management boards replace a wiring harness, and new contactors are fast enough to drop the pyro fuse entirely. Tesla’s battery director graded the pack an A minus, compared with a D for the Model Y structural pack and a B minus for Cybertruck. Up front, the drive unit runs an 11:1 gear ratio versus roughly 9:1 on most Teslas, since the Cybercab does not need a high top speed.

Advertisement
-

The deployment side is now the bottleneck Moravy described. Tesla had more than 50 Cybercabs working the Formula 1 weekend in Austin, and Texas records show 463 Cybercabs registered. Tesla said on its earnings call that Cybercab service will launch in Dallas next month, and Moravy said the company is aiming to get Cybercabs to customers by the end of 2026. Every unit built so far has gone into Tesla’s own fleet since the line moved into volume production in April.

Munro Live also asked when it could get a Cybercab to tear down. Tesla’s answer: “Not yet.”

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.

Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.

This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:

With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.

This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.

Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.

Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.

The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.

Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.

For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.

Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Assisted Driving expands to tenth EU country

Published

on

Tesla has expanded its Tesla Assisted Driving (TAD) suite to its tenth European country, as Latvia joined a growing list of European Union member states authorizing the company’s advanced driver assistance technology.

Tesla Europe announced this morning that the system is now approved in Latvia, with a software rollout to begin soon.

The approval and rollout follow recognition of a provisional European type approval originally granted by the Netherlands’ RDW authority on April 10.

Latvia’s Road Traffic Safety Directorate (CSDD) evaluated the Dutch documentation, coordinated with the other national authorities, and reviewed updates from Tesla. These included tightened limits on speed offsets, automatic resets of any manual speed adjustments after each trip, and stronger driver monitoring.

In Europe, the feature is marketed as Tesla Assisted Driving after a recent rule change that labeled the name “Full Self-Driving” as misleading.

Tesla starts showing how FSD will change lives in Europe

The system remains an SAE Level 2 driver assistance tool, not unsupervised autonomy. It can control speed, steering, braking, lane changes, and intersections while following a navigation route. Drivers need not keep their hands on the wheel at all times, yet they must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to intervene immediately.

The sequence of EU recognitions began with the Netherlands in April and continued through Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, Czechia, Croatia, and Slovakia. Most have relied on mutual recognition of the single Dutch provisional approval rather than independent national testing.

These national clearances do not yet constitute bloc-wide authorization. An EU-wide decision requires a qualified majority in the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles: at least 15 of 27 member states representing 65 percent of the EU population. Larger markets, like Germany, France, and Italy, remain under review, and a vote is expected this December.

However, for Latvian Tesla owners with compatible vehicles and software, the imminent rollout expands access to the supervised system while underscoring that attentive human oversight remains essential.

Continue Reading