hybrid torque?

[mamboman777]

I can believe it hasn't been done yet... Has anyone found the results of the hybrid on a Dyno?

If not, what would it take to make that happen?

I am doubtful if the 155 ft/lbs figure... Not going to change my decision, but I am curious.

Sponsored

 

[Deleted member 1483]

The only insight I can give you is a combined torque figure kind of “doesn’t make sense” and horsepower is the proper figure.

Actual real world results show the hybrid right on the heels of the ecoboost. I wouldnt worry.

 

[WesM]

The only insight I can give you is a combined torque figure kind of “doesn’t make sense” and horsepower is the proper figure.

Actual real world results show the hybrid right on the heels of the ecoboost. I wouldnt worry.

I don't think its so much a worry thing as it is a curiosity thing. I would be interested in seeing the results of a dyno on a hybrid Maverick as well.

 

[mamboman777]

Here's an example ( not Maverick, but you get the point):

 

[mamboman777]

Why not list the electric motor torque? All of the materials I've read say 155ft/lbs for the Atkinson. Why not list the electric motor torque? And what is the figure?

 

[mamboman777]

Why not list the electric motor torque? All of the materials I've read say 155ft/lbs for the Atkinson. Why not list the electric motor torque? And what is the figure?

I mean, if the 2015 fusion hybrids electric motor was good for 177 ft/lbs, isn't the updated electric motor generating more?

 

[MLowe05]

They just go with ICE torque because, due to torque curves, you these can't be combined. So they'd have to say X-lb/ft 0rpm-XXXXrpm, then X-lb/ft in another RPM range.

Just easier to list the normal ICE number.

 

[mamboman777]

They just go with ICE torque because, due to torque curves, you these can't be combined. So they'd have to say X-lb/ft 0rpm-XXXXrpm, then X-lb/ft in another RPM range.

Just easier to list the normal ICE number.

Fair, but why not also list the electric torque (see above)?

 

[rlhdweman]

They just go with ICE torque because, due to torque curves, you these can't be combined. So they'd have to say X-lb/ft 0rpm-XXXXrpm, then X-lb/ft in another RPM range.

Just easier to list the normal ICE number.

This is why one needs to be put on a dyno, they already list the electric motor adding about 30 horsepower, torque # will be more than hp lets say 50lbs, but the electric motors torque is throughout the entire powerband making it hard to pinpoint exact figures & the number may fluctuate because of battery charge available, so put a hybrid on the dyno & look at the graph & we will have an idea.

 

[gorignak]

Fair, but why not also list the electric torque (see above)?

I'm guessing that the torque isn't listed because it's very low. Even on level ground the acceleration from only electric power is slow. If it really had close to the torque of the ICE it would have no trouble getting up to speed. If I want to drive in electric mode this truck is by far the most sluggish vehicle I've driven but when the ICE kicks in I feel like I have almost unlimited power.

 

[mamboman777]

I'm guessing that the torque isn't listed because it's very low. Even on level ground the acceleration from only electric power is slow. If it really had close to the torque of the ICE it would have no trouble getting up to speed. If I want to drive in electric mode this truck is by far the most sluggish vehicle I've driven but when the ICE kicks in I feel like I have almost unlimited power.

You did see where the previous generation of this same engine/power train combination listed 177 ft/lbs for the electric engine, right?

 

[MLowe05]

The torque is higher than the ICE.. but it likely is only available for a moment and not consistently. I'm not sure a dyno would be super useful. Under WOT, the battery would be depleted relatively quickly.

 

[gorignak]

You did see where the previous generation of this same engine/power train combination listed 177 ft/lbs for the electric engine, right?

I saw that, but when I use the electric motor it doesn't act like it has that much torque. I don't think Ford would spend the extra money to put a powerful electric motor and then not make it usable. Maybe the battery can't supply enough power to maximize the motor's potential so it only puts out full power when the engine is running, but I don't know enough about the battery to say of that's reasonable or not.

 

[mamboman777]

I saw that, but when I use the electric motor it doesn't act like it has that much torque. I don't think Ford would spend the extra money to put a powerful electric motor and then not make it usable. Maybe the battery can't supply enough power to maximize the motor's potential so it only puts out full power when the engine is running, but I don't know enough about the battery to say of that's reasonable or not.

I think you're probably correct about all that. That said ... Is it take 155... Like.... Near as makes no difference Same as my '12 focus 155?

I just wanna see what the Dyno says...

 

[jwiedle24]

I think you're probably correct about all that. That said ... Is it take 155... Like.... Near as makes no difference Same as my '12 focus 155?

I just wanna see what the Dyno says...

I also was curious of the combined torque as well. The only person I’ve even seen mention it is Alex on Autos…for what it’s worth, this was his estimation:

Sponsored