Ford's Electric Vision: New Hybrids, 700 Mile-Range PHEV by 2012

First, thanks to the thread's poster for the great article.

Now, with respect to the content of the article.

I have to complement Ford on its expected group of electric-centric vehicles. Not only will there be a range of alternatives for consumers [personal and industrial], but it's bound to stimulate other manufacturers to compete more heavily in that class as demand for the high-MPG vehicles grows.

Yes, growing-demand will depend on how world events unfold, but I believe that putting mainland-China and India (and to an extent the former USSR countries) on wheels will change the game in the availability and price of oil, and will do so sooner than we think.

One other obligatory comment. I'm still amazed that so extensive an article as that referred to never hits the issue of class-leading MPG of the Ford Fusion Hybrid claim is for their insertion of the word "sedan" in the compact class, rather than the best "vehicle / car / etc". That so comprehensive an article can miss this is amazing.

One other comment on Ford's scheduling. It's reassuring that Ford is concentrating on (I assume from the roll-out schedule of the vehicles) getting it right instead of getting it out first in various segments. The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese. Here's hoping Ford can get high quality ratings for these vehicles.

 

$2.50 gas has lured this country back into energy complacency. It will take another energy crisis to wake up the Luddites.

 

Ford's POOR start....Gas-guzzling, GAS-HOG, TwinForce (EcoBoost..??) engines....

Going to take a long time, a VERY long time, for Ford to recover from that bit of IDIOCY.

And now a FWD 2011 (FreeStyle, Taurus X) Explorer....??!!

 

EcoBoost are actually more efficient engines.

Ford's big strategy is to put higher content efficient cars on the market. This more expensive small car strategy is questionable in the US, so we shall see.

Toyota and to a lesser extent Ford have an advantage when it comes to HV. Both seem to be very conservative in brining PHEV and EVs to the market, keeping themselves in the game, but waiting until someone is sucessful. If the leaf or volt are very sucessful ford can quickly turn out designs on world platforms. This is less likely to be optimized for the best vehicles, but should help them profitably make small (less than 50K/year) volume runs. Toyota is behiind on some engine technology (DI, Turbo/supercharging) and on pure ev's but should be able to use their HV lead to quickly add PHEV if they prove profitable.

 

I guess it depends on what you mean by "quickly". I believe it takes 4 years to bring a new ICE car to market. I'm not sure EV is very different ...

 

I mean they are designing the new cars with electric power trains. So the transit connect comes out at end of this year, focus end of next year, and I think they have two more in 2012. Most of the parts are the same other than the batteries and motor. There is plenty of motor capacity, so it depends on how fast they can ramp up batteries. Then production can shift from ice vehicles to BEVs. Ofcourse a clean sheet design like the leaf is optimised for electric we will have to see how much of a compromise the ev focus will be. We can assume it will be more money as they are putting in liquid cooling for the batteries and batteries will likely be more expensive than Nissan is projecting. For transit connect battery cost is $750/kwh, Nissan projections are to bring battery cost down bellow $400/kwh and appear to be pricing the leaf with those projections in mind.

 

Ford also believe the blended approach for PHV is better.

 

The article says the Prius is classified as a compact, 2010 is classified as midsize. Also pushes the $48,000 figure for the Prius PHEV!

 

What's ironic is that 2010 Prius has more interior room than 2010 Fusion hybrid.

 

Irony? Nahh . . . . . if your competitor is beating the pants off you, and you want to SAY your product is the "best" . . . or you want to SAY you are "Number 1" . . . . all you have to do is "reclassify" the competitor's product as different from yours. Here, Ford simply "Claims" that the Prius is a compact car, even though interior room in Ford's offering is smaller ... which must necessarily mean that the Ford offering would logically be a "SUBCOMPACT", if the prius is a compact.

 

Actually Toyota might be bit ahead of the game re: DFI. The Lexus GS series uses SFI and DFI. There appears to be a significant problem yet to be covercome with DFI in that the PCV contaminants deposit on the manifold side of the intake valve and with no fuel to continually wash them away....

I would have used a couple of throttle-body injectors but SFI was probably already there.....

And I care not about TurboCharging since the base/native engine CR must be detuned/derated in order to accommodate same.

Variable volume, CONSTANTLY variable volume, SuperCharging using the Toyota HSD CVT/PSD technique most definitely will have a RICH future IMMHO.

 

Biggest thing about EVs is obviously the batteries - including BMS. That is why Toyota is getting those from Tesla for the EV prototypes. You really need to know how to manage the batteries to be able to give 8yr/100k mile warranty that has now become de facto std because of Volt/Leaf.

Apparently there are issues with automating the assembly line as well. The line that works for ICE may not work for EV - so there is a lot of learning there as well.

Since Ford is completely outsourcing EVs to Magna, I wonder how much experience they will build inhouse, anyway.

BTW, Ford is not committed to EVs at the top. This is the discussion on what Mullaly said a couple of months back.

http://priuschat.com/forums/ev-elec...-ford-ceo-electric-vehicles-no-time-soon.html

 

Well of course they do, they have to belive that the product plan is best Seriously ford, toyota, and hyundai are all going to do PHEV parrellel serial because they want to use fewer batteries. GM is betting the other way. My business sense would say bet against gm. Toyota does appear to have a very low range and ev speed for the american market though.

That is just bad reporting.

Do you know what irony is? FFH appears to have more interior room for front passengers (most important), and back passengers. The prius is a hatchback and has more cargo room. Isn't that the purpose of a hatchback? The fit has more cargo room than the FFH and the TCH is it a bigger car?

No they just couldn't get small amounts of fuel to mix well and already were using dual injectors. They don't seem to being adding DFI across the model line, or have I missed something. DI implemented correctly also means you don't need premium gas.

Turbocharging increases efficiency as it uses some of the power lost to the exhaust. You need to look at the efficiency of the system not just the compression. The prius's valve timing also robs the engine of some compression, but increases efficiency. Turbo charging a gasoline engine has less of a gain than a diesel since the compression and wasted energy is lower. Ford is also adding EGR. Focus will get a 155hp 2L DI normally aspirated engine, it looks like it will also get a 1.6L ecoboost with more horsepower but similar 40mpg highway fuel economy. Ford really took tdi technology and adapted it to higher temperature gas engines.

On the small efficient side, nissan is developing a 3cyl 1.2L di miller cycle (supercharged atkinson) making 100hp, and ford is developing a 3 cyl 1L ecoboost making 120hp. I'm curious as to which will end up with better fuel economy.

The focus bev will have a liquid cooling system like tesla. They also say they will get the batteries to the right temperature before charging starts. I believe the transit connect has a proposed similar warenty to the leaf. We won't know for years whether the leaf really can get by with their less expensive cooling system.

Having your part supplier design components to your specification is part of the modern auto industry. Toyota calls it partnering. There doesn't seem much risk in the magna side, other than magna can sell similar systems to other car makers. Ford is playing both JCI-saft and LG off for future battery tech. BMW and mercedes use JCI-saft, and GM and Hyundai use LG.

 

At the core of the theroy on improving fuel economy using electric hybrid technology is ICE downsizing. You put in an engine small enough that it runs in its efficient sweet spot a majority of its driving time, cruising. Then you use an electric motor to supply extra power at demand peaks like passing and hill climbing. When the little engine alone would make the vehicle a dog.

Turbo charging can do the same thing. Use a smaller engine with the turbo for power demand peaks. It just hasn't regularly been used this way until now. The HEV will get a larger increase in fuel economy, but turbo will be cheaper and lighter to implement.

As to Ford on introducing the 3.5l ecoboost in the Taurus first and the pricing. Well, a few years ago Ford wasn't doing too well and was on the verge of going belly up. They probably aren't in the position to nurture a tight margin car for an extended period of time like Toyota did with the Prius. Besides, we here are still in the minority of car buyers. For most people, performance and sportiness is important factors in car selection. The $6000 for the SHO also covers AWD and a sport tuned suspension. They market it as V8 performance with V6 economy. Like Toyota said V12 performance with V8 economy with the Lexus 600h. The new model and refreshening cycles are also a factor. The Taurus may have been the first model due for it when the ecoboosts were ready for market.

Ford's big market is still trucks. The 3.5 ecoboost is going to be an option in the F150. This is a segment where the base engines are 4+ liters, and most sold being 5+. Their press releases are claiming 30 mpg highway. We'll see, but even high 20s will be impressive in such a vehicle. In the recent past, the optional 5.0 in the F150 got nearly the same EPA rating as the base 4.6.

I'm hoping to see the 1.2 ecoboost in the Fiesta.

 

There are a few additional features of a good hybrid design:

• engine off operation - regardless of diesel or gasser, at low power settings, a significant amount of the fuel energy is consumed in friction within the engine. To get a rough idea, it is in the same magnitude as the starter motor power. If you disable the fuel system and spin the engine using the starter, the amount of energy consumed is close to the amount of energy the fuel has to provide at low power settings. Actually piston ring friction makes it significantly higher. Cycling the engine ON and OFF allows a larger percentage of the energy to be spent on vehicle drive instead of just moving the engine parts around.
• regenerative energy capture - the braking efficiency that captures some of the kinetic energy instead of heating the brake pads and rotors.

I would also point out that jet engines and two-strokes are also much lighter and higher performing than a turbo-charger. But they all three share problems with thermal dynamic efficiency.

Bob Wilson

 

"The HEV will get a larger increase in fuel economy" was my hand wave to the other advantages mentioned the hybrid gets in trying to keep the post short. Hybrids are the definite winner. Just because it's better, doesn't mean we should not explore other avenues of improving fuel economy and ICE efficiency. As of know, and likely for the recent future, there isn't a sub $20k hybrid available. Also, where would you even put the battery in a Smart or iQ hybrid.

I don't see any reason why direct injection and/or turbocharging can't be used with a hybrid. I would have prefered a turbo 1.5 or smaller over the 1.8 in the new Prius. I know the reason for the larger engine is better efficiency at American highway speeds. The info center on my car has average speed. It's at 42mph currently. That includes a recent trip on 95 doing 70+. My day to day commute average is around 35 with highway miles. Maybe people can get up to highway speeds more often in other areas of the country. I don't see how around here though.

Plus there other options being explored. I've heard there is work being done with a hybrid turbo system. In the simplistic, it's an electric supercharger, powered by a battery, charged by a turbine, that's spun by the exhaust.

It's disappointing that the first ecoboost available is the 3.5. Unfortunely, the larger vehicles and engines have a larger market still. With the reintroduction of the Fiesta and buzz around the new Focus with its multiple drive trains, I believe Ford is looking to the future, but they have to be profitable in order to cover the costs of innovation and risks.

Start/stop systems have been available for years outside the US. Most only help in stop and go traffic, but that might have more to do with regulations about being unpowered and/or free wheeling while in motion than current technical expertise. Even when Ford owned a higher share of Mazda, it probably wouldn't have happened, but I thought it would be sweet to have an ecoboost with the SISS start/stop system.

If it weren't for dishonesty and greed, GM had a shot at really improving the overall US consumer fleet economy with their mild 'hybrid'. We all know it is really just a start/stop system, but the larger battery allows the implementation of regenerative braking and electrifying of accessories. I think BMW is exploring a larger battery for just that purpose.

 

A high efficiency Engine, ICE, say using the delayed intake valve closing technique to effect the Atkinson cycle mode, is not compatible with turbocharging. The Atkinson cycle is more efficient due to the fact that it uses more of the energy from A/F combustion in pushing the piston downward.

Turbocharging actually REQUIRES that the engine be of low base efficiency in order to have leftover power to spin the turbine. Additionally, if you wish to take the greatest advantage of INTERCOOLED boost pressure the engine's base/native compression ratio must be lower than optimal when running off-boost.

An electric SC that could be switched on ONLY at WOT would be more of an ideal.

And a variable volume, variable "speed" positive displacement SC even better.

Use a CVT/PSD to drive the SC to control boost independent of engine RPM and eliminate the throttle plate also.

 

I am very disappointed That ford is dragging Their feet on electric vehicle technology. Nissan Is probally in the process Offsetting in all time record 4 new vehicle volume ramp up. Any will still take them 2 years.

Toyota realizing they Head hit the gold mine With the second generation prius Took over 2 years To ramp up production. so if 40 is not even gonna start playing the game until 2012 we r 4 years of way at the very minimum people we see any real contribution from them.

I'm very disappointed in them. the only real of the point about the entire article is that they are upgrading the fusion after only 2 years realizing a much better technology is available. I do appreciate their not Milking the current technology As long as they possibly can.

But then again There is little doubt That their actions are primarily Motivated by the competition. The only question now Is how much we will benefit

 

I thought Atkinson plus turbo was the Miller cycle.