EMC Flash truck unveiled: 40 miles of electric power in a F-150 body for $50,000
Electric Motors Corporation has been working on upgrading Ford F-150 trucks with more advanced powertrains for a while now. The company's drives incorporate PML-Hi-Pa electric motor technology and were in the F-150 that was at SEMA last year (see more here). But EMC has bigger plans, including a pair of plug-in serial hybrid trucks, called Flash and Thunderbolt, that it hopes to start building next year. The company took the wraps off of the Flash prototype at its Wakarusa, Indiana headquarters over the weekend during the Green Jobs for America Exposition.
Pickuptrucks.com's Mike Levine got his hands on some images of the new and unconventional vehicle and got the story from EMC CEO Wil Cashen about the two-truck project. The Flash has lithium-ion batteries that will be able to drive for 40, 100 or 250 miles, depending on which option the buyer chooses. All versions use a 1.2 liter gas engine as a range extender. The electric motor and powertrain should be enough to to tow 5,700 pounds and cary 1,940 pounds but won't be able to go off-road. Price: under $50,000 for the base model before a potential federal tax credit of $7,500. The Thunderbolt will be even more powerful and is intended to serve as a power source at work sites and have built-in WiFi.
Cashen described his company's methods as Tesla-like, saying, "It's an electric truck with an onboard range-extender generator system. We've taken an F-150 and have done something similar to Tesla, where they used a Lotus sports car for the underpinnings of their electric car. We're using an American-made vehicle for [the underpinnings] of our truck." There's a video of Cashen speaking about his company on Indiana Business after the jump.
[Source: EMC, Pickuptrucks.com]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mark Kiernan 5:14PM (9/08/2009)
if it is true it is pretty good.
Reply
DasBoese 5:23PM (9/08/2009)
"Tesla (...) used a Lotus sports car for the underpinnings of their electric car."
No they didn't. When will this stupid myth die?
Reply
PopSmith 5:52PM (9/08/2009)
I fully agree with you. I hate this myth and yet it refuses to die. I've linked to a Tesla Blog (on their site) that says:
"In fact, we recently counted how many parts the two cars shared and the total number was under 7% by parts count."
See the blog, and read it, here:
http://www.teslamotors.com/blog3/?p=74
Dave 6:23PM (9/08/2009)
It will die when it stops being true.
The "underpinnings" are the chassis. You can alter the engine cradle and change shocks and springs to support more weight.
But that doesnt change the fact that it is a Lotus chassis.
Get over it.
nrb 6:46PM (9/08/2009)
If they started with a Lotus chassis, who cares? No one expects EVERYTHING about the car to be machined from scratch.
Chris M 7:04PM (9/08/2009)
Dave, the Tesla Roadster is longer and has a lower door sill than the Elise, so it isn't the same chassis. Granted, it is roughly based on the Elise design, but was extensively modified to fit the radically different requirements of an EV.
Jeremy 8:21PM (9/08/2009)
That's correct in that it started with the Elise chassis, but Tesla modified it and the Tesla chassis is longer, wider, and has lowered door sills plus has changes obviously to the area where the engine and trans would usually mount, etc. It's a very very light and stiff chassis and it's also quite safe in crash testing. The finished car is also longer and wider, and actually a few inches shorter than the Elise.
About 6% or so shared parts between the two cars. Major ones are the windshield (and wiper), parts of the brakes, and some of the dashboard parts. It's certainly a far cry from being a "modified Elise" as a lot of people like to brand it. However, some of the great aspects of the Elise like the stiff and light chassis are not lost, despite Tesla's changes to it.
Jeremy
jake 9:00PM (9/08/2009)
@Dave
They didn't really use a Lotus sports car for the Roadster's underpinnings, like this company is using an F-150 as the underpinnings. They used the underpinnings of the Elise chassis for the Roadster. There is a huge difference (one is a simple conversion, the other is almost a complete redesign).
DasBoese 7:25AM (9/09/2009)
The Tesla chassis uses Lotus' patented construction method (bonded aluminium) and has a similar general layout (MR), and that's it.
Saying the Roadster shares its underpinnings with the Elise would be like saying the Dodge Ram shares its underpinnings with the Ford F-150 because they're both made of steel, body-on-frame and front engined pickup trucks.
Throwback 9:20AM (9/09/2009)
Wow, the Tesla kool-aid is really flowing. If it where not for Lotus, there would be no Tesla roadster. Lotus was specifically chosen as the basis for the roadster, because of the light stiff chassis. Saying "only" 6% of the parts are the same means nothing. What did you start with? The VW Golf forms the basis of several different VW cars with different wheelbases and widths, are those cars not Golf based?
Relax fanboys, saying the roadster is Lotus based is not an insult. Lotus has been about light efficient cars long before Tesla existed.
Reply
Bernd 2:01PM (9/09/2009)
Exactly right.
If the doorsils are lower, they are probably the ones of the Europa S, which is also closer to the Teslas wheelbase.
Anyway, using the Lotus "construction-kit-chassis" was the most sensible thing they could ever do.
It is very likely the best available sports car chassis platform in terms of weight, stiffness and variability out there.
If you would want to do any better, you would have to start from scratch, which is too expensive for a low production-volume car. And you still have the risk of loosing that race.
Reply
Imperial Phantom 6:37PM (9/09/2009)
Who gives a crap what the platform of the TR is? Who cares how much of it is originally Lotus? Whether it's 5 percent or 80 percent, what does that change about the quality of the car itself?
Reply
future-autos.blogspot.com 6:39PM (9/09/2009)
Anyways, I bet this will get quite a bit of farm use, where it could be a gas-free workhorse. Good idea, and a success in the making.
Reply
Paolo 6:36PM (9/12/2009)
yes, but how did they manage to make it so ugly?
Reply