akirby
-
Posts
43,535 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1,459
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by akirby
-
-
There are some manufacturers looking at turbo diesel hybrids in Europe, but they are a very tough sell.
Both the diesel and a typical full hybrid both have a very nice feature -- lots of torque at low speeds which makes driveability great. But when you put a turbodiesel with a hybrid, you are putting strength against strength. The present Atkins cycle engine matches weakness on acceleration matched with electric motor assist with economy at higher speeds when the motors kick off, so the Atkins cycle ICE and electric traction motor complement each other nicely. In addition, a diesel would be adding a slew of additonal cost for aftertreatment (as in $1,000-$2,000)..
I do wonder, however, if there is any situation where a small displacement EcoBoost would work? Or maybe if you really wanted to push for hybrid economy with gasoline, it might be more likely to have a small supercharged Miller cycle?
Fuel cells are an entirely different proposition. Of course, you don't need an ICE with a fuel cell vehicle -- the fuel cell stack produces electricity which powers the car. The main problem with fuel cell vehicles is cost and package of both the fuel cell stack and tank. There are a lot of very expensive materials in the catalyst in the stack (platinum for instance), and you have to use compressed hydrogen which is not readily available except for certain areas in California (hydrogen can only be turned into a liquid at very low temperatures not practical for autos). These cars will be coming on the market in the next few years, but expect price near to $100,000. Ford has done a ton of research and has a connection with Ballard in Canada, but appears to be showing no interest. Looking ahead, CARB believes that hydrogen fuel cells will overtake batteries and represent the majority of electric vehicles sold (in other words, they don't ever see battery technology improving to a point where range extends radically, and charging times reduce substantially). Of course, CARB could give a crap about cost to the manufacturer, particularly if it's a U.S. company, but they are willing to continue to give European manufacturers a sweetheart deal on delaying compliance with zero emission vehicles.
I wasn't advocating fuel cells now - just saying that if you had a fully electric vehicle with a separate ICE generator (whether it was gas or electric) you could convert it to a fuel cell rather simply whereas you could not do that if the generator was part of the drivetrain. Or you could offer multiple options - ICE gas or ICE diesel or fuel cell or whatever.
Remember that with a turbo diesel you control the rpm, not the driver which should make it easier to control emissions and/or maximize fuel efficiency.
-
It's possible that a turbine would be a better energy source, although even there you're looking at such a wide variety of power requirements during a 'typical drive' vs., say, the fairly consistent power requirements of, say, a locomotive engine.
I was thinking a small turbo diesel or some future technology like a hydrogen fuel cell. Since the engine would not be constrained by the operating parameters of a transmission it really opens up the options.
-
and all of those things listed can be done for you (ok maybe not the manure thing) by a 3rd party. Refrigerators and Rocks can be delivered and yard waste can be taken care of during bulk pick up days if you have garbage pickup...
Trucks are nice for the 2-5% time that you actually need all that space in the bed...otherwise its wasted space.
Another spin is look at all the pickups over the years with caps on them...more or less pseudo-SUV
Most people did not buy Rangers to haul stuff. They bought them because they were cheap.
In 1990 I got a std cab 4 cylinder with sliding rear window, chrome wheels, chrome bumper, 4 speaker am/fm cassette and air conditioning for $7995. I bought it because it was cheap and got decent gas mileage and came in handy for some chores. I traded that for a 4.0L supercab in 95 (manual also). I traded that one in on a car in 1999 and I've had cars ever since.
-
The Volt switches to direct ICE drive under SOME circumstances over about 70mph. This actually has nothing to do with sufficent electricity to drive the wheels but rather that at certain speeds and loads, it is more efficent to do direct drive rather than electrical drive. Under other conditions, the Volt will stay on pure electric drive up to 100mph... It's actually a very elegant system.
Above 70 mph the ICE is always engaged and provides some motive force through the secondary motor/generator.
A traditional plug-in hybrid is way more efficient with the ICE always powering the drivetrain directly when it's running rather than indirectly through a generator.
Where the Volt could shine is the use of a more efficient power source (totally disconnected from the drivetrain) that can overcome the energy conversion losses yielding better MPG. This energy source could be swapped out, upgraded or run in parallel to provide more electricity.
-
Basically for the Volt:
1. The system first depletes the charge in the battery. At this point, the Volt drives on electric only, and the ICE does not come on at all. As you mention, however, I believe you are correct that the Volt has a driver selection that can override the system and turn on the ICE earlier to preserve the battery charge. But the default is electric only for the first 40 miles or so on the battery.
2. After the charge in the battery is depleted, the Volt turns into a series hybrid. The ICE powers a generator which in turn powers the traction motor.
3. In some circumstances (higher speeds), clutches engage and the Volt can be powered directly by the ICE.
Ford's system is another version of the powersplit where the ICE and electric motor/generators interreact and the relationship can be adjusted through the powertrain calibration. Generally, the driver will leave it up to the experts who calibrated the vehicle. However, the Plug In Prius and the Ford Energi's both have driver selections that will tell the car to, say, stay on electric only at first. But this only goes so far -- if the power requirement is too high, like accelerating swiftly on an entrance ramp, the ICE will come on anyway.
I think the only reason it uses the ICE directly is that the generator cannot supply enough electricity to drive the wheels on electricity alone. That's the drawback of the Volt architecture - you lose energy when you convert the ICE output to electricity and then convert it back to mechanical energy through the electric motors. It's more efficient to drive the wheels directly.
That's why the Volt only gets 37 mpg once the battery is depleted whereas the Fusion Energi should get close to the Fusion Hybrid (40's).
-
SE and Hybrid no Sony audio and max speakers is 6 correct?
Adaptive Cruise Control not available on Hybrid correct?
What does retail orders only mean exactly? (on the SE series equipment group page)
1.6L EcoBoost® Engine w/manual transmission
Note: Retail orders only
The Hybrid is based on the SE and the Sony radio is only available on the Titanium.
Retail order means non-fleet (I think).
-
the competition which was to force the compact pickup to be larger, more powerful and more capable, basically closed the gap between the ranger and the Dakota. so instead of improving the winning formula, they behaved like compact pickup segment is the same as the full size segment which it is not.
So the manufacturers Think that the small pick up is simply a Smaller full size pickup, it is like thinking that the fiesta is simply a smaller Fusion. The differences in size require a different way of thinking, thus it is more practical to have a fiesta hatchback than a fiesta sedan. the decrease in size drives the need to maximize people cargo flexibility, that the larger fusion does not need. The key to the compact segment should have been flexibility not towing, payload or 0-60. think about the compact pick up in terms of flexibility gets you designs like the element,and some other SUVs, that are not driven by performance.
You don't understand why most people bought Rangers and other small trucks to begin with. They were cheap utilitarian transportation. Small crossovers and hybrids didn't exist yet and gas was cheap. I bought 2 myself. As small crossovers got better and we got better fuel efficiency on all vehicles small pickup buyers changed to other vehicles.
It's that simple. Same thing happened to BOF full and midsized SUVs. The market changed and it's not changing back right now regardless of the products. It may change in the future.
It is understanding why the 2nd best selling compact car has 128hp while the focus has 160hp, HP and is not the reason people buy compact cars towing and payload are not primary reasons people buy compact pickups, there is an expectation of loss in capability to improve economy.
But Ford can charge a lot more for a vehicle with better performance and/or fuel economy. It's never about absolute sales volume. In fact keeping sales volume within one plant's capacity gives you the best cost structure and spreading sales out among multiple models and segments gives the company more flexibility to absorb market changes.
-
Could be a loose connection somewhere. Time for a dealer visit.
-
not that I know what I'm talking about...
but
doesn't that sound something like the Volt?
The engine in the Volt only charges the battery and does not directly drive the wheels except at high speed (not sure exactly how that part works).
-
They have done nothing to improve the vehicle which ends up making it more attract to dump the vehicle, not invest in it.
Seriously? This is the stupidest thing you've said in a long time.
-
Getting shot is a fricking nightmare, especially critically.
Thanks Captain Obvious.
Owning and carrying a gun only increases your chances of hot lead invading your body and doing lots of internal damage.
Did it ever occur to you that people who are more likely to be shot at are more likely to have a gun themselves?
Here's another factoid. Did you know that wearing a batting helmet increases your chances of being hit in the head by a baseball dramatically?
-
I'm planning to get a loaded Titanium Ruby Red w/19" grey wheels. I actually wanted the black interior so that wasn't an issue. Mine is $32K X plan. FWD.
-
Wow 2k. That's crazy.
8" touchscreen LCDs weren't that cheap 10 years ago.
-
but that is the problem lack of investment in declining product cause the decline of the product in some case, this becomes a Self-Fulfilling prophecy. lack of investment begets more lack of investment until the investment required to maintain a product becomes too great to justify the redesign of that product.
If the ranger was the only product in it's class then that argument might hold water. But even if the Ranger was left to wither on the vine, what about the Colorado, Tacoma and Frontier? Did all of the small truck mfrs conspire together to kill the market? Of course not. The Tacoma especially was a perfectly viable alternative to folks who actually wanted or needed a small truck and the others weren't terrible either.
Sometimes the market changes and it's not because of
-
the ranger is just an example. hopefully Ford did the innovative thinking into the future possibiliites and determined something new wasn't worth the investment. that's the point of the article, if they didn't, the opportunity passed them by and if someone else does it the ranger product has lost out. look at how much more efficient other new vehicles are with as much or more power today than the same models were just a few years ago.
Sometimes it's cheaper to NOT make something. Ford saved a ton of money killing the old Ranger. If they didn't have the F150 and the small truck market didn't keep failling when gas prices went up there would have been a better business case for keeping and/or upgrading it.
You can't make every possible product - you have to pick and choose.
-
You made a fundamental mistake in thinking that the very fact that you receive a check for being laid off is an incentive to any sort of majority. I see no benefit from getting a smaller wage than I would working after having received the better wage.
You severely overestimate the average person's initiative.
I've seen perfectly capable grown people sit on their ass and collect $800/month welfare instead of working for twice that. Of course most of them lived in subsidized housing (some even second generation).
If you allow people to be lazy, they will be. It's that simple.
-
1
-
-
Lincoln Town Cars have aluminum hoods...
But to make suspension parts out of aluminum? That's a real big risk involved.
The Lincoln LS suspension was mostly aluminum - upper and lower control arms included.
-
Yeah. I don't get the 795 for nav. I guess I'll stick to my iPhone for that
It used to cost $2K. And a 8" screen is way bigger than your iPhone.
-
Process oriented innovations - techniques in production planning, logistics, supplier relations, etc. - are arguably the most noteworthy innovations from Toyota. The company's principle of applying kaizen throughout its operations has been imitated but no automotive OEM does it better. James Surowiecki wrote about this in a New Yorker article a few years ago.
Nonetheless, Toyota has demonstrated product innovation outside gasoline-electric hybrids, as well: powertrains (e.g., D4-S fuel injection system, electrically actuated VVT, first production eight speed AT), telematics (G-Book, Entune), chassis (KDSS), and lighting (LED headlamps on mass market cars) among other areas.
Ok, I'll buy that. I was thinking more in terms of products.
-
This is mlhm5's fantasy right here.
Only thing: it's a parallel (read: "mild") hybrid. More akin to GM's eAssist than a full hybrid system like Ford's or Toyota's.
Parallel doesn't mean "mild hybrid". All regular hybrids are parallel meaning the wheels are driven by both the ICE and electric motor. GMs eAssist only provided start/stop capability. This system is more like a normal hybrid that can operate the car in full EV mode for short periods. It just doesn't have the large battery for extended EV range like Ford and Toyota.
-
One of the pictures on the site did indeed say cloth, though. But I think it was wrong, probably taken from the Fusion site or something...
That is what had me concerned, not the "leather trimmed" comment. But obviously it was a mistake.
-
Aren't we saying the same thing. GM wasn't making cars that were good sellers and they had to many people working at the plants making marginal vehicles.
They were selling plenty of cars. They just weren't making enough money selling them.
Honda and Porsche sold FAR fewer cars than GM but made lots of money.
It's not the volume - it's the profit level.
-
My guess would be improper kickbacks or gifts from Manchester United.
-
That sounds like a serious code of conduct violation.
Ecoboost Fuel Requirements
in Escape & Kuga Forum
Posted
And in temperature extremes. It's not 1985 any more and turbos are not to be feared.