The higher gas prices go, the higher the oil companies profits.

 

And if we can get the various subsidies removed....

 

amen.

I think one of the biggest subsidies I've heard of is a liability cap on drilling...
If there was a leak like the one in the gulf in the arctic it would cost many times more for the clean up, but the liability of the drilling /oil company is capped.

 

I was wondering if I could get an update from folks who have the Enginer kit installed (especially FEH), and how it has been working for them over a longer period of time (it's been more than a year since this topic been discussed, so I may assume there is a lot more data.
I am seriously contemplating getting one myself, however Enginer's web-site does not provide a lot of information on FEH, but I did found this link with some good information: http://www.eaa-phev.org/wiki/Escape_PHEV_TechInfo

 

The short answer to your question is it did not perform satisfactorily and I would not buy it again. I spent the last 16 months trying to get it to perform to my satisfaction and have failed. Shortly after installation, I began to think that the equipment was not suitable for the FEH and assume it is more compatible with the Prius. Just so you know—I am no stranger to electric power. I have lived off-grid for more than a decade, and I have converted three Ford Electric Rangers from lead acid to LifePO4. All of these have HP 100ah cells and I am getting approximately 80+ miles per charge with them. This required extensive rewiring plus flashing the BCM and the process can be viewed at http://rvtechstop.com/ranger_ev.htm I do not use the Rangers for winter use because of the extreme cold, but mostly because of the tremendous use of salt on our roads. I wanted the Escape for winter because of 4X4 and OEM mpg is above 25mpg in winter. I had extra LiFEPO4 cells left over from the Ranger conversions so that made purchasing the Enginer a bit more economical. Further, I used a BMS that has performed extremely well in the Ranger EVs. This equipment gave me my first tip that the charger supplied with the Enginer kit was not charging to the high voltage cutoff point.
We spent months testing, adjusting, and replacing components. By the time, I was ready to give up…..guess what….my warranty had expired and I could not get a full refund! My advice is that if the equipment does not work to your satisfaction within the warranty period, return it while you can still get a refund. Don’t fall for the “let’s replace XXXX and see if that makes it better” tactic.
Since I could not return it for a full refund and was not comfortable selling it to someone else, I added another bank of cells which increased the capacity from 100ah to 200ah. Now I see an improvement in mpg from 30 to 35. I have never seen any of the outstanding mpg (over 40) that some have reported and I cannot maintain all-electric mode as Prius owners say they can. The only time it stays in all electric mode is when going under 30mph downhill with no pressure on the accelerator.
The added cell pack creates as many problems as it solves. The extra weight requires that air bags be installed in the rear springs so the ride height and alignment specs are maintained. I have never found an adequate way of securing the Enginer equipment and the battery packs to protect in the event of a rollover or collision. I will either resolve this issue before winter or the equipment will be removed. In addition to the modification to the rear springs, I installed the block heater and a 12v supply to power the battery heater, which is present in the 06 models.
If you still want to try this yourself, I strongly suggest that you get permission from Jack Chen to access the “Installer” section of the forum on the Enginer site. Lastly, there has always been some question in my mind that increasing performance by adding extra pack(s) may have an adverse effect on the OEM NiMH pack. This is a potential source of worry and only a suspicion. I can’t prove it but when you parallel battery packs in other applications, there is an immediate surge of power so the pack voltages are equal almost instantly. If that is the case with the NiMH pack, there is a possibility of shorter life. Ford achieves its outstanding durability by limiting the maximum charge and discharge of the OEM pack.
http://www.fordrangerev.com/REVolt/Shop_Manuals.html This is a link to where you can see the manuals for the Ford Ranger EV. Not that you are particularly interested in the Ranger, but reviewing these documents reveals Ford’s approach to safety and protection of occupants, vehicle, and battery pack in the case of a failure or accident.
There is much more I could say about my experience but I don’t want to take up space here. You can contact me directly if you want to know more.
Ed

 

Addendum to Ed’s remarks:

The major drawback of the whole system is the loss of cargo space for such a meager increase in mileage. I compete in dog sports (agility and schutzhund) and I have to use smaller crates than my Dobermans need just to accommodate the system. By my calculations, the Engineer saves .02/gal on the cost of gasoline and that is not worth the major inconvenience. When you add the expense of the kit, you are way behind. This is exactly why Ford had the good sense to stop building FEH vehicles. They are too expensive for the value provided.
If Ed does not remove the Enginer from my car, I am afraid that I will be found dead with my hands wrapped around cables I tried to yank out of the car! OR….someone may find Ed dead with my hands wrapped around his neck!
Kidding aside, the system has not performed as expected and it is a lot of money just to tinker and experiment with technology. I have to add that when Ed drives the car, he can get 36-38mpg. I still get only 30. I do not hot-rod with fast take-offs (that could hurt my dogs) but neither do I drive below the speed limit to coax a little bit more mpg…I need a car to get to where I need to be and I am not interested in playing with Ed’s toys.

Ed’s wife

 

Good post and I agree fully with you and ED.

I sold my '05 FEH because it ran terrible with E10 and had a drastic decrease in MPG. My '09 FEH runs excellent with E10, but I've never tried regular 87 octane to see if it is better. Just can't find 87 straight gas here in Florida anymore since the law changed.

Before I'd change my '09 FEH HV system, I'd just buy a new plug-in Lithium vehicle and not get away from a stock vehicle.

The next Fusion plug-in is a big improvement, but I like the height of the FEH for getting into and out of. I don't think the price will be appealing either.

For now, I can squeeze out 60mpg plus tanks in my '09 FEH with no mods, so why buy a other plug-in system at a much higher price. One big advantage to the '09 and newer FEH is 100% fuel-cut above 40mph and EV below 40mph. The '10 and newer FEH can go EV up to 44mph, but the battery is used to spin the engine above 40mph to protect the eCVT. I think that design is counter productive to battery use. I like a full electric Focus, but it's too expensive for such a small vehicle for me.

GaryG

 

I will add some balance to this discussion.
2011 FEH (AWD) with 4kwh Enginer system installed Feb, 2011. This is definitely not a "plug and play" system. I have had to replace the converter, 3 battery packs, and the BMS since installation. This is a system that needs constant monitoring and tweaking. Having said that, I have been satisfied with my system and its impact for me. Of note, the 2010 and later FEH are a different animal than earlier models and are better suited to the Enginer kit. I was getting 32mpg prior to install and now, after install, average 40mpg for a 25% increase. With the tax credits available here in Colorado, I have now paid for my system with the savings in just 1.5 years. I am currently struggling with battery pack issues but that increase in mpg is taking into account the downtime associated with managing the system. I drive my FEH everywhere (including in 4wd-only trails at high altitude) and the impact on the storage is minimal for me. I would do it again but wish the system were more reliable in preventing damage to the battery cells. But I am also realistic and know that the decrease in cost is associated with manufacture in China with the resulting unreliability.
Brian

 

Brian,
I don’t see much balance…looks to me like you have as many issues as we do.
In PA, tax credits are only available with a dealer installation. DIY people like me get no benefit from tax credits. We either pay the installer or forfeit the credit. In addition, my objection to using an installer was that, generally, I have more experience than they do…this includes my home alternative energy system, which was designed and implemented in 1989 and used seasonally in PA and totally off-grid in AZ during winter; EVs; the FEH; and further, I previously manufactured lead-acid batteries, under license from GM, for reproduction vintage DELCO batteries for Corvettes and Chevrolets.
IMO, the most critical shortage of Chinese technology for lithium was a suitable BMS system that actually worked. If you read Jack Chen’s forum, you can see that he suffered through this problem. It is not possible to determine SOC of a lithium cell by resting voltage. Instead, the cell manufacturer determines the high cutoff charge voltage and low cutoff discharge voltage, as well as the number of cycles available at various depth of discharge. Cells are usually rated at a number of cycles at 80% DOD (depth of discharge) at a specific C rating. So when a cell is rated for 2000 cycles, this means that it should provide between 5 and 10 years of use, depending on number of days used per week and depth of discharge for each use. It is not unreasonable to expect that cells should last from 5-10 years. The durability of the NIMH pack is because of the charge/discharge limitations Ford has set. A properly designed and functioning BMS must be able to determine when cells reach max charge voltage and when they fall to minimum voltage during discharge. In addition, it is very desirable to have some sort of equalizing feature. Equalizing can be from a top down or bottom up approach. There are several workable systems available. Some favor mounting the BMS on individual cells and others favor a centralized version. The latter is less popular, but it is my favorite. Each has advantages and disadvantages. I have experience with one BMS that I know works well. You can get more information on the website http://cleanpowerauto.com/ On the Enginer forums, there are others who have also successfully used the MiniBMS by CleanPowerAuto. My concern is that even when you get a working pack that provides service for the warranty period, it may not provide long-term service because of an inadequate BMS.
I would not use my FEH with an Enginer System off-road. I have not yet seen a mounting system that would survive a rollover event. Also, I was intending to do the suspension modification even before I added the extra cells. Unfortunately, it is almost impossible for those of us installing an after-market system to be certain that the installation can survive an accident.
For those who have installed the Enginer, I am interested in how they secured the equipment.
Lastly, I appreciate your comments about the later model Escapes. I will still try to flash the 06 computer to 10 parameters but I can’t begin that project until all of the other issues with the Enginer are resolved. This, of course, assumes that Carol is not successful with her threat.
Ed

 

Ed,
I believe you are confusing my statement on balance with reliability rather than performance. While the other 2 comments opined there was a negligible increase in efficiency, my experience is the opposite. A 25% increase in mileage per gallon is what I had hoped for. If I cherry picked my driving like others in this forum, my efficiency would be more than doubled. I do agree that the key to the system is the BMS.
Brian