EV Truck Towing Test: Ford vs Rivian Real-World Data
content: The Reality of Towing with Electric Trucks
Towing 7,500 pounds with an electric truck isn't just about power—it's a battle against physics and infrastructure. After analyzing Edmunds' rigorous 200-mile Southern California test with the Ford F-150 Lightning and Rivian R1T, I’ve identified critical insights every potential EV tower needs. Both trucks hauled box trailers carrying Hyundai Ioniq 5 SUVs, but their performance diverged in ways that reveal deeper truths about EV towing readiness.
Performance and Efficiency Under Load
The Rivian’s 800 horsepower made the trailer feel nearly invisible during acceleration—a stark contrast to gas trucks that strain under similar loads. However, brute force doesn’t solve efficiency woes:
- Range degradation was severe: The Lightning averaged 1.0 mi/kWh (down from 1.5 mi/kWh with a flatbed trailer), while the Rivian managed 0.9 mi/kWh.
- Aerodynamics proved crucial: The box trailer’s tall profile slashed range by 33% compared to flatbed towing.
- Regen braking shined downhill: Both trucks recaptured energy effectively, with the Rivian temporarily regaining 10+ miles of range on descents.
Key takeaway: Trailer design impacts efficiency more than weight. Flatbeds preserve range; box trailers demolish it.
Range Estimation: Trust but Verify
Here’s where the trucks diverged dramatically. The Lightning’s onboard system allowed inputting trailer weight and dimensions, yielding accurate range predictions. The Rivian’s binary "tow mode" ignored payload specifics, causing:
- Dangerous over-optimism: Initially showing 200+ miles, the Rivian’s estimate plummeted to 177 miles after 10 miles of headwinds.
- Real-world math necessity: Calculating range manually (battery size × mi/kWh average) proved essential for the R1T.
My analysis: Ford’s payload-aware system isn’t a luxury—it’s a safety feature. Rivian’s approach risks strandings.
Charging Hurdles and Hidden Time Costs
Charging with trailers revealed operational headaches:
- Detaching trailers was mandatory at crowded stations, adding 15+ minutes per stop.
- Infrastructure gaps persisted: Despite "luck" finding functional 350kW chargers, the Rivian peaked at 120kW (half its capability) due to thermal limits.
- Strategic planning was vital: Using PlugShare or A Better Route Planner to check recent station reviews prevented disasters.
Notable moment: A non-charging vehicle blocked a stall, highlighting etiquette issues.
Critical Towing Features Compared
| Ford F-150 Lightning | Rivian R1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Towing Mirrors | Functional and wide | Dangerously inadequate |
| Range Prediction | Accurate with trailer data | Unreliable in tow mode |
| Driver Aids | Functional cruise control | Highway assist disabled |
| Cost per Mile | $0.48 | $0.52 |
Why the Ford wins: Beyond specs, its towing-specific refinements—like usable mirrors and climate controls—reduce driver fatigue. The Rivian’s screen-dependent vents distracted during highway turbulence.
Actionable Towing Toolkit
Immediate checklist for EV towers:
- Calculate your true range: (Battery size) × (0.8 mi/kWh for box trailers / 1.2 mi/kWh for flatbeds).
- Verify chargers en route: Cross-check via PlugShare and the truck’s nav.
- Pack trailer detach tools: You’ll need them at 90% of charging stations.
Advanced resources:
- A Better Route Planner: For crowd-sourced charging reliability data (superior to built-in nav).
- Weight distribution hitches: Essential for trailers over 5,000 lbs to stabilize handling.
Final Verdict: Capable but Not Carefree
The Lightning emerges as the better towing partner—not because it’s more powerful, but because it respects the tower’s workflow. Its range accuracy, physical controls, and mirrors demonstrate Ford’s trucking experience. The Rivian, while impressively powerful, feels like a brilliant first draft.
One question for you: When towing, would you prioritize raw capability or real-world predictability? Share your approach below—your experience helps others navigate this evolving landscape.
