Sherminator98
-
Posts
25,831 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
146
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by Sherminator98
-
-
32 minutes ago, Rick73 said:
What makes you think I’m referring to existing R10 transmission? That’s the very first thing that needs to be replaced.and there isn’t a viable alternative to it outside of using an EREV setup. ECVT won’t meet the requirements for towing heavy loads.
-
59 minutes ago, Rick73 said:
That’s a bad example of what can be accomplished. The Ford F-150 PowerBoost HEV originally only had a 35 kW (47 HP) electric motor for electrification boost. That’s really low by modern hybrid standards, especially considering the size and weight of an F-150. It’s almost a mild hybrid (I thought Ford had upgraded electric motor but various sources still report 35 kW).
The Honda Civic as example has 181 HP electric motor that exceeds the engine’s 145 HP; and that’s for a vehicle about half the weight of F-150. Toyota similarly also uses powerful electric motors. The Ford Maverick hybrid by comparison to F-150 hybrid also benefits from greater level of electrification. That’s the direction Ford should take future hybrid pickups and large hybrids. IMO a full-size hybrid pickup could easily have 300 HP or greater of electric boost. A major problem is that required investment to design and manufacture new engines and new hybrid transmissions is probably very high.Below are specs for Maverick hybrid. I could easily see Ford roughly doubling those numbers or more to end up with at least 300 HP engine plus 300 HP electric for larger pickups — provided investment wasn’t a limitation. But it is, so we may see very little in this area.
But you’re completely glossing over the fact that a eCVT won’t work in heavy duty towing applications that a F-150 would be required to do.
The small electric motor is due to limitations of it being inside the R10 transmission.
At that point you’re just better going the EREV route.
-
9 hours ago, Rick73 said:
Fear doesn’t have to be justifiable to be real, and hence influence behavior.
People don't like change, but at the same time if you have a major ICE powertrain failure, it will cost you around 11K to get it fixed, going by a thread I've seen on Bronco6G with a Bronco Engine.
-
5 hours ago, Rick73 said:
I’d personally like to see more done to improve hybrid pickups’ capabilities and efficiency, and also additional models/sizes.
Your not because if you went with an Atkinson style setup in a larger/more powerful engine, your power losses are going to be greater and not be evened out by adding a hybrid motor to help. Then add in additional weight etc and its more or less a lost cause. That is why Ford was marketing the hybrid in the F-150 as a power adder/power generation, not an increase in MPGs.
-
6 minutes ago, Rick73 said:
IMO issue of battery replacement fears for one needs to be addressed.
How many batteries actually need to be replaced in say the first 10 years of ownership?
-
15 hours ago, Texasota said:
100% agree. I think they will succeed on their own when solid state batteries become common.
32 minutes ago, Rick73 said:
Yeah, unfortunately solid state batteries could still be many years away. It’s not just the technology, which is indeed promising, but also the higher cost per kWh. Projected prices I’ve seen are still much higher than present LFP as example.But at the same time, LFPs are good enough for most use cases...seems like people come up with an excuse just not to buy something because it does something slightly differently.
-
11 hours ago, akirby said:
The article you quoted implies you can replace a 1.5 turbo with a NA 1.5 hybrid. But most hybrids are 2.5 Atkinson cycle for max mpg and a 1.5 Atkinson cycle won’t have enough power even with hybrid assist.Seems to be a bit of willful ignorance going on here that he is completely ignoring:
The 2.0L made 160 horsepower at 6,500 RPM and 146 pound-feet of torque in non-ecoboost form2.5L 168 horsepower and 170 lb-ft of torque in non-hybrid form
2.5L Hybrid is rated at 192 horsepower and 155 pound-feet of torque combined with the hybrid motor. The engine alone 162 HP
The 1.5L Ecoboost makes 181HP and 190 ft lbs
2.0L Ecoboost makes 250 horsepower and 280 lb-ft of torque
The 3.0L V6 made 240HP and 231 ft of torque
The whole point of the Ecoboost engines where to downsize from a V6 and a larger I4 to packages that give you more power and equal or better MPGs vs their larger counterparts.
The power numbers from the 2.5L are from 15 years ago, so there is a decent amount of loss from going to an Atkinson cycle given possible improvements in the power output of the engine over time. Like you said a NA 1.5L would be lucky to hit 100-120HP and a hybrid setup would maybe add another 30-40HP if you where lucky,
-
7 hours ago, morgan20 said:
One of the big shots at GM, John Roth at Cadillac, said that GM is keepin' at it regardless of what happens with tax credits. In addition to Chevy being the fastest growing domestic EV brand, Cadillac was the best selling luxury EV brand in the U.S. in Q2 (if you don't count Tesla as a luxury brand):
I wonder how this will translate into long term sales...they could be new customers say from Tesla, which hasn't had much new in the marketplace, so people are willing to try new things.
The overall feel for EVs is that it seems like overall in the industry that demand is softening for them, but I don't have the numbers for that but I'm sure we'll have a better picture once the tax rebates go away.
-
Looks like we should be seeing this soon
https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/bronco-hybrid-electric-sneak-peek-reveal-china.118328/#post-2582489
Also looks like imports of the regular Bronco got stopped back a few months ago due the tariffs, but not sure if that has changed since then. -
6 hours ago, tbone said:
I don’t mind standardization, but just make the damn parts better. That nickel Ford saved per pump is now likely costing them hundreds of millions of dollars.We don't know that is case or not. Shit happens sometimes.
-
They where supposed to build a bunch of wind farms off the coast of NJ, but they got all killed off, but the most important issue was financing...they couldn't do it at the rates we have now vs what was around 5-10 years ago.
-
5 hours ago, tbone said:
The number of recalls at this point is beyond ridiculous. Our 22 Explorer is included in the fuel pump recall.
That is part of the problem with using more standardized powertrains...larger amount of vehicles using it mean more recalls.
-
9 hours ago, rmc523 said:
Meh, no thanks.
IMO the front end is the weakest part and generally its just a Fox body plumped up a bit. It really isn't all that different from the Fox of the era
I can see them maybe sharping the lines up on the current Mustang to give them more a creased look vs being rounded out.
-
2 hours ago, Rick73 said:
Anyway, the amount of money that can be saved on fuel by downsizing with turbo engine versus larger-displacement NA isn’t much. Nissan Rogue 1.5L turbo I-3 versus 2.5L NA I-4 saved in order of $100 per year in fuel according to EPA ratings from a couple of years ago. For me that’s not enough to worry about so I’d go with larger-displacement simpler engine option.
Auto manufactures don't care what you think, they have/had to meet CAFE requirements. Your wants and needs aren't want the auto industry needs to do.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, tbone said:
Though I liked that Mustang back in the day, I just don’t think that style has aged particularly well. I don’t know what elements would be drawn from it.This was making the rounds on social media recently
I like the flanks of it, but the in upper photo it looks like it has a green house of a EXP and not a 1985+ Mustang
-
45 minutes ago, rmc523 said:
I've had this thing recently where it'll seemingly lose some power for a split second or two as I'm pulling away at low speeds after starting it (I typically let the engine warm up until the rpms drop)....don't know if it's related to this or not.
Well the notice is showing up in my Fordpass App now also and Carfax send me an email about it. Now to just wait and see when they get the repair for it.
-
20 hours ago, exrub said:
Her Bronco Sport has the 2.0L w/AWD or 1.5L w/AWD? I had a 2018 Escape Titanium with the 2.0L w/ AWD and liked the performance a lot. Just trying to get a sense of how a 1.5L w/ AWD may be compared to that.
Thanks!
The Escape had the 2.0l Ecoboost and the Bronco Sport she has now has the 1.5L Ecoboost. Performance accelerating from say 10-60 MPH is roughly the same. It is slightly slower at higher speeds.
-
1
-
-
18 hours ago, 02MustangGT said:
This will be a headline worth the attention:
Crap....I've been noticing that my Bronco has been running ever so slightly rough in the hot weather we've been having...this would explain that. And I fall into that range.
-
10 hours ago, mustang84isu said:
Weirdly, I felt like the S550 Mustang had some cues that were a nod back to the new edge Mustang (headlights, and some of the sharper angles on the hood). I really liked the S550 despite the early criticism toward it, and think it has aged well and IMO has been an apex for modern Mustang styling. Ford really took at step backward with the S650. The proportions are all out of whack - headlights too low, grille too big, too sharp of an angle at the rear trunklid. Even the overhangs look longer. It's like new edge where they tried too hard to make it menacing and just made it into a caricature of what a Mustang should be.
I liked the 2015 redesign and the 2018 went backwards IMO. I like the S650, it looks far better in person then in photos.
-
7 hours ago, jpd80 said:
Looking at Bronco Sport National dealer stock, about 85% (16,800) are 1.5 I-3 EB and 15% (3,200) are 2.0 EB
Seems like adding a 2.5 hybrid would eat into the already popular 1.5 EBs but Ford may see an opportunity
to push the more urban lifestyle of a good hybrid for those that like the Bronco Sport style but don’t go off road..
The 2.0L ecoboost is only in the top end Bronco Sport Badlands trim also.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, morgan20 said:
You have every right to be skeptical my friend. Lawler and other big shots spoutin' stuff like "We will own the entire electrical architecture... the pace of development, and then the cost structure" is the same 'ol "Not Invented Here Syndrome" I experienced at Ford when I worked there in the 1990s and 2000s.
And we all know how that turned out:
Ford wrote the book on “Not Invented Here” – Ford will take that idea and do it better, cheaper and in less time. The reality is something altogether different. After Ford operatives get their hands on an idea, it will cost twice as much, take twice as long and be not even remotely better.
Maybe things really are different this time at the skunkworks. But until Ford announces tangible products and process improvements from that operation, keep your BS detector turned on.
But that was the whole point of the Skunkworks team-relying on legacy suppliers like they've been doing for 50+ years that don't have the skills for EVs is part of the problem.
But anyways I believe your last line.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, ZanatWork said:
The "Porsche of off road" had better start caring about engines again, because they'll want some impressive headlines to counteract the slew of recalls, sub-average quality ratings, and more doom/gloom in their news for too long.
Given all the headlines Ford has gotten, has it really hurt their business? Not saying it hasn't, but nor is it all gloom and doom like say Nissan, who seems to be circling the drain at this point.
-
3 hours ago, morgan20 said:
Apparently on-road focused Jeeps ain't all that desirable. A Jeep dealership in Oregon is almost givin' one of its new Wagoneer S away for a $1/month lease:
I've yet to see one of those or the new EV Challenger/Charger in my area and I live in an area with good EV sales.
-
37 minutes ago, Rick73 said:
Cells are not all that standard particularly over a long period of time.I was speaking of the physical footprint, not the chemistry of it.
America's largest power grid is struggling to meet demand from AI
in E.V. Central
Posted
The vast majority of utility companies are regulated by state governments.