88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
#21
12-15-2008, 05:21 PM
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
You guys that are getting ridiculously high averages should have been in my shoes today.
Left Minneapolis today -6 F with a 20 mph headwind. It rained less than 24 hours prior to snowing and the temps dropped from +35 to -6 overnight. Half-way thru that trip (where the rain had changed to snow), I had stop and go driving since a couple cars had gone into the ditch from the ice-covered roads and everyone had to gawk. I did have EV mod during the stop and go, which was nice. When I got to Fargo, the temp was -16 and I still had the same, nasty headwind, and I did not get even close to 30 mpg for the trip.
Left Minneapolis today -6 F with a 20 mph headwind. It rained less than 24 hours prior to snowing and the temps dropped from +35 to -6 overnight. Half-way thru that trip (where the rain had changed to snow), I had stop and go driving since a couple cars had gone into the ditch from the ice-covered roads and everyone had to gawk. I did have EV mod during the stop and go, which was nice. When I got to Fargo, the temp was -16 and I still had the same, nasty headwind, and I did not get even close to 30 mpg for the trip.
#22
12-15-2008, 05:53 PM
Hybrid and Ethanol Expert
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: All over the Central U.S.
Posts: 3,616
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
I was in your shoes today, and yesterday too!
I'm in NW Nebraska, and having the same weather.
Daytime high was +1 and nighttime low was -16 degrees F.
I used my 120VAC plug-in heater, and had EV mode driving in 2 miles.
Car was parked outdoors at a NW Nebraska hotel for 12 hours.
( and I left the plug in for 12 hours, since I didn't have a timer, and I'm not paying for the electricity )
At +1 degree outside air, and 12 hours of plug time, my engine water temp. was 71 degrees before I turned the key, and my HV battery temp was 57 degrees.
The heater combo included 425w engine block heater + 75w battery heater.
This option was available on 2005-2007 model years for sure, and may be on newer models.
I'm in NW Nebraska, and having the same weather.
Daytime high was +1 and nighttime low was -16 degrees F.
I used my 120VAC plug-in heater, and had EV mode driving in 2 miles.
Car was parked outdoors at a NW Nebraska hotel for 12 hours.
( and I left the plug in for 12 hours, since I didn't have a timer, and I'm not paying for the electricity )
At +1 degree outside air, and 12 hours of plug time, my engine water temp. was 71 degrees before I turned the key, and my HV battery temp was 57 degrees.
The heater combo included 425w engine block heater + 75w battery heater.
This option was available on 2005-2007 model years for sure, and may be on newer models.
#24
12-15-2008, 07:55 PM
Hybrid and Ethanol Expert
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: All over the Central U.S.
Posts: 3,616
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
How cold will your garage get?
2 hours will help.
With these kinds of temperatures, I would give it 4 or 5 hours personally.
Good luck... I feel what you are going through... almost.
2 hours will help.
With these kinds of temperatures, I would give it 4 or 5 hours personally.
Good luck... I feel what you are going through... almost.
#25
12-16-2008, 07:45 AM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Beautiful Pacific NW
Posts: 1,678
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
You guys that are getting ridiculously high averages should have been in my shoes today.
Left Minneapolis today -6 F with a 20 mph headwind. It rained less than 24 hours prior to snowing and the temps dropped from +35 to -6 overnight. Half-way thru that trip (where the rain had changed to snow), I had stop and go driving since a couple cars had gone into the ditch from the ice-covered roads and everyone had to gawk. I did have EV mod during the stop and go, which was nice. When I got to Fargo, the temp was -16 and I still had the same, nasty headwind, and I did not get even close to 30 mpg for the trip.
Left Minneapolis today -6 F with a 20 mph headwind. It rained less than 24 hours prior to snowing and the temps dropped from +35 to -6 overnight. Half-way thru that trip (where the rain had changed to snow), I had stop and go driving since a couple cars had gone into the ditch from the ice-covered roads and everyone had to gawk. I did have EV mod during the stop and go, which was nice. When I got to Fargo, the temp was -16 and I still had the same, nasty headwind, and I did not get even close to 30 mpg for the trip.
Unintentional/inadvertent (engine compression or regenerative) braking, especially on a FWD or F/AWD vehicle can become desastorous so quickly it's virtually unbelievable . Absent a driver downshifting to/for a serious level engine compression braking due to simple throttle lift will hardly ever result in loss of directional control. ON the other in an FEH/MMH/Tribute should you lift the throttle and the hybrid battery's charge be "threatenly" low you might very well incur a significant level of braking due to regeneration. That could prove hazardous for the FED/MMH/Tribute at times the roadbed surface is more likely to be slippery.
So, don't "YOU" downshift radically in a non-hybrid when there is that potential and the firmware will handle that job for you in an HSD.
Last edited by wwest; 12-16-2008 at 06:54 PM.
#26
12-16-2008, 08:33 AM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Beautiful Pacific NW
Posts: 1,678
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
HA HA I wasn't trying to start an argument here.. I was just curious as to what the HECK he was talking about?
I will agree that a 4 cyl manual non-hybrid will probably produce more MPG at highway speeds (60+MPH) for an average driver... one 'not trained' in the FE ways of a hybrid.
Pick your BEST "FE ways of a hybrid" driver, give us "equal" year/model HSD vehicles, and I would wager for the non-hybrid for hwy distance driving, road conditions of your choosing, but equal.
I know my FEH really seems to 'struggle' at speeds above 70MPH.. especially climbing hills... but I suspect that has more to do with the CVT than the hybrid part.
The Atkinson cycle engine has its advantages and disadvantages.
The two primary advantages are...
Lower pumping losses and no/less "waste gas", energy, into the exhaust manifold. You will likely never see a turbo on an Atkinson cycle engine.
During the early part of the compression stroke the intake valve remains open so there is no "back-pressure" on the rising piston at a time, just leaving BDC, when there is very little crankshaft "leverage".
The compression stroke has been "fore-shortened", less A/F mixture charge for combustion compared to an equal displacement "otto" engine, resulting in improved FE over the "equal" "Otto" engine.
The Atkinson engine is most optimal at high torque requirements, WOT, when the entering A/F charge is at its maximum, and thereby the extra "burn" period due to the longer, relatively, power stroke, results in significantly improved FE.
Probably most ideal for cruise settings in an aircraft.
Disadvantages...
Lower engine torque "across the board" vs an equal displacement "Otto" engine, but especially so when only "cruising" HP/torque is required, low power settings.
The Mazda Millennia "S" used a SuperCharger to bring the charge entering the cylinder back up to the level of an Otto engine and still gained an FE improvement of 23%....while also maintaining the HP/torque figures at the Otto engine level.
In the HSD "model" the battery is used in place of the SC.
Not that it doesn't have the power to do so, but that the RPMs climb so high in the process that it just doesn't seem efficient.
As road speed increases the requirement for engine HP/torque also rises. With a DERATED Atkinson cycle engine and NO ability, constant roadspeed ability, for use of the hybrid battery, the Atkinson engine RPM MUST rise in order to produce enough HP for the combination, ICE and MG's, to propel the vehicle forward at those speeds.
Since a significant level of the ICE's torque is being siphoned off to drive the MG1(2?) in generator mode and then route that electric power to MG2(1?) for input power to the e/CVT, the losses begin to add up.
We average 30-32MPG in our 4WD FEH (2005).. about 70% city, 30% highway driving. I know the 4WD is a big part of the problem, but also because I only drive the car once in awhile (wife almost always uses it for work) and it's hard to establish consistent driving habit when you don't know exactly what the heck she does with it during the day
I will agree that a 4 cyl manual non-hybrid will probably produce more MPG at highway speeds (60+MPH) for an average driver... one 'not trained' in the FE ways of a hybrid.
Pick your BEST "FE ways of a hybrid" driver, give us "equal" year/model HSD vehicles, and I would wager for the non-hybrid for hwy distance driving, road conditions of your choosing, but equal.
I know my FEH really seems to 'struggle' at speeds above 70MPH.. especially climbing hills... but I suspect that has more to do with the CVT than the hybrid part.
The Atkinson cycle engine has its advantages and disadvantages.
The two primary advantages are...
Lower pumping losses and no/less "waste gas", energy, into the exhaust manifold. You will likely never see a turbo on an Atkinson cycle engine.
During the early part of the compression stroke the intake valve remains open so there is no "back-pressure" on the rising piston at a time, just leaving BDC, when there is very little crankshaft "leverage".
The compression stroke has been "fore-shortened", less A/F mixture charge for combustion compared to an equal displacement "otto" engine, resulting in improved FE over the "equal" "Otto" engine.
The Atkinson engine is most optimal at high torque requirements, WOT, when the entering A/F charge is at its maximum, and thereby the extra "burn" period due to the longer, relatively, power stroke, results in significantly improved FE.
Probably most ideal for cruise settings in an aircraft.
Disadvantages...
Lower engine torque "across the board" vs an equal displacement "Otto" engine, but especially so when only "cruising" HP/torque is required, low power settings.
The Mazda Millennia "S" used a SuperCharger to bring the charge entering the cylinder back up to the level of an Otto engine and still gained an FE improvement of 23%....while also maintaining the HP/torque figures at the Otto engine level.
In the HSD "model" the battery is used in place of the SC.
Not that it doesn't have the power to do so, but that the RPMs climb so high in the process that it just doesn't seem efficient.
As road speed increases the requirement for engine HP/torque also rises. With a DERATED Atkinson cycle engine and NO ability, constant roadspeed ability, for use of the hybrid battery, the Atkinson engine RPM MUST rise in order to produce enough HP for the combination, ICE and MG's, to propel the vehicle forward at those speeds.
Since a significant level of the ICE's torque is being siphoned off to drive the MG1(2?) in generator mode and then route that electric power to MG2(1?) for input power to the e/CVT, the losses begin to add up.
We average 30-32MPG in our 4WD FEH (2005).. about 70% city, 30% highway driving. I know the 4WD is a big part of the problem, but also because I only drive the car once in awhile (wife almost always uses it for work) and it's hard to establish consistent driving habit when you don't know exactly what the heck she does with it during the day
#27
12-16-2008, 09:40 AM
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
Camry Hybrid @3680lbs 33/34MPG
Fusion Hybrid @ 3805lbs 39/37MPG
#28
12-16-2008, 10:53 AM
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
GaryG
#29
12-16-2008, 11:28 AM
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
Gary, we're all impressed with your LMPG numbers but I'd rather base my discussion on what the general public can expect. In my opinion the EPA estimates are our best representation of that (sure YOU can do better but since you don't have personal numbers for either of these vehicles...). Besides, I like to keep as many variables the same when discussing who's technology is better. In this case the Fusion and the Camry are almost the same size, weight, and cost.
I believe Willard seems to think that Ford's technology is deficient although this comparison does not support it.
#30
12-16-2008, 04:23 PM
Re: 88,000 miles on a used FEH. Good or bad idea?
Like I said, apples-to-apples.
Gary, we're all impressed with your LMPG numbers but I'd rather base my discussion on what the general public can expect. In my opinion the EPA estimates are our best representation of that (sure YOU can do better but since you don't have personal numbers for either of these vehicles...). Besides, I like to keep as many variables the same when discussing who's technology is better. In this case the Fusion and the Camry are almost the same size, weight, and cost.
I believe Willard seems to think that Ford's technology is deficient although this comparison does not support it.
Gary, we're all impressed with your LMPG numbers but I'd rather base my discussion on what the general public can expect. In my opinion the EPA estimates are our best representation of that (sure YOU can do better but since you don't have personal numbers for either of these vehicles...). Besides, I like to keep as many variables the same when discussing who's technology is better. In this case the Fusion and the Camry are almost the same size, weight, and cost.
I believe Willard seems to think that Ford's technology is deficient although this comparison does not support it.
I feel a little insulted with your post.
GaryG
