Ford's new hybrid Maverick: A 40 MPG pickup for $20,000.

[aerohead]

I guess I missed all the mass street rioting by truck buyers who couldn't get their mitts on a hybrid pickup.
For over 30-years, truckmakers have spent millions on efficient pickup concepts for the annual auto shows, only to to be shot down by a lack of interest there, and in consumer clinics.
I don't have a single neighbor who doesn't own a pickup. And I don't recall ever hearing a single word about any interest in hybrids or mpg.
I figured that it must be a matter of pride to pay any price for fuel without complaint.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

I guess I missed all the mass street rioting by truck buyers who couldn't get their mitts on a hybrid pickup.
For over 30-years, truckmakers have spent millions on efficient pickup concepts for the annual auto shows, only to to be shot down by a lack of interest there, and in consumer clinics.
I don't have a single neighbor who doesn't own a pickup. And I don't recall ever hearing a single word about any interest in hybrids or mpg.
I figured that it must be a matter of pride to pay any price for fuel without complaint.

I don't really disagree with any of that, but this is a case where "if you build it, they will come".

Look at the stampede for EV trucks now, and as mentioned above, that 63% of Maverick orders are for the hybrid.

The fact that the first hybrid in the US was an ultra-efficient 2-seater completely missed the strength of hybrid technology; to downsize the ICE requirement and recapture kinetic energy during deceleration while maintaining acceptable performance characteristics.

Hybrids should have started with the truck, but instead we were busy trying to figure out how to get a flea to be a tiny bit more efficient. If someone had built a 27 MPG full-sized hybrid truck, with electric 4x4 and great performance, they wouldn't be able to keep them on showroom floors.

The mantra that "you got to pay to play" is only chanted in truck/jeep forums to console people. If there were fuel efficient versions available, people would change their tune.

[JSH]

Originally Posted by rmay635703

A Maverick with only HEV and PHEV options would not sell in tiny numbers

63% of orders were for the hybrid, Ford rejected large numbers of hybrid orders so the final sale volume may not match but customers spoke and Ford wasn’t able to deliver the volume.

I myself would have ordered if PHEV existed, even with the year wait.

HEV or Ecobust aren’t motivating .
Though hybrid is far better than nothing

https://www.motortrend.com/news/ford...py-photos/amp/

Sadly next year the Maverick is going to be a +$5000 affair with no guaranteed sale price in the contract

I'm curious where you found data on engine mix for the 2022 Maverick - I haven't seen that so please pass it on.

All configurations of the Maverick have been sold out since February so I really doubt Ford cares that you didn't order one because they didn't spend a bunch of money to offer a low-volume PHEV version. Making cars is about making money and the option that makes the most money gets priority.

Adding an AWD hybrid trim makes the most sense as the next step in product offerings. While Motor Trend says that mule is a PHEV others believe it is just the regular hybrid AWD. There is no charge port door and the base weight only goes from 1684 kg to 1790 kg. I really doubt they can add AWD and 14 kWh of batteries with only a net add of 106 kg. There is also some faulty logic that they Maverick is ready prepped for PHEV because there is an unused space under the seat that would allow two battery packs. The problem with that theory is that the hybrid pack is only 1.1 kWh. There is no way Ford puts out a Maverick PHEV with only 2.2 kWh of battery capacity. Doubling the battery size when they add AWD - that makes sense.


It also looks like Ford is working on a hybrid version of the Bronco Sport. No doubt some components will be shared between it and the Maverick hybrid AWD.
https://fordauthority.com/2022/05/fo...otted-testing/

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

I don't really disagree with any of that, but this is a case where "if you build it, they will come".

Look at the stampede for EV trucks now, and as mentioned above, that 63% of Maverick orders are for the hybrid.

The fact that the first hybrid in the US was an ultra-efficient 2-seater completely missed the strength of hybrid technology; to downsize the ICE requirement and recapture kinetic energy during deceleration while maintaining acceptable performance characteristics.

Hybrids should have started with the truck, but instead we were busy trying to figure out how to get a flea to be a tiny bit more efficient. If someone had built a 27 MPG full-sized hybrid truck, with electric 4x4 and great performance, they wouldn't be able to keep them on showroom floors.

The mantra that "you got to pay to play" is only chanted in truck/jeep forums to console people. If there were fuel efficient versions available, people would change their tune.

President Clinton's Program for a New Generation Vehicle ( PNGV ) was about 80-mpg passenger cars. The rumor is that the automakers figured that they could defeat the law, and only HONDA and Toyota took it serious enough to construct a commercial product and put it on the market.
The technology ( TRW ) had been on the shelf since 1972.
No one spoke of pickups.
I had a 39.9-mpg truck in 2017 and it didn't ignite anyone's imagination. That would be 45.8-mpg with GDI. As a turbo-diesel TDI, we'd be looking at 50.7-mpg HWY (actual ).
The pickup truck capital of the world still loved their trucks with $5/gallon gas.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerohead

President Clinton's Program for a New Generation Vehicle ( PNGV ) was about 80-mpg passenger cars. The rumor is that the automakers figured that they could defeat the law, and only HONDA and Toyota took it serious enough to construct a commercial product and put it on the market.
The technology ( TRW ) had been on the shelf since 1972.
No one spoke of pickups.
I had a 39.9-mpg truck in 2017 and it didn't ignite anyone's imagination. That would be 45.8-mpg with GDI. As a turbo-diesel TDI, we'd be looking at 50.7-mpg HWY (actual ).
The pickup truck capital of the world still loved their trucks with $5/gallon gas.

Again, I don't really disagree with any of the major points you bring up, but do regard the details as hyperbolic.

NiMh batteries weren't even on the market until 1989, so that technology wasn't "on the shelf since 1972".

The high petrol prices of the '80s would have been the impetus to introduce super fuel efficient technology if such stuff were just sitting on a shelf. Instead they just made small vehicles with weaker motors.

Clinton's program as described by you sounds dumb. There's no point in 80 MPG (ICE) cars as it's impractical. If manufacturers didn't take it seriously, it's because they shouldn't. If the target was 30 MPG, that would be more realistic. The Insight only achieved 60 MPG, and that's not been beaten yet.

Still, your theory that government threat may have been the reason hybrid technology started with the most fuel efficient vehicle segment makes sense. My point is that hybrid tech stands the highest chance of non-coercive adoption in the larger vehicle segments. It's where the fuel savings is greatest. It's where the extra power boost from electric motors makes sense. It's where adding a 4x4 drive option becomes more practical. It's where the already large platform size can more easily accommodate all the EV bits.

[Ecky]

Apples to oranges. In the same drive cycle where Aerohead's truck is getting 40mpg, an Insight is getting 90+. Not that I disagree with the point that the market is ripe for this now.

Plenty of mild hybrids made their way into GM products over the years and failed to make a splash, because the improvements were so small. 0mpg highway and 2mpg city in the EPA test? Back in the late 90's, gasoline was $1 per gallon. There was hardly the same incentive, it was more of a publicity stunt. One that I drove for a decade, mind you.

In New Zealand, it's possible to pull up to a traffic light with a dozen stopped vehicles, and for there to be a dozen hybrids. Fuel is approximately twice as expensive and it's reflected in what's imported here. Turns out there are, in fact, hybrid versions of a lot of vehicles which simply aren't sold in the States.

[Snax]

Regardless of what Ford thinks is going to sell tomorrow, they proved the benefits of a hybrid drivetrain in a larger vehicle with the Escape. While not as impressive on economy, it demonstrated something people wanted in a less conventional 'car'. They could have put the same drivetrain into the Sport-Trac and had a pickup truck winner before anybody else ever got close to that market.

Instead, they just tried to sell more trucks - because that is what people were buying more than anything else at the time, and government incentives to do anything else were inadequate to do otherwise.

[redpoint5]

I'm just surprised the industry wasn't in a hurry to electrify their trucks. They could downsize the ICE and mount it horizontally in the engine bay to make the truck FWD, eliminating the drive shaft to the rear. They could eliminate the gearbox by using the Toyota planetary gear system. They could power the rear with electric motors. Batteries stuffed in all the void space of the bed / frame area, finally giving trucks a slightly better weight distribution and better handling. The hybrid truck could be getting 30 MPG in the process and 400 horsepower.

Who wouldn't want that?

[JSH]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

The high petrol prices of the '80s would have been the impetus to introduce super fuel efficient technology if such stuff were just sitting on a shelf. Instead they just made small vehicles with weaker motors.

The power split device that makes up Toyota's "hybrid synergy drive" and every other 2 motor hybrid was invented in the 70's by TRW. What was missing then and in the 80's was the computer controls to seamlessly blend the interactions between the 2 motors and ICE.

Originally Posted by redpoint5

Clinton's program as described by you sounds dumb. There's no point in 80 MPG (ICE) cars as it's impractical. If manufacturers didn't take it seriously, it's because they shouldn't. If the target was 30 MPG, that would be more realistic. The Insight only achieved 60 MPG, and that's not been beaten yet.

The Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles was a demonstration program not an attempt to make 80 mpg production vehicles. Like the Supertruck program that followed it was meant to get automakers to evaluate and test a bunch of fuel saving techniques all in one vehicle and then put some of the promising tech that makes sense financially into production vehicles.

The problem with your 30 mpg hybrid truck is the cost - especially 15 years ago. The other problem is customers and the fact that to this day they prefer V8 full size trucks.

As Ecky mentioned - GM has tried mild and full hybrids in the past and they flopped because truck customers don't care much about fuel economy. Rationally every Dodge Ram V8 sold today should be an eTorque because it boost torque by 130 lb-ft, boosts fuel economy 15%, only costs $1,450, and pays back in less than 3 years. However, that isn't the case

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by JSH

The problem with your 30 mpg hybrid truck is the cost - especially 15 years ago. The other problem is customers and the fact that to this day they prefer V8 full size trucks.

As Ecky mentioned - GM has tried mild and full hybrids in the past and they flopped because truck customers don't care much about fuel economy. Rationally every Dodge Ram V8 sold today should be an eTorque because it boost torque by 130 lb-ft, boosts fuel economy 15%, only costs $1,450, and pays back in less than 3 years. However, that isn't the case

I have zero insight into the industry, simply my wild speculation. My hunch was that a hybrid truck made sense a decade ago, which is 2012. By then, Toyota was already working on their 4th gen Prius.

A mild hybrid doesn't really allow the engine to be downsized.

The sweet spot would have been a plug-in hybrid full-sized truck with 16 kWh battery. That cost you mention would be more than offset by the $7,500 federal tax credit. A battery that size can supply quite a powerful electric motor(s), allowing the engine to go down to 6 cylinder.

I wonder if a series hybrid makes sense in a truck application?