The Thailand Special Thread - New Developments/News

[whynot]

Originally Posted by smoo

I don’t have faith in engineers. Look at the shit being released in the automotive world in the past 20 years. There’s probably more dud engines across all manufacturers full of inherent design faults and cost cutting measures that jeopardise the longevity of it than what there is decent engine. Even Honda have gone for a wet belt set up in one of their engines ffs.

Well, if you are correct, then it wont be long until we see a string of broken down Shark PHEV along the side of the road. Hey?

And if we don't?

[jpd80]

Perhaps the way people use the Shark 6 will determine if there’s issues or not,
anything at the moment is pure speculation but sounds like plenty of “guinea pigs”
are prepared to be early adopters….

[smoo]

Originally Posted by whynot

Well, if you are correct, then it wont be long until we see a string of broken down Shark PHEV along the side of the road. Hey?

And if we don't?

I suspect this is gonna be a repeat of diesel Focus.
Marketing and sales sold cars to people to be used in the wrong application, resulting in a lot of burned and unhappy customers.
Going off the carsales fuel figures we will probably see a lot of unsatisfied buyers who are spending more on fuel than Ram and Silverado owners.
Time will tell, maybe we revisit this in a year and see.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by smoo

Yes, so assume the same engine in in a small car the size of a fiesta.
It will most likely average low 5l/100km.
It’s burning three times that pushing this thing down the road at highway speeds when the battery reserve is depleted. That is a huge increase in the amount of work that engine has to do.


For reference. I’ve had both 100 series petrol V8 and turbo diesel.
Towing the same weight approx 2.2 tonne diesel in the vicinity of 14l/100km, petrol V8 20l/100km.

Fiesta ST I use as my daily, 1.6L turbo 4 ~250,000km on the clock and its hauling me around + a boot full of tools, does a bit of farm track work and off road access to infrastructure.

6.3L/100km on average but does 7-8L/100km if I do a lot of suburban traffic.

Somewhat interestingly, its capable of matching or bettering fuel economy its naturally aspirated brother in my shitbox fleet, both 1.6L 4 cylinder engines, same driver, same tools, same routes.

Somewhat curious to see what the BYD Shark does in suburban trade type work where you're doing traffic light to traffic light with some tools, or say 1.7 tonne excavator on machinery trailer, you'd probably be able to comfortably do that with 2500kg towing capacity.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Generally, most vehicles doing max towing use roughly three times the fuel compared to light cruise.
So if a vehicle gets 8 litres/100 km on the highway then expect around 24 litres/100 km when heavy towing.
It’s not perfect but seems to work for a lot of full sized gasoline pickups in the US but turbo petrol can be even worse.

Diesel engines seem to give about 30% better fuel economy when towing compared to petrol engines..

Hope this helps with estimations…

I think these days with a lot of the modern high torque engines, it's closer to double than triple.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by prydey

I think these days with a lot of the modern high torque engines, it's closer to double than triple.

Not according to lots of American tests, even BEVs use up to triple the energy when doing a heavy tow,
It’s not uncommon for full size gasoline Utes to go from US22mpg down to 7 mpg when doing max towing.
Also, the usable range is roughly a third of max distance on the battery. F150 can get by with us36 gallon tank
but the Lightning is stuck with an impossible task of recharging on anything longer than 160 km trip.

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by whynot

Yes, but don't mix up the one pedal brake setting that the driver can choose with the amount of regenerative braking that the computer applies.

When I drive an EV or a PHEV, I leave the one-pedal setting "off" as I cannot stand it.

But when one puts their foot on the brake pedal, one can usually see on the dash board how much retardation that the regenerative brake is applying. Keep pushing the brake pedal, and at some point the car applies pads onto disk. These days, it is hard to tell exactly when the pads are hitting the disk during braking.

With the new model Outlander (presume other PHEVs are the same) you can set the regen before or on the run, no need to brake just lift the throttle on a decline then adjust up or down to level 5 (max), like a retarder on a truck
Vehicle alone going down fairly steep terrain such as the kaimai range in (nz) level 4 will allow you to maintain a consistent speed with out the use of brake, I wouldn't think it would be strong enough to hold back a heavy trailer though you would need to use a bit of brake

[naddis01]

Interesting to note that news.com.au are reporting a much lower fuel consumption figure.
https://www.news.com.au/technology/m...4ca7ed95b084e0

I assume this is the exact same test as the Carsales one as they take the same route and the vehicle is the same in the photos. However there is no mention that they averaged between 14-16Lph. Just that the 2Lph claim is useless and they used closer to 10Lph.

[whynot]

Originally Posted by PooDog

, I wouldn't think it would be strong enough to hold back a heavy trailer though you would need to use a bit of brake

For regenerative braking, rotor speed is proportional to energy being recovered (aka effective braking). At slow speed, when the rotor speed of the permanent magnets is slow, there isn't a lot of magnetic flux cutting across the stator. By energising the field of the stator, it is easy to create a back EMF that helps slow the car down: and apply as much retardation force as mechanical brake pads. But that is actually using battery life, not adding to it.

As an aside, when a PHEV is cruising down the highway with the ICE on, even with the battery fully charged, there is a small amount of power being bleed off by the front generator and supplied to the rear axle motor. This is to prevent the flux from the magnet in the rear motor/generator causing energy losses due to magnetic flux.

When I had the Mitsubishi Outland PHEV, I was really impressed with the electrical engineering that had gone into the design and build. I was also really annoyed with a few engineering gripes as well (like battery life and the mechanical slop in the steering).

Just looking back through my old fuel logs for the Outlander PHEV, there was one stretch where I did 2,404 km over an eight week period. The refuel was 24.08 litres at an average fuel consumption of 1l/100 km. That is sort of like the type of city running for a tradie that the Shark will excel at.

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by whynot

For regenerative braking, rotor speed is proportional to energy being recovered (aka effective braking). At slow speed, when the rotor speed of the permanent magnets is slow, there isn't a lot of magnetic flux cutting across the stator. By energising the field of the stator, it is easy to create a back EMF that helps slow the car down: and apply as much retardation force as mechanical brake pads. But that is actually using battery life, not adding to it.

As an aside, when a PHEV is cruising down the highway with the ICE on, even with the battery fully charged, there is a small amount of power being bleed off by the front generator and supplied to the rear axle motor. This is to prevent the flux from the magnet in the rear motor/generator causing energy losses due to magnetic flux.

When I had the Mitsubishi Outland PHEV, I was really impressed with the electrical engineering that had gone into the design and build. I was also really annoyed with a few engineering gripes as well (like battery life and the mechanical slop in the steering).

Just looking back through my old fuel logs for the Outlander PHEV, there was one stretch where I did 2,404 km over an eight week period. The refuel was 24.08 litres at an average fuel consumption of 1l/100 km. That is sort of like the type of city running for a tradie that the Shark will excel at.

Umm OK, ill take your word for it on the electrical wizardry
Yep,, we bought it knowing it was an old tech cobalt battery, Mitsi own Yuasa so I presume it's made by them

They Seam OK in respect to catching fire etc, charge range can vary a lot it can be anything from 70 to 100km?

We've had it down to 1l/100km also, it actually comes up that the fuel could be getting stale if you don't use any for a while and runs the motor so you have to add fuel..... Quite technical really

[whynot]

Have a bit of a dig around on Google using the following key words;

"Technician Training Guide" "PHEV Outlander" "Mitsubishi Motors Australia"

The 2014 version is getting a bit dated now (it is over a decade old). That said, it is a great guide to how PHEV technology works, with lots of breakout coloured diagrams of the various subsystems and how they work together.

[XR Martin]

Yuasa batteries are not owned by Mitsubishi.

They do have a joint venture with them in producing Lithium batteries though.

[PooDog]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

Yuasa batteries are not owned by Mitsubishi.

They do have a joint venture with them in producing Lithium batteries though.

Wikipedia says there parent company GS Yuasa is a joint venture between GS Yuasa and Mitsubishi

So what do you want to call them joint owners?