Featured F-150 Hybrid

oy ...
47hp electric motor ... 1.5kW battery. Meah ... better than nothin.
.

 

This 3.5 V6 is expected to get about 23MPG.
But the previous got 22MPG (2.7 Ecobost variant)...

 

Here is Ford's press release. The hybrid will be available for the XLT through Limited trims. That leaves out the Raptor and any cheaper, fleet only trims Ford might have. The line up is getting active grill shutters, and auto deploying air dam; they already have start/stop standard. Little space is lost to the battery; probably liquid cooled like the Explorer and Escape.
Built for Getting Things Done, Ford Reveals the Toughest, Most Productive F-150 Ever and Most Powerful in Its Class | Ford Media Center

The hybrid system is basically the same as in the Explorer. The main difference for the F150 is that it is paired to a slightly bigger, turbocharged engine(I didn't compare transmission and differential ratios). Compare Side-by-Side


The MPG improvements aren't big, but we know small ones in less efficient vehicles can be big in terms of fuel reduction. The Highlander hybrid handily beats it, but the Highlander can't tow 5000 pounds. This is the first hybrid system that can compete with the ICE model in terms of towing. The F150 will be good for up to 12,000 pounds.

Ford is stressing the onboard generator, which can be a big draw for those that actually use a truck for work. It is an option for all models, but the hybrid will have the highest output.
"Available Pro Power Onboard expands F-150’s capability by bringing generator levels of exportable power to work sites, camp sites and everyday life. Pro Power Onboard is available with a 2.0-kilowatt output on optional gas engines, while PowerBoost(name of hybrid system)-equipped F-150 comes standard with 2.4 kilowatts of output or an optional 7.2 kilowatts of output. Power is accessible through in-cabin outlets and up to four cargo bed-mounted 120-volt 20-amp outlets, with a 240-volt 30-amp outlet on the 7.2-kilowatt version. The system even provides power on the move to charge tool batteries in between jobs."

The battery is bigger than what Li-ion Toyota puts in their hybrids
The motor's output goes through the 10 speed transmission. It doesn't need to be as powerful, nor cost as much, as one that directly drives the wheels like in HSD.

The current 3.5L can tow one to two (non-metric) tons more than the 2.7L. Same with the new hybrid.

The 23mpg estimate is calculated from total tank range. Ford's published range for Explorer hybrid is based on the combined MPG. So the F150 2WD hybrid will likely have 23mpg combined. The current 2.7L 4WD combined MPG is 20. The 3.5L is 19 for both 2WD and 4WD; the 4WD does worse on the highway. Since the published EPA estimates are rounded to a whole, I wouldn't expect much change for the current engines; maybe 1mpg increase for highway with the better aerodynamics.

Now Ford could put a more efficient, lower power engine with the hybrid system at a later date, but this is the land of cheap gas. Power will move more hybrids as Ford is planning for it the have the most torque and power in the class, which includes their own and other's diesels.

 

jeez - only 23? ... of similar cargo capacity & weight is our V6 hybrid minivan. It's efficiency is significantly "different".

Of course, you have to give up that all-important Macho / manly pickup image thing.
.

 

Could your Pacifica tow the boat in your picture with the Model X?

 

Nope

On the other hand, most SUV & pickup owners never tow anything anyways - other than adding a mini hitch for an ice chest or pair of bicycles on it.
.

 

But there is a sizeable number of F150 sales that do go to those that use a truck for work, and fuel economy is likely more on their mind. If the hybrid model was lacking in ability, it might go the way of GM's two-mode system.

Going by the Lexus LS and LC, the hybrid Tundra, whenever it arrives, isn't going to be much better than this F150 in terms of fuel economy.

 

Compare Side-by-Side



hmm if somone picks up a hybrid f150 instead of a 14 mpg tundra that will be big fuel savings.

But as hill has commented it would be better with a more powerful battery and a more efficient engine, and perhaps an electronic awd system with a bigger motor driving the other axle. Think perhaps the rav4 prime, but with a 6 cylinder version of the same engine (2.5L atkinson I4 to 3.75L) but with mg3 on the front axle and the ford set up for the rear. Still if it is 23 mpg combined that will be a big jump in city fuel economy as is, and ford probably needs to figure out electronic awd.

 

As an aside, I saw a Lincoln Aviator, PHEV AWD getting a charge at Whole Foods:

• 23 MPG - 4.3 gal/100mi
• 56 MPGe - 60 kWh/100mi
• 460 miles total range
  • 21 miles EV

So the F150 doesn't really 'crank my tractor' nor this Lincoln.

Bob Wilson

 

Ford will figure out electronic AWD for the F150EV. Unless you have a battery that is big enough for a PHEV, the asymmetrical AWD of electronic in a hybrid isn't going to work for those that truly take the truck off road.

With price being unknown, we can't give proper judgement of the hybrid. I see some of Ford's decisions being to keep costs down. mainly be staying with existing engines and drive trains from the ICE models. The 3.5 Ecoboost is the most popular engine in the F150. The gains from using the 3.3L(used by the Explorer hybrid) or 2.7L would be slight, while losing payload and towing.

A bigger battery would help, but that increases costs. Admittedly not much per unit, but this system is also in the Explorer, and likely going into the Mustang. Ford needed to go with a capacity that will fit across platforms. Giving the F150 a bigger one, would add to development costs.

This system is a power hybrid. It is for a truck that can haul heavy loads, and likely a sports car. In the case of the Explorer, the system needed to meet the needs of police departments. If you want a Ford hybrid for efficiency, there is the Escape, and still the Fusion.

A better Toyota comparison would be with the LS and LC, whose system will likely be in a Tundra hybrid. Those hybrids do a little worse than my 2017 Camry in terms of efficiency.
Compare Side-by-Side

 

Well yes its fairly obvious that they could copy the tech from tesla, or if they can't do it without violating intellectual property laws (I'm sure they can), they could pay to license it. The fact is they probably did not have it working in time for the f150 hybrid design.

On a hybrid truck yes they need a bigger battery or motors or both to do proper awd. But that is lighter and cheaper than a mechanical system (it may be more expensive if volume is not high enough given r&d expense). Double the battery (2 batteries if you want to standardize on the 1.5 Kwh) to 3 kwh - 70 kw power. Keep the 35 kw motor to the rwd system. Add a 105 kw motor or similar (like the tesla model 3 front motor). Then you probably have the power pull 35 kw off the engine through the mg and provide the other 70 kw from the battery for a minute and a half, plenty of time to pull then recharge.

yep

 

I agree, hybrid truck should have bigger battery and e-AWD, engine can be downsized to 2.5L. Oh wait, am I describing RAV4 Prime here?

I know, I know, RAV4 hybrid system can not cope with long time high load, but how much would take to size it properly? I think not much, rear motors on Prime are the same as on normal hybrid, just install bigger rear electric motors and maybe some more efficient cooling for other components. I really don't understand why a truck should be designed over a rear wheel drive + optional FWD. If you design the whole thing as AWD then there is no need to go "driveshaft route" to the rear drive. Just make the engine transverse and mechanical drive the front wheels only, this will make you a huge room for the battery in the middle underfloor of the truck.

Not to mention the R&D, since you already have the same layout on the RAV4 Prime, all you need is just a little tuning to cope with more load.

 

It would go well in the caravan towing area of the market over here in Australia. Additional torque on take off would be a real bonus, probably not a lot of regen gain because the van would still try to overtake the tow vehicle if the majority of the braking was done by the tow vehicle. In an RV, a real bonus, so they might become the platform for the eco friendly RV option. Being able to generate 240vac would be a real bonus, save dragging a generator along as well.

T1 Terry

 

More efficient cooling maybe? That has been Toyotas least developed area, continuing to stick with air cooled rather than liquid. Our hybrid Lexus RX (same powertrain as hi hy) had a handful of service bulletins regarding overheating inverter. It would be a non-issue had cooling been liquid.
But that means more expensive / development costs.
.

 

Making a 3.5 hybrid with additional n-speed transmission means even greater development costs. But in the end development costs are not that important if you really intend to sell your product in volume.

There is cost cutting involved everywhere, I think over the years of hybrid tech Toyota has made a clear picture where they can get away with it and for what application. For a pick-up it just means some "thousand" dolar more of material cost, so what.

 

Why bother with "soft" transition, let the conservative buyer just buy the old tech. Make the new truck from a blank sheet of paper and get in the new buyers.

The only benefit a conservative buyer will see is a 2kW power outlet. All other will seem like a negative to him.

 

My uneducated feeling on Ford's attempt is that they are trying to put a "hybrid" truck out there to grab the truck driving market for a "feel good, I've joined the hybrid community". Again, I'm just guessing with this theory. But after reading all of your examples of what could be done, one has to wonder.

 

Ford has Rivian.

The mechanical 4WD system has a massive cost advantage for Ford through scale at this point.

I'll also note that Subaru decided to stick with a mechanical system for the Crosstrek PHEV, and they have access to Toyota's expertise.

This is going to be able to tow 5 times the weight that the Rav4 Prime can.

Power is just part of what determines max trailer weight. The tow vehicle's size is also important. the 4 door Wrangler can tow more than the 2 door. Being able to stop with the trailer is also important. RWD generally gets a higher rating because the trailer doesn't just put weight on the rear axle, but also shifts weight off the front one.

Europe(and Australia) allows heavier trailers with FWD cars because the regulations don't put as much weight on the car, and trailer brakes are required at lower weights. The way European trailers are loaded to reduce the weight on the car means they are unstable at higher speeds, thus the 60mph limits while towing them. Your commercial trucks are RWD, and can travel at higher speeds. The trailer limits on what the F150's harder working brother is CDL requirements.

When in comes to hybrids and towing, power split systems have always under performed compared to ICE models. Past Toyotas had to have rear electric motor to even get a tow rating. The Rav4 hybrid had bucked the trend by being more powerful than the available ICE, but that changed with the new model. The Adventure(and I think TRD) trims can tow 3500 pounds, the Prime is 2000.

PS: the Renegade and Compass PHEVs are front engine with rear motors, and there might past examples of through the road hybrids.

Part of the lower fuel efficiency gains can be because regen braking is on the rear axle. The front does most of the work, and it is that work being captured. With a trailer, regen should contribute more. Any trailer that could overtake needs to have to have its own brakes.

Ford's press release really stressed the generator,. While many pick ups here are only used as other cars, they are designed for actual work use. Built in generator means not having one taking up space in the trucks bed, and why a lower power one is an option for the ICE models. I've been wondering if the hybrid F150 could allow a landscaping crew go all electric for their tools. That would reduce emissions far more than making a street legal car a hybrid.

Ford and Toyota had a partnership developing a work truck hybrid system. Ford has opted for a parallel system. It is using the same transmission as the ICE models, the development cost is just getting the motor to work with it and the engine. Not a simple feat, but one that has gotten easier since the Prius came out. Part of the reason for the ExplorerH's low improvement is take the engine isn't Atkinson. Supposedly using one would require a different transmission.

Toyota stuck with power split, and came out with the Multi-stage system, which is basically a 4 speed auto stuck onto the back end of HSD. The MPG gains of the Lexus it is in look as impressive as the Explorer and F150. We have to wait until a Tundra hybrid comes out to see how well it retains the ICE work capabilities.

Ford sold nearly a million F-series last year, and many would be considered conservative buyers. It is less risk to Ford to take the soft approach.

The division of their customer base will come with the F150 EV.

Ford has pretty good hybrid system like Toyota's in the Escape and Fusion. They can do hybrids for fuel efficiency, but those segments have differing requirements from the pick up truck one. Which means different balances in the design that will result in the sale.

The F150 hybrid needs to be just as capable as the ICE version. It will also be available in a lower, and one of the most common, trims, so hiding the cost in the price extras isn't an option.
The 3.5 Ecoboost engine is one of the most popular choices, because of the performance to efficiency balance. Sticking with an engine already in use, keeps costs down. Using one of the more efficiency engines isn't going result in a wowing improvement over the 3.5, that's the nature of using MPG, and it will reduce the work capabilities.
An electronic AWD would save over the 4WD penalty to fuel economy, but in this MPG range, it won't look like a lot on the window sticker. In terms of percentages, the current 3.5 4WD combined mpg is about 5% less than the 2WD one. The Explorer hybrid AWD to RWD is 10%. Going from the combined mpg estimate for the F150 hybrid, assuming a 10% loss, the 4WD hybrid will get 10% to 15% fuel economy than the 2WD ICE model. The mechanical 4WD system development has already been paid, and Ford's customers are familiar with it.

If Ford just wanted to do virtue signaling, they could have just gone with a mild hybrid system; they have them in Europe. So far, this looks good for a pick up truck that will actually be put to work. Price still an unknown though.