GM Volt Forum banner
1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
eTorque: Any 2019 Ram 1500—the all-new one, not the Ram Classic that is just a continuation of the previous generation—can be equipped with a motor/generator attached to its engine's crankshaft via a belt that is capable of adding torque, cranking the engine in a stop/start event, or making electricity with regenerative braking. The 3.6-liter Pentastar V-6 comes with eTorque as standard, and it is a stand-alone, $1450 option for the 5.7-liter Hemi V-8. The same system is optional on the new Jeep Wrangler, too.


GM has done something similar in the past, but unlike the giant banners on the doors of circa-2008 Chevy Tahoe hybrids, nothing on this truck proclaims that your testosterone-fueled purchase of a Ram 1500 pickup is secretly reducing America's fuel consumption.

Because that would be bad? lol

  • stop/start system
  • regenerative braking
  • liquid-cooled eTorque motor for the V-6
  • air-cooled eTorque motor for the V-8
  • air-cooled battery is mounted behind the rear seat
  • adds 105 lbs for V-6, 90 lbs for V-8


https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2019-ram-1500-etorque-hybrid-pickup-drive

https://jalopnik.com/the-2019-ram-1500-etorque-proves-that-electrification-w-1828568208

https://www.thecarconnection.com/ne...st-drive-the-silent-assassin-of-pickup-trucks
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
I read an article on this last night. It really only seemed like the advantage was saving 2-3 MPG in the article I read. No real other advantages. It seemed like it was very complicated in what it did. .... all for 2-3 MPG!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,854 Posts
Vehicle designers need to use every possible means at their disposal to improve overall fuel economy. 1 MPG is a win, 2-3 MPG is hitting it out of the ball park. Ford and GM have lightened their trucks and largely switched from V8 engines to 6 cylinder engines, 4 cylinder engines and now diesel engines but they need to continue to push towards better fuel economy. Ford and GM will take notice, may follow with their own hybrid truck offerings.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
Vehicle designers need to use every possible means at their disposal to improve overall fuel economy.
Regardless of making it overly expensive and complicated. More things to fail and pay the dealers to fix. More parts suppliers. Certainly added cost to the buyer in the end even if they get a little better MPG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,854 Posts
Initially the cost of new technology can be high but over time the unit cost will drop. The price of the Gen1 Volt was initially much higher than the current Gen 2 Volt LT. Give the consumer a range of options so they will make the best choice for their needs.

Ford just spent years and untold $ developing a V6 diesel engine for the F150. Today, the consumer cost of the diesel option is at least $4300 higher than a comparable V6 gas engine F150. The price of the diesel option may come down, meanwhile Ford is working on a hybrid F150 that may offer many of the same benefits as the diesel at significantly lower cost.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
Initially the cost of new technology can be high but over time the unit cost will drop. The price of the Gen1 Volt was initially much higher than the current Gen 2 Volt LT. Give the consumer a range of options so they will make the best choice for their needs.
Yes but you didn't address "More things to fail and pay the dealers to fix. "

And then there is the warranty of the electronic part of this. Look at how many people here have reported 180 degree coverage of the same parts and situations at different dealers. If you have a good dealer (as I do - A/C charger replaced then later part of battery pack) then things seem great but a lot of stories of bad dealers we read about for hybrid systems like the Volts even.

Instead of a regularly hybrid and "half-hearted attempt" make it a full plug-in hybrid if you are going deal with start/stop, increased MPG (ie. first X miles on battery).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,854 Posts
Time will tell if the hybrid components are reliable. It is interesting the FCA has chosen two different motor generators, one liquid cooled and one air cooled, for the V6 and V8 RAM 1500 48 volt hybrid systems. Both hybrid configurations use the same air cooled 0.4 kWh 48V lithium ion battery pack. Maybe the engineers know that the motor generator in the V6 is going to see more use providing extra torque while pulling away from a stop light and when shifting. That would explain the decision to include liquid cooling for the V6 Ram 1500 electric motor generator, in spite of the extra weight and additional plumbing, but not use liquid cooling on the V8 equipped with the hybrid system.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Regardless of making it overly expensive and complicated. More things to fail and pay the dealers to fix. More parts suppliers. Certainly added cost to the buyer in the end even if they get a little better MPG.
This is Nissan's position on their air-cooled Leaf battery pack when compared to the Volt's (and Tesla) liquid cooling. So the Leaf is less expensive, less complicated, but less durable based on the Leaf's loss of battery range.

2-3 MPG increase represents a 12%-18% boost in fuel economy on a 17 MPG vehicle. If someone offered a 12%-18% ROI on your checking or savings account people would line up in droves. Whether the extra money comes from fuel savings or a bank account should not make a difference. Green (money) is green either way.

I just think it's funny they don't want to scare away "macho men" with a hybrid badge. I sure hope they don't use energy saving LED's on that truck, that could be the final straw, haha. I remember some years ago that people started stockpiling incandescent light bulbs rather than use efficient, "big government" CFL's or LED's.

I hope more company's add hybrid and even PHEV's to their truck lines and sooner rather than later. You just can't tell truck buyers there is a battery involved unless it's 12V :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,890 Posts
Every little bit helps. I remember talking to a guy I worked with about the Dodge Ram trucks getting 36 mpg (probably Imperial) where they used closed shutters on the front at highway speeds for better aerodynamics. They aren't going to get as simple as they were in the 60's except for EV's but then we have electronics and software and wiring and sensors to take up the slack.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
2-3 MPG increase represents a 12%-18% boost in fuel economy on a 17 MPG vehicle. If someone offered a 12%-18% ROI on your checking or savings account people would line up in droves. Whether the extra money comes from fuel savings or a bank account should not make a difference. Green (money) is green either way.
Haha, not sure that hyperbolic analogy works. I don't think a large percentage of truck buyers do the math on fuel cost ... unless you are fleet manager. Plus they would have to calculate how long the higher cost hybrid would return an ROI with filling up the tank. I think commuters may.

Just an odd situation and I think going full plug-in is the real break thru and owners would see/feel the difference of not filling up as often. Hybrid trucks have been around for many years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Truck drivers indeed care about economy. And it is climbing. 20 mpg with a 300HP+ full sized pickup used to be a fantasy. My '73 Ford with a 460ci engine never hit 10 mpg on the highway (225HP).

10% reduction in SUV/Light Truck fuel economy will do more for the environment than all the existing Hybrid and Electric cars on the roads in the US. It's a numbers game. They have the numbers.

In 2018 a Ford F-150 with 325HP (new SAE) gets an EPA of 22mpg combined. This is easy to exceed by 10%: set the cruise at 65mph and putting on a tonneau cover. And 325HP SAE today = about 390HP SAE in 1968. 0-60mph in 5.9 seconds, mid 14 second ET's.

Now pre-closed loop digital engine control, with >20 times the emissions:
1995 F-150, with 210HP (old SAE) gets 13 mpg combined EPA. If you pray and have a tailwind.

With the lifespan of pickups, and massive numbers on the roads, boosting MPG in trucks is critical.

I used to dyno tune trucks for fuel economy, and I was pretty good at it. [email protected], 2.0x 0-60mph, 197.044 mph at Bonneville... and 25 mpg highway at 70 mph. This was written up in a magazine.

The idea that pickup drivers are biologically and mentally inferior to desk jockeys is comedy. Few great inventions came from filing clerks with liberal arts degrees.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Trivia - GMC was the leader in heavy duty electric trucks, and perhaps the last producer until this century.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
20,890 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
The idea that pickup drivers are biologically and mentally inferior to desk jockeys is comedy. Few great inventions came from filing clerks with liberal arts degrees.
I agree. There are two extremes. Commuter Cowboys who buy a truck for image appear to be driving Ram's decision to hide the hybrid. In contrast, those who operate fleets are keenly focused on costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
283 Posts
I read an article on this last night. It really only seemed like the advantage was saving 2-3 MPG in the article I read. No real other advantages. It seemed like it was very complicated in what it did. .... all for 2-3 MPG!!
I'm a dealer tech with Chrysler. You're only focusing on part of the benefits. Things you can't put into numbers are how long it takes to get the engine back running during a stop/start event, how quick it can get off the line when you're booting the throttle during the stop start event, and how much torque can the EV system put back into the powertrain after a regen event.

The MPG's are only part of it. The eTorque's mission is making the evils of stop start a seamless event, so you capture the gains of off engine idle and regen braking without souring the V8/V6 experience. If you've ever driven an early stop start vehicle, they're awful. This makes the awful go away, while padding the fuel numbers a bit.

It's all about the driver experience.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
I'm a dealer tech with Chrysler. You're only focusing on part of the benefits. Things you can't put into numbers are how long it takes to get the engine back running during a stop/start event, how quick it can get off the line when you're booting the throttle during the stop start event, and how much torque can the EV system put back into the powertrain after a regen event.

The MPG's are only part of it. The eTorque's mission is making the evils of stop start a seamless event, so you capture the gains of off engine idle and regen braking without souring the V8/V6 experience. If you've ever driven an early stop start vehicle, they're awful. This makes the awful go away, while padding the fuel numbers a bit.

It's all about the driver experience.
Thanks for your input. It seems to me that the start/stop purpose is for increased MPG. As long as the A/C or heater work adequately during those stops then it seems like a good deal.

I really think a plug-in pickup with a decent battery is the game changer as long as the price is comparable. Hope that helps explain my point of view (ie. impressions from that detailed article).

Here is the article I read and I thought it had really good details in it describing the system. I didn't really read that the EV system actually adds_to/increases the driving experience just that it doesn't distract or less it. ie. better off the line feel from electric motor boost.

https://jalopnik.com/the-2019-ram-1500-etorque-proves-that-electrification-w-1828568208

I spent hours driving the V6 and V8 eTorque hybrids on the rolling hills of Kentucky, looking for strange drivability issues that the integration of the mild hybrid system might have introduced. For the most part, I found the system to be seamless.

Stop-start was fairly smooth, with the engine shutting off when the truck came to a halt, and the MGU quickly and harmoniously firing that engine back up to accelerate the truck from a stop.

I not only towed a trailer, but I quite frequently hammered on the gas pedal like a jackass, and the truck took off like it should, and made all the right sounds. In other words, the hybrid powertrain doesn’t soften the grunt of that 5.7-liter motor or of the 3.6-liter (which, at 305 horsepower, wasn’t slow, but definitely spent a lot of time high in the rev range when I drove it).

In many ways, both the 5.7-liter and 3.6-liter hybrids behaved quite similarly to their non-hybrid counterparts from the previous generation truck.

Every 3.6-liter DT Ram must be optioned with the mild hybrid system, and that means you get to lug around 105 pounds of extra weight, plus you get to deal with the loss of packaging space (which could make repairs more difficult), and you’ll have to deal with whatever servicing comes with maintaining a liquid-cooled MGU and an air-cooled lithium ion battery pack.
...
>>> As far as the drivability benefits of the system, I can’t say I really noticed them in my short time driving the truck. If anything, the only true benefit was the seamlessness of the start-stop events, but I haven’t really paid attention to how a regular non-hybrid Ram handles those, so it’s hard for me to really quantify that. <<<
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,990 Posts
Somewhat interesting, yet I can’t get past how my wife’s 90’s Dodge Daytona had a nice engine, but lousy interior build quality. Have they fixed that with the Daimler or Fiat takeovers? I need to eventually replace my 9 mpg suburban 2500 with a 454cu in V8, but at 300-1000 miles per year, the only way to see an ROI is for the vehicle to be free. The only other advantage I see is a working AC and modern amenities like Bluetooth, more airbags, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,521 Posts
I read an article on this last night. It really only seemed like the advantage was saving 2-3 MPG in the article I read. No real other advantages. It seemed like it was very complicated in what it did. .... all for 2-3 MPG!!
Do the math!
EPA ratings for RAM 1500 5.7L: 17mpg combined without, 19mpg combined with.

1/17 - 1/19 = 2/323
1/50 - 2/323 = 323/16150 - 100/16150 = 223/16150
16150/223 ~= 72.4

Toyota could only dream of making a 72.4mpg Prius.

10,000 miles:
10,000/17 - 10,000/19 = 61.9
3 * 61.9 = 185.7

Given reduced brake wear from regenerative braking, if the fuel-economy benefits are real (unlike some older mild hybrid systems) it seems like it'd be a no-brainer purchase. But there are possible effects on GVWR or other forced upgrades that could render it unsuitable or up the hybrid premium.

I'd note that GMC Sierra Hybrid sales are up.
Sierra eAssist is under $1135, but it's only offered on limited trims, so the real premium is larger, and GVWR is given as a bit over 7,000lb. Don't know how that compares.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,391 Posts
Given reduced brake wear from regenerative braking...
Do you think normal pickup purchasers long-term ROI math :)

I would guess that the regen is barely noticeable (< Volt in D?) so I wonder how much it would reduce brake wear? If the regen was significant, OTOH, that would/will be a big deal. The article didn't mention the feel of them so I would guess they are not even noticeable. https://jalopnik.com/the-2019-ram-1500-etorque-proves-that-electrification-w-1828568208

Brakes are no small expense as I'm aware from when I owned a Ford Expedition (03) and Explorer (91).


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,405 Posts
Brakes are cheap, but a non-issue on trucks.

A pickup that is 8,020lb wet, w/ >110,000 miles, lots of towing (racecar trailer) and dragstrip use (Hit brakes HARD at 110mph, about 1,000 times in 10 years), still our 2006 full sized pickup is on the original brakes. Brakes are often lifetime on modern vehicles.

But say I want to change them:

At NAPA - 8 Ceramic pads front, rear - $101.98 + 2 front rotors $94 + 2 rear rotors $106 (premium) = $302. Less than cost of a Tesla rotor, but many times more powerful and durable.

8 lug HD sealed wheel bearing and ABS sensor module and cabling? $175x2 fronts, drop in, plug and play, 1 hr in your garage if you suck. Rears should be done by somebody with talent, but parts are under $200. They are lifetime normally though. It's a freakin' AAM 11.5" locker full floating. It will take over 2000HP without breaking a sweat. I've put over 5,000 lb in the bed of an 11.5" AAM, enough to bend the axles on play trucks or SUVs and driven it. And towed >50,000lb at WOT with them repeatedly.

People are fixated on what they THINK today's trucks are. Primitive relics from the 1950's. Certainly not the most competitive designs in the US market. GM is sporting 445 (new method) SAE Horsepower and is probably underrated with 910ftlb of torque for their 250,000 mile version with their medium duty bulletproof transmission, although 500,000 miles is more common. 445 new method is about 550HP SAE from 1968. More power than a F40 Ferrari when using the same SAE spec.

This is more powerful as well as cleaner and with less GHG/mi than any previous efforts at these kinds of power levels. The engineering is intense. Solid roller cam, inconel valves, variable vane turbocharging, over 30,000 psi fuel pressure, more than 5 unique injection events per revolution, rotary forged and nitrated fully counterweighted crankshaft, "learning" ECM and TCM, the ability to alter injection shot for each cylinder based on crankshaft acceleration, water-cooled oil, water-cooled turbocharger, gear driven fuel pump/waterpump/camshaft, etc. ECM controlled alternator, turbo-controlled engine braking, cold air EGR, cold air induction, 4 valves per cylinder, induction hardened cylinders that show no wear at all after 250k miles, internal cooling loop in piston crown with finger style oil injectors to cool crowns... I could go on and on.

It makes anything coming out of Europe or Japan look like a VW Beetle engine, even their race car engines. Because with all that race tech in the Dmax, it's not a grenade, and it doesn't wear at WOT, and can easily double the output with no harm. Try to double the power on a Mercedes and see what happens.

Why don't the Germans or Japanese make decent heavy duty pickup after 50 years? Because they can't, or they would.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,925 Posts
I would guess that the regen is barely noticeable (< Volt in D?) so I wonder how much it would reduce brake wear? If the regen was significant, OTOH, that would/will be a big deal. The article didn't mention the feel of them so I would guess they are not even noticeable. https://jalopnik.com/the-2019-ram-1500-etorque-proves-that-electrification-w-1828568208

Brakes are no small expense as I'm aware from when I owned a Ford Expedition (03) and Explorer (91).
Perhaps you overlooked the passage in the article saying, "Another part of that fuel economy benefit is regeneration, which occurs during coasting or braking..."

That suggests the vehicle has a blended braking system, whereby the brake pedal allows the driver to modulate the regen level, slowing the vehicle faster, without necessarily using the friction brakes. The larger the vehicle, the less momentum loss you want to create merely by easing off the accelerator, so it would seem wise to limit "coasting" regen to the Volt’s D level.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top