- Thread starter
- #1
What is the size (power) of the electric motor battery pack? I haven't been able to find this info. Do we expect it to be similar to the Ford Escape Hybrid? 1.1 kWh? Or maybe bigger?
Sponsored
Sponsored
Lithium-ion Battery pack size for the Maverick's Hybrid system?
- Thread starter SpacemanSpiff
- Start date
- Watchers 3
- First Name
- Devin
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2021
- Threads
- 24
- Messages
- 366
- Reaction score
- 505
- Location
- Toledo Ohio
- Vehicle(s)
- 2000 Mercury Grand Marquis LS
Yes. Same battery. Different (bigger) motor.
- First Name
- Frank
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2021
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 452
- Reaction score
- 491
- Location
- Bushnell's Basin
- Vehicle(s)
- 2020 Escape Hybrid
Do tell! Only thing I've seen was a slight rotor/stator upgrade in the Maverick (and going forward across the board I suspect). No sign of a change from the 2.5L Atkinson.
- First Name
- Devin
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2021
- Threads
- 24
- Messages
- 366
- Reaction score
- 505
- Location
- Toledo Ohio
- Vehicle(s)
- 2000 Mercury Grand Marquis LS
Motors as in both electric motors.
The drive motor and starter/ generator. The gas motor is the same 2.5L in the escape.
The traction battery in Hybrids is usually about 1 - 1.5 kWh. There is no need for bigger one as the energy regen only when braking and then releases it during following acceleration, so small battery is plenty. It does not have to push the car all the time.
Last edited:
Sponsored
- First Name
- Frank
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2021
- Threads
- 0
- Messages
- 452
- Reaction score
- 491
- Location
- Bushnell's Basin
- Vehicle(s)
- 2020 Escape Hybrid
C-Max has a 1.5kWh air-cooled HVB.
Escape has a 1.1kWh water-cooled HVB.
IMHO, water cooling buys back more performance than was lost by reducing capacity, 1.5 to 1.1 kWh. Charging is more aggressive, so a given duration ICE burn yields more HVB charge and longer EV distances.
Remember that the HVB in a hybrid is an energy buffer not an energy source as it would be in an EV or plug-in. The system goal is to run the ICE only in high-efficiency modes and use the EV capability to fill-in what would be low-efficiency ICE operation, i.e. idling.
I came up with this diagram when I got the C-Max, updated for Escape tank and battery size, and improved engine efficiency and charging efficiency. It shows that all energy comes from the gas tank by running the ICE to move the car or charge the battery, or both. But it's a 1-way trip, the ultimate "use it or lose it." Once burned, you can't put fuel back in the tank. You either use it, store it, or lose it.
The HVB gives you a place to store energy that's not terrain-dependent.
Note that there are no numbers in the LOSSES box because they vary a lot.
- rolling resistance is fairly constant with both speed and load, so I see it as The Distance Penalty, the cost of moving anywhere.
- aerodynamic drag depends on speed (and windows open/closed), so I see it as The Time Penalty, the cost of getting there sooner.
- friction braking is a direct loss of energy, turning motion into heat, so I see it as The Attentiveness Penalty, the cost of not paying attention.
Good mileage is nothing more than minimizing losses while using the ICE efficiently. Time (speed) and distance (route) are up to you.
Escape has a 1.1kWh water-cooled HVB.
IMHO, water cooling buys back more performance than was lost by reducing capacity, 1.5 to 1.1 kWh. Charging is more aggressive, so a given duration ICE burn yields more HVB charge and longer EV distances.
Remember that the HVB in a hybrid is an energy buffer not an energy source as it would be in an EV or plug-in. The system goal is to run the ICE only in high-efficiency modes and use the EV capability to fill-in what would be low-efficiency ICE operation, i.e. idling.
I came up with this diagram when I got the C-Max, updated for Escape tank and battery size, and improved engine efficiency and charging efficiency. It shows that all energy comes from the gas tank by running the ICE to move the car or charge the battery, or both. But it's a 1-way trip, the ultimate "use it or lose it." Once burned, you can't put fuel back in the tank. You either use it, store it, or lose it.
The HVB gives you a place to store energy that's not terrain-dependent.
Note that there are no numbers in the LOSSES box because they vary a lot.
- rolling resistance is fairly constant with both speed and load, so I see it as The Distance Penalty, the cost of moving anywhere.
- aerodynamic drag depends on speed (and windows open/closed), so I see it as The Time Penalty, the cost of getting there sooner.
- friction braking is a direct loss of energy, turning motion into heat, so I see it as The Attentiveness Penalty, the cost of not paying attention.
Good mileage is nothing more than minimizing losses while using the ICE efficiently. Time (speed) and distance (route) are up to you.
If it is anything like the Toyota system, the ICE also charges the traction battery when needed.
- First Name
- Charles
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2021
- Threads
- 1
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 6
- Location
- Bastrop, texas
- Vehicle(s)
- 56 f100, 83 ranger, 84 dodge d150, 13 fusion hyb,
toyota and ford developed the system together.
OP
OP
- Thread starter
- #9
Source? I would like to read more of the hybrid history between Ford and Toyota.
Sponsored
OP
OP
- Thread starter
- #11
My understanding was that the hybrid transmission was developed by a third company that Toyota later bought the company, taking ownership of the design. Ford and Toyota hybrid systems were independently developed BUT Ford unintentionally violated some of Toyota's hybrid patents. Meanwhile Toyota unintentionally violated Ford's emission patents. The two decided to swap. Ford allowed to use Toyota's patents, and Toyota allowed to use Ford's patents. So no purchase, or co-development, but a swap in patents, at least initially 10+ years ago.
It is a good thing that you don’t have to understand the science of hybrid engines and batteries to enjoy driving a hybrid.C-Max has a 1.5kWh air-cooled HVB.
Escape has a 1.1kWh water-cooled HVB.
IMHO, water cooling buys back more performance than was lost by reducing capacity, 1.5 to 1.1 kWh. Charging is more aggressive, so a given duration ICE burn yields more HVB charge and longer EV distances.
Remember that the HVB in a hybrid is an energy buffer not an energy source as it would be in an EV or plug-in. The system goal is to run the ICE only in high-efficiency modes and use the EV capability to fill-in what would be low-efficiency ICE operation, i.e. idling.
I came up with this diagram when I got the C-Max, updated for Escape tank and battery size, and improved engine efficiency and charging efficiency. It shows that all energy comes from the gas tank by running the ICE to move the car or charge the battery, or both. But it's a 1-way trip, the ultimate "use it or lose it." Once burned, you can't put fuel back in the tank. You either use it, store it, or lose it.
The HVB gives you a place to store energy that's not terrain-dependent.
Note that there are no numbers in the LOSSES box because they vary a lot.
- rolling resistance is fairly constant with both speed and load, so I see it as The Distance Penalty, the cost of moving anywhere.
- aerodynamic drag depends on speed (and windows open/closed), so I see it as The Time Penalty, the cost of getting there sooner.
- friction braking is a direct loss of energy, turning motion into heat, so I see it as The Attentiveness Penalty, the cost of not paying attention.
Good mileage is nothing more than minimizing losses while using the ICE efficiently. Time (speed) and distance (route) are up to you.
You sure? Ford's current BEV fleet uses pouch cells. MME and E-Transit come from LG like the hybrid battery cells, while F-150 Lightning sources from SK.
Regardless, they're not cylindrical cells. Tesla is rather unique in that regard.
Sponsored
Similar threads
