First Drive: BYD's Shark PHEV Pickup Truck

[Biker16]

 

[Rick73]

Interesting design for sure, especially the FWD engine part combined with RWD electric; for a truck that is.  Other vehicles have used this approach but I’m not aware of any pickups to date.  What is most interesting to me is that it “may” not use a “normal” transmission at all, but rather an all-electric series engine-driven layout.  I would love to see more information on powertrain.  Sounds like engine may be able to power front wheels directly similar to Honda hybrids.

 

https://www.autoblog.com/features/byd-shark-phev-pickup-truck-heads-to-mexico
 

“The truck is conventional in the sense that it has a body-on-frame chassis with a longitudinally-mounted engine; in this case a turbocharged 1.5-liter four-cylinder (though BYD doesn't explicitly state whether it's a gas or diesel engine on its consumer site). But it starts differing from there. It has double-wishbone independent suspension at all four corners. And the engine is only coupled to the front motor, with a separate motor providing drive power for the rear. It seems it operates generally like a series hybrid, though it's possible the engine can provide some direct power for the front axle if needed. Front unit output is rated at 228 horsepower, and the rear at 201 horsepower, and BYD combines those for 430 horsepower total output. BYD also estimates a run to 62 mph at 5.7 seconds.“

 

[Rick73]

My Spanish is a little rusty, but the Mexican BYD Website has some interesting additional information I can make out.

 

Front power is 170 kW and torque 310 N-m.  Rear motor is 150 kW and 340 N-m.  Maximum combined power is shown as 430 HP, which is 320 kW.

 

Maximum towing is listed at 2,500 kg, or 5,500 pounds.  Not bad for plug-in electric mid-size pickup.

 

I like that truck has exportable electrical power similar to Ford’s Pro Power Onboard.  BYD shows it being used for camping as an example.  With 29.6 kWh battery capacity, it could power an RV air conditioner all through night without pickup’s engine having to start.  That could be really useful when camping where generators are not allowed except a couple of hours during day.  Obviously during power outages also.  I could not find what the exportable power rating is, but I’m sure it’s plenty for camping or power tools on job site.  Picture says “a power station anywhere at any time” if I’m reading correctly.
 

[jpd80]

 

[jpd80]

There’s an incorrect belief on the internet that because the Shark 6 has no transmission,

it’s therefore, purely a series hybrid like a diesel locomotive - that is factually incorrect.

 

One Aussie automotive reviewer reached out to BYD for clarification and was told that 

when road speed increases to 60 kph (38mph) or more, there is a clutch that engages

the engine to the front motor drive unit, turning the series hybrid into a parallel hybrid.

 

It makes sense when you think about it, the 1.5 turbo engine’s power is added to the

front and rear drive motors for maximum power and torque situations, that can only

happen if engine power is connected directly to the front wheels.

 

Thinking about this, it would be possible for Ford to do a similar arrangement with

the C2 based Maverick if it was to use the Lincoln Nautilus 2.0 EB hybrid setup

combined with a rear electric motor design. Sure, such a vehicle would be smaller

than the Shark 6 but on the up side, the price would also be a lot less too….

 

Edited December 17, 2024 by jpd80

[Rick73]

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

There’s an incorrect belief on the internet that because the Shark 6 has no transmission,

it’s therefore, purely a series hybrid like a diesel locomotive - that is factually incorrect.

 

One Aussie automotive reviewer reached out to BYD for clarification and was told that 

when road speed increases to 60 kph (38mph) or more, there is a clutch that engages

the engine to the front motor drive unit, turning the series hybrid into a parallel hybrid.

 

It makes sense when you think about it, the 1.5 turbo engine’s power is added to the

front and rear drive motors for maximum power and torque situations, that can only

happen if engine power n smitten directly to the front wheels.

 

Thinking about this, it would be possible for Ford to do a similar arrangement with

the C2 based Maverick if it was to use the Lincoln Nautilus 2.0 EB hybrid setup

combined with a rear electric motor design. Sure, such a vehicle would be smaller

than the Shark 6 but on the up side, the price would also be a lot less too….

 

The BYD system is likely more like the Honda hybrid transmission than the Ford C2 PowerSplit in that it doesn’t use planetary gearing to split and or combine engine and electric motor power.  The Ford design that mostly copied Toyota made more sense to me back when electric motors were relatively small and underpowered, but on newer Honda (and apparently BYD) design, the electric motor is large and powerful enough to serve as primary propulsion.  I expect the clutch that locks engine to wheels directly is there mostly to improve fuel economy once vehicle reaches (near) steady-state cruising speed.  It’s the best of both worlds.

 

I’m sure Ford could use C2 PowerSplit hybrid transmission, but with newer smaller-and-more-powerful electric motors now available, maybe it’s time for a new transmission without added cost and weight of planetary gearing.

 

As I suggested a while back, Ford could also design a new hybrid transmission for longitudinal-engine vehicles in RWD, AWD, or even FWD (when appropriate) using same design concept.  It could function similar to an Extended Range EV but with a clutch to drive wheels directly with ICE at (near) highway speeds.  I see very little reason to have a 10-speed plus reverse transmission at all when electric motor can handle the job much simpler.  Or maybe 2-speed like some German manufacturers are designing or using.  Two speeds could help with towing and improve e-motor efficiency.

[jpd80]

On 12/15/2024 at 9:49 AM, Rick73 said:

The BYD system is likely more like the Honda hybrid transmission than the Ford C2 PowerSplit in that it doesn’t use planetary gearing to split and or combine engine and electric motor power.  The Ford design that mostly copied Toyota made more sense to me back when electric motors were relatively small and underpowered, but on newer Honda (and apparently BYD) design, the electric motor is large and powerful enough to serve as primary propulsion.  I expect the clutch that locks engine to wheels directly is there mostly to improve fuel economy once vehicle reaches (near) steady-state cruising speed.  It’s the best of both worlds.

 

I’m sure Ford could use C2 PowerSplit hybrid transmission, but with newer smaller-and-more-powerful electric motors now available, maybe it’s time for a new transmission without added cost and weight of planetary gearing.

 

As I suggested a while back, Ford could also design a new hybrid transmission for longitudinal-engine vehicles in RWD, AWD, or even FWD (when appropriate) using same design concept.  It could function similar to an Extended Range EV but with a clutch to drive wheels directly with ICE at (near) highway speeds.  I see very little reason to have a 10-speed plus reverse transmission at all when electric motor can handle the job much simpler.  Or maybe 2-speed like some German manufacturers are designing or using.  Two speeds could help with towing and improve e-motor efficiency.

If there was no ICE production at Ford, then developing a different transmission for PHEV/EREV would probably make sense

but as it stands, the ICE production justified the 10R years ago so adding a motor where the torque converter goes was a 

relatively cheap way to get a hybrid transmission without funding a completely new design (hard to justify to Ford financing).

 

Don’t get me wrong a lot of your suggestion on changes would make perfect sense if Ford

hadn’t already spent money and developed the engines and transmissions it has years ago.

Don’t lose heart, There’s always the possibility that Ford will some day surprise us all with

a sweeping change to rationalise production across all models that saves a ton of money.

On that day, you can say, I told ya so…..LOL

 

Edited December 17, 2024 by jpd80

[akirby]

6 hours ago, jpd80 said:

If there was no ICE production at Ford, then developing a different transmission for PHEV/EREV would probably make sense

but as it stands, the ICE production justified the 10R years ago so adding a motor where the torque converter goes was a 

relatively cheap way to get a hybrid transmission without funding a completely new design (hard to justify to Ford financing).

 

Yes it was a time and cost saver for sure but it also preserved the ability to tow and haul heavy loads

[Rick73]

8 hours ago, jpd80 said:

If there was no ICE production at Ford, then developing a different transmission for PHEV/EREV would probably make sense

but as it stands, the ICE production justified the 10R years ago so adding a motor where the torque converter goes was a 

relatively cheap way to get a hybrid transmission without funding a completely new design (hard to justify to Ford financing).

 

Don’t get me wrong a lot of your suggestion on changes would make perfect sense if Ford

hadn’t already spent money and developed the engines and transmissions it has years ago.

Don’t lose heart, There’s always the possibility that Ford will some day surprise us all with

a sweeping change to rationalise production across all models that saves a ton of money.

On that day, you can say, I told ya so…..LOL

 

A heavy duty eCVT would also function with HEV, not just PHEV and EREV; though technically an EREV with eCVT becomes PHEV with larger battery (which I think is better design choice).  Adding a lock-up clutch is a small cost that improves highway efficiency, range, and reduces needed battery capacity.  Main disadvantage is that it limits powertrain packaging compared to pure EREV.

 

Anyway, much depends on how committed Ford is to a HEV/PHEV future for larger RWD SUVs and trucks.  If HEV replaces ICE as the base powertrain, the 10R will likely be replaced and phased out in my opinion.  Honestly, 10R is overkill and its need was driven more by marketing than engineering.  Offering a 10-speed sounds much better than an 8-speed from marketing perspective, but may have more cons than pros.

 

The challenge I see with electric motor replacing torque converter is that packaging and speed limits electric horsepower.  If HEV/PHEV will play large role over 10 years, or longer, it may be time for clean sheet design.

[Sherminator98]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

A heavy duty eCVT would also function with HEV

 

But your assuming that making  eCVT would be even possible-you might be able to, but it might be so costly that it makes zero sense to do so 

[jpd80]

6 hours ago, akirby said:

Yes it was a time and cost saver for sure but it also preserved the ability to tow and haul heavy loads

True but the gist was that all previous electrification efforts (hybrid and PHEV) were extensions of existing ICE projects

and that’s how funding worked at Ford. Back then, asking for financing of completely new products was much harder.

 

and to your point of tow and haul, here’s an interesting test on the Shark 6 that shows what happens

when the battery becomes very discharged while towing a Dynomometer load….

The test starts of with Caravan test but then shows the induced load testing…

 

 

[Texasota]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

True but the gist was that all previous electrification efforts (hybrid and PHEV) were extensions of existing ICE projects

and that’s how funding worked at Ford. Back then, asking for financing of completely new products was much harder.

 

and to your point of tow and haul, here’s an interesting test on the Shark 6 that shows what happens

when the battery becomes very discharged while towing a Dynomometer load….

The test starts of with Caravan test but then shows the induced load testing…

Thanks, JPD. This was very interesting to watch and does confirm what was debated in detail in another thread. In this case, when the battery became depleted the Shark was limited to about 45 MPH while towing the dyno load. It would likely not perform well when towing maximum load up the Ike Gauntlet in Colorado. In this scenario a Ranger PHEV (or Ranger ICE) is going to perform much better.

[Rick73]

6 hours ago, Texasota said:

Thanks, JPD. This was very interesting to watch and does confirm what was debated in detail in another thread. In this case, when the battery became depleted the Shark was limited to about 45 MPH while towing the dyno load. It would likely not perform well when towing maximum load up the Ike Gauntlet in Colorado. In this scenario a Ranger PHEV (or Ranger ICE) is going to perform much better.

That video is indeed interesting in many ways, and could benefit from additional context in my opinion.

 

The first thing that jumps out as somewhat unusual is the sled being set for 3,000 Newtons of drag, which is 674 pounds.  Pulling that much resistance at say 60 MPH would require ~108 HP at drive wheels, and even more at engine.  That seems excessive to me for that size truck, which explains why battery runs down if speed is held continuously.  I’m not sure that’s a realistic test most buyers in this segment would often encounter, though in fairness the video states larger vehicles can maintain 100 kph, or 62 MPH, while towing.  Example he shows is Toyota Landcruiser KAKADU which has turbo diesel almost twice as large (2.8L).

 

As to Ike Gauntlet you refer to the TFLT guys use as world’s toughest  towing test, I think the BYD may do OK if it started the climb with fully charged battery.  The climb is only 8 miles long IIRC and takes 8 minutes at 60 MPH for a perfect run.  Given battery is just shy of 30 kWh, it should last if drivetrain is somewhat efficient, especially since engine would contribute some power also during climb.  In other Ike Gauntlet EV tests, they recorded energy consumption on uphill of only 20 kWh with Rivian towing 9,000 pounds, so BYD with a proportionally smaller trailer should do fine with 30 kWh battery, plus the ~ 130 kW from turbo 1.5L engine.  It would be a cool test to see. 👍 

[jpd80]

To be fair, the reporter pointed out the load imposed on the Shark 6 was extremely heavy and something

that would tax plenty of diesel pickups as it approximates towing something up a continuous steep grade.

 

The drawbar load from say, a 5,500 lb caravan being towed on relatively flat or undulating road would be

far less than that but the test was intended to show the extreme worst case. I’m not surprised that the 

small 1.5 turbo struggled with that load but still being able to muster about 45 mph showed it could be done

and in the real world towing a caravan with depleted battery, the Shark 6  probably keep up with 60 mph running.

 

Now imagine that 1.5 turbo was replaced by say, a 2.0 or 2.3 turbo engine, performance would have been way better

without too much of a hit to fuel economy…I guess it’s one of those things China has to learn about differnt markets..