Toyota and Ford teeming up to build hybrid system

I was referring to the 100% running ICE portion of the comment. Even if it is just at long lights, turning off the engine on the trip is a reliable way of increasing economy, and was likely used in those reports you saw.

 

Good point! With our previous cars, I found I had to do a lot of the basic stuff like that, plus keeping cars/tires in good condition, not drive stupidly, etc, just to make the EPA numbers. Getting even 25% above the EPA city numbers is a pretty good accomplishment with no modifications!

Not sure how extensive the new Ford/Toyota system will be, but even a mild hybrid with a relatively small battery/motor and an autostart would be a low cost way to make modest improvements for the masses and significant improvements for hypermilers who pulse&glide. Even 10% or 20% gains on the worst gas guzzlers is also a pretty good accomplishment. I guess they are looking forward to the new CAFE standards already and maybe Ford realizes that eventually their big profit F-series trucks are going to have to do better.

 

GM's two-mode system, and Toyota's HSD in the Highlander both had to use a larger ICE in order to maintain an acceptable tow rating. The 5.4L is GM's V8 with cylinder deactivation, but they opted for the thirstier 6L in the hybrid. The 2WD 4 cylinder Highlander is rated for as much as the hybrid. A series hybrid would have no problem, but has conversion inefficiencies that are too much of a burden in a consumer vehicle. Simply using larger motors in a full hybrid, likely leads to the same problem.

A parallel hybrid should have no problem being incorporated into a truck, but still relying on the ICE for the bulk of the work might make an Atkinson cycle impractical. Besides, this relatively easy. I don't think Ford and Toyota would team up for such a system.

I believe both are already working on a full hybrid system that doesn't make compromises to a work truck's performance. Instead of rushing development to beat the other to the patent office, they have decided working together makes better sense to get a working solution to market.

They do, and the 2.0 ecoboost will likely be in the F-150 soon. They also have a stable of small block diesels they sell over seas as options.

 

True, and that also gets back to the earlier point. I'd much prefer a smaller engine in my Highlander as I don't need the towing capability. Even if it only meant a few mpg improvement going to a 4-cylinder engine and 2WD. For full size trucks, I'd think a much lower percentage of buyers would be willing to make that compromise. You'd probably still need the big ICE to sell the truck, but maybe a modest hybrid system would do? I'm sure the engineers and marketers are hard at work to answer that.

 

Yes, I have a '92 Chevy 4X4 with a 6.5 turbo diesel, not a dually. I bought it new and it only has 80K miles, runs great never had a major problem. Factory equipped with mechanical fuel injection, 5 speed manual gearbox, and no catalytic converter.

It will tow 10K pounds or carry 4K pounds with no trouble but it does slow down a bit going up hill with that much weight. Empty it will get 18 to 20 MPG at 65 MPH and almost that much around town.

But if someone builds a smaller 4X4 truck that will tow 4K or 5K pounds and get 30 MPG empty I will probably buy one.

 

+1
I don't think many people looking at the Highlander need a tow beast.
Toyota was also putting this drivetrain into the Lexus though, and it was to help dispel hybrids are weak myths.

If it ever gets here, the Mahindra diesel will supposedly deliver this.

 

Right- the main complaint about the Highlander Hybrid seems to be the high price. Not sure why they couldn't offer a base model that is less expensive with a smaller ICE and 2WD (like Lexus does) and then perhaps include the V6/AWD powertrain on the Limited or as an option. For those buying a hybrid for fuel economy, it seems like a no-brainer.

That might not be a good strategy on an F-series, but maybe on a Ranger or Tacoma that tend to be used for less heavy duty purposes? Or maybe it is, as even the F-series sells with a variety of engine/transmission options. Most likely, fuel prices will dictate what happens. If they keep dropping, it'll be back to big sales for gas guzzlers. If they go back up, maybe we'll see more fuel efficient options and trim levels in the future for trucks and SUVs.

 

Ford's Escape SUV hybrid has licensed Toyota hybrid technology.
They've sold a lot of them, but their problem is people want POWER to pull and carry
heavy things.And hybrids don't have powerful enough batteries yet--which is also their limitation in trucks.

That guy in Texas who has all the natural gas wanted to power big trucks with it, and it was even put in the energy bill that died on Lindsey Graham's desk in the Senate because of some communications screwup with Obama.

 

Interesting- all the more reason that at least for SUVs and Trucks, it might be a good idea to have a choice in hybrid powertrains, one for fuel economy and at least one for competitive power/torque/towing.

 

The Highlander was initially offered with the 2WD drivetrain as the Lexus, but there wasn't any real gas savings between the two. That, and lack of a Toyota tow rating, likely had most opting for the AWD. It didn't hurt that it made Toyota more money.

Has this been stated somewhere? I don't see how this can be the only issue. Otherwise, Ford and Toyota wouldn't need to team up. Neither is a battery company.

 

Yeah, of the few Highlander Hybrids there are on lots right now, nearly all of them are Limiteds anyway. The 2WD Lexus only gets 2mpg more city, 1mpg overall. Combined with a smaller ICE and a few weight saving tricks from the Prius, I think they could have managed over 30mpg city on a 2WD Highlander and cut the price a thousand or two as well. Of course, if Toyota made very few of these less profitable versions like it is now with the base model, very few would be available to purchase anyway.

The FEH gets a few mpg higher in 2WD trim all around. I wonder what the split in sales for those are?

 

FWD Highlander hybrid has MGR (by-wire) to power the rear wheels. It is air cooled so the towing is limited by thermal condition.

The truck and SUV that they are teaming up is RWD. Toyota has done RWD HSD with GS450h and LS600h. Both of them used dual stage HSD. Perhaps Ford needs that technology and Toyota needs truck expertise from Ford.

 

Is stop/start really worth it without any form of motor assist? It seems the cars that have it do not seem to get a large advantage over those who do not.

 

More in the city I would think, and even more from those willing to do some modest pulse&coast around town. EPA testing probably doesn't gain any advantage from start/stop except at simulated traffic stops?

 

I suppose I could try it and see what happens in the Fiesta at lights but I would forget and look like an nice person for sure.

 

The epa tests don't really capture the full fuel savings. These system also are inexpensive (<$500 more) and simply have higher quality and capacity batteries and alternators. The big savings are from cars that are stopped a lot in city driving.

http://news.discovery.com/autos/ford-to-offer-fuel-saving-start-stop-system.html

 

Limited is actually the only option on the Toyota site to build a hybrid Highlander right now.

I think electric motor torque drops as rpms increase, too. That and cooling can explain why the rating is what it is. It doesn't explain why the AWD Highlander and Lexus have the same rating as the FWD 2.7L Highlander completely, or why the FWD Lexus has no rating.

I am not familiar with those Lexi hybrids. Do they use the Atkinson cycle? I realized earlier that may be part of the issue. The power trade off for efficiency may be too much for this application. Increasing engine displacement or going with Otto cycle defeats many of the benefits of using a hybrid system. The improvements to fuel economy will be less. Diesels and improved petrols would likely give much of the same benefit at a lower price point.

These trucks and SUVs are already pricey. For a hybrid to be successful it needs to cheap, or improve fuel efficiency enough to over shadow the price increase.

Perhaps they are going to mate an ecoboost to a hybrid system.

 

Those high power dual stage HSD use Otto cycle ICE . That also explains less mpg benefit.

 

The early RXes, RX400h, used Otto cycle only. The new RX450h uses Otto cycle, base/native compression ratio of 13:1, for low engine RPM and then switches to Atkinson cycle, delayed intake valve closing, effective CR of 10:1, at higher RPMs.

It will be nice seeing these with DFI, >15:1 Base/native CR.

Ford may be striking this deal in order to gain access to Toyota's E-VVT-i techniue, Extended range Variable Valve Timing w/Intelligence.

Use of this technique in an EcoBoost DFI engine, otherwise GAS-GUZZLER, would allow the engine to run with decent FE, CR=12:1, off-boost and still make use of BOOST, CR=10:1, when needed.

Since the Atkinson cycle cannot support a turbo, not enough "waste" energy in the exhaust, a switch to an SC would be required for a true multi-mode DFI engine, Otto/Atkinson/Miller cycles.

 

Why don't you tell us how you really feel about Ford's ecoboost.

Any luck finding detailed info on the E-VVT-i? According to the Lexus site, the engine in to RX450h is a VVT-i Atkinson with 12.5:1 compression.