Sure,
plug-in hybrid tech has been around for a while, but no major manufacturer has stepped up and actually delivered on all the
concepts and vague
plans we've seen so far -- until yesterday, when Ford delivered the first of 20 plug-in hybrid Escapes to Southern California Edison to begin testing. The handoff, which happened with great fanfare at the EVS23 conference, is the start of a two-year pilot program between Ford and Edison that will eventually have consumers testing the vehicles. For now, the first off the line is being dubbed a "research vehicle," and features a 30-mile electric-only range on a full battery charge. When the battery is depleted, the system switches over to a traditional gas / electric hybrid scheme, which, under ideal conditions, can apparently achieve up to 120mpg. There's a full gallery of the unveiling and the interior over at AutoBlog Green, hit the read link for some eco-friendly love.
posted December 5th 2007 5:32PM
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2007/07/san-diego-gas-a.html
Saw one of these a month or so ago cruising around San Diego...
Hey Ford, bring back the Pinto and make it a plug-in!
Now when you hit it from behind it will explode with Lithium Ion juice instead of gas. Die green!
:o)
Does anybody else notice that pretty much any time something new comes out Engadget says something along the lines of "oh well we've already seen this before BUT" don't get me wrong I love Engadget but still, has everything already been done and only they know about it?
Simpsons did it!
I doubt the 120mgp is real. If so they would be eligible for the 100mpg X Prize http://www.xprize.org/news/automotive-x-prize-seeks-100-mpg-car
Welcome to the ... 90's? 70's? (19)00's? Nope. 1832. The first electric car. Hydrogen and oxygen were used in a combustion engine in 1807. This new fangled contraption is supposed to be a pilot program? Way to go Ford. I'm sure you feel so darn special living in the same year you started. Why even go with Edison? SoCal Costco's have plugin stations collecting dust already. This will end the same way the EV1 did as long as oil sticks around or under $100/barrel. Suck that big fat oil rig. Suck it, Detroit.
The Ford Escape is technically not an SUV, but a crossover.
It's built on a smaller frame that has more in common with a car, hence the really good better gas milage (I can get around 40mpg in city driving in my '08 Escape Hybrid).
I don't know about all states, but in Texas I don't believe it's considered a truck because of its smaller size. It sits about 2 feet lower than an Explorer, which is a true SUV.
Can somebody please explain to me why a plug-in car is a good idea period?
I don't know how many New York car owners have in-house garages, but I'd imagine there will be quite a lot of accidents from all the extension cords that travel from 4th floor appartments across 4 blocks to where their car is parked in front of a fire hydrant.
While I might prefer other vehicles, I'm stoked about this. Will there be better technology in the future - sure - is it one of the best practical options for right now - I think so. I'm hoping to see a lot more of this technology available in standard vehicles SOON!!!!
I have a beef with this-- And keep in mind I'm the guy who rides an electric bike 2/3 of the year.
My problem is that any time there's an electric car or hybrid being tested, they test it in SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. Why not here in Michigan, where cars are (were) our economy, and they're completely necessary, and where the weather isn't perfect all year round? Wouldn't it be in their best interest to see how their car handles rain, sun, snow, ice, sleet, and other conditions that could potential affect not just the driving conditions, but the battery/fuel conditions as well? What the hell will they learn from southern California? That it works perfectly in ideal weather conditions?
Now, as to the whole SUV debate... My two cents is this: People don't *want* SUVs. They feel they need to have SUVs to maintain their social status among their peer group. SUVs are *rarely* used in off-road conditions, *rarely* used for cargo or large passenger loads, and tend to be driven by one person who uses the extra capacity perhaps once a week, if that. They could just as easily get a decent-sized sedan and accomplish their trips to the grocery store and soccer practice.
This is all about style over substance. Many people who drive SUVs also think they need to have brand names on their clothing in order to be accepted by their peer group. It's a status symbol, and little else.
And finally--- To those doubting the efficiency of electric (plug-in) versus fossil fuel, let me point out that it takes less electricity to power a motor directly than fossil fuel energy to power an engine indirectly. Of course, it all depends on what your community uses to produce electricity, but coal-powered electricity is actually a pretty direct fuel source compared to an internal combustion engine.
But some communities do use hydroelectric or wind power, and they save even more when it comes to carbon footprints. I'm a supporter of nuclear energy (I used to live in a town that had it, until it was shut down by paranoid people) because it's clean, extremely efficient, and the waste is nowhere near as dangerous and explosive as opponents would have you think... it's certainly less dangerous than gasoline, coal, or natural gas.
When it comes to electric vehicles, the community has a lot to do with how much the EVs will save the environment. If the community has a terrible, inefficient electric power plant, then the EV's impact will be negligible compared to one in a community with responsible, safe, renewable energy.
In my case, there's a personal benefit to riding an electric bike: I didn't have to pay for gasoline from April until early November. Not one drop. I paid electric bills, but the fifty cents per charge (getting me about 30 miles) was far easier to deal with than $3 a gallon, and my vehicle didn't produce any carbon emissions during this time. (Also, parking was a lot easier. I hate being back in the car, because I have to drive around looking for parking spaces when I go anywhere now.)
The Big Three are dragging their heels on electric, and have been for over 40 years. My father worked for GM, and there was talk of an electric car when he started there in the 60s. The technology is there NOW, even if it was wonky in the 60s (of course, we did go to the moon on 1960s tech, too, so I wonder.)
These people look like midgets, and the car still looks small.
According to Ford's specs this thing is capable of 34 mpg - probably only in the 2wd version. If it is anything like the 2005, which I own, it does 28 mpg (4wd) in the city and 27 mpg on the highway (during the summer months +70 F degree weather), the gas consumption is much worse in winter conditions (24mpg in 45 degrees F and below).
The engine itself does not run until the battery is depleted - the article is probably stating something out of a white paper and not actual use.
120 mpg in this thing is impossible. I do mostly city driving on streets less than 35 mph (the gas engine kicks in at 30 mph if you baby it) and I am very carefull to drive slow and watch my acceleration, the most I have gotten is 29.4 mpg.
Don't make another Pinto mistake. Please make this with large format nickel metal hydride batteries. Sue Chevron for sequestering and suppressing them just when we need them most. Nickel batteries made in the early 1900's still work today 100 years later. Short lived Lithium will be one big worthless brick I would not want to have to replace in my car. Don't make the transition from electric only mode unnoticeable. As a PHEV buyer I want to know when I begin to consume gas!