Would you like to buy a 60mpg F150?
2/14/06, 11:25 AM
#1
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
I have heard blurbs about this, but its getting a little press, and it looks like the EPA and Ford are really just about ready for it. Pretty amazing technology, could outdo the prius with your supercrew lariat [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img] Might explain Ford's reluctance to do the F150 in diesel, and don't forget the Expys would come along for the ride... Few articles running on this thread:
http://www.blueovalforums.com/~blueova1/fo...?showtopic=1735
http://www.blueovalforums.com/~blueova1/fo...?showtopic=1735
2/14/06, 11:54 AM
#4
Bullitt Member
Join Date: June 9, 2004
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just read about that on another forum. I'd like to know what the city/highway numbers are, as well as the MPG's of the 4 door 4x4. I'm sure that 60mpg is for the standard cab 4x2.
2/14/06, 12:45 PM
#6
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the EPA and the Big Three should contribute to a sort of tech superfund to co-develop technologies like this, HCCI, E85, and other stuff, then use the fruits of that labor in their respective line-ups. Sure it might be slightly socialist but it could save the big three, help with the trade gap, protect the ol' environment AND reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
2/14/06, 01:30 PM
#8
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnotherMustangMan @ February 14, 2006, 2:48 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
I think the EPA and the Big Three should contribute to a sort of tech superfund to co-develop technologies like this, HCCI, E85, and other stuff, then use the fruits of that labor in their respective line-ups. Sure it might be slightly socialist but it could save the big three, help with the trade gap, protect the ol' environment AND reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
[/b][/quote]
The EPA has money in this project, its in with Ford, the US army, and the company that develops vehicles for the USPS.
The one idea they tested, the 'power' version got 33mpg in the city, 0-60 in 8.9 sec and towed 12000lbs, being in an expedition. And this was over 2 years ago, I'm sure they've gotten further along.
I think the EPA and the Big Three should contribute to a sort of tech superfund to co-develop technologies like this, HCCI, E85, and other stuff, then use the fruits of that labor in their respective line-ups. Sure it might be slightly socialist but it could save the big three, help with the trade gap, protect the ol' environment AND reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
[/b][/quote]
The EPA has money in this project, its in with Ford, the US army, and the company that develops vehicles for the USPS.
The one idea they tested, the 'power' version got 33mpg in the city, 0-60 in 8.9 sec and towed 12000lbs, being in an expedition. And this was over 2 years ago, I'm sure they've gotten further along.
2/14/06, 03:18 PM
#10
Team Mustang Source
Thread Starter
Well the hydraulic hybrid can be implemented on gas or diesel large vehicles. It eliminates the tranny and transfer case to offset the weight. It is also much cheaper then electric components. So it seems like the next major step in the truck world. Using this technology and biodiesel or ethanol fuels would be the real future. The infastructure would only need to change slightly rather then Hydrogen. I could see hydrogen vehicles making its first appearance like CNG vehicles do now, in government fleet vehicles, airport support equipment, etc where the fleet refuel center is centralized.
2/14/06, 03:28 PM
#11
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wrote a pair of columns (yes I get bored) advocating nuclear energy and E85 hybrids over coal fired power plants and hydrogen respectively. PM me for them if youve got 15 minutes to burn and nothing to do.
2/15/06, 11:00 AM
#13
Cobra R Member
Join Date: March 18, 2004
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Autoblog has an article saying some site called New Tech Spy is claiming Hydraulic Launch Assist will be available on the 2008 F-150. I dunno how credible that site is cause they say this Truck would get 60mpg, which is obviously an exageration. But still, the Tonka was the first time I'd ever heard of that kind of set up in a car, it'd be awesome if they do actually pull it off.
Hydraulic hybrids work by recapturing braking energy in a high pressure tank. Basically, when you brake, the wheels start cranking a pump which crams a bunch of Nitrogen gas into an accumulator, building up to about 5000psi. Then when the truck takes off from the stop, this pressure is released back through the pump, cranking the wheels.
On the Tonka concept, they said the hydraulic motor could provide 600lb ft of torque (!!) for about 15 seconds (if i recall correctly from my Popular Science reading days). That would mean the HLA would take care of getting the truck up to speed, meaning the engine wouldn't need to be nearly as big (well... gotta keep towing in mind i suppose..)
Anyway, somebody on autoblog linked to this EPA site:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology/#pagetop
The EPA has done lots of research on the topic of Hydraulic hybrids and actually built a Ford Expedition hydraulic hybrid back in 2004.
here's a PDF with a fact sheet about this truck:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology/420f04019.pdf
Here's one of their projected design examples:
Medium engine package:
(they're saying since you got the HLA, you can swap out the engine for something smaller)
Diesel Engine: 3.8L (170kW.... that's about 230hp)
15 gallon accumulator
Weight increases 360lbs
Fuel economy City/Highway/Combined: 32/22/27
Cost increase $2200
Consumer Payback (assuming $1.50 a gallon!! hehe... 2004.....): 2.5 years
Net Lifetime Savings (14 years, 188,000 miles): $4,800
0-60: 8.9 seconds
Max sustained speed (at GVWR): 108mph
Max sustained grade (at 70mph GVWR): 9.1%
GVWR plus towing (at 65mph at 5% grade): 12,000lbs
Obviously there's some potential with this technology. I like it cause the regenerative braking is really efficient... no batteries or anything, so it recaptures 82% of braking energy. Also, this thing would be more environmentally friendly when its old and dead, no batteries to worry about. However, this technology doesn't really make much of a bridge to newer technologies down the road. Electric hybrids are great because a lot of what we learn from them about electric motors and such will be applicable to hydrogen fuel cell cars. I also love the engine shut off at a stop, which I'm guessing hydraulic hybrids wouldn't get.
But i hope this comes true about the F150. That same EPA site says ..."EPA joined senior executives from Ford on January 28, 2005, to announce their partnership to further develop a new diesel emission technology called Clean Diesel Combustion (CDC)." Maybe Ford could give us a clean running diesel F-150 with Hydraulic Launch Assist, giving us all the same performance as a current truck, maybe even quicker off the line, but returning close to 30mpg combined driving?
Hydraulic hybrids work by recapturing braking energy in a high pressure tank. Basically, when you brake, the wheels start cranking a pump which crams a bunch of Nitrogen gas into an accumulator, building up to about 5000psi. Then when the truck takes off from the stop, this pressure is released back through the pump, cranking the wheels.
On the Tonka concept, they said the hydraulic motor could provide 600lb ft of torque (!!) for about 15 seconds (if i recall correctly from my Popular Science reading days). That would mean the HLA would take care of getting the truck up to speed, meaning the engine wouldn't need to be nearly as big (well... gotta keep towing in mind i suppose..)
Anyway, somebody on autoblog linked to this EPA site:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology/#pagetop
The EPA has done lots of research on the topic of Hydraulic hybrids and actually built a Ford Expedition hydraulic hybrid back in 2004.
here's a PDF with a fact sheet about this truck:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/technology/420f04019.pdf
Here's one of their projected design examples:
Medium engine package:
(they're saying since you got the HLA, you can swap out the engine for something smaller)
Diesel Engine: 3.8L (170kW.... that's about 230hp)
15 gallon accumulator
Weight increases 360lbs
Fuel economy City/Highway/Combined: 32/22/27
Cost increase $2200
Consumer Payback (assuming $1.50 a gallon!! hehe... 2004.....): 2.5 years
Net Lifetime Savings (14 years, 188,000 miles): $4,800
0-60: 8.9 seconds
Max sustained speed (at GVWR): 108mph
Max sustained grade (at 70mph GVWR): 9.1%
GVWR plus towing (at 65mph at 5% grade): 12,000lbs
Obviously there's some potential with this technology. I like it cause the regenerative braking is really efficient... no batteries or anything, so it recaptures 82% of braking energy. Also, this thing would be more environmentally friendly when its old and dead, no batteries to worry about. However, this technology doesn't really make much of a bridge to newer technologies down the road. Electric hybrids are great because a lot of what we learn from them about electric motors and such will be applicable to hydrogen fuel cell cars. I also love the engine shut off at a stop, which I'm guessing hydraulic hybrids wouldn't get.
But i hope this comes true about the F150. That same EPA site says ..."EPA joined senior executives from Ford on January 28, 2005, to announce their partnership to further develop a new diesel emission technology called Clean Diesel Combustion (CDC)." Maybe Ford could give us a clean running diesel F-150 with Hydraulic Launch Assist, giving us all the same performance as a current truck, maybe even quicker off the line, but returning close to 30mpg combined driving?
2/15/06, 12:34 PM
#14
Cam Tease
Join Date: September 30, 2004
Posts: 1,378
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haha, nooo. I didnt advocate nuke cars.
Basically I explained why environments who suggest hydrogen power to replace IC engines as a means of reducing pollution are forgetting the worse polluter (energy generation for industry.) So recommended replacing coal fired power plants with nuclear reactors as a means of reducing pollution. Then as a corollary (in a second article) I suggested E85-engineered (to take advantage of 105 octane) vehicles to cut down on mid-east reliance.
Basically I explained why environments who suggest hydrogen power to replace IC engines as a means of reducing pollution are forgetting the worse polluter (energy generation for industry.) So recommended replacing coal fired power plants with nuclear reactors as a means of reducing pollution. Then as a corollary (in a second article) I suggested E85-engineered (to take advantage of 105 octane) vehicles to cut down on mid-east reliance.
2/15/06, 03:14 PM
#15
GT Member
Join Date: April 25, 2004
Posts: 193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it works as well in real life as it sounds in the articles, Ford should get this out ASAP... Imagine the positive press they would get putting an full size truck on the market that gets fuel economy equal or better than a Prius?
If they could implement this in SUVs as well, the environmentalists couldn't villify trucks & SUVs as the "root of all evil".
If they could implement this in SUVs as well, the environmentalists couldn't villify trucks & SUVs as the "root of all evil".
2/15/06, 04:11 PM
#16
Cobra R Member
Join Date: March 18, 2004
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well i guess my thread:
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=45056
was a little slow on the draw... but only cause i figured this uber F150 would be an OTHER FORD!! ... and did not see a thread about it in the OTHER FORDs section. You may have genuinely beat me to it in terms of time this round, Kevin... but your thread placement is marginal at best! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrinjester.gif[/img]
I don't doubt that Ford is working on something like this, and it'd be awesome if it actually came around as soon as 2008. But I have a real hard time trusting that site (not a very profesh looking site, not that looks matter...) about the 60mpg claim. This system wouldn't do much for highway mileage. It'll mean that the engine doesn't need to be geared to get going from a stop, so it can have a real low rpm at highway cruising, but the right transmission could accomplish the same thing.
For city driving it'll help a lot. But even if you were to recapture 100% of your braking efficiency... how high could the mileage get? Certainly no more than if you were just crusing at a steady city pace without any stops at all. If regenerative braking is 100% efficient, then energy lost just comes down to drag, and the F-150 is not that aerodynamic. How could a truck like this do as good as a low slung Insight cruising on the highway?
I don't trust newtechspy.com enough to believe that number. I'm guessing it'll be more on the same level as that Expedition they built a few years ago... somewhere between 30 and 40mpg, which is still bloody incredible for a big truck.
That Expedition who's numbers Kevin quoted earlier was actually running with a 3.9L Diesel engine, another thing that Ford and the EPA have been working on together.
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/index.php?showtopic=45056
was a little slow on the draw... but only cause i figured this uber F150 would be an OTHER FORD!! ... and did not see a thread about it in the OTHER FORDs section. You may have genuinely beat me to it in terms of time this round, Kevin... but your thread placement is marginal at best! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrinjester.gif[/img]
I don't doubt that Ford is working on something like this, and it'd be awesome if it actually came around as soon as 2008. But I have a real hard time trusting that site (not a very profesh looking site, not that looks matter...) about the 60mpg claim. This system wouldn't do much for highway mileage. It'll mean that the engine doesn't need to be geared to get going from a stop, so it can have a real low rpm at highway cruising, but the right transmission could accomplish the same thing.
For city driving it'll help a lot. But even if you were to recapture 100% of your braking efficiency... how high could the mileage get? Certainly no more than if you were just crusing at a steady city pace without any stops at all. If regenerative braking is 100% efficient, then energy lost just comes down to drag, and the F-150 is not that aerodynamic. How could a truck like this do as good as a low slung Insight cruising on the highway?
I don't trust newtechspy.com enough to believe that number. I'm guessing it'll be more on the same level as that Expedition they built a few years ago... somewhere between 30 and 40mpg, which is still bloody incredible for a big truck.
That Expedition who's numbers Kevin quoted earlier was actually running with a 3.9L Diesel engine, another thing that Ford and the EPA have been working on together.
2/15/06, 05:08 PM
#18
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mustang_sallad @ February 15, 2006, 6:42 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
thanks for tha merge. yo kevin, check the thread on bon.
you're going down!
[/b][/quote]
You're welcome. Don't know how Kevin's thread slipped past me. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dunno.gif[/img] I usually try to keep a close eye on the "Other Fords" and "General Vehicle" threads since they are two of my favorites.
thanks for tha merge. yo kevin, check the thread on bon.
you're going down!
[/b][/quote]
You're welcome. Don't know how Kevin's thread slipped past me. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dunno.gif[/img] I usually try to keep a close eye on the "Other Fords" and "General Vehicle" threads since they are two of my favorites.
2/15/06, 06:18 PM
#19
Cobra R Member
Join Date: March 18, 2004
Posts: 1,502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Evil_Capri @ February 15, 2006, 7:11 PM) Quoted post</div><div class='quotemain'>
You're welcome. Don't know how Kevin's thread slipped past me. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dunno.gif[/img] I usually try to keep a close eye on the "Other Fords" and "General Vehicle" threads since they are two of my favorites.
[/b][/quote]
Rock on! I do believe i was a ford fan before i became a mustang fan. And trust me, my annoyed tone was not directed at mods but at kevin with whom i seem to have developed some kind of thread battle lately. Any wages on who gets the next scoop?
and by scoop... i mean, being the first to notice some actual auto news web sites scoop and repost it here.
You're welcome. Don't know how Kevin's thread slipped past me. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/dunno.gif[/img] I usually try to keep a close eye on the "Other Fords" and "General Vehicle" threads since they are two of my favorites.
[/b][/quote]
Rock on! I do believe i was a ford fan before i became a mustang fan. And trust me, my annoyed tone was not directed at mods but at kevin with whom i seem to have developed some kind of thread battle lately. Any wages on who gets the next scoop?
and by scoop... i mean, being the first to notice some actual auto news web sites scoop and repost it here.
