'20 Explorer Interceptor Hybrid First Drive

[ANTAUS]

Autoblog

[Harley Lover]

Average 24 mpg combined. I wonder if the civilian version will have a better number, or if this is representative of what we can expect with the hybrid for the civilian market.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Harley Lover

[mackinaw]

Mark Phelan of the Detroit Free Press also drove it.

https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/mark-phelan/2019/05/17/review-2020-ford-police-interceptor/3690347002/

[akirby]

52 minutes ago, Harley Lover said:

Average 24 mpg combined. I wonder if the civilian version will have a better number, or if this is representative of what we can expect with the hybrid for the civilian market.

That's what was reported earlier but we don't know yet if the regular version will be tuned differently.  It certainly won't have the pursuit modes which definitely rob mpg in favor of better performance.

 

I can get 24 in my F150 3.5L ecoboost.

[fuzzymoomoo]

1 hour ago, Harley Lover said:

Average 24 mpg combined. I wonder if the civilian version will have a better number, or if this is representative of what we can expect with the hybrid for the civilian market.

If nothing else the civilian version should be lighter so that will help. 

[jpd80]

9 hours ago, akirby said:

That's what was reported earlier but we don't know yet if the regular version will be tuned differently.  It certainly won't have the pursuit modes which definitely rob mpg in favor of better performance.

 

I can get 24 in my F150 3.5L ecoboost.

The pursuit rating means that the hybrid electric side expends all its energy in power assist under full throttle acceleration soprobably doesn't affect fuel economy and regen braking efficiency in normal use....

 

24 MPG for an EB 3.5 F150 in mixed driving is excellent, you're obviously very pleased with that and I doubt the Hybrid explorer would give much better than that, they usually even out all the city and highway mileages like Fusion Hybrid did before being restated..

[twintornados]

18 hours ago, akirby said:

That's what was reported earlier but we don't know yet if the regular version will be tuned differently.  It certainly won't have the pursuit modes which definitely rob mpg in favor of better performance.

 

I can get 24 in my F150 3.5L ecoboost.

Wondering what an F150 with the 3.3L / Hybrid / 10 speed combo will get.

[fuzzymoomoo]

21 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

If nothing else the civilian version should be lighter so that will help. 

What does that cost you per week if you don't mind me asking? 

I'm averaging about 27 in my Fusion and I fill up about once a week at a cost of $30-$40 per tank depending on the cost per gallon. 

[akirby]

36 minutes ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

What does that cost you per week if you don't mind me asking? 

I'm averaging about 27 in my Fusion and I fill up about once a week at a cost of $30-$40 per tank depending on the cost per gallon. 

Hope you’re not waiting for that guy to respond.......

[blazerdude20]

5 minutes ago, akirby said:

Hope you’re not waiting for that guy to respond.......

Haha I think he was asking you... 

[akirby]

12 minutes ago, blazerdude20 said:

Haha I think he was asking you... 

I try not to judge people who talk to themselves.   I do it all the time.

No you don’t.

Yes I do.

[akirby]

If you were asking me I have no idea.  I have a 36 gallon tank and I don’t drive that much so I only fill up once or twice per month and I never pay attention to what it costs.   Wife pays the credit card bills.

[fuzzymoomoo]

25 minutes ago, akirby said:

Hope you’re not waiting for that guy to respond.......

Lol I have no idea what happened there, I just woke up when I posted that ???

[Harley Lover]

7 hours ago, twintornados said:

Wondering what an F150 with the 3.3L / Hybrid / 10 speed combo will get.

I echo that question. The police interceptor version of the Explorer can't carry the jockstrap of the Highlander hybrid in terms of mpg, but presumably the Interceptor prioitizes performance rather than mpg. The setup you mention is more closely aligned to the previous gen Highlander hybrid (the new one is going to use a I4 set up for more mpg), so it would be interesting to see what an Explorer with the drivetrain you describe could achieve. Would the Atkinson cycle principles be used on a naturally aspirated engine by Ford? I don't think they have ever offered a V6 set up in that manner, have they?

[fuzzymoomoo]

4 minutes ago, Harley Lover said:

I echo that question. The police interceptor version of the Explorer can't carry the jockstrap of the Highlander hybrid in terms of mpg, but presumably the Interceptor prioitizes performance rather than mpg. The setup you mention is more closely aligned to the previous gen Highlander hybrid (the new one is going to use a I4 set up for more mpg), so it would be interesting to see what an Explorer with the drivetrain you describe could achieve. Would the Atkinson cycle principles be used on a naturally aspirated engine by Ford? I don't think they have ever offered a V6 set up in that manner, have they?

I'm not an engineer but my understanding that V6s don't lend themselves very well to the Atkinson cycle for some reason. As far as I know the 3.3 V6 in the Hybrid configuration runs a standard ignition cycle.

The 2.5 I4 that Ford has used in hybrids forever now runs the Atkinson cycle. 

Edited May 18, 2019 by fuzzymoomoo

[02MustangGT]

On 5/17/2019 at 1:00 PM, akirby said:

 

I can get 24 in my F150 3.5L ecoboost.

How?  55mph no stops?   I average about 20ish mpg in my 2017 Fusion Sport during the work week.  There are several round-a-bouts on my 8 mile commute to the office and I don’t drive with a heavy foot.  No way you average 24mpg in mixed driving on an entire tank of gas.  

[akirby]

1 hour ago, 02MustangGT said:

How?  55mph no stops?   I average about 20ish mpg in my 2017 Fusion Sport during the work week.  There are several round-a-bouts on my 8 mile commute to the office and I don’t drive with a heavy foot.  No way you average 24mpg in mixed driving on an entire tank of gas.  

I drove to the airport earlier this week - 70 mph most of the way - 51 miles.  All interstate except the last 4 miles.  When I got off the interstate I was at 29 mpg.   28 by the time I stopped to park.

Commuting with no traffic running 45-50 with stop signs and a few traffic lights I can get 26.  These newer ecoboost are great.

[02MustangGT]

So by newer I assume your 3.5 is different than my 2.7 in some way (or for that matter the 1.6 in my Fiesta ST)?   I average about 27mpg at 70 mph in my Fusion.  29mpg from a 3.5EB in a ~5000lb truck is unbelievable and basically impossible.  I hope you actually check the fuel mileage with something besides the display on the IP.  

[rperez817]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

I drove to the airport earlier this week - 70 mph most of the way - 51 miles.  All interstate except the last 4 miles.  When I got off the interstate I was at 29 mpg.   28 by the time I stopped to park.

Very impressive. You are skilled at hypermiling to get those numbers.

[akirby]

I wasn’t hypermiling but I was following some semi trucks part of the way and it may have been slightly downhill also.  I just checked it today and the computer is about 1 mpg high, so maybe instead of 30 it was actually 28.5.  Still pretty impressive.

The current 3.5LEB is the 3rd generation.  I think the 2.7L has most of the new tech that’s in the 3rd gen 3.5L.

The difference in your Fusion Sport vs my F150 is that I have the 10 speed transmission and you still have the old 6 speed.

[2005Explorer]

4 hours ago, akirby said:

I drove to the airport earlier this week - 70 mph most of the way - 51 miles.  All interstate except the last 4 miles.  When I got off the interstate I was at 29 mpg.   28 by the time I stopped to park.

Commuting with no traffic running 45-50 with stop signs and a few traffic lights I can get 26.  These newer ecoboost are great.

I’ve never seen anything close to that. I had a ‘16 F150 and granted it was a 4x4 with the 2.7 and no matter what I did I never saw anything much above 20 on the highway. I suppose if I drove 55-60 with it I might have gotten a little better. My new Ranger can get around 22 on the highway. We are always bucking a wind one way or the other around here and wind is a killer on MPG with the poor aerodynamics of large pickups. I guess the 2.3 and 2.7 EcoBoosts must be gas guzzlers compared to the 3.5. That doesn’t make much sense, but it appears that way if your hitting almost 30. Even on a still day I never see anything close to that and I try to be a smooth driver.

Edited May 19, 2019 by 2005Explorer

[Harley Lover]

17 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:

I'm not an engineer but my understanding that V6s don't lend themselves very well to the Atkinson cycle for some reason. As far as I know the 3.3 V6 in the Hybrid configuration runs a standard ignition cycle.

The 2.5 I4 that Ford has used in hybrids forever now runs the Atkinson cycle. 

Fuzzy, I googled a bit and low and behold, Toyota's V6 in the current Highlander hybrid is Atkinson cycle:

Quote

Hybrid engine — 3.5-Liter V6 Double Overhead Cam (DOHC) 24-Valve direct-injection Atkinson-cycle-capable engine with VVT-iW (Variable Valve Timing-intelligent Wide) intake and VVT-i (Variable Valve Timing with intelligence) exhaust; EV,^80, 76 ECO and POWER Modes; 306 hybrid system net hp (228 kW)

Perhaps more interesting, Toyota offer an Atkinson cycle V6 in a non hybrid vehicle, the Tacoma:  https://news.pickuptrucks.com/2019/02/engine-deep-dive-toyota-tacomas-atkinson-cycle-v-6.html

Interesting things going on the world of the ICE engine these days.

Edited May 19, 2019 by Harley Lover

[akirby]

8 hours ago, 2005Explorer said:

I’ve never seen anything close to that. I had a ‘16 F150 and granted it was a 4x4 with the 2.7 and no matter what I did I never saw anything much above 20 on the highway. I suppose if I drove 55-60 with it I might have gotten a little better. My new Ranger can get around 22 on the highway. We are always bucking a wind one way or the other around here and wind is a killer on MPG with the poor aerodynamics of large pickups. I guess the 2.3 and 2.7 EcoBoosts must be gas guzzlers compared to the 3.5. That doesn’t make much sense, but it appears that way if your hitting almost 30. Even on a still day I never see anything close to that and I try to be a smooth driver.

You had a 1st gen 3.5LEB - the 2nd gens are way better on fuel economy.   1st gens had cooling issues causing them to run rich.  My 2013 Fusion 2.0L only got 21-22 mpg and sooty tailpipes.   The 10 speed also helps a lot compared to your 6 speed and 4WD probably robs a couple mpg.  I assume you had a more aggressive axle ratio too.

[2005Explorer]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

You had a 1st gen 3.5LEB - the 2nd gens are way better on fuel economy.   1st gens had cooling issues causing them to run rich.  My 2013 Fusion 2.0L only got 21-22 mpg and sooty tailpipes.   The 10 speed also helps a lot compared to your 6 speed and 4WD probably robs a couple mpg.  I assume you had a more aggressive axle ratio too.

I had a 2.7 never a 3.5. I also had a 3.73 rear end with a 6 speed and 4x4, but the fact you are getting like 35-40% better economy is crazy good. It's also beating the Ranger by a wide margin. A guy I know has a 2018 2.7 and he gets around 21, but his is a 4x4. I'm just going to assume that in real life the 4x4 system drops the fuel economy by a huge percent even when it's running in 2 high.

When the F150 with the most powerful 3.5 engine is beating the Ranger by a wide margin in MPG I can see why sales have been lukewarm. Don't get me wrong I love my little truck, but MPG is not a selling point when the F150 can hit 30 with normal driving these days. No one (even 2wd) is hitting even close to that that in Rangers from all the real world MPG threads I have been following. 20-24 is pretty common with the Ranger. Like I said it's possible the 2.3 or even the 2.7 are just gas guzzlers compared to the 3.5 or 4x4 in the F-150s case cuts MPG by 8-10.

[2005Explorer]