1966 Hybrid Mustang - 65% increase in MPG's!

[ncwa]

Hi Everyone - I just want to share my latest numbers. My 1966 Mustang with a nearly stock 6 cylinder engine would normally see around 17 mpg's. With the electric hybrid motor I added, I achieve 22-24 mpg's with a range of 40-80+ miles. However when I lower the range to around 20 miles, I am seeing around 28 mpg's! This is about a 65% increase! This is all with normal driving and a small 2.8 kWh battery pack (~70lbs). I am hoping to start implementing some of your all's driving tips and mods someday soon. Cheers!
howtobuildahybrid.com

[Frank Lee]

Is the baseline really that bad? My '59 V8 with slushy 2-speed a/t Bel Air gets over 20. Hell, my 4x4 V8 pickup is doing better than that.

[gone-ot]

...don't mind Frank, he's our designated "Optimistic Greeter" to all things which may/may not have "Uni-Corn" pixi-dust about them (wink,wink).

[Frank Lee]

I want it work and I think such a thing can work but come on. I have friends with a Falcon and with early Mustangs (and the Stang is a rebodied Falcon) and if they aren't all hopped up with rumpity rump cams and low gears and such, one should expect low 20's at a minimum, and mid 20's mpg if you drive sensibly.

[Diesel_Dave]

Give the guy a break, man, he made a '66 Mustang into hybrid for crying out loud. Whether or not it breaks any fuel economy records, you gotta admit that's kinda cool. I for one am intriuged if nothing else.

[cfg83]

ncwa -

Cool beans! I wish I had your skillz and the time to do something like this.

CarloSW2

[Frank Lee]

It is cool and it is intriguing and I hope it works but geez that low baseline number is like waving a red flag in front of a bull.

I know unsubstantiated reports are next to worthless but these Mustang owners report about what my Falcon/Mustang owner friends do.

Originally Posted by some guy online

I had a 1965 200 cid 6 cylinder - automatic

Not rebuilt many miles on the engine - usure of how many rollovers at least one.

I would get 17 mpg city, 24-28 mpg highway

FWIW: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...7110759AAojJOX

I can't tell if post 1 is from real data or projected results.

Originally Posted by mustang hybrid guy

If our example vehicle travels 65 miles at 65 mph, approximately 20 hp per hour or 14.9 kWh are required. The 5 kWh battery pack is rated to deliver 5 kW for 1 hour. If all the energy is used evenly during the hour, then 5 kWh will be delivered by the batteries and the remaining 9.9 kWh must come from the internal combustion engine (ICE) and the gas it uses. The fuel savings (or increase in mpg’s) is approximately (5/14.9 x 100%) 34%. In order to account for energy lost to heat, couplers, drivetrain etc., an electric drive system efficiency of 70% for the home built vehicle is likely appropriate. So a true mpg increase is likely closer to (34 x 70% eff.) 24%. Not too bad for a system that might also add 10 – 50 hp when charging more frequently!

Ahhh, but the above is all conjecture at this point. Shades of Zoltan a little bit... No performance data has been collected. Perhaps it has not ever been activated yet at all. One thing the above projection omits is how much less efficient the ICE gets at lower and lower percentage loading i.e. all the same arguments we went through re: Electrocharger. Toss in the inefficiency of using the ICE to charge batteries instead of roll it all down the road as well (also discussed here at EM). Also wondering if that 5 kwh is for what DOD?

Brucey might be the guy who can shed the most light on this sort of thing, as it sounds strikingly similar...

[ncwa]

Thanks for the comments – good and questionable! I don’t mind Frank’s questions at all as there is a lot to consider. Questions/concerns help me think through all the design challenges!

To clarify to a couple of items:

1)This is real and it does run! (There is poor quality youtube video out there where you can hear the electric motor under the tuned exhaust.) The web site example is not directly for this build.

2)Frank quoted a city mpg of 17 for another Mustang. That is the same baseline number I gave. My numbers are, for the most part city but some highway. I should have qualified that this was mostly city driving. Here is another number I didn’t post: After multiple charges and running around the city with many wide open throttle stop light starts (it is hard to hold back the extra torque!) my city mpg’s were 22.

3)The batteries are charged at idle and during engine braking, but most importantly, the batteries are charged by plugging in the car – it is a plug in hybrid.

4)The original Ford 200 engines were not the most efficient engines and mine likely hasn’t been rebuilt correctly in a very very long time. A rebuilt 200, with some of the performance modifications that make it more efficient, can achieve up to 28 mpg’s. I am just not there yet.

If I can get to 30, I’ll be very excited. But for now I will take my 20’s!

[mcrews]

I had a 66 w/ same set up 200ci 1bbl w/ auto trany(cruise-o-matic) 3speed. rear ratio is 2.89 (or something close.) back in 76 to 1984
I had the head rebuilt at 100k.
I ran clifford headers 3-2 - 1. with 2 inch pipe to a ssingle muffler, the y into the GT tips. (I just LOVED the gt tips!!!)
I also ran a gas/mpg monitor and a cruise control (had to run 67 gas pedal linkage to make the cruise work)
I got about 28mpg on the freeway at 65mph. A mumber I was pretty excited about at the time.
The headers really made a nice rumble sound.

oh, I also was running a F70/14 series tire. I know that was a size or two taller than the stock.

[ncwa]

Mcrews-i am really impressed that you were getting 28 in your old Mustang! I've only spoken to one other person who could get 28 mph. They did it by driving 55 -65 mph and tuned the engine on the lean side. He said that he had a little trouble with the lean mixture (heat) but overall it worked well for him.

Was your's tuned lean? Also when you rebuild the head, did you oversize the valves or increase the rocker arm ratio to decrease breathing restrictions?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Also - I am running smaller tires, 195/60R14. I like the smaller tires as they seem to improve acc/breaking/handling.