Featured F-150 Hybrid

The battery is liquid conditioned, I'm sure the inverter is as well.

Ford stated they are not using Rivian technology in the electric F150. Since ford is unlikely to have been able to get a rivian truck in time to test it for the F150 bev I'm sure they tested the proven platform on tesla. That's why I mentioned it.

On the low volume crosstek phev I doubt the R&D funds would have been practical. Remember subaru's awd was better at awd at the design time than toyota's but less efficient. Hopefully the one in the rav4 prime is much better.

The system I outlined would increase torque and be mechanically extremely durable. As I said I would keep the rwd ford system, but change the front axis. Software can react much faster than a mechanical system, with the abs braking system taking care of the slipping wheel on each wheel. Torque split on each axle can be controlled better as well as being more efficient than a mechanical system. The extra torque on the front axle would likely improve the towing and awd capability at low speeds (<20 mph) versus a mechanical system. It also would help braking especially on towing as regen would supplement the already excellent braking on the f150.

It would take a more powerful battery, I'm suggesting they simply double it, from 1.5 kwh able to supply 35 kw (47 hp) to 3 kwh able to supply 70 kw (93 hp). The extra hp provided by the mgs and battery could either be additive to give it almost 500 hp, or the engine could be down sized to be more efficient and lighter and provide the same hp. The extra r&d would mostly be done for the f150 bev or the mustang hybrid. So maybe in 7 years for the f150 ;-)

Ford Mustang Hybrid may give pony-purists two big shocks - SlashGear

 

The F150 doesn't have AWD, it has 4WD.
Now, I know the technical differences doesn't matter to how most people use the truck. In fact, AWD is a better choice for pavement, though higher trim F150s have an auto 4WD mode that provides it. The differences are important to technical off-roaders, and this system is going into the Bronco.

The Ford F-150 Raptor&#39;s AWD/4WD System Is Engineering Brilliance | CarBuzz.

Subaru's system is symmetrical, with some torque always going to the front and rear axles. It means better reaction times to wheel slip than asymmetrical systems that leave one axle unpowered most of the time.

While eAWD can be symmetrical, I don't see the Rav4p having it, as that will drop efficiency and range compared to asymmentrical. For most that never leave the pavement, asymmetrical is fine, but a low speed(<25mph) symmetrical setting would be nice.

The best AWD system for the Rav4 is the mechanical one on the Adventure and TRD. I believe it is a reason why they have the highest tow rating for the model.

 

4WD is nothing more than a AWD with central diff lock. 4WD is a cheaper manufacturing option (no central diff), and it's here just because customers are too dumb to understand that. But thank god the times are changing and we see more and more AWD + diff lock systems in the coming models But I see that marketing department have a tough time naming it

Having 4WD system in a an empty 400 HP truck on tarmac is just useless, on terrain even a modern AWD assisted with ESP (braking individual wheels) will not lag behind 4WD. It may have been the other way around in the old days, but definitly not today.

If we get back on topic, a hybrid truck can have front axle ICE driven and can have two motors in the back running each individual wheel. This layout is superior to any mechanical 4WD or AWD system. And with PSD system you can always have power split 50/50 front and rear even when in hybrid full power mode. There is no way you could do that with hybrid system that Ford will use in F-150.

There is no technical restriction to what can PSD be desigend for, sure today the do cost cutting so it just handels the minimum for the intended product. PSD is nothing more than two electric motors and some gearing, how can a Tesla make a semi haul all that weight with the motors from normal Model 3. It can be done, it will cost you some more materials (oversizing/cooling) but in the end it will be a superior solution and I really hope Toyota goes that route, but I must say I'm not that confident they will

 

I have said most F150 buyers would be better served with AWD than the 4WD that is 2WD on pavement. Ford does have an Auto 4WD system that does work as AWD(video in above link explains it). It is only in higher F150 trims, and is a part of the reason the retail diesel model gets worse MPG than the fleet one, which is the most efficiency F150 today.

Remember, hybrids don't do any good if no one buys them, and there is a contingent of truck buyers that believe 4WD is superior to AWD. Labeling it auto 4WD will help, if the central differential can be locked up manually for off road use. Electronic AWD systems will face the question from that buyer segment of "can it power all four wheels continuously while off road?" Current systems can't. It can be done, but for cost and sales, Ford's decision to stick with a mechanical system is probably the correct one for this time.

A mechanical 4/AWD system can have a 50/50 power split between between front and rear, so Ford's hybrid system can too.

Ford filed a patent for using two front mounted motors with this hybrid system. For work trucks and performance vehicles, RWD is generally held as superior by buyers, so you want to keep the rear engine driven.

If the PSD and motors can simply be upscaled, why did Toyota develop this?

It is basically an HSD with a 4 speed automatic bolted to the back end, and it will most likely be what a hybrid Tundra will be using.
Lexus Tech: Inside the Multi-Stage Hybrid System | Lexus Enthusiast

There are limits to an HSD type system. Past FWD biased SUV models were only allowed to tow when equipped with an eAWD system, and then ICE models could still handle more weight. Even GM's two mode system towed less than the ICE trucks of similar power. The Prius couldn't tow im Europe until the gen4 got a tranny cooler, and smaller ICE cars can still out tow it.

Perhaps stronger components in the HSD will solve this issue, but Toyota still developed that multistage system. It is an expensive solution for performance cars to get the feel of regular transmission. A parallel hybrid would be much cheaper.

Moving mass with direct drive motors is easy. It is why locomotives went that route decades ago. Series hybrids get lower efficiency at higher speeds though, and it seems adding components like a PSD weaken the drivetrain overall.

 

Yes, there are RPM limits to the HSD, but top speed is no problem on a truck, but it is on LC an LS. I doubt you would loose customers if you gear a truck for ~100 MPH top speed.

But you have a point here, a truck would benefit with "low gearing" multistage HSD, as it would give it more power and control when slowly crawling. This slow control is definitely a problem when you watch reviews of RAV4 hybrid going off road. But nevertheless, Tesla has the proof that electric motors can have a very broad rpm range, on the other hand Porsche choose to use 2 gears on their EV, you could do the same on a truck on the axle where you only have electric motors, you could even simplify it to the point where a truck must be stopped to engage "low range", since truck drivers are already used to do that today.

 

You can do a lot with electric motors. When they are on their own.
Start connecting them to up to other things, like engines, and other limits will start having an impact on what you can do.

Ford has experience with power-split hybrid systems. The first Escape hybrid came out about a year after the gen2 Prius. They have been refining it through the years. Making a RWD version for trucks was within their capability, and they even have the option to develop one with Toyota.

But Ford has chosen not to. In the past, power-split hybrids were the superior technology, but then the competition back then were mild hybrids of varying strengths. Hyundai has shown that full parallel hybrids can be competitive with power-splits in regards to fuel efficiency. Ford believes they are a better choice for work trucks and performance cars. The only advantage power-splits might have in EV operation for a plug in.

 

Power split hybrid is a good option when you intend to do more power on the electric side, because bigger motors and higher cost pay off, just look at the RAV4 Prime. Power split hybrid is nothing more than transferring half the power to el. motor through generator, so you basicly have an "EV" motor with reduction gear (MG2), that is feed with electricity, just like an EV. No one cares if this electricity comes from battery or from MG1. So I thing you are wrong with your statement that el. motors do fine on their own, but run into problems when you start connecting them. I just hope Toyota proves you wrong

When you intend to do a lower power hybrid, then just adding a 40 HP electric motor in the trans is the cheapest option and you can have a Hybrid badge on it. But when you are adding bigger battery to it then you don't get much benefit. I think we had the same argument when comparing Ioniq and Prius, I said back then that upgrading a Prius to plug-in is way cheaper than making the same thing to IONIQ with same EV power. The end result is that Ioniq has much less power in EV mode than Prius Prime, because Hyundai just didn't want to make it more expensive with bigger el. motor.

 

I didn't say there was problems with connecting. I said that you introduce limitations on them that aren't on a motor driving a wheel directly. With HSD, you have two motors and an engine that need to work together without causing damage to any of them. On top of that, MG1 is pulling double duty. In addition to being a generator, its output is controlled to simulate the variable gears of a CVT.

Power-split to plug in is cheaper because you have paid for motors that are actually bigger than you need to get the job done for a straight hybrid. Hyundai's hybrids have competitive performance to Toyota's while using a cheaper, less powerful motor.

Power-split systems need oversized motors in order to work properly. Full parallels needed better control systems than what was available when power-splits came to market.

 

True but on the other hand PSD doesn't need DCT or similar transmission, with multiple clutches, torque converter and other moving parts.

You can Look at HSD as two separated parts
1. Engine + MG1 (power generation)
2. MG2 (directly connected to the wheels as any BEV)

You could separate the two and have MG2 on the rear axle and mechancal path of PSD drive the front wheels only. The downside would be cabling to the rear and related efficiency losses, because for efficiency reasons you wan't MG1, MG2 and inverter as close as possible.

Now if wee look what the competition is doing on a BEV side, every one is going for single speed gearing, so I don't see a point in Toyota going the multistage hybrid route for truck application, it would just add cost. Sure it works on a Lexus where cost can be justified, but I don't see it on a Toyota.

 

The motor replaces the torque convertor in transmissions that use them. The reliability of automatic transmissions as a whole is quite good, despite all the parts. AAMCO hasn't been a transmission only service station for years now.

It is all that gearing that allows motor downsizing.

In markets with gooseneck trailers are a thing, a truck with part time power to the rear axle won't sell. Trailers in the US have higher tongue weights. It allows them to travel at higher speeds safely than ones in Europe. It does mean more weight on the rear of the truck, which leads to less on the front as the center of gravity shifts back. Engine driving the rear will be easier to sell to those buyers.

First, like locomotives, BEVs power their motors 100% of the time, and can do so at higher power than a hybrid with a tiny battery. Then the BEVs I'm aware of with a notable tow rating(>3500lbs) are RWD or AWD biased to the rear.

Toyota had been working with Ford on a truck hybrid system, and probably were before the partnership. When the Multistage system was unveiled in the Lexus, I and some others said that was the system designed for trucks. Since there are some overlap between truck and performance car requirements, using the system in other cars spreads out the development costs. Published rumors are that the new Tundra will be using it, which should be out by 2022.

 

Again, you so wrong on so many levels. You don't understand what I'm talking about, you are basing your knowladge only on the real world products and news and rumours that are circulating around. I'm not talking about part time rear el. motors, in HSD MG2 gets 50+% power all the time through MG1 and additional power from the battery.

RAV4 Prime has around 180 HP in EV power only, why the hell did they (according to you) oversize only the front motor, and didn't touch the rear motor? Maybe because they did nothing and just used the regular RAV4 hybrid motors (according to Alex on Autos this is the case). The bottleneck is the battery power, just add bigger battery and you have more power, it's simple as that.

 

We don't yet know how well toyota has implemented the rav4 prime. They didn't really do the electronics properly in the prius prime but I hope they learned from it, and the rav4 prime is a great seller and proves electronic awd in phevs as tesla has done with bevs.

The problem with psd in a high powered hybrid truck is it does not scale well. In fact more engine power than the hybrid system in the rav4/camry/etc and motors and hardware grow too fast. This is what makes the rav4 prime a great idea, they add more power by bigger batteries and more powerful motors, and its enough to overcome the problems with the 6 cylinder Lexus/toyota hybrids (weight, cost, etc). Taming the turbo V6 in the LS to toyota's hybrid system with a atkinson version of the engine added 320 lbs and only improved fuel economy 3 mpg (combined went from 23 mpg to 26 mpg) as well as making acceleration and handling handling worse. The Rav4 prime adds 900 lbs to the regular 4 cylinder fwd rav4 which means suspension probably needed a major redesign. Fuel economy went up from 30 mpg to 38 mpg or 93 mpge on electric while power went up from 203 hp to 302 hp. Acceleration and ease of towing went way up, but max towing weight is lower likely because brakes have not been upgraded for the added weight, handling probably is worse too, but we need to see reviews to really know.

The 35 watt (47hp) + a modified version of their new standard 10 speed transmission definitely makes a lot more sense in a pick up truck than that v6 lexus system that would be needed. But really it needs a more powerful battery and more efficient engine to really improve fuel economy.

2020 Lexus LS500h Struggles to Make Its Case

 

MG2 isn't getting getting 50% power from MG1 all the time. PSD diverts 20something% of the engine's torque to MG1. At the ICE's peak torque, 18hp might be going to MG1. At the ICE's peak power, the best is 24hp. This assuming a 25% torque split to MG1. I know it is lower, but it varies with generations. MG2 might be getting 33% power from MG1.

Then MG1's output isn't always going to MG2. It goes to the battery at times. In addition to that, MG1's job varying the transmission ratios for the engine can reduce what is going out.

That job as CVT is why MG1 is more powerful than it needs to be for generating power for the system and starting the engine. The equivalent component in a parallel hybrid has only a third to half the output.

Yes, bigger battery allows more power, but it is less power than needed for a full size pick up with capabilities at the higher end. The engine going into the F150 hybrid produces 73 more hp than the Rav4p; it also makes more torque. To scale it up to match an ICE means paying for more powerful engine, motors, and battery. The PSD needs to be robust enough to not get torn apart by the stronger forces. Even then, the transaxle may not hold enough fluid to keep it cool.

The ICE Rav4 street trims(FWD and AWD) are rated to tow 1500#, the hybrid 1750#, and the off road trims 3500#. It is reported the Prime will be 2000#.

Going by the specs on Toyota's site, they all have the same brakes, and there is just one engine option for the ICE models. The off road trims have an oil cooler the street ones don't, though the transmission cooler may be larger for the off road ones.

The hybrid does better than the street modes because of the AWD-i. It is possible the AWD ICE can do better than FWD, and the same rating is for marketing. With the off roads having the same engine as the streets, higher tow ratings for the hybrids isn't likely because of higher power output. The Prime being able to power the rear axle for longer durations is most likely the reason for its edge over the hybrid.

The off road trims don't just have AWD. They have real torque vectoring; not simulated by brake control. Plus hill descent control over the others. They don't have start-stop like the streets, which might lead to problems when stopped on an incline with a trailer, though won't make a difference to tow rating.

Give the hybrid an AWD system with the abilities of the off roads, and it should be able to tow 3500#. With its battery size, a mechanical one might be the only option. In the Prime's case, that 3500# will have to be reduced by the extra weight of the battery.

PS: The hybrid started using Li-ion packs in June.

It can be better, but we don't want the perfect to be the enemy of the good enough. Costs, price targets, and schedules are factors that need to be taken into account. There might also be an issue of battery supply. If the F150 hybrid has a 10% take rate, that could mean up 135,000kW of batteries, during a time when Ford is releasing their first serious BEV. I know hybrids and BEVs use different battery types, but how many can Ford afford in supply agreements?

 

I know you probably know this and just made a math mistake. Power is proportional to torque x rpm. Since in toyota and fords psd, rpm at the shaft (mg2) is proportional to speed. At very low vehicle speeds and high ice power most power in the psd goes to m1 then electronically to mg2. That is why as ice power increases like with the lexus v6, the power of mg1 and mg2 must also increase as well as the the strength of the gearing to be able to handle the extra torque.

--------snip----------------------------

we now have the first review with numbers that I've seen.
Tested: 2021 Toyota RAV4 Prime Is Quicker Than Supra 2.0

As I guessed in my previous post the brakes and tires have not been upgraded enough for the extra weight (195' versus 182'), and handling given by skid pad drops to 0.75 g from 0.81 g. Still it will be good enough for most rav4 buyers.

Its a good first cut but its already 2020. i'm just disappointed given the rumors. Just F series trucks are plenty expensive I'm sure people would pay a little more for better fuel economy. I'm sure production of batteries could be ramped up fairly easily if they planned for it.

 

The first attempt at a full hybrid truck ending up being too expensive, and still came up short in work truck performance.

I think time was wasted with that partnership with Toyota.

From the estimate we have, the hybrid's combined MPG matches the current truck's highway with the 3.5 Ecoboost. Going by the Explorer hybrid, its city should be 21+mpg. The only F150 getting that now is the diesel.

Putting this system with the 2.7 Ecoboost should be easy for a high efficiency model, but they likely did a power hybrid for the same reason Toyota did with the Highlander/RX, to show that a hybrid can do all that an ICE truck can do.

And lets be honest, Ford isn't in the best financial shape. Sometimes you have to work with what you have.

 

Sorry, I stopped reading here, clearly you don't understand the correlation between torque and power.

 

Torque is a rotational force. Power is force applied over time. An engine produces a listed torque for each revolution; so power is determined from torque and the number of revolutions per minute.

All the documentation on Toyota's hybrid system states the PSD has a set split of the engine's torque going to MG1. It is 28% in the gen2 Prius, but I think it has dropped with newer generations. The engine's torque varies with its speed. MG1's power out is going to be based on that varying torque input and the speed it is spinning at. (forgot MG1's rpm before)

For MG2 to get 50% power fro MG1 all the time, MG1 needs to be running at max output all the time. So MG1's speed needs be varied to account for the incoming torque differences. Lower torque means higher MG1 speeds, and higher means lower. Engine torque climbs with engine speed. So MG1 needs to go slower in relation to the engine as it speeds up.

The connection of MG1 and the engine to the PSD means that MG1 spins in the same direction as the engine, and opposite that of the ring gear, and thus the wheels. Speed up the engine, and MG1 will want to speed up too. To get the MG1 to slow down, the ring gear needs to spin faster than engine speed increase would entail. Slower engine speeds would mean even slower ring speeds to keep MG1's speed up. In operation, this is an engine directly driving the wheels with more steps involved.

Which isn't how HSD operates. Engine speed isn't linked to vehicle speed. That's because HSD is designed to simulate a CVT. Yes, when accelerating the engine speeds, as does MG1, letting MG2 contribute more. When cruising at a set speed, engine speed drops in order to conserve fuel. For that to work, MG1 actually needs to spin backwards. Then the roles are reversed, MG2 becomes the generator powering MG1. Whats Going On As I Drive?

Back to the OT, for those that think a power-split hybrid system is the best for a non-plug in work truck, a couple questions.
Why have power-split hybrids underperformed compared to ICE models when it comes to work functions? What is needed to correct this?
Ford has developed their own power-split system, and it has been available in various models since 2005. Why do you suppose they decided to develop a new parallel system for work trucks?

 

Stop, you are making fun of yourself.

 

Care to answer these questions, if you are unwilling to show me where I'm wrong?

Back to the OT, for those that think a power-split hybrid system is the best for a non-plug in work truck, a couple questions.
Why have power-split hybrids underperformed compared to ICE models when it comes to work functions? What is needed to correct this?
Ford has developed their own power-split system, and it has been available in various models since 2005. Why do you suppose they decided to develop a new parallel system for work trucks?

 

Obvious. It's a mystery.

.