EREV is, as far as automotive acronyms go, close to perfect. There’s an onomatopoetic quality to it you don’t get with, say, BEV or HEV. The worst might be PHEV, which sounds like what happens when you unsuccessfully try to stifle a sneeze. With an EREV, there’s “E” there, which everyone other than Jaguar associates with electricity. Then there’s “REV,” which is what a gas-powered engine does. EREV!
Ford likes the sound of it as well, with the company confirming to Bloomberg its much-anticipated pivot to Extended Range Electric Vehicles for its line of trucks, SUVs, and crossovers. This means I get to tap the “Decade of the EREV” sign again, which you know is something I love to do when I write The Morning Dump.
It’s going to take Ford at least two years to get to this EREV future and in the interim it’ll have to do its best to fend off rivals like Hyundai/Kia and Mazda, both of whom had great months. Tesla will remain an ever-present competitor to Ford as well, although the brand continues to show weakness.
Oh, hey, remember when I wrote that long piece about the impending cost of tariffs against Mexico and Canada? It was yesterday. Those are on hold. Tariffs against China, though, are happening. I think! I don’t know. Keep your powder dry.
How Excited Are You For An EREV Super Duty?
Ford has two simultaneous projects going on to prepare itself for the future. One is the so-called Skunkworks project to create a sub-$30k range of electric vehicles to stave off Chinese automakers and eat into Tesla’s waning dominance of the EV space. The other plan–much speculated on and basically confirmed today in this Bloomberg article–is a hard shift into EREVs.
EREVs have become very popular in China, the world’s largest market for battery-powered cars, and Farley was wowed by the technology during a visit there with his executives last spring. Ford plans to offer EREV versions of its sport utility vehicles, crossover models and its big Super Duty pickup, its most popular and profitable vehicles, according to people familiar with its plans.
No automakers currently offer EREVs for sale in the US, but that will change soon. Chrysler parent Stellantis NV will be the first to offer one later this year with its Ram 1500 Ramcharger. Volkswagen AG’s new battery-powered Scout line of SUVs and trucks is slated to debut EREV versions in 2027.
Am I surprised? I’m not surprised. When the Scout was revealed to be an EREV, David made a big tweet asking automakers to consider this. The response from Ford CEO Jim Farley?
David, interesting comments……
— Jim Farley (@jimfarley98) October 26, 2024
“David, interesting comments……” That’s a double ellipse. That’s six whole periods. Two hockey games! That’s a lot of innuendo.
If you’re not a huge EREV-head, allow me to briefly explain. An EREV is essentially an electric car with a gas-powered generator to provide additional range when necessary. The difference between a PHEV and an EREV is that the wheels can’t be driven by the gas-powered engine. The only EREV sold in the United States in any numbers were the BMW i3 and BMW i8 with the range-extender option. I tend to believe the Volt counts, as well, though there was a mode in which the ICE could be used to power the wheels, so David doesn’t count it even if he does love it. [Ed Note: Also, an EREV provides not only immunity to EV infrastructure inadequacies, but in theory it can be cheaper because it protects for road trip/towing use cases not with a bunch of extra heavy/pricy battery capacity, but with a cheaper and lighter gas generator. What’s more, it allows automakers to use a common platform for both fully electric and EREV powertrains. -DT]
To explain why EREVs make sense, I’ll quote from David’s follow-up piece on the inevitability of the technology:
America is a truck and SUV market, which is why GM has axed legendary nameplates like the Chevy Impala and Malibu, and Stellantis and Ford don’t offer a single sedan today. Expecting Americans to give up SUVs and trucks for small cars in order to get more range for their money just ain’t gonna happen organically (it doesn’t help that small cars see higher fatality rates, and that in the U.S. you almost have to have a big car to feel safe). High-range small and midsize crossovers — not unsubstantial classes, to be sure — will get cheaper and cheaper as they become even more efficient, and we’re starting to see that already (see the Equinox EV, which is great) — this is a segment for which EREVs perhaps make less sense. But big trucks and big SUVs simply don’t work as affordable EVs. In fact, right now there are zero affordable, competitive electric pickup trucks or large SUVs on the American market, especially if the EV tax credit goes away.
Rivians and the long-range Kia EV9 are both too expensive, every EV pickup truck is either too pricey or can’t tow nearly far enough on a charge, and as for hard-core off-road competitors to the Wrangler and Bronco? Forget about it. Throwing 35-inch tires on an EV will damage Vehicle Demand Energy so much it just won’t work out.
I’m all for reducing Vehicle Demand Energy to reduce overall EV cost, and I’m for offering lots of lower-range models, but Americans aren’t giving up full-size pickups, large three-row SUVs, or off-roaders, and if you want to get lots of folks driving electric as quickly as possible, you’re going to have to meet them where they are.
Ford is a brand that only makes one car. Just one! It’s the Mustang. Everything else is some form of truck, SUV, or crossover. Let’s think of all the ways an EREV makes sense:
- Super Duty Trucks: Yes
- F-150: Yes
- Expedition: Yes
- Explorer: Yes
- Bronco: Yes
- Bronco Sport: Yes
- Maverick: Yes
- Mustang: Maybe?
- Transit: Yes
The big question, of course, is hybrids. Ford sells a lot of regular HEV-style hybrids. If you build an EREV platform you ideally want it to be BEV + EREV, not BEV + EREV + ICE + HEV. For trucks that might work because packaging is easier, but anything Explorer or smaller is another question. Does this mean we’re going to get a Bronco that’s either electric or EREV?
The Scout is either EREV or BEV. The Ram platform, though, is available as an ICE-powered truck, an incoming EREV, and an electric truck that’s been delayed so the EREV Ramcharger can go to market first. Ford is going to be talking to investors on Wednesday and the question I want analysts to ask is: Where is the cutoff? At what point do you say something is either hybrid or EREV?
Either way, I love this. More efficient big trucks are a good thing. This, I hope, will move more buyers towards upgrading their homes for EV charging. It’ll show people how often they actually drive. It should lead to lower gasoline consumption and, therefore, emissions. All of this is good.
Also, just to be clear, I like to use old concept cars to introduce new ideas, so I’m using the Ford Atlas Concept from 2013 here to illustrate an EREV future for Ford. This was actually used to preview the last generation F-150, but I like the blue lights.
January Was Another Good Month For Hybrids
Even with some less-than-ideal weather in a lot of the country, many automakers reported strong January sales. Everyone loves a winner, so let’s start with some winners.
Honda was up 4.1% and Acura improved 0.6% over last January. Honda lumps the Prologue with all its hybrids as “electrified” vehicles, and “electrified” vehicles saw an 83.2% year-over-year increase. Sure, that’s mostly hybrids, but Honda also sold (or leased) 3,744 Prologues. That’s a lot of Prologues.
Subura had another good month, up 4.1% year-over-year. Mazda was an even bigger winner, up 11.2%. Overall, though, it’s Hyundai and Kia you’d like to be right now. Overall, the brands improved deliveries by 13.1% if you include Genesis. Hyundai was the strongest of the two with a 14.6% year-over-year increase.
Toyota sales were off by about 1.6%, though some of that may still be from a lack of inventory. While Toyota sells more cars than Honda, Honda usually has more cars to sell. One small bright spot for Toyota was the 3.8% year-over-year increase for the Prius.
EV sales are now growing faster at Ford than hybrid vehicles are, with a 21.2% year-over-year increase in EV sales led by 3,529 Mach-Es. HEVs were up just 19.2%, though those were seemingly dragged down by a drop in Maverick sales of 29.8% off a banger of a January last year. It’ll be interesting to see how the introduction of a revised Maverick will impact sales now that prices are higher.
Most other brands report quarterly, so we’ll have to wait for registration data later this month to make broader conclusions.
Tesla Sales Are The Ultimate Rorschach Test
Tesla was always destined to lose market share. You can’t be that successful at something and not expect other people to compete against you. Are Tesla’s declines in places like California, where EVs are expanding, a sign that the market is maturing or a sign that people don’t like Elon Musk? How you answer that question might say more about what you believe than what you know.
At the same time, is Tesla’s big 63% drop in France a sign that the French don’t like the company’s CEO and his Lost Boys/AfD antics? Or is it just that the French are nationalistic and will buy a French car before an American one?
French government ministers late last month called for the European Commission to immediately suspend the regulation on CO2 emissions from passenger cars, warning that it could result in billions of euros going to Chinese manufacturers and Tesla, “whose CEO Elon Musk is openly attacking European regulations and values.”
Or, and hear me out, the world isn’t black-and-white and it’s a mixture of all these things plus the fact that the cars are old and need to be updated.
Tariffs On China Will Continue
Speaking of Rorschach tests, the very short-lived tariffs against Canada and Mexico didn’t happen. Was this capitulation from Mexico and Canada? Was this President Trump getting spooked by the market? Does anything mean anything anymore? Again, the answer to that question has a lot to do with what you already believe. And for our purposes, it doesn’t matter. What matters is that the tariffs are on hold for a month, and whatever happens in renegotiations to the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement in the next month is far more important.
The additional 10% tariff against China, which was lost in all the panic yesterday, is apparently happening. China is already responding, according to Nikkei Asia:
China’s Ministry of Commerce on Tuesday announced a 15% tariff on American coal and liquefied natural gas, as well as 10% on crude oil, farm equipment and some vehicles, all starting next Monday.
China also expanded export controls on shipments of tungsten, tellurium and other rare metal products that could be used for goods such as lithium batteries. American companies including clothing maker PVH and biotechnology player Illumina were added to a so-called unreliable entity list.
“The imposition of tariffs by the United States on Chinese exports to the United States is a serious violation of [World Trade Organization] rules,” a ministry spokesperson said on Tuesday. The representative blasted U.S. behavior as “of bad nature, typical of unilateralism and a form of trade protectionism.”
Separately, China’s market regulator said it was launching an investigation into Google over alleged violation of antitrust law
Chinese President Xi Jinping and President Trump are supposed to talk soon, so perhaps this will also go away. I saw two different elementary school performances of The Wizard of Oz last week and it reminded me how much I loved the meta line “People come and go so quickly here.” That’s basically how I feel about these tariffs.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
The debate yesterday was between playing Bjork’s “It’s Oh So Quiet” and “Birthday” by pre-solo Bjork project The Sugarcubes. Why can’t we have both?
The Big Question
You go through the Ford/Lincoln lineup and tell me what should be:
- ICE
- ICE + HEV
- BEV + EREV
- BEV + HEV + ICE + EREV
or any other combination.
China could have avoided the tariffs by sending 10,000 troops to the US/China border like Mexico and Canada did, but here we are
Yes, imagine 10,000 Chinese naval troops stationed just 12.1 miles off the coast of West Palm Beach in international waters…
Should have demanded they lease us Hong Kong, that would have gone over great
EREV BRONCO EREV BRONCO EREV BRONCO EREV BRONCO JIM FARLEY PLEASEEEEEEEEEEE
Oh man, the rock crawling/overlanding scene would go BUGFUCK once they tried out EREVs. Silent wheeling with maximum torque at low speeds? Imagine how many more 4×4 clubs could be around when they’re not causing noise pollution.
So the one thing I constantly notice when driving EVs is the ability to hear the tires on the road. You can actually hear when they start to slip even before you feel it. I have to imagine that would be really cool when off-roading.
Voltec everything (PHEV?), when I drive the 28 miles to work, 18 are gas (38 MPG on average – highway driving) and the remaining 10 electric (city driving). Basically I use a gallon per day. I do this over the winter so I can use max heat from the engine. Summer time I stay on electric mode all the time. Running costs are very low, I am surprised is taking this long to get there.
I think the BMW i3 REX is really cool but my main criticisms are the puny fuel tank (2.4 gal?) and speed/power restrictions (56 mph?) in REX mode. I guess that’s ok for a compact city car but Ford will have to do much better than that with its trucks, especially the Super Duty. If you’re roadtripping somewhere and EV charging stations are scarce (or broken) you don’t want to be fueling up every hour or 2 or struggle to pull a hill.
For TBQ (but only for the ones I care to mention);
EREV’s make sense for a lot of vehicles that can’t realistically go BEV yet, but in other cases, HEV’s make better sense, I think.
Expedition/Navigator is heavily influenced by F150. If anything this new generation for 2025 should have gotten the Powerboost Hybrid
I missed out on the Sugarcubes back in the day but apparently they were the answer to “The Cure, but weirder.” Or maybe it’s just that this song reminds me of “Pictures of You.”
So the complaints I see with the EREV is the engine noise versus pedal use-age. People expect when you depress the pedal that the ICE will make more noise but the target with EREV is for the ICE to run at optimum states for best fuel economy while supplying electrons to the drive motor. So that will be a challenge many don’t consider when buying. Or they will complain about the piped in noise that makes you think you have an F1 car engine.
I’ve heard a lot of that, too, but with all the hybrids and CVTs on the market today, disconnecting the pedal from the noise is a lot more common than it used to be. It’s a valid complaint, but still kind of a stupid one.
I thought the killer marketing angle would be to compare an EREV truck to a locomotive. Dollars to donuts, the first wave of marketing will have some form of that. Because it makes people feel big.
“The new Ford FreightHauler, running a train on the competition.”
I’m still workshopping the model name, but I’m keeping the slogan.
I’d personally love an EREV F150. Being able to drive around as an EV for 90% of the time, then tow the racecar to the track thats 180-250 miles away would be perfect. However, It will most likely be way out of my price range given a new 4WD STX (Base non work truck spec trim) is $53k+
MSRP… You can find them mid-40’s all day long.
Thats fair, quick search of my local dealers have them between $45-50k. That’s still $10k more than my budget though
Until someone manages to develop an EREV that isn’t massively expensive, I don’t see how they’re a solution for anything. Even if the resulting vehicle is in fact, good at everything.
Look, I get it, everyone wants to have it all. But having it all is expensive. If anything we should be shifting towards vehicles that do a better job at what they’re actually used for, but that’s not what manufacturers and marketers want. I totally understand why hardly anyone wants an EV, they take the limitless potential of the automobile and neuter it with reliance on completely shit infrastructure.
Anyway, I have absolutely zero enthusiasm for 80k pickups, so until a manufacturers states their intent to make an EREV that I might afford in my lifetime, I’d rather see more regular hybrids and PHEVs.
The thing with pickup trucks is that they’re already expensive, both in price and fuel consumption. This is commonly tolerated, because the 4-door family pickup truck is ‘good at everything’.
I agree these EREV trucks will be expansive, but theoretically cheaper than a pure EV with the same capability. (See Silverado EV pricing)
Car buyers, the type ones who buy or lease new pickup trucks anyways, have been shown to be quite flexible on price provided they can justify the purchase with increased capability. I’m sure quite a few people would stomach a 10-15k upcharge over a comparable ICE truck if it means they never have to use gas around town again.
That said, I’ve long been an advocate that Ford should sell an affordable light duty, PHEV F150 based on a low-output version of their 2.7 V6. I think that would be a very popular truck for both personal and fleet usage.
Bjork was roughly 23 when the video was made. I remember when 23 seemed so far into the future and just so OLD. lol. Either way, great tune.
As far as Ford goes, whatever they decide to do I can’t see ever buying one. Jump at the opportunity to drive a GT? You betcha. But, paying insurance on any Ford? Highly unlikely.
As a ph Stephen, PHEV to me sounds like VEV, which rolls off the tongue in a sort of sexy way.
I drive a PHEV, it’s a Phevy Pholt, it’s Phery Phancy. Gonna try that line out on the wife tonight!
It is and it isn’t.
But aren’t gasoline and diesel prices going be down at $1 a gallon soon? /s
I’m still not seeing where the EREV vehicle pricing is going to be competitive or better than a normal ICE vehicle and that’s sort of the crux of the matter. Never mind the additional complexity. Sure, some people will enjoy it (and spend for it) but those that are happy with EV currently will stay that way, those that are completely anti anything with a battery will bash it, and the automakers now have even more of a multiplexity of model lineups to develop, stock, support, and repair. Seems like the worst of all worlds for virtually everyone and ends up keeping the US on a bit of a technological island. You said it yourself that the infrastructure isn’t there for EVs. Except it IS for the Tesla people, and while a number of people tow that’s nowhere near the majority, or else we wouldn’t have people always complaining about empty single occupant empty pickup trucks everywhere…the serious hard-core towing crowd will likely stay resolutely anti-anything-with-a-battery.
Setting aside the Tesla leader’s self-immolation as it relates to their vehicle sales, in a normal world (i.e. if the CEO changed tomorrow) Tesla would be continuing to build out its network, develop it so it better supports other vehicles and towing as demand changes, develop faster chargers (still happening), and somehow eventually someone else would decide hey there might be room for a second network or that it could be piggybacked on to siphon some of that profitability. That’s still a reality and is happening in other parts of the world. However here in the U.S. we are regressing instead of actually developing.
Ford can’t seem to decide what it wants to do, for the last year all you heard about was the secret skunkworks that was going to build the definitive Tesla-killer cheap EV, now it’s a full pivot to EREVs with another few years of gestation, by which time there will likely be another shift to something else…Whatever gets them in the news I guess, at least non-built future-cars can’t be recalled until they are released so that’s a win (?)
EREV does make sense when gasser engines are cheap to make, and massive batteries are not.
You may think it’s a 100% unrealistic want, however we (American’s) drive significantly more than anyone else in the world. 13.5k mi a year vs 9.5 for Canadians in second place.
EREV also functions as a plug in hybrid on steroids, especially if you do not have access to home/work charging. If a Conventional Hybrid is 1/4 EV, PHEV is 1/2 way there, EREV is 3/4. All with 0 range anxiety, real or imagined by the consumer.
On the Tesla commentary, until ‘networks’ are replaced by independent charging stations (with sub 10min 300mi charge rates), a bunch of people will stay with gasoline power density. The mostly monopolized state of fast charging hurts EV adoption, regardless of who is running it.
The RAM EREV’s battery size is 92kWh, that’s 21% larger than in a Tesla Model 3 or Y Long Range. A larger battery isn’t going to be cheaper, that’s for sure, if battery costs are the concern.
Batteries are getting cheaper to make every year, both for EVs and EREVs obviously. And can be recycled. Gasoline isn’t cheap either though in many places and unlikely to come down in price. An Engine plus a Battery is more expensive than just an engine, however it’s perhaps at this point cheaper than just a larger battery.
13500 miles a year isn’t a large amount. It’s 260 miles A WEEK. i.e. something that can be handled in many current EVs with a weekly charge. And it is obviously not the person that is towing across the country on a weekly or even monthly basis. So that leaves more outliers than “average” persons.
My point is that recharging IS getting faster. And the use case of people that require a 300 mile fillup WHILE ON A TRIP WITHOUT A SECONDARY VEHICLE OPTION is still not a huge amount of people, but rather those that insist every vehicle in their fleet be a best fit for every singly purpose which in reality is not the case.
At least the EREV argument removes the biggest argument vs a pure EV, i.e. the people against an EV due to the “battery needing to be replaced”…
Hey, EREVs may be great, I just don’t see them as a cure-all without a downside as they are often promoted here. Cost, complexity, etc.
my commute to my office is 11 miles one-way, and I do that 3-4 times a week = 88ish miles. Add in some other odds and ends and a “normal” week is 150 miles or less… except for the 1-2 weeks a month when I’m visiting one of our other sites, 200+ miles one-way from my home, and having to commute from a hotel to their site and then back home, with no destination chargers in sight (the turnpike has some Supercharger rest stop locations).
I have 2 cars and a motorcycle: CX30 for winter & trips, BMW e93 for summer normal drives & trips, and the bike for goofing around town. BMW is ripe for replacement, but no one sells a convertible EREV or BEV. Plenty of articles on this site about the challenges facing BEV bikes. CX30 has to be the ‘do it all’ answer, and EREV fits the bill best.
I’d posit that having to be away from home in a hotel for 1-2 weeks and driving there puts you in the outlier position though, and hardly a common use case. If the other site were 30 miles away you’d commute back home and if it were 500 miles away you’d by flying there and using a rental car while there. Your CX-30 or the same replacement sounds like the perfect current vehicle, or do you envision that an EREV version of that car if it existed would cost remotely the same amount? Either way though your situation isn’t really a “common” one.
“those that are happy with EV currently will stay that way, those that are completely anti anything with a battery will bash it”
I think the flaw in your logic is assuming the 2 groups above make up a significant portion of the population. Sure, for people whose use case makes an EV great, they probably wouldn’t go to EREV. But for the way most Americans live, an EV still represents a compromise in terms of versatility and ease of use. For the people who are “anti-battery” I mean … every car has a battery in it already. If the tech and price meet their use case, the only thing left to fall into place is the marketing.
The biggest group of people buying cars are those that want their next car to cost less rather than more. An EREV is likely going to cost more than either an ICE car, a hybrid, or a pure EV. Obviously you DO get a benefit in the form of the extended range, but if the cost is higher, people will want to rationalize that cost and I just don’t see that many people saying that the extended range is actually worth the cost of this technology. Yes it makes some sense in some case but likely not the majority. The single worst moment in a modern PHEV is when you run out of battery power when merging on a freeway in the morning and the cold century-old tech ICE kicks in, instantly taking you back 100 years. 🙂
The archaic lead-acid battery in a modern car is likely the single component most likely to fail and require replacement ahead of anything else in the vehicle bar perhaps tires. A modern EV battery on the other hand is likely one of the longer-lasting components in an EV, I do understand that, I’m extremely pro-EV while also seeing the (current) advantages of ICE (preferably hybrid) in some cases. I just find EREV to be an expensive stop-gap solution that isn’t really more than a short-term bandaid.
EREV! Henrik Fisker was the visionary we all needed! Go out and buy a Karma now as testament to his genius.
(I don’t know where I’m going with this other than to let everyone know Karma still exists and is still selling the Revero in essentially the same form factor as Henrik launched it nearly 14 years ago)
The one additional question this all raises, of course, is whether 10 years down the line owners might revolt at the potential repair costs. Like it or not, the industry HAS to prepare for inevitably longer ownership periods and longer replacement cycles, especially since prices will remain high. This should start with the goodwill of longer warranties…the traditional 3/36 is absolutely laughable. It’s almost as if people could collect Social Security at 65 or something! Get with the times.
Wait, what?
Musk now controls Social Security so we all now work for him. Plus he’s more into other SS themed activites. Not the Chevy ones unfortunately.
I’ve been PHEV/EREV-curious since the first gen Volt, when I sat around wondering why it wasn’t the post-Carpocalypse prototype for all future vehicles (starting with GM).
Then it was updated and made even better.
Crickets.
I did a lot of gut-checking about whether I was insane or not, and I came to the conclusion it was just a halfhearted effort to sell a bodystyle (small sedan/hatch) that was already on the way out. The flaw was simply that GM didn’t engineer it to make their popular, thirsty vehicles better. They engineered it to make a compact car stellar.
A bigger, better piece of a pie that nobody wanted.
Now the industry gets a do-over!
I remembered why EREV bugs me, I always was calling those Series-Hybrid, vs Parallel-hybrid like a Prius. I get it, it’s not catchy, EREV is as noted, snappier, and also denotes more EV than Hybrid.
Also I have an averse reaction to acronyms in general, I’m asking my doctor if there’s a product right for me on that.
For the vehicles, I feel like the bigger they are, the less adding a lot of batteries helps, and just add to the heaviness and they won’t recoup their environmental impact in a reasonable amount of miles.
Maverick and Bronco Sport should have plug-in options, they already do it with the Escape so should be not terrible to do.
Regular Bronco should have a hybrid to at least get better mpg, same with Explorer/Edge/Excursion/F150, at least hybrid the big things.
Kill the Lightning, it made it’s point, but so inefficient. It’s gets the equivalent of 60mpg on the highway, that’s half a regular Compact/Midsize EV. Just do the hybrid, maybe an EREV but probably just do regular plug-in. Batteries don’t come from nothing.
Maybe a hybrid diesel F150? It already gets 30mpg on the highway, maybe a hybrid diesel could get 30 city/30 highway.
I recommend an OTC product called DILLIGAF for your acronym aversion.
Side effects may include side eye, heavy sighs, general fatigue…
EREV is a sort of Series Hybrid, but a big step further. There are series hybrids you can buy – Honda and Nissan hybrids (basically) work this way. But, EREV is definitely a distinction, because they’re not meant to be hybrids, they’re meant to be electric. You have an electric vehicle, until which point your battery runs out of charge, then you have a series hybrid backup.
Yeah, I was into hybrids before they were cool, too. 🙂
I would love a series-hybrid/EREV F250 with an 8′ bed but even if that ever exists, I doubt I’ll be able to afford one while I’m still young enough to do stuff that requires a tow vehicle.
I’d be hard pressed to drive a ford for free, and you want me to be excited about. A 90K truck? I’ll stick to the automakers that make actual cars that don’t need a wire
Everything should be PHEV on the low trim option, EREV on the high trim. The Mustang might be a different story for packaging reasons. But squeezing in a small pack or ultracapacitor stack to add performance and incidental efficiency could be a thing, I guess.
Honestly, though, most of Ford’s lineup leaves me yawning. I like the Maverick, but Ford isn’t doing enough with it, or building enough of them. There needs to be a street truck variant, a PHEV, etc. etc. The Bronco is fine, I guess, but the V6 versions seem hard to work on and beset with quality problems. The trucks are trucks, oversized, over-featured, overpriced, and overcomplicated. The crossovers are just more interchangeable people-pods. Meh. The Mach-E is fine, though the efficiency could be better and the trunk is puny. EREV versions of the Transit would be good, and bringing back an EREV Transit Connect would be pretty sweet, especially if they sacked up and did an ST trim, which they really should have done last time.
After living with a PHEV, I can’t see wanting another ICE-only vehicle for a daily driver. The smoothness and instant torque from an electric drivetrain is just so much more pleasant for everyday car things.
If the Ramcharger has both an ICE and EREV version available, why would anyone buy a BEV version? I have a suspicion that delay is going to turn into a full-on cancellation at some point.
If the manufacturers had asked themselves this question a few years ago they would have wasted far fewer dollars on BEV trucks.
Can’t say I’m excited at all about yet another pig-ugly 25 foot long $90k pickup with a chest-height front bumper, to be honest with you.
Personally I think Ford’s next product should be a Bronco with IRS. You already got an IFS Dana 44 in it, put one in the back, give it optional height adjustable air suspension, tada you have a new Land Rover LR3/LR4.
But why? Who’s going to buy that?
Yeah, that seems to be the answer to a question nobody asked.
My parents for one. Height adjustable air suspension is great (with independent suspension front and rear). At slow speeds you can max out your ground clearance, at high speeds it lowers for better aerodynamics, when loading and unloading you can lower it to make it easier as well, which old people and old doggos really appreciate.
I still fail to see the appeal here. Seems you’re adding a lot of complexity for minimal gains. On top of that, older people aren’t really the targeted audience of a boxy off-roader with either a cloth or glorified cardboard top.
Better MPG, Better ride, Better Handling, Better Soft-Roading performance, Better loading and unloading, etc.
Imagine pressing a button and getting 3+ inches of ground clearance over normal. It makes a difference.
I can’t think of a single vehicle in the Ford and Lincoln lineup that should be ICE-only, literally everything would benefit from some sort of ICE/electric combo. Whether that’s in the form of hybrid, PHEV, or EREV is the question
Manuals don’t really work well with hybrids so as long as the Mustang and Bronco offer a manual, they need an ICE option. I do agree though that a hybrid Bronco makes sense, I do not think that a hybrid in the traditional Mustang would go well right now. But I wouldn’t mind being proven wrong.
I think most people buying a 4 cylinder automatic Mustang would be thrilled if it also got 40mpg
Honda somehow made a manual work fine in the Insight 25 years ago
That was before autos got so much more efficient. The Civic hybrid had a manual too, but now with the electric motors often being inside the transmission, it doesn’t seem like it would work as well. But you’re not wrong, especially in the convertible auto mustangs. I was thinking the weight penalty would be too significant, but people buying those are just out to cruise and mow people down on the way out of cars and coffee, not looking to set lap times so I recant my statement. All Fords should have at minimum a hybrid option.
Honda did a series hybrid manual Insight. Worked fine. Do a series hybrid to boost the low end torque before the ICE gets into its powerband. Put the windings around the flywheel and magnets into the flywheel. Add a replaceable friction surface. With the advances in motor tech since the 1990’s, this should hopefully be easy. Then run a cooling loop for the stationary windings if needed. Bam, done.
I am very split on the idea of an EREV Superduty.
A nicely equipped F250 Diesel costs around 100K now, and making it an EREV would likely add 20% to the cost. This is assuming they use the Diesel as the generator. If they used the Godzilla 7.3 as the generator, kept pricing and capacity around where the Diesel currently lives, it could be a nice upgrade; especially for fleet usage. Heck, it would likely cost less in maintenance versus the diesel too!
The best thing they could do is what they did to test F-150 aluminum bodies: give them to the trades (especially mines, as that is a rough environment) to see how it goes. If it works out, maybe it’s viable).
The Maverick and F-150 would make awesome EREV options, or at least plug in hybrids.
Why would they need to use huge engines in the EREV version?
they wouldn’t NEED to. You can meet most peak kw demands by combining the ICE generator and battery output. So you don’t have to oversize the motor like pure ICE.
But they’re always going to run into the “I have to climb a 15% grade for 2 hours with full towing load” crowd. As long as their response is “then stick to ICE” then they can use a much smaller generator in an EREV for the other 99%. Which would help to keep costs and weight down, and efficiency up.
What is the point of a Super Duty if it can’t climb a 15 percent grade for 2 hours with a full load? The answer is F150 at that point.
I don’t think there is any vehicle in the market that would handle a 15 percent grade for 2 hours with a full load. But any EREV will for sure be able to complete the SAE Davis Dam test which is about a 6% grade for 11.4 miles with full load and at 100 degrees f with A/C on full blast without dropping below 40 MPH at any point.
I mentioned that silly 15% stuff more as a placeholder for the top 1% of extreme use cases for even an F250. Hopefully Rippstik understood that and was doing the same.
Will it be able to complete it on the range-extender alone?
That question seems to be the crux of the matter here.
I would argue that a tow rating that isn’t duplicable in every state of battery charge is not legitimate.
The point is the other 99% of use cases. Most people use non-commercial 250s even though a 150 would suffice. Because they like them. They’d probably love to plug in at the campsite after dropping off the travel trailer instead of getting 15 MPG driving around town all week.
My FIL has a Super Duty that I have used (as a truck) more than him in the 13 years of ownership, and I used it once. That crowd makes no sense, but unfortunately they have a voice that is being listened to.
Ford can’t release a toothbrush without 5 recalls these days. Hard pass on the first 2, maybe 3 model years of this tech being implemented.
If they can get it down, without it being super expensive, then great! I see lots of cost, lots of complexity and lots of failure points from my view though.
It’s going to be pricey. No way in heck is the industry going to convert the high margin full size truck and SUV market into something not high margin. Unless the technology and material becomes super cheap, affordability isn’t even going to be considered.
I’m still amazed (not surprised) the degree to which the market has accepted the high prices of large trucks and SUVs. All I see is fully amortized development costs and printing their own money. EREVs will take that down a notch.
I realize I’m weird. I also don’t buy soft drinks in restaurants. I can’t stomach the margin just on principle.
I read somewhere, maybe here, that they are starting to pump out the low trims now because those platinums aren’t selling like they used to. Hopefully the trend goes further and they just make simpler, affordable products from the start.