Hybrid mpg

Some of that is weight. Remember a lot of the Ford is aluminum. Tundra is porky heavy metal. May also be some gearing differences.

 

Some of you guys are confused about regen and what it is. Nearly all hybrids regen when coasting and braking. Plus, the engine is shut off usually. This is the way the F150 powerboost works and likely how the Tundra hybrid will work.

 

Yup, coasting IS regen braking. On some cars' systems you can select the level. Some prefer max regen, some prefer a more normal braking experience. Point is if you are on the throttle even the least bit, even going down hills, you have no regen.

 

Doesn’t the gen 3 have a composite bed and some aluminum panels now to make it lighter?

 

Hybrids don’t have to be coasting or braking to regen.

 

This is true too. They can send engine power to the battery while driving. The hybrid system decides when it’s best to start recharging the battery using the gasoline engine. I wouldn’t necessarily call it regen though since most define regen as recapturing lost energy like braking energy. Below is an example of Toyota hybrid energy flow showing the battery charging.

 

Yeah but it still uses a lot of steel. I was curious and noticed a lot of steel parts still. What’s interesting is the front doors seem to be aluminum but the rear are steel. Plus there are a lot of overbuilt parts. Have you seen the front sway bar?

 

Yes, sure, but that is not "free" like braking or coast braking. So this is not really regen but active charging that uses additional fuel.

 

Even coasting is not “free” if there is regen. Decelerating from just aerodynamic and mechanical drag would be more efficient than regen due to whatever losses may exist in the drivetrain and battery. Braking is definitely the best form of regen.

 

When I say "coasting" I mean you have the system set to go into regen braking when you lift off the throttle. Many cars you can vary how much to get the brake behavior you want.

 

???

Not sure what you’re trying to say… from what I know of Toyota hybrid system, there is a fixed amount of regen during coasting (accelerator off, brake off) and a varying amount of regen during braking that’s decided by the hybrid ecu based on how the brake pedal is pressed (blending of regen and corner brakes to give the desired braking force). We’re getting off topic here though…

 

Some hybrid and BEV systems allow you to select the amount of throttle off regen braking via the driver interface. You read stories of people who hyper mile these things to drive and stop without ever using their brakes by relying almost entirely on throttle-off regen braking. They do this because people coming from standard vehicles may not like the sensation of getting too much slowing when they lift the throttle. It's a trade off between feel and efficiency. And you can adjust it later to get more (or less) regen effect. I don't know how the Tundra will be set up. But I suspect that the Tundra is so massive, and the battery and motor/generator so relatively small, it may not matter and you won't even feel any throttle off regen. So I assume it would be fixed.

 

Control amount of regen with brake pedal pressure.

 

I think I get what you’re saying now. Don’t know any hybrids that do this but definitely lots of BEVs that have those settings. The Ford MachE has 3 options, high regen (feels like braking when accelerator off), low regen (feels like a gas engine vehicle), and no regen (pure coasting, deceleration from aero and mechanical drag only). Tesla used to have high and low regen option but I heard a reflash eliminated the low regen option.

As far as I’ve seen in my buddy’s F150 hybrid there’s no option to change regen when accelerator is off. It also feels like any other vehicle and not heavy like a Tesla. I expect the Tundra hybrid to be the same as the Ford since the systems are nearly identical.

 

Just got off the phone with my dealer in Canada who had the TRD Pro training today, he stated 11.2L/100km Combined for the TRD Pro. 21MPG ish ?

 

LOL. That’s fucking lame if true.

 

Lift, all terrain tires, 33s, no air dam ... seems about right for combined. The regular hybrids will likely be a lot better.

 

That would be about right for the non hybrid if it were offered.

As I was. “combined” number. If it hit’s that combined it may be acceptable.

 

30 mpg was always an impossibility. Someone on the internet threw it out there and it stuck.
The lighter F150 Powerboost only gets 24 mpg (worse now, 2022 Powerboost estimate is 23 mpg). I mean, even diesel half-tons are barely pushing 30 mpg hwy and diesel has about at most ~20% more energy per gallon than gasoline.

If we do the math, that means RAM’s 29 mpg hwy for the diesel is roughly equivalent to 23~24 mpg of gasoline energy density.

 

Diesel fuel is roughly the same as gas for energy by mass. However, diesel fuel is denser than petrol and contains about 12% more energy by volume.

Diesel gets ~30% better MPG, because the they are also more efficient, mostly due to higher compression.

 

I couldn’t find any figures for diesels but V35A-FTS thermal efficiency is 37%. That’s very diesel-like. I’d be surprised if any production 6-cyl diesel exceeds 40% thermal efficiency.

 

Because that's lifted, larger heavier tires, skid plates, no air dam, etc vs the hybrid non pro

 

If that combined MPG is equivalent or better for the non-PRO hybrid models, than that is appealing to me. I average 14.4 MPG with my 5.7, so that’s a 45-46% increase in MPG. The PRO has little appeal to me, but the hybrid engine on the Platinum I’m currently waiting on could be nice. The MPG reports for the non-hybrid has been all over the map, so it’s hard to gauge.

 

I think he’s saying all the extra stuff on the pro negatively impacts mpg and it still gets 21. The other hybrid trims (less weight and drag) should get a couple more mpgs tacked on

 

25 mpg on 2WD i force max is possible but unlikely when comparing to Ford.

 

I am saying the trd pro with hybrid engine will get lower number than say a limited, platinum or 1794 with the i force max due to the additional items I listed above. The max is only available on this trims.

 

It's easy to gauge, you just have to use some sense.

Fuelly gives ~14 MPG for the 5.7, and ~16 for the Ford 3.5L TT. Ford's EPA is 20 MPG combined vs 19 for the Tundra, so the non-hybrid Tundra will be at best 2 MPG better than the 5.7. Probably less. All these people reporting ~16 MPG in their new Tundras are not experiencing a strange anomaly...

Sweers who is the Tundra chief engineer, said that the hybrid wasn't for MPG but for power and torque. If it gives an additional 2 MPG boost over the non-hybrid, I'd say that is very good. I doubt it will be that much, likely closer to 1.

Why would anyone buy it? More power (437 vs 389, a 12% increase) and torque (583 vs 479, a 22% increase). The 5.7 has 401 torque, so that's a whopping 45% increase compared to last gen. Plus you even get 5-10% MPG improvement over the standard engine which is a nice bonus, and 15-20% over the 5.7.

 

A lot of people believed the 5.7 was worse for MPG than it was, relative to the competition. That's because the Tundra actually matched its EPA ratings in the real world, while the others all fell short by quite a bit. Are they tuned for the EPA cycle or cheating somehow (tuning for the test being different than what you buy)? Regardless, Toyota seems to be doing the same for the new Tundra.

Going by EPA ratings though... where the Ford 3.5 is 20 vs 14 for the 5.7 for instance, a 43% difference!... the Tundra was still the cheapest full size to own (according to Edmunds). In the grand scheme of things MPG isn't that big of a deal even on these big trucks. Everyone likes to pretend it matters, but it's really just $ and not many at that.

Power rules. When you are trying to sell macho trucks to guys with waning testosterone, having power #s to brag about is way better than MPG #s.

 

Yes, but its still 5-700 lbs more than an equally optioned GM or Ford. Although, its tough to tell because I think the payload stickers on the tundra are BS. Either way though, Andre's crewmax Limited on TFL truck is claimed to be 5800 lbs while an equivalent F150 would be like 5300 lbs probably. Even if they generate the same HP, the F150 will be considerably quicker.

 

And the lack of pumping losses. Diesels don't have a throttle plate the the cylinders have to pull against.

This is why auto manufacturers are going to small displacement V6's and V8's with displacement on demand. If you have a 6L V8 that barely has to work to move a truck down the road, the pistons are having to pull against a significant vacuum in the intake manifold because the throttle plate is closed. By shutting off half the cylinders, they make it a 3.0L and the engine suddenly has to be close to WOT throttle to be able to produce the power/torque needed to move the truck and the pistons are not pulling against a vacuum anymore and not working against the other cylinders.

Its also the same reason people with old school big blocks don't see a huge hit in MPG's when towing. The engine is highly inefficient at low load, but when you hook up a trailer and start working the engine hard(and open the throttle), the efficiency per HP generated increases dramatically.

Basically, if you look, the efficiency of trucks in the last 10 years has only increased in the unloaded state. Towing, our gas engines today are basically getting the same mileage as one from >10 years ago plus or minus a little bit.