Hacker News

points by kube-system 1 day ago | 0 comments

Ford had EV trucks that could do that before Tesla did.

The ford home integration setup never really worked as advertised. The idea is that if the home power fails, the truck will output high voltage DC to an inverter that powers the house. No owners have got this failing over reliably.

Most people just plug an extension cord into the onboard inverter. You have to manually flip it on and plug it in, but 240V30A is plenty for an emergency. Doing it this way isn't any different from any other vehicle with an onboard inverter though.

[–] pocksuppet 1 day ago

It's completely illegal unless your home has a "transfer switch" (manual or automatic) installed for this purpose - and if you're plugged into the generator side of a transfer switch, then you can't charge the truck, only discharge it. There are probably modules designed for solar power that allow two-way transfer safely.

On the other hand there are no tricky rules for an electric truck to have extra power outlets in it.

[–] pythonaut_16 1 day ago

I'd expect a lot of people might just use extension cords and plug critical devices directly into the truck.

[–] pocksuppet 1 day ago

As you should. That's a good way to handle emergency use. Much easier and safer than rewiring your house.

[–] NathanielK 1 day ago

Bingo. Unsurprisingly, the ford system is basically an off the shelf solar system minus the panels and with a very tiny battery to kickstart the system.

[–] thesuitonym 1 day ago

Do cybertrucks work any differently?

[–] NathanielK 1 day ago

I believe they use the vehicle's onboard inverter rather than an external one.

[–] kendkwncowncn 1 day ago

No one is saying they can’t. Drop the whataboutism, please.

[–] samdixon 1 day ago

The whole GP is irrelevant to the article regardless. Point being, what does it matter that the cybertruck has this feature when it's a not unique and b irrelevant to why it failed.

The whole comment comes across as an AI agent that is lacking severe human context by posting a complete non-sequitur, regardless if it is actually an agent or not.

[–] brightball 1 day ago

It was an article about the end of the Cybertruck. It’s my one story about a Cybertruck so I thought I’d share.

First time I’ve been compared to an AI agent.

[–] samdixon 1 day ago

Yeah sorry - that's an overly negative take. It's just odd to me the TOP comment on a post about the cybertruck winding down is a random anecdote about it's battery backup capabilities, lol.

[–] alt227 1 day ago

Do they now?

[–] dragontamer 1 day ago

I know its been a few years, but the Cybertruck has been an epic disaster.

Cybertruck was announced first. Then Ford _released_ the F150 Lightning, including the ability to operate as a backup battery for a house. And a dozen or so months later, Cybertruck comes out at a much higher price than F150 Lightning ever was.

[–] kamranjon 1 day ago

I think they might be commenting on the fact that the f150 lightning has been cancelled for some time now

[–] scottyah 1 day ago

Has it? It was the R&D car and really cut the costs of developing the robotaxi that they're going all-in on. 48v wiring, ethernet hub, giant casting tech, and a lot more.

[–] brightball 1 day ago

The price point on the Cybertruck and the Lightning were comparable, particularly if you price based on range.

[–] dragontamer 12 hours ago

F150 Lightning had significant numbers of trucks sold at $40k though. It was a bit of a "lose money per sale" stunt, but Tesla never even got close (and Tesla is also up for losing money per sale for stunts).

Eventually F150 Lightning stabilized around 50k to 60k IIRC, but Cybertruck _started_ $100k and even today is $70k-ish. And ONLY if you get incredibly reduced battery packs.

Cybertruck never seriously competed vs F150 Lightning.