Facelift 2025 Maverick Hybrid AWD is a lot quicker/faster than 2024 FWD Model (acceleration figures by Car and Driver)

[LSchicago]

Yeah for 10 minutes then the battery goes soft and your left with the 2.5’s 150 hp.
As long as I got gas in the tank I can climb and haul azz.
I’ve seen Mavbrids haul it up off the line just like my Eco.
But then what. ?
Don’t you have to Re-gen first to get some from 50 to 60 say six or seven times like in a mix of switchbacks ?

I did finally re-test drive a Mavbrid, I was impressed to say the least. Very quick off the line. Absolutely !
I was glad to get back in my Eco.
I just don’t like the transmission feel. Feels like a golf cart, no gears. Yucky feeling.

To each his own right !

Zoom Zoom !
Oh crap that’s Mazda :’P

Wow, that is a really out there post. Who floors it for 10 minutes? Also if you did that the Hybrid would be far ahead of the Ecoboost due to the higher top speed. The hybrid never runs out of battery, it is always charging when the engine is running.

Sponsored

 

[LSchicago]

“More powerful electric motor” sounds interesting.
Would be interesting if they provided an upgrade package.

This comes standard on all 2025 And 2026 Hybrids. All include more powerful Electric motors than previous years. Huge improvement.

 

[Cherokee]

Wow, that is a really out there post. Who floors it for 10 minutes? Also if you did that the Hybrid would be far ahead of the Ecoboost due to the higher top speed. The hybrid never runs out of battery, it is always charging when the engine is running.

Yeah I hear ya about flooring it but what about long climbs where your on the gas ?

I talked to one hybrid guy up here that switched to the Eco because he wanted more hp and tq. The Eco made him a happy camper.

Still I can’t wrap my head around the fact that it’s total output electric and gas together is about the same as the 3 cylinder Bronco sport I had that couldn’t reach 200 Hp total.

A 2.5 Ltr normally aspirated should put out closer to 180 on its own. Then adding the 40 ish HP of the electric would get near 220 hp.

The 2016 Ford Transit Connect that I owned with the 2.5-liter engine produced 169 horsepower and 171 lb-ft of torque.
Why is the more modern 2.5 only 151 Hp ?

And every one says the hybrid is faster. Ext the very least reached the Transit connects level would think.
I got an average of 24 mpg in that.

On a quarter mile maybe but not where I run,
Not in traffic at 75 MPH or even 65
The hybrid ice should have

 

[710-oil-614]

Yeah I hear ya about flooring it but what about long climbs where your on the gas ?

I talked to one hybrid guy up here that switched to the Eco because he wanted more hp and tq. The Eco made him a happy camper.

Still I can’t wrap my head around the fact that it’s total output electric and gas together is about the same as the 3 cylinder Bronco sport I had that couldn’t reach 200 Hp total.

A 2.5 Ltr normally aspirated should put out closer to 180 on its own. Then adding the 40 ish HP of the electric would get near 220 hp.

The 2016 Ford Transit Connect that I owned with the 2.5-liter engine produced 169 horsepower and 171 lb-ft of torque.
Why is the more modern 2.5 only 151 Hp ?

And every one says the hybrid is faster. Ext the very least reached the Transit connects level would think.
I got an average of 24 mpg in that.

On a quarter mile maybe but not where I run,
Not in traffic at 75 MPH or even 65
The hybrid ice should have

The electric motor alone has 232 ft lb of torque.

You’re getting hung up on the stated power ratings. You know how back in the 60s and 70s manufacturers would lie about the horsepower totals for insurance purposes?

I’m not sure why Ford chooses not to state a combined torque rating, understanding it isn’t as simple as combining max torque from ICE and electric.

We know you’ll never drive a hybrid. However with the new HF55 they significantly closed the gap on power between the hybrid and ecoboost.

 

[JohnCondren1933]

I did not know the 2025 FWD is also using the HF55 hybrid transmission.

I would then think that the 2025 FWD would get slightly worse mileage than 2024 simply for the HF55 being a bit heavier from its increased electrical power capacity over HF45.

But all else equal, there is no question IMO that the HF55 hybrid transmission drive will outlast the HF45 for the same driving load, because for the same driving load, the HF45 will be being pushed closer to its driving limits than the HF55.
IE even if both had the same coolant flow rate & cooling capacity (they don't), the HF55 has more mass to & surface for the ULV fluid to contact and transfer heat from.

In a FWD config the HF55 is probably overbuilt, ie the HF55 is not the bottleneck for 2 wheel power delivery, with enough engine power like the Ecoboost, it could almost certainly deliver enough power to the front wheels to overpower the tires if the PCU was reprogrammed.

Isn't the Lincoln Nautilus hybrid an Ecoboost 2.0 with the HF55 hybrid transmission? That could honestly be a scary powertrain if its FWD, scary not necessarily in a good way if someone custom remapped the PCU for max acceleration and bypassed the steering angle sensor input.

I strongly believe people need to change the HF55 coolant alot more than recommended interval vs changing the Mercon ULV, industrial 3phase electric drive systems can last forever with proper cooling but boy oh boy can even short temperature spikes destroy them, Ive seen liquid cooled drives run 20 years & same drive destroyed in 15 minutes from a coolant flow blockage,

Ive never really looked into engine coolant additive depletion rate, most street driving is never taking engines to their limits and engines can handle an overtemp condition which an inverter outputting 80% of its FLA at time of incident absolutely cannot.

Brainfart in my post I was thinking inverter when saying hybrid drive, its part of the hybrid drive but hybrid drive implies the generator & motor stator windings, which would definitely handle more heat than the inverter IGBTs

For those who want to make their Maverick hybrid powertrain last past 200,000 miles VERY doable, but we will have to replace the flimsy plastic coolant tubing by 100-150k miles with something better

All 25 model hybrids have the lower final drive ratio, as all 25's have the HF55 transmission.

 

[710-oil-614]

I did not know the 2025 FWD is also using the HF55 hybrid transmission.

I would then think that the 2025 FWD would get slightly worse mileage than 2024 simply for the HF55 being a bit heavier from its increased electrical power capacity over HF45.

But all else equal, there is no question IMO that the HF55 hybrid transmission drive will outlast the HF45 for the same driving load, because for the same driving load, the HF45 will be being pushed closer to its driving limits than the HF55.
IE even if both had the same coolant flow rate & cooling capacity (they don't), the HF55 has more mass to & surface for the ULV fluid to contact and transfer heat from.

In a FWD config the HF55 is probably overbuilt, ie the HF55 is not the bottleneck for 2 wheel power delivery, with enough engine power like the Ecoboost, it could almost certainly deliver enough power to the front wheels to overpower the tires if the PCU was reprogrammed.

Isn't the Lincoln Nautilus hybrid an Ecoboost 2.0 with the HF55 hybrid transmission? That could honestly be a scary powertrain if its FWD, scary not necessarily in a good way if someone custom remapped the PCU for max acceleration and bypassed the steering angle sensor input.

I strongly believe people need to change the HF55 coolant alot more than recommended interval vs changing the Mercon ULV, industrial 3phase electric drive systems can last forever with proper cooling but boy oh boy can even short temperature spikes destroy them, Ive seen liquid cooled drives run 20 years & same drive destroyed in 15 minutes from a coolant flow blockage,

Ive never really looked into engine coolant additive depletion rate, most street driving is never taking engines to their limits and engines can handle an overtemp condition which an inverter outputting 80% of its FLA at time of incident absolutely cannot.

Brainfart in my post I was thinking inverter when saying hybrid drive, its part of the hybrid drive but hybrid drive implies the generator & motor stator windings, which would definitely handle more heat than the inverter IGBTs

For those who want to make their Maverick hybrid powertrain last past 200,000 miles VERY doable, but we will have to replace the flimsy plastic coolant tubing by 100-150k miles with something better

The HF55 motors fits in the same footprint as the HF45 the weight increase if at all is negligible and more power doesn’t mean less efficiency in this case - it mean more too.

 

[Cherokee]

The electric motor alone has 232 ft lb of torque.

You’re getting hung up on the stated power ratings. You know how back in the 60s and 70s manufacturers would lie about the horsepower totals for insurance purposes?

I’m not sure why Ford chooses not to state a combined torque rating, understanding it isn’t as simple as combining max torque from ICE and electric.

We know you’ll never drive a hybrid. However with the new HF55 they significantly closed the gap on power between the hybrid and ecoboost.

If gas does what I expect it to do I will be wanting a 2029 Hybrid. I’m gonna have to stop being an old dude and accept the fact that my eight speed tranny will go the way of the Dodo bird.

 

[MaverickDragon]

Wait. They are comparing FWD vs AWD ?
very even comparison
not

While a true statement, they can't compare a 24 Hybrid AWD to a 25 Hybrid AWD as 25 is the first year offering for that configuration..
Perhaps the point was to note that the 25 with AWD didn't slow the Hybrid down.
Hybrid and AWD were two primary considerations for why I bought my trucklet...

 

[MarkLally]

The 2016 Ford Transit Connect that I owned with the 2.5-liter engine produced 169 horsepower and 171 lb-ft of torque.
Why is the more modern 2.5 only 151 Hp ?


The 2.5L engine HP alone is actually 162HP. The reason the HP is down from other 2.5L of the past is that the hybrid 2.5L runs in the Atkinson cycle. These Atkinson cycle engines are more fuel efficient because the power stroke is always longer than the compression stroke. The intake cam actually lets about 20% of the compression stroke escape back into the intake manifold, thus turning your 2.5L engine into a 2.0L normally aspirated engine (compression stroke wise), but with a 2.5L engine (power stroke wise). This is how the Atkinson engine gets away with a 13 to 1 compression ratio on regular gas. The actual compression ratio volumetrically is really about 10.4 to 1 because of the lost 20% of compression. Whenever your Atkinson cycle engine is up to operating temperature and it is running, it is running at nearly full throttle all the time, regardless of the speed you are going or even if you are sitting still and just charging the HV battery. You don't feel this because the computer never runs the engine at an RPM low enough that will allow the engine to lug, but not much above that either, unless of course the driver is demanding more power than the engine can produce at that low RPM. All of this combined allows for these engines to run about 42% thermal efficiency and nearly all the time. This is a much higher thermal efficiency than the normal Otto cycle engines running in most all ICE only cars. Atkinson cycle engines have very poor low RPM torque, but that doesn't matter when you have a VERY torquey electric motor to make up the torque deficit.

 

[MarkLally]

Isn't the Lincoln Nautilus hybrid an Ecoboost 2.0 with the HF55 hybrid transmission? That could honestly be a scary powertrain if its FWD, scary not necessarily in a good way if someone custom remapped the PCU for max acceleration and bypassed the steering angle sensor input.



Someone posted a while back showing the internals of a HF45 compared to the HF55, It's obvious that the HF55 is substantially stronger.
You are correct that the Nautilus hybrid has a HF55 with a 2.0L EB and it has a total of 310 HP. My take on it is if the HF55 was designed to live at 310 HP, is will be coasting at 191 HP. They should be damn near bulletproof in a Maverick.

 

[JBnorthTX]

Both the '24 and the '25 were traveling 90 mph at the end of the quarter mile. That suggests the faster 0-60 time of the '25 resulted more from better traction than more power.

 

[Ryom]

I really want to see plotted torque curves before and after the refresh and compared to the Ecoboost.

 

[LSchicago]

Yeah I hear ya about flooring it but what about long climbs where your on the gas ?

I talked to one hybrid guy up here that switched to the Eco because he wanted more hp and tq. The Eco made him a happy camper.

Still I can’t wrap my head around the fact that it’s total output electric and gas together is about the same as the 3 cylinder Bronco sport I had that couldn’t reach 200 Hp total.

A 2.5 Ltr normally aspirated should put out closer to 180 on its own. Then adding the 40 ish HP of the electric would get near 220 hp.

The 2016 Ford Transit Connect that I owned with the 2.5-liter engine produced 169 horsepower and 171 lb-ft of torque.
Why is the more modern 2.5 only 151 Hp ?

And every one says the hybrid is faster. Ext the very least reached the Transit connects level would think.
I got an average of 24 mpg in that.

On a quarter mile maybe but not where I run,
Not in traffic at 75 MPH or even 65
The hybrid ice should have

I've hit 80+ mph pulling a trailer up a hill with my 23 Hybrid within a minute. How fast do you need to climb that hill? Again, the hybrid battery never goes dead. I can tell you never drove one.

 

[HeyBales]

Wow, that is a really out there post. Who floors it for 10 minutes? Also if you did that the Hybrid would be far ahead of the Ecoboost due to the higher top speed. The hybrid never runs out of battery, it is always charging when the engine is running.

Ehhh - the Generator Motor used for charging the HVB is also used for gearing.

Gearing is the primary focus, charging is secondary.

And some of the gearing provides little to no charging.
The HVB will go into loosing mode easily enough, at 30% you aren't getting much power out of it, as that's considered bottom of usable range.
Some GM electricity will go straight to TM if it can be used - but higher speeds - not really.

If you let up off the gas at higher speeds where the ICE will be running - sure some charging happens.

Here's a typical run from 15 to 67 mph.
You can see the ICE torque line go negative on spin up from EV mode to then being on.
ICE is used more & more, while TM torque goes down and down, as HVB SOC goes down, as HVB Amps are actually used, not charged.
No charging (which is neg Amps line) until the speed slows a bit because pedal was just let go - so charging amps.
Otherwise there would be none.
Data file attached.

 

[710-oil-614]

Both the '24 and the '25 were traveling 90 mph at the end of the quarter mile. That suggests the faster 0-60 time of the '25 resulted more from better traction than more power.

LOL.

Sponsored