- Thread starter
- #76
Additional braking through regen and lighter config?The braking distance is pretty interesting. 18 foot difference between the Hybrid and 2.0?
Sponsored
Additional braking through regen and lighter config?The braking distance is pretty interesting. 18 foot difference between the Hybrid and 2.0?
I think most of the extra weight is the AWD.I've read the Motor Trend review over & find a couple things, first the curb weight of this EB Maverick is 3900lbs! I don't know how it can get that heavy, but with every available option, I guess, that will slow it down a bit, they said using regular gas, will slow it down a bit, & no mention of the modes, so using normal mode, those 3 will put a damper on acceleration. None of us are buying the Maverick for a race vehicle, but we have seen a couple members & other tests that have produced 0-60 times of 6.2-6.6 & 1/4 mile times of 14.8-14.9, THAT is a huge difference from the MT test, putting it much quicker than the hybrid. The best I have seen from a hybrid test is 7.4 & 15.9, which is very impressive for a hybrid/truck, & getting 36-38mpg normal driving is making me think I should have gone with the hybrid model.
Because of the regenerative braking. Slows down quicker.
Thats what I assumed, but 18 feet seemed like a lot. A couple hundred pounds should not make that much of a difference, so it must really be the regen slowing it down. I wonder how that would look in slippery conditions (rain/snow).Additional braking through regen and lighter config?
I did a little research and I take back its not all the regen brakes its actually electric motor regen that works in conjunction with the regen brakes to slow quicker. Actually saves on the brake pads.Thats what I assumed, but 18 feet seemed like a lot. A couple hundred pounds should not make that much of a difference, so it must really be the regen slowing it down. I wonder how that would look in slippery conditions (rain/snow).
They are one and the same. the eCVT through variations in MG1 RPM and rotation direction controls regen. There is really no such thing as regen brakes on these trucks. Its the electric motor resistance that slows the vehicle during regen "braking". Then there are the physical brakes at the wheels like all cars have.I did a little research and I take back its not all the regen brakes its actually electric motor regen that works in conjunction with the regen brakes to slow quicker. Actually saves on the brake pads.
I stand corrected. ThanxThey are one and the same. the eCVT through variations in MG1 RPM and rotation direction controls regen. There is really no such thing as regen brakes on these trucks. Its the electric motor resistance that slows the vehicle during regen "braking". Then there are the physical brakes at the wheels like all cars have.
For sure! Who wouldn't look at the hybrid if towing and awd were available?Does anyone seriously select the Mav model they want based on a drag race? Sure, it's great to see the numbers (which will vary truck to truck, btw...), kind of fun but pretty useless to apply to anything meaningful. With numbers so close, it's a drivers race anyway.
What do you think would happen if Ford offered the Mav with an AWD hybrid w/4K tow?
*THIS* is the (main) reason buyers are choosing the 2.0 over the 2.5; to get AWD & 4K tow.
"Base" curb weights according to Ford (assuming XL with no options)I think most of the extra weight is the AWD.
Not my chart. It's motortrend's. And it clearly shows that the hybrid (12.5-4.2=8.3) is faster than the EB (12.4-3.5=8.9) from 40 to 80. all the times shown are from zero so the early lead by the EB leads to the faster times.
I did a little research and I take back its not all the regen brakes its actually electric motor regen that works in conjunction with the regen brakes to slow quicker. Actually saves on the brake pads.
Magnets and copper coils don't wear out.This isn't possible via physics, unless something else is wearing additionally morseo on the hybrid (the electric regen system)
WAIT A MINUTE, WAIT A MINUTE…….Wow, nice looking truck.
"Country boys will survive..."... Apparently in the suburbs, based off of your picture.
While I understand the math you're doing, this chart doesn't show when the EB is shifting. Back when 4AT/5MT cars ruled the earth some cars seemed much faster than their 0-60 times because they had to shift into 3rd to get to that speed while many others could do it in 2nd. Having said that, these tenths of seconds probably won't make much of a difference when you're trying to accelerate or pass.Not my chart. It's motortrend's. And it clearly shows that the hybrid (12.5-4.2=8.3) is faster than the EB (12.4-3.5=8.9) from 40 to 80. all the times shown are from zero so the early lead by the EB leads to the faster times.
Sure there are a some caveats in the data, but there was a bit of talk on the forum a while ago about how the hybrid would be worse than the EB (or downright bad) for merging and passing. This data seems to contradict those assumptions.While I understand the math you're doing, this chart doesn't show when the EB is shifting. Back when 4AT/5MT cars ruled the earth some cars seemed much faster than their 0-60 times because they had to shift into 3rd to get to that speed while many others could do it in 2nd. Having said that, these tenths of seconds probably won't make much of a difference when you're trying to accelerate or pass.