So it is possible! Diesel Hybrid

[HammaMan]

The Lightning is fine, but if you tow, its nearly worthless. I have no idea how the Ramcharger may or may not fix this but if you can continually tow hundreds of miles so long as there is fuel in the tank.... definitely better than Lightning. Now, perhaps if the battery is depleted, even with fuel in the tank, maybe it won't have enough power to keep towing full loads??

It's simple math, yes the ram charger with its 130kW generation can both tow a trailer and charge its battery simultaneously. Here's the interesting part since the math is easy to do. The tesla semi averages 1.6kWh/m (in pepsico's use case), the ram charger's generator can provide the tesla semi 81 miles of range / per hour. What wasn't provided regarding the semi is what its usage per given speed. That's just an average so what the math doesn't tell us is that it can run it at say 70mph which may use more power than the average.

What we do know however is that the RC uses a common vehicle V6 NA engine. Car engines are designed to be decently efficient across a broad RPM. A smaller purpose built engine tailored to run at peak efficiency for constant RPM would be a better fit both literally and figuratively. They're just using an engine they have at hand already for the project to get it out the door.

Where the RC concept diverges from reality is that the power generator is ~500lbs dead weight when not needed. The battery with 140miles or more of range is also dead weight if not needed. The average daily mileage is somewhere around 40 miles. In the next 4 years chargers will have significantly increased in volume -- there should be nearly 3x as many within 5 years time. The more ubiquitous the charging situation, the less sense having both a large battery and power unit onboard makes. That use case is going to make for a horrible ownership as no engine likes to sit for months at a time, nor does ethanol containing gasoline. Perhaps we'll see this evolve as they get their test articles on the road providing better clarity to what the realistic use / needs are.

Sponsored

 

[amschind]

I didn't realize how bad the 3.0 PS was. I very nearly bought that instead of the PB, but a neighbor's dad who has forgotten more about diesels than most diesel mechanics will ever know told me, "If you aren't making money with a vehicle, use a gas engine instead of a diesel."" His point being the maintenance requirements to keep a diesel running well are beyond what it makes sense to pay unless it's paying you back for driving it. Many folks, even a lot of truckers, let maintenance slip to save money or through sheer indifference; gas engines will tolerate that, but diesels will not.

 

[amschind]

It's simple math, yes the ram charger with its 130kW generation can both tow a trailer and charge its battery simultaneously. Here's the interesting part since the math is easy to do. The tesla semi averages 1.6kWh/m (in pepsico's use case), the ram charger's generator can provide the tesla semi 81 miles of range / per hour. What wasn't provided regarding the semi is what its usage per given speed. That's just an average so what the math doesn't tell us is that it can run it at say 70mph which may use more power than the average.

What we do know however is that the RC uses a common vehicle V6 NA engine. Car engines are designed to be decently efficient across a broad RPM. A smaller purpose built engine tailored to run at peak efficiency for constant RPM would be a better fit both literally and figuratively. They're just using an engine they have at hand already for the project to get it out the door.

Where the RC concept diverges from reality is that the power generator is ~500lbs dead weight when not needed. The battery with 140miles or more of range is also dead weight if not needed. The average daily mileage is somewhere around 40 miles. In the next 4 years chargers will have significantly increased in volume -- there should be nearly 3x as many within 5 years time. The more ubiquitous the charging situation, the less sense having both a large battery and power unit onboard makes. That use case is going to make for a horrible ownership as no engine likes to sit for months at a time, nor does ethanol containing gasoline. Perhaps we'll see this evolve as they get their test articles on the road providing better clarity to what the realistic use / needs are.

And more to the point, the benefits from a series hybrid mostly show up in the form of heavy optimization of the ICE to run at its best efficiency point, even to the point of very different engine designs. With a series hybrid, you are actually better off without cams and heads, much less advanced cam timing or waste gates. An opposed piston 2 stroke SCCI engine is significantly worse than a modern 4 stroke SCSI when running at a wide variety of load and RPM conditions, but it runs circles around the same 4 stroke if called upon to run within a narrow RPM band indefinitely. A small (like 1.0-1.2L) displacement opposed piston 2 stroke with simple turbos running max boost turning a generator is DRAMATICALLY simpler than the engines that we have now, while also being 1.5-1.7x as efficient.

My next F150 or F250 will get >40 MPG combined unladen with torque specs as good or better than the current Lightning. I expect to wait 10-17 years for that to become available, but it could be done in 2 years.

 

[JJSnell]

@Suns_PSD @Snakebitten @Jerome10 @Samson16 @Henfield

So here are some breakdown numbers, (I know... it's what I do... I'm a business owner so I'm always crunching numbers.)

(based on GasBuddy pricing in my area)

PowerBoost	Gas (Regular)​	Diesel​	Tank Size​	Miles Per Gallon​	Total Miles per Tank​	Annual Cost (10,000 miles)​
	$4.29​		28​	24​	672​	$1,787.50​
Duramax 3.0		$4.99​	28​	27​	756 (1.5-2 gallons DEF**)​	$1,848.14*​
Duramax Hybrid (Speculation)		$4.99​	28​	32 (benefit of the doubt)​	896 (2.0-3.0 gallons DEF**)​	$1,559.37*​

* - Annual cost does not include DEF purchase required.
** - DEF Fuel | Bulk DEF Tank | Ricochet Fuel Distributors

Ecoboost - 400HP
PowerBoost - 430HP (0.075% Hybrid increase from base Ecoboost)
Duramax 3.0l - 277HP
Duramax Hybrid -298HP (based on same Hybrid increase percentage as above)

The PB annual fuel is less expensive than the Duramax based on a 10,000 mile average per truck.

The Duramax (hybrid) with my own 'guesstimated' 32MPGs (based on no data, just a number for arguments sake, which I think would be high, shows to be lower than the PB by about $228.00 annually. Again this does NOT include DEF needed 1 gallon per 300-500 miles.

I also 'guesstimated' the HP increase of the Duramox Hybrid based on the same 0.075% increase the PB gained over the EB.

Long story short, by my own, non-professional assessment... You might pay less per year on a Duramax Hybrid, maybe.... But most definitely at the cost of lower towing capacity (about 1,000lbs) and the loss of well over 100-130 horsepower....

 

[JExpedition07]

GM is pairing their hybrid system with the 6th gen small block gasoline V8 package, I don’t think the Duramax will be getting electrified due to the issue of cold weather stopping/starting a diesel. Maybe the 2.7 TM. GM has spent nearly $1 billion on this new V8.

 

[Jerry3741]

That's like ram 'e-torque not remotely close to a hybrid' system. I think that's it's technical name.

I think ford is done w/ diesels in F150 for now in the US. Demand just wasn't there. They need to look at serious electrification strategy in some form though. They've pretty much milked all of the COTS parts bins. It's time to tell the lawyers and bean counters to piss off while they fill a serious hole in the market using whatever feasible solution that looks like.

GM is selling all they can make. Ford put in a lousy engine to start with. If ford had a good engine & marketing had been good then they could still be selling.

 

[HammaMan]

GM is selling all they can make. Ford put in a lousy engine to start with. If ford had a good engine & marketing had been good then they could still be selling.

Is GM selling all they can?

 

[Roush Auto Detailing]

That 3.0 PS was the Lyon engine out of a 2004 Range Rover wrapped in Ford badging. Besides being a gutless pig, they are insanely unreliable and notoriously horrendous to work on. Awful engine package. I feel bad for anyone Ford suckered into buying that engine. It’s truly lousy on all fronts, and a maintenance nightmare as it ages. The timing set is weaker than the 5.4L 3V. To add salt to the wound, the 5.4 3V from 2007 was still faster than a 2022 Powerstroke F-150 LOL.

This motor is based off the modern European Lyon motor that has been proven to be reliable. What is not proven is if the modifications made by ford to make it suitable for truck use will hold up for people truly using it for a truck.

I own one and couldn’t be happier with it. There is such a common misconception of truck power needs these days. Trucks need torque more than HP when you use it for what they are made for. I tow a camper and enclosed work trailer with it and it’s phenomenal. Efficient (~13 mpgs pulling a 6800lb camper, ~16 mpgs pulling a ~3000lb enclosed trailer, ~24 mpgs around town and have got up to 34 miles a gallon on the highway on oem tires), enough power to get me up a 4 mile long 7% grade, quiet, and easy to work on so far being only 27K miles in. In my opinion, trucks need to be strong not fast.

The only downfall that I can think about it is the turbo lag. There are ways I can make it better, but will wait until the warranty is up before I do anything about that.

 

[Snakebitten]

I agree. Torque is what I want in a truck.
I'm amazed that my F150 has more available torque than my 7.3 Powerstrokes had. I worked those big brutes pretty good in the day.

 

[Samson16]

Can the tuner shops create a towing tune for our Powerboosts that keeps the torque but lowers the HP to combat heat builup? Work some of that VVT magic as it were...

 

[RickBullotta]

Back to the original question, sort of. Diesel/electric locomotives come to mind, which are more like the new RAM Charger.

 

[JExpedition07]

Can the tuner shops create a towing tune for our Powerboosts that keeps the torque but lowers the HP to combat heat builup? Work some of that VVT magic as it were...

That will create the opposite effect, lugging up on boost with less revs creates more heat and more stress on the oil. You want more rpm and to use horsepower to shed excess heat. Manually downshift to allow the engine to spin up/come off boost and watch your temps drop down immediately.

 

[Samson16]

That will create the opposite effect, lugging up on boost with less revs creates more heat and more stress on the oil. You want more rpm and to use horsepower to shed excess heat. Manually downshift to allow the engine to spin up/come off boost and watch your temps drop down immediately.

What if they could detune me to 350hp and 500tq?

 

[Samson16]

It’s a wonderful problem to have. My powertrain is just too strong lol.

 

[Samson16]

For instance, what if above 65mph one of the turbos is bypassed?

Sponsored