General Motors may be preparing for a major shift in its EV battery strategy, and if it works, it could matter most in the segment where battery cost hurts the most... electric trucks.

According to a new Reuters report, GM may move away from plans to use LFP batteries in future EVs and instead focus more heavily on lithium manganese-rich battery chemistry, commonly called LMR.

That might sound like a technical battery industry story, but for truck buyers, it could be much more practical than that.

This could be one of the technologies that helps bring the cost of electric trucks down.

And frankly, that is exactly what the segment needs.

Why EV Trucks Are So Expensive

The biggest challenge with electric trucks is not hard to understand. Trucks are large, heavy, capable vehicles. Buyers expect them to tow, haul, handle bad weather, carry families, run accessories, and still deliver meaningful driving range. That requires a lot of battery.

A compact EV or crossover can get by with a smaller pack and still offer decent range. A full-size electric truck is a different story. The battery has to support a much larger vehicle, and in many cases, it has to do that while also preserving the kind of range truck buyers expect.  That is where cost becomes a problem.

The battery pack is one of the most expensive parts of any EV. When you need a huge battery pack, the cost problem gets much worse. That is one reason electric trucks like the Chevrolet Silverado EV, GMC Sierra EV, Hummer EV, Rivian R1T, and Ford F-150 Lightning have generally landed at higher price points than many mainstream buyers would like.

For EV trucks to truly reach the masses, the industry needs cheaper battery packs without giving up too much range, performance, or durability.  That is why LMR matters.

What LMR Is Trying To Solve

Most EV battery discussions today focus on two broad paths.  High-nickel batteries offer strong energy density, which helps with range, but they are expensive. LFP batteries are cheaper, durable, and already widely used, but they are less energy dense. That means an LFP battery usually needs more size and weight to deliver the same amount of usable energy.  That tradeoff matters in any EV, but it matters even more in a truck. 

Truck buyers want to preserve as much of the payload rating as possible.  If you put a lower energy density battery chemistry into a full-size truck, you may need an even larger and heavier pack to deliver the range buyers expect. That can create a cycle where the truck gets heavier, less efficient, and potentially less capable.

LMR is interesting because it is trying to bridge that gap.  GM has said its LMR cells can offer significantly better energy density than LFP at a comparable cost. In simple terms, that means GM believes LMR could provide more range from a similarly priced battery cell.  That is the whole ballgame for electric trucks.

Why This Could Be Bigger For Trucks Than Cars

For smaller EVs, LFP still makes a lot of sense. If you are building an affordable commuter car, urban crossover, or standard-range EV, LFP can be a great fit. It is relatively inexpensive, durable, and well understood.

But full-size trucks are not small commuter cars.  Truck buyers usually do not want to hear, “It is affordable, but the range is limited.” They also do not want a truck that loses too much range when towing, hauling, or driving in cold weather. And they definitely do not want to pay luxury SUV money for something that is supposed to be a practical work or family vehicle.

That is where LMR could become important.  If GM can use LMR to reduce pack cost while still keeping strong range, it gives the company a more realistic path to affordable electric trucks and SUVs. Not cheap EVs. Not stripped-down compliance vehicles. Real trucks with real range at prices that are at least closer to what mainstream buyers can justify.

This is not just about GM changing battery chemistry. It is about GM looking for the right chemistry for big, heavy, battery-hungry vehicles.

LFP Is Not Bad, But It May Not Be The Best Fit For Everything

LFP is not a bad battery chemistry. In fact, it has major advantages.

LFP batteries are generally cheaper, durable, and less dependent on expensive materials like cobalt and nickel. That is why Tesla, Ford, Rivian, and many Chinese automakers have used or explored LFP for lower-cost EVs.

But the best battery chemistry depends on the vehicle.  For a smaller EV, LFP may be the right answer. For stationary energy storage, LFP can also make a lot of sense. Reuters reported that GM’s Tennessee LFP production is expected to support energy storage systems, not necessarily future EVs.

For large electric trucks, though, GM appears to be betting that LMR offers a better balance.  That makes sense to me.

When the battery pack gets very large, energy density matters. Weight matters. Packaging matters. Cost matters. If LMR can deliver a meaningful improvement in energy density while keeping costs closer to LFP, it could be a better fit for electric trucks than simply using cheaper but less energy-dense cells.

LMR Still Has To Prove Itself

LMR has been discussed for years, but it has historically faced technical challenges, including battery life and voltage fade over time. GM says it has made progress solving those issues, and the company has been working on this chemistry for more than a decade.

Still, there is a difference between a promising battery chemistry and a battery chemistry that works reliably at scale in real customer vehicles.

Questions I have:

• Can GM manufacture LMR cells at scale?
• Can the cells deliver the promised durability?
• Can they perform well in real-world trucks that tow, fast charge, sit in extreme temperatures, and rack up serious mileage?
• Can GM actually bring the cost down in a way that reaches the buyer, not just the balance sheet?

Those are the questions that matter.

Why This Matters For Silverado EV And Sierra EV Buyers

As someone who follows electric trucks closely, this is the kind of development I think could shape the next generation of Silverado EV and Sierra EV.

The current GM electric trucks already offer impressive range and capability, but they are expensive. That is the biggest obstacle. A lot of truck buyers are not against electric trucks. They are against paying premium prices for them.

LMR could help change that equation.  If GM can offer future electric trucks with more than 400 miles of range and lower battery pack costs, that could make the Silverado EV and Sierra EV much more competitive with ICE. It could also allow GM to build more trims that make sense for regular buyers, not just early adopters, fleets, or luxury customers.

That is what the EV truck market needs next. Not just more horsepower.  Not just bigger screens.  Not just faster charging numbers. 

It needs lower costs without destroying the core truck ownership experience.

My Take

I think LMR is likely to be one of the most important battery technologies for electric trucks over the next several years.

Not because it sounds exciting on paper, but because it targets the biggest weakness in the EV truck formula... the cost of the battery.

Electric trucks require large battery packs. Large battery packs are expensive. That is the main reason these vehicles are still out of reach for many buyers.

If LMR can deliver higher energy density than LFP at a similar cost, it gives automakers like GM a way to build electric trucks that still have strong range but do not need to carry the same battery cost burden as today’s high-nickel packs.

That does not mean LFP is going away across the industry. It probably still has a strong future in smaller EVs and energy storage. But for full-size electric trucks and SUVs, LMR may end up being the more important chemistry.

GM still has to prove it can bring this to production and make it work. But if the technology delivers, this could be one of the key steps toward making electric trucks more affordable for regular buyers.

And that is when the EV truck market gets a lot more interesting.

Got questions? Drop a comment I love hearing from all of you.

If you found this useful:

• please considering buying me a coffee to help support future content
• Did I get something wrong?  Let me know in the comments section or visit our Link Tree to contact us.
• Also, please consider visiting our EV Accessories store to support us.