There is a battle currently being waged across America. It’s not based on horsepower, towing capacity, or payload rating. And the victor might not reap any sort of substantial reward. But that outcome hasn’t stopped several automakers from jumping head first into hybrid vehicle development. Honda is one such company, and they’re betting hybrids will be more appealing than EVs for the foreseeable future. But they’re not alone.
Hybrid vehicles have been available for about twenty years, but for much of that time they’ve been niche products. And for most of the 2010s it seemed like they would remain that way. The Volkswagen Jetta, Nissan Rogue, and Chevy Malibu hybrids were unceremoniously axed by their respective manufacturers. Poor sales are the likely culprit, but obviously the companies initially thought they could carve out their own hybrid customer base, otherwise they wouldn’t have introduced them in the first place. Now they’re pivoting to fully electric vehicles.
To be fair, even automakers more closely associated with hybrid vehicles stumbled a bit. Honda introduced the lukewarm second generation Insight in 2010, and it sort of staggered along until it got cancelled in 2013. Ford cancelled the Escape Hybrid, introduced the bulbous C-Max, cancelled the C-Max, then reintroduced a modern Escape Hybrid in less than ten years. Even Toyota mucked things up a bit with the Prius C and V.
But the key difference with Honda, Ford, and Toyota, at least when compared to GM and Volkswagen, is their refusal to give up on hybrids. Honda CEO Takahiro Hachigo recently reaffirmed his company’s commitment to hybrid vehicles. It seems Honda is taking a vastly more conservative approach to electrification by focusing on substantial efficiency improvements rather than battery electric vehicles. His strategy is already apparent in vehicles like the third generation Insight. The recently reintroduced hybrid boasts EPA mileage ratings within spitting distance of the Prius. It also ditched its awkward looks for something arguably more attractive than the current generation Civic. The company also continues to sell an Accord hybrid and will introduce a CR-V hybrid later this year.
Toyota also introduced a new hybrid sedan. The first-ever Corolla hybrid rivals the Prius in fuel efficiency. Additionally, the Rav4 and Highlander continue to offer hybrid powertrains as options. The Rav4 hybrid also became more popular than the Prius within the last several years. And they’re in high demand too.
The Koreans have also launched a hybrid assault of their own. The Hyundai Ionic and Kia Niro are in their first generations and sell in decent numbers. And that’s to say nothing of the Sonata and Optima hybrids. The next generation mid-size sedans will receive hybrid variants at some point in the near future. Even the Sorento is getting a hybrid powertrain.
Each of these companies even engineer their hybrids a bit differently from one another. Hyundai uses two different six speed automatic transmissions for its hybrid vehicles, a stark contrast to other automakers that employ something more akin to a CVT in their lineups. Automakers are also adding all-wheel drive to their hybrid vehicles, but taking separate paths as to how power is delivered to the rear wheels. Toyota’s system involves a small electric motor to power the rear wheels on demand. Ford decided to stick with mechanical all-wheel drive for the Escape and the Explorer. Even with the additional weight and parasitic losses of a mechanical all-wheel drive system, the Escape still managed to effectively compete with the Rav4 hybrid. Whether or not that matters with customers is something that remains to be seen.
As for the Explorer, Ford’s “no compromise” approach to the hybrid variant resulted in mileage figures that are decent but not earth-shattering. It’s more than likely that Ford developed the system for the Interceptor Utility, the police variant of the Explorer. The decision to use a 3.3 liter V6 and the same 10 speed automatic transmission from the gasoline models meant the hybrid was never going to match the 2020 Highlander hybrid’s claimed 34mpg combined figure. But it does raise an interesting question. For larger vehicles, what hybrid system will appeal to customers? According to Alex Dykes of Alex on Autos, Ford built the Explorer hybrid with towing capability in mind, which they claimed is what their customers want. By contrast, the 2020 Highlander hybrid prioritized fuel economy based on customer feedback that Toyota received.
These may seem like low stakes decisions for a comparatively small segment of market. However, the hybrid war could end up determining which companies prevail in the upcoming EV war. Ford, which is mainly known for its trucks and utility vehicles, needs to develop and sell the hybrids that will appeal to loyalists and newcomers alike. That’s even more important now that they’ve exited the sedan market. Do they stress capability or fuel economy of their electrified vehicles? Can they successfully blend both those things into the promised F-150 hybrid? And will their current and upcoming hybrid buyers convert to EVs once those proliferate?
These are questions relevant to every automaker currently betting on hybrids. For now, it seems like the winning formula is to simply build attractive hybrids that get good fuel economy. That applies to hybrid cars and crossovers alike. Automakers used to think that funky designs would sell hybrids, but after a brief teething period, it seems like they finally understand the most appealing aspects of these vehicles are completely negated if the vehicles in question are ugly or weird looking.
It’s entirely possible the companies that ditched hybrids made the smarter play. But it really seems like hybrids have turned a corner in terms of mainstream appeal. These newer hybrids boast significantly better fuel economy than their gasoline counterparts. And automakers are now installing batteries in non-obtrusive locations that don’t affect cargo capacity. All-wheel drive makes them even more desirable.
EVs get all the press, mainly because of Tesla. But their market dominance is far off and not at all assured. In the short term, the hybrid war might reflect how buyers end up reacting to fully electric vehicles. The Field of Dreams approach, aka the “if you build it, they will come” method of car manufacturing, has worked before. Ford introduced turbocharged engines into the F-150 lineup and it paid off handsomely for them. In the case of hybrids and other alternative energy vehicles, the stakes are much higher. The success of hybrid vehicles might ultimately reflect which automakers live, die, or merge with one another. Alternatively, Honda, Ford, Toyota, and the Koreans could have potentially wasted precious funds on vehicles buyers don’t really want. Either way, hybrids, and to a lesser extent their plug-in counterparts, are the vehicles to watch, at least for now.
“Gasoline engines will soon be rendered obsolete.”
Thomas A. Edison, 1910
“Prices on electric cars will continue to drop until they’re within reach of the average family.”
‘The Washington Post’, 1915
My bet is with Honda and Toyota. I just want to know where VW gets all that money that it seems to flush away.
Agree that the measured Hybrid approach is likely the most realistic way to migrate mass consumers toward EVs.
As for VW, they are boasting of having just sold their 250,000th VW-branded EV globally (source InsideEVs 12/27/19) since 2013, with the expectation that the brand will hit the next 250K within 2 years. The only problem is that on a worldwide basis, the VW brand sells ~6 million passenger vehicles annually, so these “milestone” EV sales projections are still just a minor fraction of their total output, though EVs undoubtedly consumes the bulk of their R&D budget.
Makes perfect sense for, “you’re not taking my Hemi” America. Now I wish they’d go one (-half?) step further and make all those hybrids plug-in models. If nothing else, it’d be a good way to educate Americans as to how electric cars work, and put an end to the stupid, “I won’t buy one until you can charge it as quickly as you can fill a gas tank”, while pointedly ignoring that: A. You start out with a ‘full tank’ every morning, and, B. Damn few people drive 300 mile commutes 365 days a year.
My main resolution for 2020 is to quit using the Kia Sedona as my daily commuter because it’s way too much of a gas hog. And it primarily works now because my main commuters at present are bicycles for five miles and under, motorcycles over longer distances. Weather and load carrying need depending, of course.
That rental Versa Note we had for two weeks while Maggie’s Dart was repaired from the fire set the base standard: Small, preferably a hatchback, mid 30’s mileage, and electric, hybrid, and gas powered (manual transmission mandatory on the latter) to be considered. The rebuilding of the garage will have 230v included for Level 2 charging capabilities.
Given my budget is $15,000.00, I’m obviously talking used. Nissan Leaf is the dream, Chevrolet Volt is the more practical reality. 30-something electric mileage is entirely sufficient for my daily running around, and it give us an additional car for theoretical long trips. Ford C-Max Energi is the alternative.
Looking forward to late winter/spring. I start shopping as soon as the garage rebuild is completed.
Well Ford does plan to offer plug in versions of most of their Hybrids. The eCVT as used in the new Escape was designed from the start to work well as a plug in, as is the electrified 10sp as used in the Explorer. There is even a plug in version of the current Explorer, they just put it behind the Aviator paywall in the US, but in Europe you can get it with a Blue Oval.
“My main resolution for 2020 is to quit using the Kia Sedona as my daily commuter because it’s way too much of a gas hog. And it primarily works now because my main commuters at present are bicycles for five miles and under, motorcycles over longer distances. Weather and load carrying need depending, of course.”
Pacifica Hybrid? If you can live without all the bells and whistles, after the $7500 tax credit, they’re priced quite reasonably.
Would love to, since it’ll keep the driveway filled with just two cars. The $15,000.00 budget kills it for now. Watching for 2-3 years from now when I replace the Kia.
I considered Level 2 charging for my C-Max, but decided it made no sense. On, ordinary 110V, it’s fully recharged in five hours, and I hope to sleep at least that long every night. Some feel that fast charging takes a toll on the battery, too. The C-Max lacks liquid cooling for its Li Ion batteries, so owners most concerned about battery longevity avoid changing in hot weather, especially in a hot garage. Mine appears to have lost 4% battery capacity per year, from an EV-only mileage run I did. That doesn’t break my heart, because it’s the total running efficiency that matters, not the amount of EV miles done.
First thing OEMs need to stop doing is using the term CVT because there’s no belt/pully in any of these systems like in a nissan cvt…in fact there’s no gear changing at all, just load splitting/shifting. I know people who see “oh it’s got a cvt. I herd from nissan owners they’re unreliable. no thanks” and avoid them. Toyota and Ford hybrids have always used a fixed planetary gearset where the bigger electric motor and gas engine share the load to propell the car while the little electric motor powers reverse and is a generator. It’s brilliantly simple and super reliable given it’s just a planetary gearset splitting power. Honda uses a simpler setup where the electric motor powers the vehicle to a given speed where a clutch pack switches to the gas engine, even more simple.
So yes summary, ditch the term CVT it just causes confusion and scares buyers away.
I’m not so sure they’re using the term much, if at all. Who is?
Toyota and ford have used the term ecvt in their literature which has lead many jounrnalists and internet publishers to throw the term cvt out there for a long time. I remember car and driver saying the 07 camry used a cvt and I assumed it was a belt and pully style transmission. Today you still see credible people like scorry kilmer misunderstanding whats going on in there.The reality is its a simple fixed gearset. Heres a simple fascinating video on how it works. Well woth the 15 minutes.
https://youtu.be/E_xCssR8qQI
Yeah while that is some great rendering it doesn’t properly explain how it works. After about 11min it gets a lot of things wrong on how it operates.
Also please stop calling it a fixed gear set, the Power Split Device is an infinitely variable reduction. Yes some of the later Prius single axis transaxles use a fixed planetary gear set between the traction motor and the ring gear. The call it a speed reducer and its purpose is to slow down the starter/generator to increase the maximum engine off speed.
Sorry for the short posts, my longer ones keep going to spam. This Video does a much better job of explaining and showing how it works. It is not w/o mistakes though which if you read the comments John does correct. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmHpSyTsfm0
That is one of John’s first videos so at that point he was still teaching himself how they worked in preparation for creating his classes.
Ford and Toyota do call it an eCVT in their literature/website.
Ford and Toyota Hybrids however have very good reputations for durability, so I don’t think that people are going to stay away from them because of Nissan’s reputation for making transmissions that don’t last. Most people don’t know it is a CVT they just think it is an automatic.
Ford and Toyota do not used a fixed planetary gear set, it is continuously variable so that is why they call it what they call it. Also the smaller motor does not back up the vehicle, or actually provide mechanical power to propel the vehicle at all. All reversing power is from the traction motor, though the engine will fire up to power the starter/generator to supplement electrical power from the battery. So watch where you park, you have a smaller amount of torque to back the vehicle up a steep hill. Ask me how I learned about that.
I think 3800fan means it’s a fixed planetary gear set in that each of the three shafts, sun, planet and ring, is permanently connected, no clutches. The gear ratio between any two shafts is determined by the speed of the third. So varying one motor/generator’s speed determines the ratio between engine crankshaft and output shaft.
Not exactly, the gear ratio between the engine and the wheels is determined by the speed of the starter generator. The speed of the traction motor is determined by the vehicle speed, ok so really the speed of the traction motor determines the speed of the vehicle but that is the output of the system, not an input.
The actions of my car’s eCVT are beyond my comprehension, but I do want to note that the car always starts out from stop as an EV, even after the plug-in battery is exhausted. So the ICE never has to lug that dead load- it just kicks in at higher speeds.
Im looking forward to the crv hybrids US release. I just hope honda doesnt limit it to higher trims.
I’m not sure if you agree but I believe Ford may have made a bit of an unforced error in focusing on towing capability for the new Explorer Hybrid as opposed to fuel economy. The supposed difference between it and the new Highlander Hybrid (just now being tested and soon to be released to the public) is about 10mpg (25mpg vs 35mpg) according to the same video reviewer cited in the text above. Part of that is undoubtedly Toyota’s decision to use a big 4 instead of a 6 this time around on the Hybrid but it doesn’t seem to make much if any real world power/refinement/usability difference. Still, that’s a huge mpg difference and could easily be taken advantage of in advertising, I’d guess there are many more people that are concerned with economy over tow ratings in that class. We for example are currently at around 20mpg lifetime in our current non-hybrid Highlander and would be extremely interested in much better economy in whatever its eventual replacement might be but not at all interested in towing much if anything with it. I happened to rent a 4cylinder Ford hybrid last week and was very impressed with its hybrid system in operation, it was completely seamless and produced excellent economy.
I cannot recall the last time I saw ANY Explorer towing anything and don’t believe there is a very large market for hybriders that tow heavy items regularly as opposed to buyers that want good fuel economy along with three rows and perhaps AWD. I think more people will just see the relatively low mpg rating and decide against it (or just as likely head across the showroom to the non-hybrid I suppose if mileage isn’t that important after all). People who tow reflexively tend to go for a truck anyway or have one in their driveway already, it’s the rare American owner that has one new $50k vehicle and no others.
I have a feeling the hybrid drivetrain is primarily for the Interceptor Utility and Ford is simply offering some to the civilians who’d want it. After all, the hybrid is standard on the Interceptor.
I don’t think that’s the explanation. Ford decided to make the new Explorer RWD-based, with a longitudinal drive train. That includes this new V6 hybrid system. Why? Obviously so that they can also use it in their F Series trucks. Is there any reason to think this is not essentially the upcoming F150 hybrid’s drive train? Maybe a few tweaks, but there’s zero doubt in my mind that it was always going to be V6 based. Here it is.
Since Ford is moving away from sedans, it made no sense for Ford to engineer a “mid-sized” hybrid system for the Explorer only. The real reason Ford turned the Explorer into a RWD-based vehicle is so that it can share the drive train (and other components) of their RWD-based trucks (and vans). Ford is primarily a truck company, so having the Explorer be integrated into the truck lines creates gobs of efficiencies.
Yes, the Explorer hybrid will not get as good of mileage as the four cylinder Highlander. That’s the price they pay for this move.
I suspect it’s true that it was developed for the Police Interceptor, given the number of idle hours police cars rack up they should’ve gone hybrid 15 years ago.
On a similar note I’m surprised the hybrid Escape isn’t available in the low trim levels unless Ford has or fears the supply issues that have been hitting Toyota’s RAV4 hybrid or just makes them fleet-only, they’d be a big hit with commercial users.
In theory hybrid/EVs should be ideal for towing with the instant torque from the electric motor. In practice one of the challenges for full-EV trucks will be maintaining acceptable range at full GCWR.
Fleets will buy the Hybrid Escape, even though it isn’t available in the S trim. They bought lots of the previous Escape Hybrid and original Fusion Hybrid even though they were a unique mid range and up trim level. Even the second generation Fusion Hybrids weren’t available in the S trim at launch, that was a later addition.
I think both Paul and Edward are right in their own ways.
This Hybrid system was developed first and foremost for the F-150 and its development predates the development of the new RWD chassis that underpins the 2020 Explorer.
However because for various reasons they did eventually decide that the new Explorer was going to be RWD based the system designed for the F-150 was a natural for this application.
The qualities that they wanted in a Hybrid power train for an F-150 also made it perfect for the Interceptor Utility.
However since the system is designed for towing and hauling it is never going to give the kind of fuel economy gains that you see with a power split system as used in Ford FWDs and Toyotas.
So yeah the retail Explorer gets this Hybrid version because they can for no additional development cost.
Yes you don’t see people towing with Explorers much any more, however their towing ability is what got a lot of people out of their minivans when it was first introduced and you did see Explorers towing fairly frequently. The fact that the FWD generation lost towing capacity vs its predecessor probably factors into the fact that you don’t see people towing with them like you used to.
Since this is the power train they had to work with yes they are promoting the fact that it is designed with towing capability.
Ok long posts are going to spam.
Paul is right this hybrid system was developed first and foremost for the F-150 and development on it started well before Ford axed sedans and even before they started on the RWD platform that underpins the 2020 Explorer.
Edward is also right, the same things that made this system right for the F-150 make it good for Police use as well. So yeah the retail version is forced to use the same system rather than one that is optimized for economy w/o concern about maximum towing capacity.
Jim, you are correct that recent Explorers are not used much for towing. However their abilities were reduced vs their RWD based predecessor’s. Since RWD was determined to be required for the Continental and Interceptor Utility the retail Explorer had to follow suit. So yeah they are playing up the increase in tow capacity and the fact that the Hybrid has such a high tow rating.
I expect the next Edge will offer a version of the system used in the new Escape that should rival the Highlander Hybrid in terms of MPG for those who’s concern is maximum MPG, and yeah I wouldn’t be surprised if they offer a 3 row version as well. They do not want Goldilocks leaving the lot because they don’t have the xUV that is just right.
The overall MPGs of the Explorer hybrid look pretty pathetic, but 28 mpg in city use is a gold medal achievement for this class of big vehicle.
Hybrids and EVs are so different from one another, I’m not even sure how much they compete.
The whole point of a hybrid is to be a very efficient but otherwise normal gasoline car. A Prius drives and feels very much like a Camry that gets great mileage. That’s really its only advantage.
Driving most EVs is a different experience. Instant torque, road-hugging center of gravity. Full “tank” every morning, but it takes time to refill. Instant heat/AC. Low carbon, even zero carbon if your power is all renewable.
Our Prius and our Fiat EV are quite complimentary. The EV gets most of the trips because it’s so fun to drive, and zero carbon for us (we have Pacific Power’s renewables-only service, plus solar panels). The Prius gets big loads and out-of-town trips.
Hybrids and EVs are not an either/or. Long-run success will come to those who excel at both. Nobody’s quite there yet. Maybe Ford once the Mach E comes out. Hyundai/Kia are off to a good start. Toyota really blew their lead and have a lot of catching up to do.
“Hybrids and EVs are so different from one another, I’m not even sure how much they compete.”
It helps a bit if the proper acronmyms are used, i.e., HEV (Hybrid Electric Vehicle), BEV (Battery Electric Vehicle), and PHEV (Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle). Hell, I’ve even seen a new one: Inherently Low Emission Vehicle (ILEV) which may (or may not) cover them all.
Regardless, while it’s true that hybrids and EVs don’t technically compete directly, the PHEV is the one that really muddles things. A PHEV is effectively both a hybrid ‘and’ an EV so, theoretically, you get the benefits of both, but also a big demerit, since once the battery depletes, you’re then lugging around dead weight, which has an impact on ICE fuel mileage. The battery of a true hybrid is much smaller since it operates differently; it just ‘helps’ the ICE and is constantly being charged/discharged by the ICE via a computer algorithm (which Toyota was the forerunner in perfecting).
The interesting quasi-PHEV is the BMW i3. Technically an EV, it has both a smallish EV system, as well as a small (optional) ICE ‘range extender’. The problem is the range is a quite limited 100 EV miles, plus another 100 ICE miles, for a total of 200. Not exactly a good choice for an extended highway trip.
Yeah but hauling around that battery who’s plug in range is depleted is actually better than hauling around a EV battery with 300mi range when you only go 20-30 miles the vast majority of days.
That’s the rub with a vehicle that has multiple propulsion units; one of them is always going to be dead weight.
That’s what I thought too, until I found myself in the perfect experimental trial. My wife drives a C-Max Hybrid, while I got the C-Max Energi. My longterm (two year) gas mileage is twice hers, 74 vs 37. Hers gets all suburban and city use, including rush hour commutes, while I regularly drive a hundred miles beyond the 20 mile EV capacity several times per week. So if we swapped cars, the Energi would do even better in comparison.
The Energi’s big battery isn’t dead weight. Driven side by side, the PHEV relies on its battery far more, all day long, and it stores more captured energy from regenerative braking. You really have to see it to believe it.
Exactly John, I bought my wife a standard Hybrid C-Max, we gave that one to my MIL and got her an Energi. It was done as a bit of an experiment but a purposeful one, to see how the Wife adapted to plugging in her car. I knew the now named Mustang Mach E and Escape/Corsair PHEV were coming and didn’t want to buy a new car that the wife wouldn’t plug in.
Upon the Mach E being revealed we discussed it and determined we won’t be lugging around a mostly unused battery pack.
Then there is this, which really drives the point home https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3-plugin-hybrid-engine-conversion-obrist/ Lower weight, lower cost for the overall power train and twice the range. You do loose the frunk and the space that was saved with the smaller battery doesn’t seem to be put to other use, but it is a conversion.
They are going to have to seriously lower the prices on a hybrid before I consider buying one. If I was to consider doing that, I would go Prius.
The economics of them still don’t justify the fuel savings. I compared my car and a 2020 Prius, saving less than $1 a day annually while paying almost half again as much doesn’t work for me. Even if I doubled my mileage, it still doesn’t work. I would break even at about the 45,000 miles a year point
That is an apples to oranges comparison. There is a Toyota premium on the Prius and a GM/dead car discount on the Cruze.
Now if you do a more apples to apples comparison the Hybrid premium can be much lower. For example the RAV-4 Hybrid is only $800 more than the Base RAV-4 plus AWD. According to Fueleconomy.gov going with the Hybrid will save you $550 per year. For the Escape FWD you get the same $550 per year fuel savings and the SE Sport Hybrid will cost you $1160 more than the SE though you do get a few more things that would reduce that gap if added to the SE.
So in either case you are looking at a ~30k mi or less pay back period, ignoring any possible increase in resale value.
Full disclosure: I own a 2008 Prius that I bought 2 years ago for $8200 OTD. I didn’t buy it because it was a hybrid, I bought it because it represented the best value I could find in a Toyota hatchback for the money I wanted to spend.
—
MPG numbers are nice, and they attract a lot of buyers. But that’s only part of the math. Looking at Toyota’s website right now, the price spread between a RAV4 LE AWD and a RAV4 LE AWD Hybrid is $1850 after rebates. According to the EPA, buying the hybrid version will save the average buyer $300/year on gas. That’s a six year payback. By year 7, the owner is coming out ahead. For years 7 to 15, it’s like printing money. And in year 15, you’re quite likely to spend $3000 for a replacement battery, negating 10 years of fuel savings.
Hybrids make sense for a certain subset of drivers. If you drive a lot of miles and tend to keep a car 8-10 years, you’re in the sweet spot.
That’s not my use case, so I doubt I’ll ever buy another hybrid. I only drive about 8,000 miles a year now, so it just doesn’t make much sense.
I think most hybrid buyers like the lower carbon emissions as much as the money saved on gas. People buy cars and trucks for all sorts of non-economic reasons.
Fact is we just have to quit burning so much gasoline. A hybrid’s driving experience and range are close to today’s normal, and the lifetime costs are about break-even, so there’s really no sacrifice. If all cars and trucks were hybrids, we’d be a long way towards where we need to be.
I don’t know, of the people who I know that have hybrids only one bought it because it was low carbon/going to save the planet, The others bought them because they are much more economical over the long run and/or just drive better than the traditional ICE power trains offered in the same car.
Amen to that! Hybrid drivers also don’t miss traditional ICE characteristics such as vibration at stoplights while the auto transmission takes the strain of brakes holding the car back. I hear other owners complaining about jerky engine stop-start systems, but my car does this quietly and smoothly. My air conditioning supply isn’t interrupted when the engine stops, either. We’ve reached the point where the hacks and extra apparatus and missing cylinders necessary to squeeze a bit more efficiency from the ICE just aren’t worth it.
Yeah a strong hybrid line up is key for at least the next several years, or maybe even decades. Fact is batteries are expensive and while technology may make them less expensive to manufacture, the supply of raw materials is still subject to demand and EVs with their much larger batteries will be much more vulnerable if prices for the raw materials increase.
It is also much easier for people to accept going hybrid since their routine doesn’t have to change, you drive it an fuel it just like they have always been doing. In the Toyota and Ford I’d bet most buyers will think it drives better than the base power trains offered, with better off the line feel and smoother stop/start operation, which is quickly spreading and can be quite annoying in many cars.
The cost has also come down relatively speaking with something like the Toyota/Ford FWD transmission being much cheaper to mfg than the complex 7, 8, 9 and 10sp transmissions that are quickly becoming the norm. The fact that most hybrids use a NA engine makes them cheaper than the turbo engines that are also quickly becoming the norm.
Add in plug-in capability and you can also appeal to those who do want a plug but don’t ever want to have to deal with sitting in line for hours to go to grandma’s for Thanksgiving or paying the high price of fast charging if they go on a non peak time trip.
There are two main types in hybrid design:
1) Two motor/generators replace the conventional transmission.
2) One motor/generator augments a conventional transmission of whatever variety (multi-speed, CVT or even manual). Some of this type may have more than one motor (esp. for AWD), but all retain a conventional transmission.
Type 1: Toyota/Lexus hybrids except Lexus LC/LS, current Honda hybrids, Ford hybrids except Explorer, Chrysler Pacifica hybrid
Type 2: Lexus LC/LS, Acura hybrids, old Honda “IMA” hybrids, Ford Explorer (and related Lincoln Aviator), all Korean hybrids, and all German hybrids.
Only Type 1) has what I think are key hybrid advantages: Mechanical simplicity and resulting longevity.
Thanks for this summary.
According to this article the Honda system has two motors and no transmission like Toyota/Ford but is fundamentally different. No planetary gears. One motor is a starter/generator, the other is a traction motor. At low speed the motor drives the car, no transmission needed. The Atkinson-cycle engine drives the generator. At high speed a clutch connects the engine to the wheels, presumably at a top-gear ratio. Still no transmission needed. Interesting!
There is one disadvantage of the current (non-IMA) Honda system compared to the Toyota/Ford system: In clutch-engaged direct mode it’s equivalent to the “top gear” of a conventional car. However, everything I’ve read/heard says the switch to direct mode happens around 45mph. So that top gear must cover the speed range from 45mph to whatever the typical highway cruising speed is, which could be as high as 80mph to 90mph in some parts of the US. This results in higher than normal highway RPM and limits highway fuel efficiency (compared to a 8/9/10 speed auto which may have 2 or 3 gears to cover that range)
In effect, the current Honda system is “fully EV” below 45mph, as far as driving feel/response is concerned.
I’d break it down further with Honda usually being the outlier.
Type 1a operate as a parallel system most of the time and must be generating some electricity for the engine to transmit torque to the wheels. They do operate in series mode when they go in reverse, if the engine is on anyway.
Type 1b would be the current Honda as they operate as a series hybrid, at least until the clutch locks up and then they operate as a single speed transmission. Once clutch locks up and it is in sustained steady state cruise the motors essentially are along for the ride, only generating the power the 12v system needs, or bringing the traction battery back up to desired SOC. This makes it more efficient at higher speeds than the 1a systems. Frictional losses are lower w/o that planetary, and there is no loss of energy converting mechanical power to electrical power, transmitting the electrical power and converting it back to mechanical power like the 1a systems do.
Type 2a would be the type that can run the motor independently of the engine and thus can operate in EV mode and be used in plug in hybrids.
Type 2b, those whose motor is permanently connected to the engine. Because the motor can’t be disconnected from the engine they can not operate in EV mode nor can they be used for a plug in system. The IMA Hondas fit into this category.
Thanks for adding further details. Mechanical simplicity is more important to me than fuel efficiency. I would not consider any “Type 2” hybrids.
I understand that sentiment, but in my PHEV, each side of the propulsion system only does what it can do best. The ICE never has to propel the car from a dead stop. There’s no clutch to wear out, which was a guaranteed $1500 repair every 100,000-150,000 miles in my “simple” old cars. The brakes rarely work very hard; if I’m driving for efficiency, over 90% of my stopping is accomplished by regen braking. The ICE doesn’t need to run at all on short trips, where it wouldn’t warm up to optimum temperature.
I don’t believe my Ford has any kind of fan or accessory belt, with all the juice available to run accessories. And have you considered how many parts are in a ten-speed automatic transmission?
Believe me, as someone who first sampled a hybrid three years ago, I once believed in every non-hybrid argument that’s been mentioned here. They’re just not true, from my experience.
No GM hybrids! No VW hybrids! Their EV plans are great on paper but thin on the ground so far.
Like I said above, hybrids and EVs are not an either-or proposition, they’re complimentary. GM and VW are too big to get away without hybrids.
Electric Vehicles while nice are still a niche vehicle. Not everybody is going to be able to buy or own one because of ether cost or lack of charging ability at home.
A hybrid is a great alternative to a EV, it allows great mpgs but you don’t have to worry about where to charge it. It is the perfect vehicle for somebody like me that lives in a town home where my assigned space is nowhere near my home so charging a EV is out of the question.
I looked at the Ionic when I got my Elantra but I did not want a first year model. I may revisit this car a year or so from now.
I am curious to see if the Prius loses some sales to the Corolla hybrid. The Prius is popular but the Corolla is a icon with high sales.
I am also interested to see how the EV and Hybrid market goes in the next decade(2020 to 2030). It will be interesting to see how new innovations to the internal combustion engine make them more environment friendly. My 2018 Elantra is considered a Super Ultra Low Emission Vehicle (SULEV) with excellent gas mpgs
I suspect that Prius sales are going to suffer further with the addition of yet another Toyota in the line up that matches the Prius combined 52 MPG number.
Unless you rely on renewable energy to charge your EV, which certainly many folks can do (home solar, or utility hydro/solar/wind, though it can be hard to know the real source on the grid) all of these vehicles sit on a continuum of fossil fuel use and storage. To me the traditional or plug-in hybrid should have a long and worthy life ahead of it.
We’re in a 100% renewable program with our utility, Pacific Power (details here), who says “Support 100% Pacific Northwest renewable resources from Oregon, Washington and Idaho. The resource mix is likely to include wind (80%), biomass (2%), solar (17%) and geothermal (1%). The cost is about $8 more per month, or $0.0105 per kWh.”
Many EV drivers don’t have that option yet so yes, a hybrid is a rational lower-carbon alternative for some time to come. The great thing about EVs though is when your utility does get less carbon per kWh, by closing coal plants etc. which is happening all over, your car gets cleaner as a result.
My personal goal is to spend the rest of my life driving Panthers. Where I live, barring some unlikely takeover of the government by radical greenies, I figure I will be able to pull it off. I fully expect the whole EV fad to collapse eventually. Everybody thinks the current fad will be around forever. Is everyone still driving a two door Cutlass? 🙂
Count me in as another, and my kids, who don’t plan on giving up our Panthers. However at this point they aren’t my front line vehicles, though they still are for my kids. The two vehicles that get most of the miles are a Hybrid and a Plug-In Hybrid and the Plug-In Hybrid will be replaced with another Plug-In Hybrid.
This article covers what I regard as the only positive trend in automobiles right now. I don’t want automated steering and braking that I must trust, while waiting to take over when it suddenly tries to kill me. I don’t want 800 horsepower, either- what’s the use? I refuse clamber up into a tall vehicle and sit with my fanny four feet off the ground, for that “commanding view” or the traffic jam I’m stuck in. I don’t want a futuristic touchscreen that I must read and navigate to do the simplest tasks, while it does its best to distract my eyes off the road. And I won’t accept an EV that will haunt me with range anxiety and make every long trip a puzzle in recharging logistics. So why does every automaker want to give me that, or else?
I just want a normal car with crisp handling, good visibility and adequate power. One that provides enough buttons and manual controls to operate everything by hand. Oh, and I want it to use as little fuel as possible.
Fortunately, my Ford C-Max Energi does all that for me. Over 36,000 miles, it’s recorded 74 mpg, not counting about 75 cents of AC shore power I pump into it every night. If I forget to plug it in, it still runs. If all the power goes out, or I’m in some remote rural area, it still can drive its 600-mile gas range. I can’t think of any other car that offers all this. Too bad that so few other buyers ever knew such a car existed.