Chevy Tahoe tows 7900 lbs - Harvester needs at least 7.000.
Except for unibody vehicles like my Defender which can tow over 8,000 lbs but is not supposed to ever use a wdh per guidance from Land Rover.AFAIK, 5,000 lbs. is the limit without a WDH.
IOW, a WDH is required for more than 5,000 lbs "conventional" towing regardless of the total tow rating (even HD pickups that are rated to tow upwards of 18k lbs.)
So I wouldn't assume that having a WDH will increase the tow rating.
Yep, diesel used to be cheeper than gas, until all of the diesel cars & pickups came out and the oil companies decided they could make more money by jacking up the price.Diesel is just under $6 a gallon here too.
Elections have consequences.
Diesel has increased less than inflation over the last 10 years, and much of the increased cost is due to the mandate for Ultra Low Sulfur formulations.Yep, diesel used to be cheeper than gas, until all of the diesel cars & pickups came out and the oil companies decided they could make more money by jacking up the price.
Losing the frunk would be a deal breaker for me, it’s one of my most valued features in my Ford LightningI also agree with others, I so wish the Harvester had a generator that took the place of the frunk. It seems like that would improve some of the towing capacity issues and be better packaging.
I’m sure it’s not useless to everyone. Wonder how many need to tow with the Terra?The towing numbers for the Harvester models is a real disappointment and if those are the actual numbers I will be cancelling my reservation. A full size truck that can only town 5,000 LBS is useless
Agree.Price is the question, the difference in battery cost (both material and size) should more than make up for the 4 cylinder generator. If they price the Harvester similar to the BEV models with the same features and options, that will be a really hard sell. If the Harvester is priced something like $5,000 below a comparable BEV trim that will be compelling for a lot of people.
I also agree with others, I so wish the Harvester had a generator that took the place of the frunk. It seems like that would improve some of the towing capacity issues and be better packaging.
Yeah, I’d trade the frunk for towing capacity. Realistically, towing is an edge case for me, but “I want a frunk!” doesn’t seem like a primary buying motivator. I wonder if engineering is too set in stone at this point to change?Price is the question, the difference in battery cost (both material and size) should more than make up for the 4 cylinder generator. If they price the Harvester similar to the BEV models with the same features and options, that will be a really hard sell. If the Harvester is priced something like $5,000 below a comparable BEV trim that will be compelling for a lot of people.
I also agree with others, I so wish the Harvester had a generator that took the place of the frunk. It seems like that would improve some of the towing capacity issues and be better packaging.
I think they just started on the engineering solution for the Harvester option and probably could change the design at his stage. It's an easy out IMO, CEO Scott can just say, "Our customers wanted a higher tow rating near or at the BEV version level, so best engineering practice necessitated moving the generator to the frunk area." The only way a 250 HP in-line 4-cylinder would fit underneath the bed of the pickup is to have it be a dry-sump engine, or lay it flat, or possibly use the flat four cylinder from Porsche.Yeah, I’d trade the frunk for towing capacity. Realistically, towing is an edge case for me, but “I want a frunk!” doesn’t seem like a primary buying motivator. I wonder if engineering is too set in stone at this point to change?