No Hybrid Explorer or Aviator for 2024

[silvrsvt]

2025 is the restyled model...which leads me to wonder if the the 2.3L Ecoboost Hybrid will be part of the line up in 2025MY. 

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a45573088/ford-explorer-lincoln-aviator-update-hybrid-dead/

[rmc523]

21 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

2025 is the restyled model...which leads me to wonder if the the 2.3L Ecoboost Hybrid will be part of the line up in 2025MY. 

 

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a45573088/ford-explorer-lincoln-aviator-update-hybrid-dead/

 

Kind of crazy that they pushed the refresh to '25 - 5 years from the new model - and Ford wonders why people lose interest in its products...

[silvrsvt]

26 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Kind of crazy that they pushed the refresh to '25 - 5 years from the new model - and Ford wonders why people lose interest in its products...

 

Its coming out in Spring of next year as 2025...not 25CY

 

The 24MY is only like 6 months long

[blazerdude20]

2 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Its coming out in Spring of next year as 2025...not 25CY

 

The 24MY is only like 6 months long

Still way too long. The 2020 Explorer went on sale June of 2019. We are talking about close to 5 years before a refresh. For a vehicle that was widely panned as taking a step back on the interior design/materials. Ford really needs to stick to 3 year refresh, 2 more before new top hat.  

[jpd80]

Did you see the reason for discontinuation of the hybrids?

 

Quote

Ford cited high demand for the hybrid version of the Explorer-based Police Interceptor Utility, along with demand for other Ford hybrids, as the reason for the Explorer hybrid's discontinuation. 

That shows how Ford is using limited battery supplies to best advantage, they obviously can’t get enough hybrid batteries for police vehicles and other hybrids could that be reference to C2s like Escape and Maverick?

 

Clearly, the thinking is that they can lose civilian Explorer/Aviator hybrids and pick up other hybrid sales. 

 

Edited October 19, 2023 by jpd80

[T-dubz]

6 hours ago, rmc523 said:

 

Kind of crazy that they pushed the refresh to '25 - 5 years from the new model - and Ford wonders why people lose interest in its products...

I know what you mean. It seems like every day I see a new facelift for a Hyundai. The Santa Fe has probably gone through three iterations during the same timeframe.

[paintguy]

Interesting that Ford is still so short of batteries for hybrids when pushing for BEVs adoption to the point of public statements that smaller 2 row SUVs that are newly developed will be BEV. BEVs approaching Tesla ranges have about 90 - 100 kwh batteries. PHEVs with class competitive electric range have 15-30 kwh batteries. Seems Ford could make far more PHEVs than BEVs. The current BEV offerings are not adding to the profit picture. Customer acceptance of BEVs appears lagging. Tesla seemed to have the best acceptance until Musk's comments on politics (which I will not address here) seemed opposite of Tesla owners online and in person.

[AM222]

8 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Clearly, the thinking is that they can lose civilian Explorer/Aviator hybrids and pick up other hybrid sales. 

From a consumer's perspective it looks like they've been struggling ever since they had to sacrifice model lines. First the cars, now the Explorer-Aviator hybrids, soon mainstream 2-row SUVs. Ford probably missed an opportunity in making a hybrid F150 Raptor — not enough battery packs I guess.

You have other manufacturers like Toyota for example, they still sell many cars (globally), has turned almost every non-sports car model into hybrids (globally) and is now getting into BEVs (late, but gaining some traction). Then you have the other side of Toyota that makes enthusiasts focused RWD and AWD GR models.
 

Edited October 19, 2023 by AM222

[Rick73]

11 hours ago, paintguy said:

Interesting that Ford is still so short of batteries for hybrids when pushing for BEVs adoption to the point of public statements that smaller 2 row SUVs that are newly developed will be BEV. BEVs approaching Tesla ranges have about 90 - 100 kwh batteries. PHEVs with class competitive electric range have 15-30 kwh batteries. Seems Ford could make far more PHEVs than BEVs. The current BEV offerings are not adding to the profit picture. Customer acceptance of BEVs appears lagging. Tesla seemed to have the best acceptance until Musk's comments on politics (which I will not address here) seemed opposite of Tesla owners online and in person.

The Car and Driver article included link to earlier review of PHEV, and claimed they could only get about 13~15 miles of electric range if driven with light right foot.  Vehicle weight was almost 6,000 pounds, so poor electric  range was understandable.  That’s where  the middle ground gets complicated.

[rmc523]

19 hours ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Its coming out in Spring of next year as 2025...not 25CY

 

The 24MY is only like 6 months long

 

Still way too long in the marketplace, considering increasingly competitive competiton.  Explorer was new for 2020, and arrived in 2019.  5 years is far too long for a product to languish unchanged, especially since it had issues from the get-go.  It's a problem we see with Ford over and over and over again on everything that isn't F-series, which (understandably) get refreshes/redesigns like clockwork.

 

13 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Did you see the reason for discontinuation of the hybrids?

 

That shows how Ford is using limited battery supplies to best advantage, they obviously can’t get enough hybrid batteries for police vehicles and other hybrids could that be reference to C2s like Escape and Maverick?

 

Clearly, the thinking is that they can lose civilian Explorer/Aviator hybrids and pick up other hybrid sales. 

 

 

Honestly, aside from battery production capacity, I think part of it is Ford still trying to correct the multitude of issues Explorer has had - by eliminating a more complex hybrid drivetrain, that'll simplify production further as they continue to sort out issues.

 

That said, it's ridiculous that Ford has been up against a production wall on hybrids for 20 years now - we've heard year after year that they don't have enough production capacity for hybrids.....why can they not get this resolved??  Maybe with the new battery plants?  But by then who knows what the market will do re: hybrids.

[Rick73]

15 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

Maybe with the new battery plants?

Are not Hybrid and BEV batteries normally different?  I believe some PHEV are similar to BEV chemistry because batteries are so much larger, but simpler hybrids often have tiny batteries as small as under 1 kWh energy capacity, but with extremely high specific charging and discharging power capabilities.  I don’t believe they are interchangeable if that’s what you were implying, though I’m no expert and could be wrong.

[rmc523]

12 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Are not Hybrid and BEV batteries normally different?  I believe some PHEV are similar to BEV chemistry because batteries are so much larger, but simpler hybrids often have tiny batteries as small as under 1 kWh energy capacity, but with extremely high specific charging and discharging power capabilities.  I don’t believe they are interchangeable if that’s what you were implying, though I’m no expert and could be wrong.

 

i'm not entirely sure to be honest.  

 

THey just seem to be a hybrid battery/production capacity year after year instead of investing in much larger capacity that the market is seemingly willing to bear.

[akirby]

54 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Are not Hybrid and BEV batteries normally different?  I believe some PHEV are similar to BEV chemistry because batteries are so much larger, but simpler hybrids often have tiny batteries as small as under 1 kWh energy capacity, but with extremely high specific charging and discharging power capabilities.  I don’t believe they are interchangeable if that’s what you were implying, though I’m no expert and could be wrong.

I’ve seen nothing that indicates different types of cells but there are differences in how they are connected.

[akirby]

Hybrid explorer never made sense to me with the 3.3 engine.  It excels at neither fuel economy like escape nor power like f150 ecoboost.  I bet the new model has a different HEV powertrain.

[rmc523]

30 minutes ago, akirby said:

Hybrid explorer never made sense to me with the 3.3 engine.  It excels at neither fuel economy like escape nor power like f150 ecoboost.  I bet the new model has a different HEV powertrain.

 

Isnt the ROW Ranger hybrid based on the 2.3?  Maybe we'll see that.

[silvrsvt]

7 minutes ago, rmc523 said:

 

Isnt the ROW Ranger hybrid based on the 2.3?  Maybe we'll see that.

 

That is what I'm expecting...

[Rick73]

Ford previously announced the F-150 base 3.3L V6 was being eliminated in 2024 MY, with  2.7L EB becoming base engine.  Is it not likely that eliminating Explorer Hybrid is because 3.3L V6 is going away?  Not sure but seems reasonable.  If Explorer hybrid volume is as low as reported, I can see Ford dropping it instead of making powertrain revisions at this time.

 

I expect Ford has learned by now that hybrid success is greatly dependent on significant fuel economy gains, as is the case with Maverick.  Other manufacturers like Toyota, Honda and Hyundai also seem to prioritize hybrid fuel economy.  If next Explorer hybrid ends up with 2.3L EB powertrain using same electrified transmission as at present, I doubt we will see a significant-enough bump in fuel economy to make it a huge success like Maverick Hybrid has been.

[akirby]

8 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

 

I expect Ford has learned by now that hybrid success is greatly dependent on significant fuel economy gains,

Powerboost F150 disagrees.

[Rick73]

10 minutes ago, akirby said:

Powerboost F150 disagrees.

Not by comparison to Maverick.  Ford stated hybrid percentage for Maverick is much much higher than for F-150.  And as I argued previously, I would bet Powerboost F-150 sales are influenced greatly by 7.2 kW Pro Power Onboard availability more than the Powerboost fuel economy gain.  Just an opinion that we would be comparing apples and oranges if applied to Explorer.

[silvrsvt]

48 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Not by comparison to Maverick.  Ford stated hybrid percentage for Maverick is much much higher than for F-150.  And as I argued previously, I would bet Powerboost F-150 sales are influenced greatly by 7.2 kW Pro Power Onboard availability more than the Powerboost fuel economy gain.  Just an opinion that we would be comparing apples and oranges if applied to Explorer.

 

I'm going to guess that hybrid gains for heavier vehicles also is also much lower then it is in small cars. I'm also willing to bet that the Atkinson cycle engines don't work well in a towing type environment either (just looked it up and they give up power)

The disadvantage of the four-stroke Atkinson-cycle engine versus the more common Otto-cycle engine is reduced power density. Due to a smaller portion of the compression stroke being devoted to compressing the intake air, an Atkinson-cycle engine does not take in as much air as would a similarly designed and sized Otto-cycle engine

 

So using the Maverick vs Ecoboost Hybrid argument isn't really apples to apples either. Plus recent hybrids have been marketed as power adders or Pro Power etc because the additional costs aren't offset by a major increase in fuel savings. 

[fordmantpw]

10 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

I'm going to guess that hybrid gains for heavier vehicles also is also much lower then it is in small cars. I'm also willing to bet that the Atkinson cycle engines don't work well in a towing type environment either (just looked it up and they give up power)
 

 

 

So using the Maverick vs Ecoboost Hybrid argument isn't really apples to apples either. Plus recent hybrids have been marketed as power adders or Pro Power etc because the additional costs aren't offset by a major increase in fuel savings. 

 

For the 2024 F150, the PowerBoost is a no-cost option (well, you get a credit for the option cost), so it's the same price as the non-hybrid.

[akirby]

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

Not by comparison to Maverick.  Ford stated hybrid percentage for Maverick is much much higher than for F-150.  And as I argued previously, I would bet Powerboost F-150 sales are influenced greatly by 7.2 kW Pro Power Onboard availability more than the Powerboost fuel economy gain.  Just an opinion that we would be comparing apples and oranges if applied to Explorer.

Your opinion is based on your obsession with maximum energy efficiency.  That has nothing to do with success in the market.  Hybrids can be used for better fuel economy or they can be used as a power adder like the new Nautilus where the 2.0eb hybrid takes the place of the previous V6.  Powerboost uses it as a power booster in addition to enabling pro power onboard.  All are perfectly valid use cases and all can be very successful in the market.   Not everyone is obsessed with fuel economy/efficiency like you are.

BTW - what do you drive?

[Rick73]

35 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

I'm going to guess that hybrid gains for heavier vehicles also is also much lower then it is in small cars. I'm also willing to bet that the Atkinson cycle engines don't work well in a towing type environment either (just looked it up and they give up power)
 

 

 

So using the Maverick vs Ecoboost Hybrid argument isn't really apples to apples either. Plus recent hybrids have been marketed as power adders or Pro Power etc because the additional costs aren't offset by a major increase in fuel savings. 

In city cycle, where hybrids do best, I would expect a heavy vehicle to perform proportionally about the same as a lighter one provided powertrain were similar and to scale.  I personally believe we haven’t seen as many fuel-efficient larger hybrids because there isn’t enough demand, not because they wouldn’t work.  Larger vehicles usually cost much more, tend to be more luxurious, and attract different buyers who don’t care about fuel economy to the same degree.  I think it’s more of a human than science issue.

 

I don’t know how much or how often Explorer owners tow, but like Maverick, an Explorer Hybrid but with larger Atkinson engine would be able to tow some.  I expect 3,500-pound tow rating shouldn’t be too difficult to achieve.

[Rick73]

11 minutes ago, akirby said:

Your opinion is based on your obsession with maximum energy efficiency.  That has nothing to do with success in the market.  Hybrids can be used for better fuel economy or they can be used as a power adder like the new Nautilus where the 2.0eb hybrid takes the place of the previous V6.  Powerboost uses it as a power booster in addition to enabling pro power onboard.  All are perfectly valid use cases and all can be very successful in the market.   Not everyone is obsessed with fuel economy/efficiency like you are.

BTW - what do you drive?

I see improving fuel economy as an option for the industry to pursue versus 100% transition to BEV.  Presently, I’m driving a huge Ford gas guzzler and hoping to replace with another gas guzzler, but one that improves MPG by 20~30 percent.  I would prefer even higher fuel economy but such a vehicle is not available in US.

 

Even “IF” I were obsessed with fuel economy, what difference does that make?  Your comment seems a little personal based on you not having same opinion.

 

Yeah, I’ve driven 100s of thousands of personal miles (not work) in Ford’s with V10s averaging +/- 10~12 MPG, but I’ve also purchased 3 new vehicles with 4-cylinder engines.  For most buyers like me, the world is not as black and white as some here seem to want to make it, or feel comfortable with.

[silvrsvt]

8 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

In city cycle, where hybrids do best, I would expect a heavy vehicle to perform proportionally about the same as a lighter one provided powertrain were similar and to scale.  I personally believe we haven’t seen as many fuel-efficient larger hybrids because there isn’t enough demand, not because they wouldn’t work.  Larger vehicles usually cost much more, tend to be more luxurious, and attract different buyers who don’t care about fuel economy to the same degree.  I think it’s more of a human than science issue.

 

I don’t know how much or how often Explorer owners tow, but like Maverick, an Explorer Hybrid but with larger Atkinson engine would be able to tow some.  I expect 3,500-pound tow rating shouldn’t be too difficult to achieve.

 

You conveniently ignored the fact that Atkinson engines develop less power and scaling them up would impact weight, which would offset any fuel economy gains in any situation. 

 

So lets do this:

Ford 2.5L Hybrid 156-hp, 136 lb.-ft without hybrid power increase

 

GM Ecotech 2.5 202 hp 191 lb-ft. 

 

So using Atkinson cycle engine, your losing almost 25-30% of your power from an Otto cycle engine. Given the fact that the Powerboost transmission only has 100HP motor in it, a typical 3.5L NA engine would lose almost 1/3 of its HP running an Atkinson cycle.