PDA

View Full Version : 60MPG F-150, no BS either

RichP
August 10th, 2006, 08:22
http://www.fordmuscle.com/blog/ford-to-build-60-mpg-f150/112114
From some other sources that led me here the technology is very neat and simple, basically an accumulator for an auto tranny.
RedHeep
August 10th, 2006, 08:27
Looks/sounds awesome. Will the oil companies let it happen?
jeepinxj01
August 10th, 2006, 08:33
Looks/sounds awesome. Will the oil companies let it happen?


Ow ow....me me, I wanna answer; HELL NO they won't. They got the money and the muscle to influence who they want.
Lawn Cher'
August 10th, 2006, 08:51
The technology is undergoing testing in diesel-powered UPS trucks, but I think 60 mpg behind a gasoline engine in a truck is highly unlikely, especially in highway cruising applications. The regenerative feature is only useful in stop and go driving, just like the parallel gasoline/electric hybrid as used in the Toyota Prius.
CRASH
August 10th, 2006, 08:56
Ow ow....me me, I wanna answer; HELL NO they won't. They got the money and the muscle to influence who they want.

Yes, it's a secret cabal.

The Jews, the oil companies, the Vatican, and the Council on Foreign Relations.

Keep an eye on all of them, cause they are keeping an eye on you.
jeepinxj01
August 10th, 2006, 09:03
Yes, it's a secret cabal.

The Jews, the oil companies, the Vatican, and the Council on Foreign Relations.

Keep an eye on all of them, cause they are keeping an eye on you.


I'm looking over my shoulder as I type..........:shiver:
little red cheroke
August 10th, 2006, 09:19
i could have swarn that a few years back GMC made a yukon that used
97XJ_Sport
August 10th, 2006, 09:21
don't forget the Free Masons
Root Moose
August 10th, 2006, 10:53
http://www.fordmuscle.com/blog/ford-to-build-60-mpg-f150/112114
From some other sources that led me here the technology is very neat and simple, basically an accumulator for an auto tranny.

Sounds like smoke and mirrors. The implication is that the hydraulic system in an automatic is extremely wasteful and if that was the case how come stick shifts aren't that much more efficient?

If they get the MPG into the mid-high 20s I'd think that would be more realistic - only in stop and go. In fact, by the sounds of the system if they can make city = hwy I think they'd be doing ok.

Steady state is a b!tch.
Root Moose
August 10th, 2006, 10:57
I'm looking over my shoulder as I type..........:shiver:


Smile for the camera... <click />
jeepinxj01
August 10th, 2006, 11:05
Smile for the camera... <click />


My cubicle isn't even safe.
kubtastic
August 10th, 2006, 20:06
Sounds like smoke and mirrors. The implication is that the hydraulic system in an automatic is extremely wasteful and if that was the case how come stick shifts aren't that much more efficient?

If they get the MPG into the mid-high 20s I'd think that would be more realistic - only in stop and go. In fact, by the sounds of the system if they can make city = hwy I think they'd be doing ok.

Steady state is a b!tch.

in 2005 ford made an expedition get 30 mpg city with this concept.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051218/AUTO01/512180348/1148

I'm not surprised... Really, how much power is required to move a truck over level ground at 25 mph, in comparison to 75 mph? it's close to 1/9th the power - discounting significant rolling resistance. 60 mpg isn't even close to the theoretical limit of travel under 45 mph.

The Enemy is wind resistance, rising with the square of velocity, and you can't recapture that lost energy.