That’s right, folks, it’s another Monday morning here at The Morning Dump and another morning that confirms my belief that 2024 is the “Year of the Hybrid.” Should we get shirts made? Am I the only person who would wear that shirt? Probably.
While Kia’s EV portfolio has expanded with a wide range of extremely appealing electric cars, the reality is the market needs and wants cheaper EVs and hybrids right now. Kia’s answer? More hybrids! And, also, a few more EVs.
The slowdown in the EV market is also hitting Tesla, which announced it would cut 10% of its workforce in the face of demand uncertainty and a price war. While Stellantis is less exposed to fluctuations in EV demand, it’s facing price pressure like everyone else. One of the company’s tactics has been to squeeze suppliers. Those suppliers have squeezed back and stopped shipping the company parts.
And, finally, both Cadillac and Ford are facing recall troubles.
Kia Going Even More Hybrid
It’s not that Kia doesn’t make hybrids. Kia makes hybrids.
Right now in North America, you can get the Niro as a hybrid or a nice PHEV. The same goes for the Sportage and Sorento, which are both available as either a hybrid or PHEV. The Kia Carnival, too, is getting a hybrid version this summer.
Those are popular cars. What Kia lacks are hybrid sedans, at least in the United States, and a big hybrid Kia Telluride. That might be changing.
Kia did its big annual investor day conference and Kia President/CEO Ho Sung Song let everyone know that more hybrids are coming.
To respond agilely to changes in the market environment, Kia will secure maximum flexibility in its line-up operation. Kia plans to strengthen its hybrid electric vehicle (HEV) line-up from six models in 2024 to nine models by 2028, with HEV powertrain options offered for most of the brand’s major models.
Cool Cool Cool. Kia does not say in its presentation which vehicles those might be, but I have some guesses. In the United States, the fact that Toyota is going all hybrid with the Camry and Honda is having success as well with hybrid sedans makes me think a K4 hybrid makes sense and that Kia will bring its K5 hybrid to the United States. Excusing future models, in the United States that only leaves the Soul and Telluride.
I’m not sure there’s going to be a next-generation Soul, though that might make sense. I think Telluride is the most likely next SUV candidate and there’s an interview with Kia VP of Marketing Russell Wager from the Chicago Auto Show with Alissa Priddle from MotorTrend that hints at the possibility:
There are no plans to add a Telluride hybrid at this time, Wager says. It is doable, but not seen as necessary given the addition of the EV9. Kia will monitor how well the EV9 does; it would be a factor in deciding to add a hybrid option on the Telluride in the future.
It seems like a good time now, although the EV9 is seemingly doing well.
That isn’t to say the company is halting EV plans:
In response to EV market changes, Kia will launch six EV models by 2026, starting with the upcoming EV3 in 2024, followed by EV2, EV4, and EV5 in major markets, including the U.S., Europe, and South Korea. In emerging markets, the company will deploy two region-specified EVs, such as Carens EV for the Indian market.
I can’t wait to see a Kia EV2.
Tesla Cuts More Than 10% Of Its Global Workforce
The news of Tesla’s potentially failing Cybertruck accelerator pedal isn’t going to help perceptions of the vehicle, but it’s probably not as big of a deal as, say, a crippling price war in China or EV demand that’s starting to stall out a little.
Therefore, Tesla is reportedly cutting at least 10% of its global staff to try and save money according to reporting from Reuters.
Some staff in California and Texas have already been notified of layoffs, a source familiar with the matter told Reuters, declining to be named due to the sensitivity of the subject.
“As we prepare the company for our next phase of growth, it is extremely important to look at every aspect of the company for cost reductions and increasing productivity,” Tesla CEO Elon Musk said in the memo.“As part of this effort, we have done a thorough review of the organization and made the difficult decision to reduce our headcount by more than 10% globally,” it said.
For those expecting demand for EVs to suddenly roar back, this isn’t a great sign. In other news, popular and well-liked Tesla exec Drew Baglino resigned from the company, saying:
I made the difficult decision to move on from Tesla after 18 years yesterday. I am so thankful to have worked with and learned from the countless incredibly talented people at Tesla over the years.
I loved tackling nearly ???? every problem we solved as a team and feel gratified…
— Drew Baglino (@baglino) April 15, 2024
Good use of an emoji in a resignation tweet.
Stellantis Puts Hard Squeeze On Suppliers, Suppliers Squeeze Back
Our Boy/Stellantis CEO Carlos Tavares (pictured, center) is back at it. In spite of pulling in record profits, Stellantis has been trying to squeeze as much out of its suppliers. According to Automotive News, it’s getting narsty:
At least two Tier 1 suppliers have stopped shipping parts to the automaker in the past few weeks because of pricing disputes, according to lawsuits in Oakland County Circuit Court filed by FCA, the former name of Stellantis, whose North American headquarters is near Detroit in Auburn Hills, Mich.
That’s not good.
At the same time, many suppliers are still looking to be made whole by automakers after three years of production and supply chain volatility ate away profit margins that haven’t fully recovered. While automakers brought in record profits, parts makers bore the brunt of financial impact from the supply chain crisis.
At Stellantis, the conversation has turned from cost relief to cost savings as “the automotive industry continues to face challenges that put its long-term sustainability at risk.”
In one of the lawsuits, a judge basically made a supplier keep shipping parts to Stellantis. In another lawsuit, a judge said it was ok for a supplier to slow down shipments until Stellantis paid the money it agreed to give the supplier for cost adjustments.
The resulting delays have cost Stellantis millions of dollars, according to Stellantis, and basically make the company look like a bad partner.
Ford And Cadillac Under Investigation By The Feds
Ford has a gas leak issue related to cracked fuel injectors in certain Escapes and Bronco Sports with the 1.5-liter three-cylinder engine. If something fails it could result in a fire. Ford issued a recall and has been trying to add a little tube to send fuel away from hot surfaces and revise some software to try and avoid its cars catching on fire.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration isn’t buying it.
But the U.S. said Friday that Ford’s fix lets fuel drain from a cylinder head hole to the ground below the vehicles. “The recall remedy does not include replacement of the cracked fuel injector,” the agency said.
That’s a real MacGruber solution.
NHTSA is also investigating GM over brake system failures with the Cadillac Lyriq:
General Motors said the electronic brake control module has an internal spindle that can fracture during an anti-lock braking system event, according to a NHTSA preliminary evaluation report.
So maybe don’t autocross the Lyriq just yet.
What I’m Listening To While Writing TMD
I had to use dad voice to get my daughter out of the house this morning and she was grumpy with me. I knew playing this song would make her feel better and I was correct.
The Big Question
Name some vehicles, from any automaker, that shouldn’t be a hybrid.
Cracked fuel injectors in certain Escapes and Bronco Sports with the 1.5-liter three-cylinder engine.
Doesn’t inspire much confidence in the 3cyl turbos being utilized in a growing number of vehicles. Has any automaker cracked the code on how to make a long lasting and reliable 3cyl Turbo?
AND they are trying to fucking bondo it instead of replace it with something that works.
In the past, 3-cylinders were chosen with the goal to be as cheap as possible, while now they’re used to meet the 0.5 liter per cylinder ‘rule’ for efficiency as opposed to a 1.5T 4-cylinder. This slight upgrade in cost class might lead to better quality.
For example, the 3-cylinder 1.5L dynamic force engines used in Corollas and Yarises outside of the US. The Nissan VC Turbo in the Rogue might become decently reliable once they’ve figured out the spun bearings issue (which they’re working on with several secret updates preceding an NHTSA investigation).
Yes, the Japanese market had reliable turbo 3-cylinders for several decades already.
Hybridize all the things!
With the exception of the “lightness/simplicity at all costs” vehicles, I can’t think of anything that wouldn’t benefit from at least a little tickle from the hybrid fairies. If Caterham starts talking about a hybrid model, I might ask some pointed questions. Beyond that, anything from the simplest commuter, to the biggest rig, or the sportiest sports car could benefit from a little electric bump.
Muscle cars. The sole reason they still exist is to make big V-8 noises. Call it something else if you want to make a sporty HEV/BEV
There’s been rumors/mules of a Palisade hybrid, and Kia has the Carnival hybrid coming, so I could see it being a balancing act for supply across those models. Or a Telluride hybrid could indeed be coming and of course they’re going to say it’s not because every outlet will run with the news and they’re not going to say anything that will make people hold off instead of buying one sooner.
Not having had a K5 hybrid so far seems like an odd omission since there were hybrids in the last two gens of Optima, but it would make sense if the K5 sticks around in general. K4 seems like a shoo-in. Seltos would make sense to go hybrid as well, although that seems close to the Niro. Those could be 3, but it assumes they’re not counting said Carnival hybrid. And it’s possible at least one is actually a plug-in variant instead as it sounds like they’re counting the HEV and PHEV variants of Niro, Sportage, and Sorento separately.
“Well, we got bad injectors. Lets just dump the fuel on the ground and let the customer pick up the cost for new ones.”
Really, Ford? Really? Your solution is to not fix the injectors, but to dump the fuel on the ground?
I could have sworn you would have been listening to No Doubt or Sublime this morning. If you haven’t seen it yet, check out their Coachella sets from the weekend.
That’s because they don’t practice Santeria.
Motorcycles probably shouldn’t be hybrid, a Honda shadow 750 gets over 50mpg, a Ninja 300 gets 70mpg, that’s fairly good already.
Agree with others that the larger vehicles like the Telluride, or things like the Santa Cruz should be hybrid, leaving money on the table with the 2nd one.
What about a range extended adventure bike? It is the only situation it would make sense to me – but I imagine some advancements would need to be made to allow the weight to be worth it.
Like an EV with a range extender? I’m not sure the packaging would work out as much, to have battery/engine/generator/motor all fitting ok. Maybe with hub motors? But would definitely want at least 2 hubs for decent power.
“As we prepare the company for our next phase of growth…(we’ve decided)…to reduce our headcount by more than 10% globally”
That’s not growth, Stupid.
Its “growth” when those folks later return to the payroll.
Or it’s just Narcissist Billionaire Corporate Speak.
Why not both?
I’ve seen this meme – I already know the ending.
I’m going to do my part for the environment and convert to a plug-in hybrid for my intra-neighborhood transportation. The use of electricity is going to take over for my pedal power. Cuts down on CO2 and methane emissions. The environment can thank me later.
Hmm. Not making the Telluride a hybrid is leaving sales to Toyota. That car guzzles gas like frat boys guzzle beer. It would be an easy upsell. Of course it would need to be EPA tested. That costs money.
It also could be that they’re wanting to push EV9 sales by offering two identical vehicles. One just happens to be much cheaper to run.
As a non-frat beer guzzler I think I may be offended.
No offense intended! Nothing wrong with guzzling beer responsibly and in moderation.
Yeah I think they’d print money with a fuel efficient Telluride. Not only because it was popular on its own, but because Toyota can’t keep a Highlander or Grand Highlander hybrid on the lot.
Vehicles that shouldn’t be hybrids:
Any vehicle where you “must” have an automatic transmission. By that I mean that Hybrids shouldn’t have automatic transmissions, they should have planetary e-CVTS or be range extended BEVs, so if you can’t make a hybrid without an automatic transmission, then you shouldn’t make said hybrid.
I hope you like chicken, cause you just won some!!!!
Ngl, you had me going in the first half.
Counterpoint: vehicles that need to do light towing.
I absolutely agree that conventional automatics are suboptimal for hybrids and kind of miss the point, but as of right now, hybrid transmissions have low or no tow ratings.
I’ll address 2 non-convention-automatic hybrid approaches:
1) Toyota/Ford planetary eCVT: In current applications, they are rated up to 1750lb. If the limiting factor is the strength of the planetary gears, then that’s a fairly simple upgrade. However, if it’s due to the electric motors (which control the gear ratio by running constantly) overheating then adding more cooling might be a more complex/expensive problem. The RAV4 Prime gets 2500lb by using eAWD (a separate motor for the rear axle) which circumvents the (main) transmission.
2) Honda/Mitsubishi parallel hybrid (engine solely powers a generator which is electrically connected to the traction motor): In current applications, they’re rated up to 1500lb for the Outlander PHEV, and 1000lb for the CR-V. The main issue here is cooling the motors as converting angular energy to electricity and back is less efficient, which results in energy lost as heat. The CR-V addresses this by having 2 direct drive gears (only 1 on the Accord) to take the load off the motors at medium to high speeds, but the rating is still only 1000lb vs the 1.5T’s 1500lb.
Things like the F-150 hybrid are best with conventional automatics until a more efficient transmission with cooling for towing capacity is made. It’ll be interesting to see what the Ram plug-in hybrid goes with, as this is likely one of the biggest engineering challenges for that vehicle.
The Maverick Hybrid can tow 2000lbs, it uses a eCVT. eAWD is a good help. Speaking of both the Maverick Hybrid and the RAV4 Hybrid Toyota making a ute based off the RAV4 Hybrid drivetrain makes a lot of sense.
If cooling is the issue it wouldn’t be that hard to fix, The Maverick Hybrid already has a liquid cooled battery pack.
I’d argue that a F-150 Lightning with a little ICE range extender makes more sense as a hybrid than the current F-150 Hybrid. That being said Ford needs to make the Lightning an actual F-150 by offering more than one bed, cab, and seating configuration.
I should clarify that the cooling issues I mentioned was for the motors in the transmission, which AFAIK are air cooled in many cases (but I could be wrong). This can be remedied by adding liquid cooling and/or a bigger transmission cooler, but that adds cost and perhaps drag (running the coolant pump and aero drag, which is mitigated by grille shutters).
I understood. Add more transmission oil, make the motors oil cooled, add an oil cooler or enlarge the current one (if one does exist).
Toyota Highlander, Grand Highlander, and Sienna hybrids are all rated at 3500 lbs using the planetary eCVT system, even only in fwd guise.
In fact, that same transmission is what’s in the RAV4 prime, so 2500 lbs for the RAV4 prime is significantly underrated. There’s a good towing test video of the standard RAV4 hybrid (with the smaller drive motor) towing about 2000lbs in the mountains, and they track all temps on a laptop. It does great. That Toyota system is fantastic.
I completely forgot about the bigger Toyota N/A hybrids as I thought they were exclusively the hybrid MAXs, which have 6ATs. Toyota’s N/A hybrids are indeed great, but the turbo Max hybrids don’t get great mileage I’ve heard. At least they’re powerful and have decent tow ratings (at least 5000lb on the Grand Highlander).
My primary complaint with hybrids is that they make the powertrain more complex, leading to more potential failure points. I had somewhat written them off until I learned from a commenter that the Toyota eCVT wasn’t really a “cvt” in the sense we’re used to and actually results in a system with fewer moving parts.
Since then the n/a Toyota hybrids have jumped to the top of my list and I basically ignore any of the light duty hybrids that have a turbo and a conventional automatic. Sounds like a potential reliability nightmare.
I love Honda’s system but I’m not sure it can quite be scaled up for towing which is likely why they haven’t tried. And I regularly get 36 mpg from my six speed 2.0 liter n/a mazda3, which is way more fun to drive.
I’m thinking Toyota might have done it right with the max, but even great engineering doesn’t automatically overcome higher complexity. Luckily I don’t need anything more than about 2k towing for my “camping vehicle”, so a Highlander or sienna hybrid would be much more than I need and still get 36 mpg.
Toyota hybrids seem to be just as reliable as their non-hybrids, even with “extra parts”.
Man, imagine if they gave us a hybrid Stinger. You can use that low end electric torque around town and still get a great V6 for highway cruising
Or just the turbo 4 cylinder. 300 hp is plenty and you can get to the V6 performance as long as the EV engine adds at least a net 70 hp.
The stinger doesn’t exist anymore.
I know, that’s why I said “imagine”
Any Jaguar/Land Rover, they need to be less complex, not the opposite.
If they were to use e-CVTs or become range extended BEVs the would become less complex, though the Brits don’t have a good reputation when it comes to electronics.
Hybrid everything.
I’d buy a PHEV GR86 even if it only had an EV range of 10 miles. Tiny battery so still fun to drive, but no more buying fuel when I pop to the shops. Also good for the climate.
I’d definitely buy a hybrid MR2 if it meant finally getting a new MR2.
Less destructive for the climate is not necessarily good for the climate. Although it will probably improve inner city air quality if just about everyone can use their battery capacity while driving short distances in town.
This is the aspect of ‘the year of hybrids’ which I’m not sure about being so enthusiastic about. If everyone continues to use gas/petrol for the majority of their driving, the only real winners are those poor neglected gas companies. The amount of climate warming exhaust gases does not get reduced anything like as much as is required to avert increased global temperatures, so the path to even more ‘freak’ weather events just continues.
But hey! At least you’ll be able to hear the wondrous roar of a V8 while trying to outrun the ‘freak’ hurricane/flood/wildfire/snowstorm/drought.
Sorry I used “good” when I meant “less bad”.
Obviously the best power source in environment terms is cutting a hole in the floor and using you feet, right Fred? Although still some CO2 generated, and that motor ideals all the time.
When you have a handful of OEMs buying from thousands of suppliers, the leverage situation is dogshit for the supply base. The last several years have been so volatile that a lot of auto suppliers are basically saying, “give me a price increase or I’ll stop shipping.” They are too desperate to care if customers sue. The smaller ones will just shut down operations, and the larger ones are willing to pay the legal fees to avoid shipping at the lower prices as long as possible. Supply chain is no fun anymore.
Management: “Bad news everyone, we’ve done a thorough analysis and we’re going to have to make the company smaller by…”
Workers who’ve been through this before: “Stop. Is the next thing you’re about to say a number or percentage in a multiple of 10?”
Management: “Yes”
Workers: “did you really do a thorough analysis or did you want a round number in your press release?”
Management: “erm…”
In their defense, first pass from leadership probably used 420.
We’re going to retain 69% of staff…
Sorry, but this whole thing is actually turning into a “96”.
Well, I don’t think you’d want to shove a hybrid drivetrain in something truly tiny like a Renault Twizy or a Microlino.
That’s where (I think) EVs shine. Normal-sized and large EVs require more weight for their batteries. This increases the wear of tires and brakes (increasing their eco-footprint). But, if it is a small EV, I would think this would not be as big of a problem.
When it comes to where range truly is an issue, long-distance highway travel, drag coefficient and size(frontal area) are both far more important than mass.
Sedans and sports cars are the easiest type of conventional vehicles to maximize the amount of range deliverable per unit of battery weight. Getting 6-8 miles per kWh on the highway is very doable in a comfortable midsized or larger vehicle where the occupants can stretch themselves out and have plenty of room if the vehicle is properly streamlined. Many small cars and even microcars that are light but which have craptacular aero are getting 4-5 miles per kWh, about the same as heavier and much large vehicles that have only slightly better overall aero, although the Aptera with its aero slipperiness shows 10 miles per kWh is very doable.
Of course, a single-seater microcar or tandem two-seater microcar with minimal frontal area has the most potential to minimize battery cost for a given amount of range, but will not be as practical of a vehicle. You can get upwards of 50 miles per kWh at highway speeds in a vehicle designed for it at the expense of many other things.
Hybrids have proven to be just as if not better for the environment than EVs. So I think Kia’s move to all hybrid or electric, is smart considering the benefits of a hybrid drivetrain vs both other major types. I think It will please the eco buffs and people who don’t subscribe to the “EVs are always better” idea (like me).
Now for the even bigger question…
How did Matt find out about Potato Dog?
Potato Dog was his nickname on the streets.
But why isn’t the plan to hybridize the Telluride? That thing is an absolute gas hog. So are pretty much all family haulers other than Toyotas. Honda has no plans for a hybrid Pilot, which is also a gas hog. The Odyssey has no hybrid. There’s no hybrid Explorer. There’s no hybrid Traverse/whatever its GMC twin is. The BOF haulers all chug gas as well, even when they’re hybridized like the Sequoia.
This is a space in the market that’s aching for hybrids. There is literally 0 reason not to offer them. No one is driving them hard. Outside of enthusiasts, who are a tiny chunk of buyers, bigger NA engines aren’t a selling point anymore…although I guess Truck Dudes still care too.
Haulers literally exist to move multiple people and their stuff from point A to B as comfortably as possible. No one buying one is going to be like “better gas mileage? No thanks!”. If you need any evidence of this try to find a hybrid Highlander or Sienna right now. You can’t, and if you do someone out there is willing to outbid you for it. Every single one other than the barest spec versions in my area has a four figure markup right now and if you’re not willing to pay it you’ll be waiting months or even years.
Meanwhile every Pilot in my area has money on the hood. Most Tellurides do too, and there are hundreds of them sitting on lots. Times are changing rapidly. Climate change is real as hell and even staunch deniers are coming around. For lack of a more eloquent way to put it, it’s just not cool to drive around gas hogs anymore.
Hybridize all these damn things yesterday. There are millions and millions of them on the road. IMHO it’s a better use of resources than hybrid compact cars and the like. Those may be more efficient overall but they’re a drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of things.
My tiny retired empty nest mom didn’t get the memo. At least it’s not the F-150 King Ranch anymore?
I have 3 reasons for why there aren’t more hybrids in these segments:
1) Big SUV/CUV buyers expect poor gas mileage/aren’t sensitive enough to fuel economy (until gas prices go up and they cry and whine for subsidies)
2) These vehicles are expected to have decent tow ratings, which makes it harder to design a good hybrid around
3) It’s harder for draggier vehicles to benefit from hybridization. Sedans, and to a lesser extent compact crossovers, gain both city and highway MPGs from hybridization. Most fuel economy is gained by turning the engine off at low loads and deploying battery energy instead. When a vehicle is draggier and heavier, the electric side of the hybrid needs to be much more powerful to be able to use this strategy. Often, this ends up with the electric system going completely unused on the highway, leading to gains only in the city and nothing on the highway. See F-150 4×4 3.5TT vs 3.5TT hybrid, 18/23 vs 24/24 mpg.
This isn’t to say these vehicles aren’t worth hybridizing, even for only city mpg gains, but there are challenges in the way.
I wager the people who say they need to tow outnumber the people who do need to tow by one or two orders of magnitude.
So if it’s taken an EV transition mandate to finally get the needle moving on hybrids; what next gen propulsion technology will it take to move the needle on EV’s.
It will take batteries with real densities
Or just a decent package that people can afford.
Mr. Fusion
Hell yes! Would be a good way to dispose of my dog’s shit.
Two words, PROTON ENGINE !!! Screw battery EV’s, just a bad idea stop gap solution.
Or hybrids. Some hybrids are more environment-friendly than EVs!
Obvious answer is flying cars.
The thing I don’t want to see is half-assed hybrids. If they are going to make a really inefficient (but more expensive) hybrid (Stellantis), really poorly packaged one (Ford Fusion plug-in), or other baffling decisions that make the hybrid significantly worse than the gasser, then they should probably create a clean-sheet hybrid instead of a hybrid version of a model.
Like Toyota’s Prius. The hugely successful 4-door we all know and love.
Exactly, or just buy a Prius.
The Camry, Corolla, and Accord hybrids are just the regular sedans with hybrid drive trains and they do a fine job of being a super fuel efficient version of the car. \
So while the Prius has its advantages, it isn’t required to be a good hybrid.
Those are not “Clean sheet” Hybrids, we were giving an example to Drews’s comment.
FWIW, the Fusion Energi (lol) was using old technology that meant the battery had poor energy density, similar to the 1st gen Nissan Leaf. It also didn’t sacrifice much gas tank capacity to make space for the battery. I feel like a modern Fusion would handle this far better.
A modern Fusion could absolutely handle it better. The Energi could have easily done it better, and probably would have done better if it got a second generation. That said, companies can still half-ass, and I’m just begging them not to.
Don’t hybridize anything available with a manual transmission, so … pretty much everything can be a hybrid.
There are some in Europe, and they make for actually usable and responsive auto start/stop systems.
Vehicles that shouldn’t be a hybrid? The Camaro SS, just let it stay dead if it isn’t coming back with a naturally aspirated V8 and a manual, it would not be improved upon with a hybrid system.
The Viper, same as the Camaro SS, but with a V10.
911 GT3.
Miata.
(Really any small to smallish sportscars with N/A motors)
Contrary: All semi-trucks and HD diesel trucks NEED to be hybrids, like yesterday. Imagine using the engine braking and brake-braking to recharge the batteries to then re-spool the turbos and an electric motor for low speed maneuvering
I mostly agree, however if the only options going forward are turbo engines or NA ICE-Hybrids, I’m taking the hybrid option 100% of the time, as a power bump added onto an ICE engine sounds an awful lot more compelling than a lower-revving, muffled, less characterful engine.
For example: Lamborghini Revuelto. Still an absolute screamer of an NA V12, but with some hybrid bits tacked on to keep it in compliance. Also Bugatti V-16 Hybrid, which should be a much spicier sounding powertrain than any Veyron or Chiron.
With that said, nothing will beat the purity of an ICE/RWD/NA/Manual sports car
This is pretty much exactly my thoughts on it too.
For sports cars:
NA>hybrid NA>turbo>turbo hybrid>>>>>EV
On the flip side, the Caterham Project V EV sports concept they debuted last year is really interesting, not that I would necessarily buy one, but as an exploration of what a true ground up EV Sports platform could be. 2600~ pound curb weight in this day and age would beat all other sports chassis save for Miata and 86/BRZ.
I don’t think it could ever beat out the most iconic sports cars, but I could see an EV with a crazy talkative motor and low weight being a compelling sports car option compared to something like a 4-cylinder auto BMW Z4
I guess I’ll believe it when I see it actually on sale.
Even for a sports car, ~200 miles of EPA range is pushing it IMO.
Agreed, I’m certainly skeptical a company the size of Caterham can just develop a lightweight EV Sports car on their own, and 200 miles of range for the very high 5-figures will be a tough sell, but if the tradeoff is an extra 100 miles of range for 3-400 pounds, I’ll take lightweight all day.
As much as it pains me to say, there is zero chance another V10 Viper is being made.
I don’t have enough confidence in Stellantis not to dust off the name for something totally different in the future, but the development path of the LA-based V10 ended with the Gen V.
That’s why I said to just let it stay dead
I hope so too.
Appears the Viper can live on as an off-road vehicle.
Call me lame or closed minded if you have to, but that thing is an abomination that should never see the light of day and no I do not pretend to be rational about this whatsoever.
V10’s automotive hot take of the day.
Yeah this is one that I forgot when the question was asked, but IMO every 911 Dakar-esque off road/lifted sports car is stupid.
I love the Camaro but I agree. If it can’t live on as an NA V8 it should be allowed to rest in peace. If it comes back as an electric crossover I’m going to lose it. Hell, the Charger going mostly EV is a huge bummer but at least there’s still a straight 6.
Counterpoint:
Keep the Corvette as non-EV, Camaro as EV. LOL, what am I thinking, that’s insane.
Viper Mach E
{ resists deep urge to punch the computer }
Dodge (sheepishly pointing finger): “Ford started it.”
FORD IS ALSO WRONG
For my own sanity, I have to think Ralph would throw his body in front of that for as long as he works there, but once he leaves or retires, look out.
Can’t spell VipEr without EV!
I don’t think semis and larger pickup trucks would really benefit from hybridization unless the batteries were huge (given current battery technology).
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but hybrids mostly work on their ICE alone on highways, right? That alone makes me think they’re nearly pointless for semis.
But for bigger vehicles, I think it just takes too much energy to get them moving that you’re really not going to recover significantly while braking or going downhill.
Simultaneously, who’s willing to lose cargo space or other functionality to the batteries themselves? There has to be a reason no one is making hybrid full-size vans.
I think there are a couple reasons for this that are more important than batteries taking a bit of cargo room.
-Cargo vans are redesigned on timescales that make the Dodge Challenger and Nissan Z look like spring chickens. You can still buy a Chevy Express that dates to the first Clinton administration, or a Ford E-series cutaway that went on sale while the USSR was still a going concern. Even the Transit/Promaster type European vans have been around a while mostly unchanged.
-Van buyers are heavily weighted toward fleets. A consumer might buy a hybrid because they care about the environment, but a fleet is going to look very carefully at that upfront cost and payback period. Similarly, maintenance of these fleets is something they look at very closely. Simple, proven, reliable powertrains might be worth spending more on fuel if they lead (or are even perceived to lead) to more uptime.
That’s why they should be hybrids and not EV’s you don’t need a huge battery for low speed maneuvering or turbo boosting to increase efficiencies, and cutting out the diesel emissions from loitering and parking lot (loading docks too) maneuvering would really benefit the people who have to work around them
Once again though, the batteries would have to be huge to maintain heat or A/C for long times spent idling. I don’t think it’s doable without MAJOR overhauls.
Depends. A window mounted A/C unit uses between 500-1500W of power so I’d guess an electric compressor in a truck would typically use 1-3 kW of power depending on conditions. Existing hybrid trucks use batteries ranging from 2-10kWh so enough to run the hypothetical A/C for an hour to a few hours or so without the engine. That’s not bad, especially if the truck can run it on shore power while docked.
Given the electric motor assist the ICE can be smaller which means less fuel and less emissions at idle so its still a win. A smaller ICE will still provide ample heat for free.
The F-150 Hybrid battery fits behind the rear seat and adds a surprising amount of power and efficiency. I’m not sure where the trade-off is for a PHEV, but any truck doing a lot of stop and go tasking will benefit. Just capturing more of the energy on downhill stretches for an uphill boost would benefit larger trucks mileage and decrease braking stress.
Semis and big pick ups could absolutely benefit from hybridization, even without massive batteries. These heavier vehicles require far more braking force, which could easily be transferred into a small battery via regen and used to aid acceleration and reduce load on the engine at cruise. You won’t be getting them to run on EV-only mode without a massive battery, but there’s plenty of room for load sharing and torque flattening.
Just look at the proposal by Range Energy or Pebble for their electric assist semi trailers and RVs to see how it could work.
Some really powerful supercars are hybrids. I forget the name but there is one with a combined HP of over 1000HP. (Not to mention the Acura NSX) I think 1000 HP would be plenty for a Camaro, don’t you?
Side note: what the heck is that Camaro SUV!? Ford did the same thing with the Mustang EV, then immediately realized they screwed up and started work on the 2024 Mustang.
I have ZERO desire for 1,000 hp in anything.
I was trying to make a point, not to be realistic. I think a muscle car should not go over 600-700 at MOST.
On the contrary, semi-trucks are one of the applications that benefit from hybridization the least. (Credentials – I was formerly a powertrain engineer for a US class 8 truck manufacturer and was the project manager for (the first part of) their SuperTruck2 DOE-funded advanced R&D program.)
Highway tractors spend 80%+ of their operating time, well, on the highway, which is broadly a steady-state operating regime, not speeding up and slowing down (which is where hybrids do most of their good, efficiency wise). At highway speeds the vast majority of a truck’s power output goes to overcome what is known in engineering as irreversible losses – aerodynamic drag and rolling resistance from the tires/axles, etc. Energy spent doing that is just gone, turned into heat rejected to the atmosphere or the road surface. The hybrid system can’t capture any of it.
There is some opportunity if the truck is driving through rolling-hills terrain, but its limited – too little of a hill and you won’t get anything back, it would be more beneficial to just let the truck roll rather than try to divert that energy to a battery. Too big of a hill and suddenly the power you’re trying to send to the battery is *way* too much to take in and store all at once, and that’s assuming you have an electric motor in your hybrid powertrain roughly equal to the power of your IC engine (which is roughly the power capability of modern engine brakes). And that’s just for rolling down a hill – anytime you end up actually hitting the service brakes on a loaded semi truck you’re now into a multi-megawatt deceleration – which is why truck brakes get so hot so quickly. The electric motors and batteries would have to be titanic to capture a meaningful portion of that energy.
Hybrids on semi trucks can make sense, but the latest tradeoff studies I know of show that it should be a ‘mild’ hybrid – an electric motor in the 20 kW range, hooked to a battery in the 10-ish kWh size range. The best fuel consumption reduction case is to use that mild hybrid system to recover ‘sips’ of energy from rolling down small hills where you’d otherwise run the engine brake just for a short blip to avoid coasting above the speed limit, using that energy to charge up the battery over the day, so that it is full when it is time to park the truck at night. Then you use the battery power to run the AC or heat for the sleeper cab so that the trucker can be kept comfortable all night without ever needing to idle the engine. Such a system works a treat, saves a bunch of fuel, and is inexpensive enough to pay for itself over a short enough timeline that trucking companies would happily invest in the additional purchase cost. Anything bigger starts running quickly into diminishing returns, fuel economy-wise, and quickly escalating costs.
COTD, thanks for this Mike, that was a great comment!
That said, I can’t help but think of what that big puff of exhaust would look like if you could put an electric motor in there to “accommodate” said state change.
For sure, and using electrification to help improve transient response / reduce emissions is an area of active research for diesel engines.
Diesels are most efficient, broadly speaking, when they are running at an air/fuel ratio of around 25. When you want to make more torque and push the pedal, the engine injects more fuel until the AFR starts to dip below ~20 or so, until the turbo can catch up and supply more boost. That’s called the smoke limiter. If you could use an energy source other than exhaust heat to speed up your turbocharger such that you could maintain that efficient 25:1 AFR during the torque transient, you’d get better fuel economy.
Electric superchargers or e-turbos (where they add an electric motor to the turbo shaft) are effective ways to do that which are under development now.
You could do something similar with an electric motor in the powertrain that would supply the extra torque demand while the engine catches up, but as it turns out it takes about 10 times the electric motor power to improve the transient response that way rather than using an e-booster of some sort. In other words, you could add 10 kilowatts to the driveshaft, or 1 kilowatt to the turbocharger, and achieve the same result.
Is there a way to improve engine efficiency/fuel economy by using electric superchargers to reduce the additional back pressure a turbocharger produces?
Maybe yes, but in the end you’d probably not want to do so. Turbochargers run on exhaust heat, which is essentially “free” in that it would otherwise be wasted energy, whereas the electricity had to be generated or recovered from somewhere, then you lose ~20% of it once it makes the round trip through the generator, inverter, battery, back through the inverter and through a motor again. It is also a “high quality” / high availability energy source, so you could do better things with it than add a little extra power to the turbo shaft to reduce exhaust manifold pressure and therefore engine pumping losses by a little bit.
It usually ends up a better overall use of electrical energy to use to help during transients like discussed above, or to decouple accessory loads that traditionally are run at a fixed ratio to engine speed, but don’t really have to be – most of the stuff driven by the fan belt, for instance, including the fan itself. Power steering, coolant pump, AC compressor… all have power demands that are more or less independent of engine speed, so could be driven more efficiently by variable speed electric motors rather than by the FEAD (Front Engine Accessory Drive). Cooling fan demand is a function of engine power, vehicle speed, and ambient temperature, coolant pump demand is a function of engine power, power steering is a function of steering shaft torque, air conditioning is a function of ambient temperature, cab solar load, and driver demand…
There are almost enough words in this whole comment stream for an article. I’d love to read more about this if possible, with pictures!
The number of people here who really know their stuff is too damn high!
Thanks for the comments, I feel ejumacted.
Insight and real information definitely appreciated!
That’s something I hadn’t considered. If your battery can’t accept the amount of power generated by braking then it’s not going to work very well.
No but resistors mounted on the roof can. That’s how diesel-electric locomotives do it. The benefit is taking the load off the friction brakes so they both last longer and pollute less. It’s quieter too.
A hybrid system that uses a 10kWh battery being called ‘mild’ in a world where passenger PHEVs use batteries of a similar size is amusing, and illustrates the massive difference in magnitude semis have over personal vehicles.
Question: Wouldn’t a 20kW motor be underpowered for such a system, even if it’s meant for charging a battery over the course of a day? A 20kW motor is about what a passenger car 48V mild hybrid uses, but a 10kWh battery can easily handle 50-100kW of power.
Yes, trucks aren’t just “cars, but bigger”. A passenger car uses an average of something less than 20 horsepower at highway cruising speed. A tractor trailer uses closer to 160 horsepower to cruise at the same speed.
The study that we did on the mild hybrid semi truck did indeed use a 48v architecture, which limited available motor power to that 20 kW mark, but significantly decreased the cost of all the other components due to them not being ‘high voltage’ with all the added safety and regulation around that. I suspect that if you were to re-run the study today, it might make more sense to switch to 480 volts or similar, since such components are available at reasonably large volumes due to the passenger EV market now. That would save price on the copper in the wires (less amperage capacity required) and would potentially allow you to go up in motor power at similar cost, which would save a bit more fuel.
Then you use the battery power to run the AC or heat for the sleeper cab so that the trucker can be kept comfortable all night without ever needing to idle the engine.
Even more so if the HVAC can also be run using shore power. I imagine that would also be useful for refrigerated trailers.
I’m replying to this comment after reading the whole thread. But OTR semi trucks would not benefit much from hybridization. Anything short haul, local, or specialized seems like it would do very well with a series hybrid a la Edison Motors’ efforts up in Canada.
I disagree with the small sports car thing, if a RWD roadster can be boosted to 50+mpg with a hybrid powetrain and still stay reasonably priced, that’s a win for anyone looking to use one as a daily driver. Obviously, if you’re looking at a sports car as a weekend toy or garage queen, it isn’t so important, but someone wanting to use one every day might be legitimately interested in seeing a Toyobaru or something with better fuel economy for highway cruising. I’d say that’s probably more true the more affordable the car is
Too bad Kia won’t sell the Carens EV (Rondo) over here. The Rondo is fucking awesome.
It’s time Detroit learns about Net 30. Pay your fucking suppliers on time, no more waiting a year to get paid. GM: Net 30. Ford: Net 30. Chrysler/Stellantis: 50% down net 30!
It’s not just Detroit. Seems like all the big corporations just figure their credit should be good indefinitely and they can force smaller suppliers to live with it, since they assume the supplier needs the contract more than they do.
But, yeah, they all need to pay on time.
Yup, truth. My company ( Major worldwide corporation ) hasn’t paid our calibration company. So they stopped calibrating our tools. Next ISO Audit should be fun.
My company ( Major worldwide corporation ) hasn’t paid our calibration company. So they stopped calibrating our tools. Next ISO Audit should be fun.
Username checks out 😉
Have I mentioned I have never failed and ISO audit??? )
Me neither and I’ve been through…
*Checks notes*
None.
Absolutely, this is far from just an automotive industry trend. It’s even worse in aerospace (thanks Boeing!). My company supplies both industries, and we’re lucky enough to have a very well diversified customer base. It’s always shocking to them when these big companies try to throw their weight around to get their terms and we just say no. In a lot of cases they need us more than they other way around.
I do wonder how some of these less well diversified suppliers stay in business though. If 50% of your sales is to one company they can dictate whatever they want and you pretty much have to say yes.
Tell that to one of my customers
It amazes me that so many companies desperately want to do business with some of these manufacturers. I get that it looks ‘sexy’ for a business to be tier one with one of the Big 3, or the amount of revenue, but the margin, cost to serve, and general PITA it takes to be a supplier is rarely offset…
It’s honestly shocking that suppliers don’t have some kind of version of the Freelance Isn’t Free Act in regards to timely payment. Freelancers — arguably one of the least protected, most shat-upon, viewed-as-throwaway class of workers out there — won protections in NYC that basically say, “pay up on time or the law gets involved.” I wish it was a national standard, but it’s certainly worked to my advantage with NYC-based outlets.
These companies are already breaching contracts and the law is involved, but the calculation in many cases is that litigation is more trouble and expense than its worth.
ugh, so annoying
My previous role was at a very large manufacturer of consumer goods (not auto). They were trying to push suppliers from 90-day to 120-day pay terms. Employees were paid once a month. I’m back in auto at a Tier 1 and was kind of pleasantly surprised to see net 60 as a standard (and I get paid twice a month).
The purpose of the longer pay terms is not just cash flow. It also allows the customer to create a big AP balance, that they can hold over the supplier’s head if the supplier wants to stop shipments. Sucks all around, and I agree that net 30 is fair.
Is it falling demand or the same demand spread among more players?
Both, I think. The demand is spreading, but when you are first to market, you have to keep bringing new things first or you start to fall behind the companies that are innovating more as they learn from your early example. If you aren’t bringing new things that a large portion of the market wants (for example, after the stans, who really wanted a cybertruck?), it’s easy to “fall behind”.
Also, everyone who is paying attention now knows that other companies’ EVs are going to get access to the Tesla charging network in the near future, which eliminates one of Tesla’s biggest advantages.
I think demand for things that require sizable loans are falling due to interest rates. It isn’t just EVs. There were articles recently about how full sized truck sales are starting to be affected.