Nickel-cad hybrid batteries -- soon to be obsolete?

[AptosDriver]

Oops, sorry about the misleading topic title. Obviously, I meant Nickel-metal-hydride batteries, not "nickel-cad." Can't figure out how to correct it.

 

I'm still mulling a hybrid purchase. The picture is now more complicated (more fuzzy?) than ever. It's not just a matter of choosing between nameplates anymore (FFH or TCH?); it's fast becoming a choice between battery technologies as well. Lithium-ion batteries are here, or shortly will be -- in the Hyundai Sonata, Kia Optima, Chevy Volt, and now the '12 Infiniti M35, reportedly due out this spring. Lithium-ion batteries weigh less, take up less space and produce more power than nickel-metal-hydride batteries. With these new batteries turning up in more and more hybrids, does it make sense to buy any hybrid with NiMH batteries? Or is it better to wait?

Edited February 5, 2011 by AptosDriver

[dogo88]

Oops, sorry about the misleading topic title. Obviously, I meant Nickel-metal-hydride batteries, not "nickel-cad." Can't figure out how to correct it.

 

I'm still mulling a hybrid purchase. The picture is now more complicated (more fuzzy?) than ever. It's not just a matter of choosing between nameplates anymore (FFH or TCH?); it's fast becoming a choice between battery technologies as well. Lithium-ion batteries are here, or shortly will be -- in the Hyundai Sonata, Kia Optima, Chevy Volt, and now the '12 Infiniti M35, reportedly due out this spring. Lithium-ion batteries weigh less, take up less space and produce more power than nickel-metal-hydride batteries. With these new batteries turning up in more and more hybrids, does it make sense to buy any hybrid with NiMH batteries? Or is it better to wait?

 

Lithium batteries have that oh so not appealing issue of burning. While engineering firms have been improving this issue, it's still a concern. The biggest concern is when do you want the item? Today, then you have to chose what's available. Tomorrow, well then you can wait. But remember there will always be a new technology coming down the road. Sooner or later you need to pick or just sit and talk about it forever.

 

Dan

[VonoreTn]

With respect to the battery issue, I agree with Dan. My plan, having bought a new FFH in August 09, and with 28K miles on it now, I have already saved $1600 in gas the first year. I will save that much every year for 10 years (more if the price of gas goes up), and at that time or around 150K miles, I will look at the cost of replacement batteries to purchase with my $16,000 in savings plus interest. Based on taxi fleet results of Escape Hybrids in New York, they might even go longer mileage than that. Based on Prius results, the first compromise from old batteries is a reduction in passing power, not fuel economy. I may at that time be willing to live with a little less power and get even longer life out of the batteries. It is not an issue, I am glad I am driving a FFH right now. We are going to jump into it and drive from Knoxville to Florida next week for a week of warmth and tennis. When you get 40 mpg in a very comfortable, fully featured car, driving has become fun again. We will only need to stop one time on the way, well into Florida, and fill it up with ~14 gallons of gas.

 

If the Ford Fusion shifts to Lithium Ion batteries, there is no question the car price will go up, significantly, and I doubt that the FE will get much better based on the lower FE of the Volt with Lithium Ion batteries now, after the first 40 miles of plug in battery power. So far no one is seeing any magic on the Volt for the incremental cost, except more "free" miles on the overnight charge. What I see to be the overwhelming advantage to the FFH is the great powertrain and strategy, which Ford bought with royalty agreements from Toyota, a win win for both companies. For a true hybrid, I don't expect much advantage from the Lithium Ion batteries, but for a pure electric, it would definitely be the way to go.

 

It will be interesting to see how many miles someone can get out of the new Focus electric, in a custom build with Lithium Ion batteries. It should improve the baseline 100 miles per plug-in significantly.

[lolder]

Oops, sorry about the misleading topic title. Obviously, I meant Nickel-metal-hydride batteries, not "nickel-cad." Can't figure out how to correct it.

 

I'm still mulling a hybrid purchase. The picture is now more complicated (more fuzzy?) than ever. It's not just a matter of choosing between nameplates anymore (FFH or TCH?); it's fast becoming a choice between battery technologies as well. Lithium-ion batteries are here, or shortly will be -- in the Hyundai Sonata, Kia Optima, Chevy Volt, and now the '12 Infiniti M35, reportedly due out this spring. Lithium-ion batteries weigh less, take up less space and produce more power than nickel-metal-hydride batteries. With these new batteries turning up in more and more hybrids, does it make sense to buy any hybrid with NiMH batteries? Or is it better to wait?

You have been on the fence for some time worrying among other things about new technology. Well Li-Ion, Hyundais and Volts are even newer technology. Ni-MH is old and PROVEN technology. With a non-plug-in hybrid, the battery technology is unimportant. The HVB must only be reliable and long lasting. It's power density, etc. is relatively unimportant. The Hyundai Li-Ion battery is supposed to save only about 30 lbs. Hybrids are gasoline cars, not electric. Increasing EV range and speed is counter productive to efficiency in a non-plug-in hybrid.

[AptosDriver]

Lithium batteries have that oh so not appealing issue of burning. While engineering firms have been improving this issue, it's still a concern. The biggest concern is when do you want the item? Today, then you have to chose what's available. Tomorrow, well then you can wait. But remember there will always be a new technology coming down the road. Sooner or later you need to pick or just sit and talk about it forever.

 

Dan

Wasn't it laptop batteries that were combusting? I would hope that these auto engineers wouldn't put batteries in their cars that would catch fire. Anyway, a friend of mine back in New Hampshire said the battery in his neighbor's Prius caught fire and burned down his garage. "Tomorrow" is like next month for the Hyundai and Kia lithium-ion batteries, and the Infiniti is due out this spring. Also today I saw a story about how Volvo is coming out with a lithium-ion hybrid in 2012. So choosing between NiMH and lithium-ion technology is becoming more of an immediate issue.

Steve

[AptosDriver]

You have been on the fence for some time worrying among other things about new technology. Well Li-Ion, Hyundais and Volts are even newer technology. Ni-MH is old and PROVEN technology. With a non-plug-in hybrid, the battery technology is unimportant. The HVB must only be reliable and long lasting. It's power density, etc. is relatively unimportant. The Hyundai Li-Ion battery is supposed to save only about 30 lbs. Hybrids are gasoline cars, not electric. Increasing EV range and speed is counter productive to efficiency in a non-plug-in hybrid.

You're right of course. Given my reluctance to be an early adopter, it wouldn't be so smart of me to choose a lithium-ion hybrid over an NiMH hybrid at this point. One point seemingly in favor of the lithium-ion battery is that it's not only lighter; it's smaller. So you get more trunk space. Anyway, I'm very interested in seeing and driving the new Kia Optima hybrid. It's supposed to develop 206 hp combined with the ICE and the electric motor.

[AptosDriver]

Based on taxi fleet results of Escape Hybrids in New York, they might even go longer mileage than that.

They were using Escape hybrid taxis in San Francisco too. They recently retired some with 300,000 miles on them. Their batteries were evidently "Energizer bunnies." They kept going, and going and going.

 

I am glad I am driving a FFH right now. We are going to jump into it and drive from Knoxville to Florida next week for a week of warmth and tennis. When you get 40 mpg in a very comfortable, fully featured car, driving has become fun again. We will only need to stop one time on the way, well into Florida, and fill it up with ~14 gallons of gas.

I'm really glad to know you're enjoying it!

 

If the Ford Fusion shifts to Lithium Ion batteries, there is no question the car price will go up, significantly,

And the prices of any leftover, new NiMH FFHs will plummet.

 

I doubt that the FE will get much better based on the lower FE of the Volt with Lithium Ion batteries now, after the first 40 miles of plug in battery power.

 

But the lithium-ion FFH would have a bigger trunk.

 

What I see to be the overwhelming advantage to the FFH is the great powertrain and strategy, which Ford bought with royalty agreements from Toyota, a win win for both companies.

 

My understanding is that Ford developed its own hybrid drivetrain, but that there were enough similarities to Toyota's hybrid technology that they were worried about patent-infringement lawsuits. So Ford approached Toyota about it and they did a deal wherein Toyota cross-licensed its technology to Ford in exchange for Ford cross-licensing its diesel technology to Toyota, and no money changed hands.

 

For a true hybrid, I don't expect much advantage from the Lithium Ion batteries, but for a pure electric, it would definitely be the way to go.

Maybe there is no advantage other than more trunk space, which is especially helpful if you're a mobster.

[lolder]

The Hyundai Sonata Hybrid is a nice looking car. The MSRP for the premium package is $ 31.5k., slightly less than the FFH 502. It doesn't appear to have SYNC or CTA. It doesn't mention Blue Tooth. The Sonata Hybid appears tuned for more highway driving efficiency. It has an automatic clutch and a six speed transmission " for a more conventional driving feel". I don't mind that the FFH doesn't "shift" at all. Buick Dynaflows advertised that for years. Every review of the Hyundai mentions the conventional shift feel. Somebody is being paid off! The starter/generator in the Hyundai does not participate in moving the car as is done in the FFH. The traction motor in the Hyundai is considerably less powerful than that in the FFH ( 30 KW vs. 60 KW ). The Hyundai may turn out to be a very good car but the hybrid system is a "kluge" and not as elegant or simple as the eCVT hybrids.

[AptosDriver]

The Hyundai Sonata Hybrid is a nice looking car. The MSRP for the premium package is $ 31.5k., slightly less than the FFH 502. It doesn't appear to have SYNC or CTA. It doesn't mention Blue Tooth. The Sonata Hybid appears tuned for more highway driving efficiency. It has an automatic clutch and a six speed transmission " for a more conventional driving feel". I don't mind that the FFH doesn't "shift" at all. Buick Dynaflows advertised that for years. Every review of the Hyundai mentions the conventional shift feel. Somebody is being paid off! The starter/generator in the Hyundai does not participate in moving the car as is done in the FFH. The traction motor in the Hyundai is considerably less powerful than that in the FFH ( 30 KW vs. 60 KW ). The Hyundai may turn out to be a very good car but the hybrid system is a "kluge" and not as elegant or simple as the eCVT hybrids.

I think I need someone to educate me on this transmission business. I did have the idea that continuously variable transmissions are more efficient that conventional transmissions. On the other hand, I have a conventional automatic transmission in my 6-cylinder RAV4, and it's so smooth I don't even know where the shift points are.What's the advantage of mating a six-speed transmission to a hybrid drivetrain?

Edited February 6, 2011 by AptosDriver

[lolder]

I think I need someone to educate me on this transmission business. I did have the idea that continuously variable transmissions are more efficient that conventional transmissions. On the other hand, I have a conventional automatic transmission in my 6-cylinder RAV4, and it's so smooth I don't even know where the shift points are.What's the advantage of mating a six-speed transmission to a hybrid drivetrain?

Those of us who are technically familiar with eCVT hybrids DON'T KNOW what the advantage of the six-speed transmission is in a hybrid. We suspect that it avoids patents. The Hyundai clutch and transmission seem needlessly complex. Automatic transmissions, though complex, are very mature technology and usually reliable. Automatic transmissions have "clutches/brakes" in them to create the gear shifts. These are wear points as is the automatic clutch between the Hyundai ICE and motor/transmission. In the eCVT systems, there are no mechanical clutches/brakes to wear. They have only gear teeth on gear teeth. The management of the system is done electrically by software and electronics that varies the torque, plus and minus, on MG 1 which is the heart of the eCVTs and connected to the "Sun" gear. There are no wear points other than gear teeth which should have very long lives. Loading up an Atkinson ICE for high efficiency is easy with an eCVT. Doing it with a six-speed transmission seems to be a harder task but the proof will be in the execution of the engineering design. Hyundai is on a roll and I wish them well. In the meantime, I'm approaching 22,000 miles and two years with FFH which was built in May, 2009. I just met a vacationing owner from Ohio on his second FFH. He said he loved it and had put 44,000 miles on his first one in one year. Don't know why he traded but he seemed a satisfied owner.

[runutzzzzz]

Those of us who are technically familiar with eCVT hybrids DON'T KNOW what the advantage of the six-speed transmission is in a hybrid. We suspect that it avoids patents. The Hyundai clutch and transmission seem needlessly complex. Automatic transmissions, though complex, are very mature technology and usually reliable. Automatic transmissions have "clutches/brakes" in them to create the gear shifts. These are wear points as is the automatic clutch between the Hyundai ICE and motor/transmission. In the eCVT systems, there are no mechanical clutches/brakes to wear. They have only gear teeth on gear teeth. The management of the system is done electrically by software and electronics that varies the torque, plus and minus, on MG 1 which is the heart of the eCVTs and connected to the "Sun" gear. There are no wear points other than gear teeth which should have very long lives. Loading up an Atkinson ICE for high efficiency is easy with an eCVT. Doing it with a six-speed transmission seems to be a harder task but the proof will be in the execution of the engineering design. Hyundai is on a roll and I wish them well. In the meantime, I'm approaching 22,000 miles and two years with FFH which was built in May, 2009. I just met a vacationing owner from Ohio on his second FFH. He said he loved it and had put 44,000 miles on his first one in one year. Don't know why he traded but he seemed a satisfied owner.

 

Don't forget that CVT transmissions are more expensive to produce too and give you almost infinite amount of "gears."

 

I say Hyundai did it to save money, they didn't want to price themselves higher than a TCH or FFH and since they shoved a Lithium battery in there they needed to take a 6spd off the shelf and mate it up to the car.

[lolder]

Don't forget that CVT transmissions are more expensive to produce too and give you almost infinite amount of "gears."

 

I say Hyundai did it to save money, they didn't want to price themselves higher than a TCH or FFH and since they shoved a Lithium battery in there they needed to take a 6spd off the shelf and mate it up to the car.

I don't think a planetary gear CVT is more expensive. Many automatics are combinations of several planetary gear sets. A hybrid eCVT has the two motor/generators built into them and that is the extra expense. The Ford eCVT is made by a Japanese transmission company called Aisin that makes lots of different transmissions. It's kind of the Borg-Warner of Japan. These transmissions look like they're made for even bigger vehicles than the FEH and FFH. The Prius eCVT is considerably smaller even allowing for the reduced weight (-20%) and horsepower of the Prius. Their planetary gear sets could be held in your two hands. The next generation of hybrids are going to be smaller and lighter because weight is the controlling factor. The Prius so far is the only car designed from the beginning to be a full hybrid. ( The Honda's are not full series-parallel hybrids).

[akirby]

I don't think a planetary gear CVT is more expensive. Many automatics are combinations of several planetary gear sets. A hybrid eCVT has the two motor/generators built into them and that is the extra expense. The Ford eCVT is made by a Japanese transmission company called Aisin that makes lots of different transmissions. It's kind of the Borg-Warner of Japan. These transmissions look like they're made for even bigger vehicles than the FEH and FFH. The Prius eCVT is considerably smaller even allowing for the reduced weight (-20%) and horsepower of the Prius. Their planetary gear sets could be held in your two hands. The next generation of hybrids are going to be smaller and lighter because weight is the controlling factor. The Prius so far is the only car designed from the beginning to be a full hybrid. ( The Honda's are not full series-parallel hybrids).

 

Ford killed their CVT in the 500/Sable/Taurus due to the added cost and complexity not being worth the efficiency gains compared to modern 6 speed autos. That's probably why Hyundai didn't use it.

[dogo88]

Wasn't it laptop batteries that were combusting? I would hope that these auto engineers wouldn't put batteries in their cars that would catch fire. Anyway, a friend of mine back in New Hampshire said the battery in his neighbor's Prius caught fire and burned down his garage. "Tomorrow" is like next month for the Hyundai and Kia lithium-ion batteries, and the Infiniti is due out this spring. Also today I saw a story about how Volvo is coming out with a lithium-ion hybrid in 2012. So choosing between NiMH and lithium-ion technology is becoming more of an immediate issue.

Steve

 

Steve,

 

While it may have been the laptops that burst into flames, I think it pertains to all Lithiums. The airline have restrictions on how many you can carry on at a time and I think it's two. I don't think the do a lot of checking but it's still a restriction. Lithiums have a heat issue and a bunch together cause problems. That and their costs are why they have been so long in coming out for large users.

 

Dan

[lolder]

Ford killed their CVT in the 500/Sable/Taurus due to the added cost and complexity not being worth the efficiency gains compared to modern 6 speed autos. That's probably why Hyundai didn't use it.

I don't think that CVT was a planetary gear type. It looks like it was a chain-variable cone type. That's a huge difference. The eCVT particularly lends itself to a full hybrid. Standard non hybrid planetary gears have a clutch or brake for them to function. Hybrid types do not.

[AptosDriver]

In the eCVT systems, there are no mechanical clutches/brakes to wear. They have only gear teeth on gear teeth. The management of the system is done electrically by software and electronics that varies the torque, plus and minus, on MG 1 which is the heart of the eCVTs and connected to the "Sun" gear. There are no wear points other than gear teeth which should have very long lives.

According to this article on CVT transmissions that I found online, they don't have gear teeth.

[VonoreTn]

 

And the prices of any leftover, new NiMH FFHs will plummet.

 

 

I don't see that happening given the marginal advantage of Lithium Ion batteries for hybrid FE, as demonstrated by the Chevy Volt FE after 40 miles.

 

I appreciate your detailed response to my comments. I learned a few things, I was not aware of the San Francisco Escape hybrid taxis experience.

 

I do not expect the new Hyundai hybrid to get better mileage than the FFH. If it has a conventional 6 speed transmission, be aware that the associated torque converter is an inefficiency point, to the extent it slips and the slip amounts to wasted energy, converted to heat. At highway speeds, typically it will be bypassed with a direct lock up, but at lower speeds it will be an inefficiency that might lower it's FE to no more than the FFH. We will see when they come out, and road tests occur. You can't believe any projections until then.

 

I would appreciate a larger trunk, but it hasn't been a problem for the two of us. If there were 3 or more of us traveling long distances, it would be an issue. A solution might be a FFH station wagon, preserving the good low drag frontal area and low drag shape, and hopefully they could package the batteries flat below the rear floor. It might knock off a couple mpg's but having a 35 average mpg stationwagon would be a marketable package I think. But I suspect the price of gas, and hence customer demand will have to go up before Ford will consider such a FFH model.

[AptosDriver]

I would appreciate a larger trunk, but it hasn't been a problem for the two of us. If there were 3 or more of us traveling long distances, it would be an issue. A solution might be a FFH station wagon, preserving the good low drag frontal area and low drag shape, and hopefully they could package the batteries flat below the rear floor.

While out for a pleasant walk today (the thermometer is in the 70s here), I saw a small Ford truck and started wondering why Ford and Toyota aren't offering hybrid pickup trucks.

[AptosDriver]

The new lithium batteries in the Sonata and Kia hybrid sedans should not be confused with lithium-ion batteries. They're lithium-polymer batteries and as I've learned from this article, there's a difference:

 

The lithium polymer battery

 

The Hyundai Hybrid Blue Drive is the only system in the market that uses lithium polymer battery technology, which is far more advanced than the competition's nickel-metal hydride and lithium-ion applications.

 

What's unique and high-tech about lithium polymer is how it improved on the lithium-ion technology, which is used in laptops and cell phones. Hyundai upgraded this technology by adding robustness, power-density and package flexibility ....

 

Lithium Polymer vs. Nickel-Metal Hydride

 

Hyundai Sonata's lithium polymer battery improves the nickel-metal batteries. Although both batteries pack the same amount of power, the lithium polymer comes with 20-30 percent less weight, 40 percent less volume, and 10 per-cent greater efficiency, as well as 1,7 times more energy density.

 

This allowed Hyundai designers and engineers to devote less space and weight originally for the battery pack. The lithium polymer can better resist temperature change and can hold its charge 1.25 times longer.

 

Lithium Polymer vs. Lithium-ion

 

The traditional lithium-ion battery is reliable and easy to handle. However, they lack packaging efficiency and their small parts are complicated to manufacture. Lithium polymer batteries, on the other hand, have higher energy density yet lower manufacturing costs.

 

It can better withstand physical damage and begins to discharge only after a considerable number of charge-discharge cycles. Lithium polymer technology definitely has advantages in thermal robustness and safety.

 

The major advantage of lithium polymer is the efficient packaging of its anode, cathode, electrolyte, and encasement material.

 

Another positive difference is that lithium polymer uses a polymer gel as the electrolyte, rather than the traditional liquid electrolyte. This allows the use of a thinner and lighter encasement or pouch with aluminum walls.

 

New Hyundai technology

 

The lithium polymer battery is a product of hundreds of hours of testing and research by Hyundai and its battery supplier, LG Chem. This new technology has been proven to have better thermal and mechanical stability than other existing systems for better and safer driving.

 

It is also much cooler than the nickel-metal hydride and lithium-ion batteries, which means it can guarantee maintenance-free battery operation for a good 10 years or 150,000 miles in any weather conditions.

 

Then there's this from Popular Mechanics:

 

Compared to nickel-metal-hydride batteries of the same output, such as those used in the hybrid versions of the Toyota Camry and the Ford Fusion, the lithium-polymer batteries are 35 percent lighter and 40 percent smaller. Therefore, they can more easily be packaged without adding weight and taking up cargo space. They also have a lower self-discharge rate, which improves on the tendency to lose electricity when the vehicle is parked.

Compared to lithium-ion batteries, such as those used in electronic appliances, lithium-polymer batteries offer a similar energy density but with lower heat generation, which improves cycle life.

 

...The difference between lithium-ion and lithium-polymer is in the chemistry and packaging. Engineers seeking to take advantage of lithium-ion's superior power density have battled its tendency to overheat and degrade as charge cycles accumulate.

 

In other words, lithium-polymer batteries are longer-lasting and much less prone to catch fire than lithium-ion batteries. The Kia Optima hybrid uses the same battery technology and drive train as the Hyundai Sonata hybrid discussed here. GM uses lithium-ion batteries in its Chevy Volt. It will be interesting to see how those work out.

 

[lolder]

According to this article on CVT transmissions that I found online, they don't have gear teeth.

This is not the type of CVT in the Toyota/Ford hybrids. See this: http://www.eahart.com/prius/psd/. The Fords work the same. The Li batteries are more advanced batteries. The question is are they as reliable. The car companies now believe their Ni-MH batteries will have tens of thousands of small range charging cycles or almost indefinite life. This is far more important in a full gas/electric hybrid than even a two to one spec. improvement of a Li battery if the Li battery can only go a few thousand cycles. An open circuit battery failure in the eCVT hybrids completely disables the car. You can't have millions of vehicles in use with even a 1 % failure rate that disables the vehicle. Toyota had to completely revise the design of a power semi-conductor called an Isolated Gate Bi-polar Transistor (IGBT) for use in hybrid cars. They were already used in high speed electric trains and heavy industrial machinery but they needed to be several orders of magnitude more reliable in cars. The IGBT is the heart of a hybrid. It converts DC to AC and vice-versa. Th early ones Toyota's electronic company made exploded a lot during tests. The aluminum leads were as thick as your finger and an internal breakdown voltage short would vaporize the aluminum and then the aluminum vapor would explode! Sounds like something the Pentagon would design. Toyota solved all those problems ( senior managers said later if they had known how risky designing the car was going to be, they probably wouldn't have done it. ) Whatever complaint you might have with the Japanese, they persevered in this job. None of the ideas were new but they made it all work together.

Edited February 7, 2011 by lolder

[CometFlash]

While out for a pleasant walk today (the thermometer is in the 70s here), I saw a small Ford truck and started wondering why Ford and Toyota aren't offering hybrid pickup trucks.

 

I wish they made an AWD Fusion Hybrid, myself. As for their pickup trucks... I bought a 2009, and was planning to buy a 2011 with the new EcoBoost engine. I was SO excited for the truck to finally get some decent MPG. Well, the EcoBoost will hit the streets very soon, and guess what... it only gets 1 stinkin' MPGcity better than the 5.4L Triton I had in my 2009. 14MPGcity vs. 15MPGcity. What a complete and utter letdown. Hence my months of looking elsewhere, such as the FFH, MKZH, Volt, etc.

 

So no idea why no hybrid pickups, other than they are always playing the towing/hauling war, and it'd probably be impossible to win that war with a hybrid drive pickup. Lots of guys want to be able to haul around 8,000 lbs. of lumber while towing their house on wheeels uphill to the top of Mt. Everest it seems. Even though hardly anyone who buys an F-150 does anything even close to that, that's what the SuperDuty's are for!

 

Stupid EcoBoost F-150. Goodbye. Hello '11 FFH. :headspin:

Edited February 7, 2011 by CometFlash

[akirby]

5.4L Triton 310 HP @ 5000 RPM Torque 365 @ 3500 RPM 14/18 mpg

 

3.5L Ecoboost 365 HP @ 5000 RPM Torque 420 @ 2500 RPM 15/21 mpg

 

55 more hp, 55 more lb/ft lower in the rpm band AND better mpg. What the hell else could you ask for?

[CometFlash]

5.4L Triton 310 HP @ 5000 RPM Torque 365 @ 3500 RPM 14/18 mpg

 

3.5L Ecoboost 365 HP @ 5000 RPM Torque 420 @ 2500 RPM 15/21 mpg

 

55 more hp, 55 more lb/ft lower in the rpm band AND better mpg. What the hell else could you ask for?

 

Better MPG.

 

Every one of my four F-150's, even my very first 1997 XLT, could handle anything I threw at them. Best built trucks ever, love 'em!

But all four also sucked on MPG.

I don't need hp, I don't need torque. All 4 had plenty or power and torque to do anything I could possibly throw at them.

Hard to find a bigger F150 fan than I; spent over 150k on them in my lifetime; and my family & friends think I'm an F-150 nutcase.

Everyone was shocked beyond belief when I drove up without my truck.

But not blind to what they need to improve upon; #1 being MPG.

 

:reading:

 

2011 Ford Fusion Hybrid

2009 Ford F-150 Platinum 4x4

2004 Ford F-150 Lariat 4x4

1998 Ford F-150 Lariat 4x4

1997 Ford F-150 XLT 4x4

[akirby]

Better MPG.

 

The laws of physics are a little hard to overcome, especially if you want 4WD. Some people just can't be pleased.

[Oman]

I was waiting for this comment...

 

An eCVT and a CVT are not at all the same thing. Every non-hybrid car that has a CVT uses a completely different system. There have been reliability problems with standard CVT transmissions. eCVTs are far more reliable and flexible than CVTs.

 

A standard CVT works just like the belt based speed control on a riding lawn mower. In fact many use high-strength belts. You just adjust where the belt sits within a large pulley and that changes the ratio between the two pulleys. There are wear and strength problems with this system as well as unwanted friction.

 

An eCVT is a single planetary with the sun gear driven by an electric motor. This allows a very wide input to output ratio (because the sun can spin in either direction). The reason you can't easily put this into a standard car is because the motor needs to draw power at low ICE to wheel ratios and will generate power at high ICE to wheel ratios. There must be a source and sink for that power which in a hybrid is both the HVB and the traction motor.

 

The eCVT is far lighter than a 6 speed transmission. It consists of about 40 parts with few significant wear items, where a 6 speed consists of over 500 parts including fluid pumps, valves, clutches, and bands.

 

The Hyundai system is a 6-speed mated to an extra set of clutches with an electric motor bolted in. It is an improvement over the older partial hybrid design but doesn't quite get to the advantages of a full hybrid. It's all about the patents and cost to license (if that was even an option).

 

BTW: The advantage of the CVT in general over a standard transmission is that the computer can choose any combination of ICE RPM / POWER and electric power based on a real-time calculation for best efficiency. When using a 6-speed the computer has six ratios to choose from and each has "slop" because of the torque converter. The "shift" feeling is something long enjoyed by car buffs. Stomping on the gas and getting whiplash when a shift occurs is/was a desired trait and showed how much power was under the hood. Getting the exact same acceleration without the shift is often described as "mushy" or slow. Even when the car is accelerating faster people often think that it isn't performing as well if they don't feel the bang of a quick shift. I should know - I restored a 1969 "R" code Mustang (that's a 428 Cobra Jet with shaker). It has a C6 three-speed. The seats don't have headrests and if I don't warn the passengers about the hard shifts, well, let's just say I always warn them.

 

 

 

 

Ford killed their CVT in the 500/Sable/Taurus due to the added cost and complexity not being worth the efficiency gains compared to modern 6 speed autos. That's probably why Hyundai didn't use it.