Ford brought one of its 2010 Fusion Hybrids to the Larz Anderson Auto Museum in Brookline Wednesday, giving its marketing people a chance to show off the vehicle to the area's automotive media and fleet managers. The vehicle, rated at 41 m.p.g. city and 36 m.p.g. highway, goes on sale later this spring. The price, for a well-equipped Fusion, will be $27,200, about $3,000 more than for a four-cylinder gasoline-powered version that, in its own right, delivers 23 city and 34 highway. Full Article I found this comment odd
What's so strange about the D cells? The pack in the Escape hybrid is apparently made up of D cells. https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/pdfs/2009_Hybrid_ERG_FINAL.pdf confirms it.
I believe the turtle icon was more to do with the SOC management because it showed that icon when the battery is low. The cooling for the D cells may be harder but Ford discharge them hard. Ford is allowing Fusion hybrid to go up to 47 mph on battery alone. That will definitely strain the HV battery more. They use Sanyo cells with 1.33v instead of PEVE 1.2v.
Well it just meant that don't expect to pass anyone cause you'll be relying on engine power alone as the HV battery will not assist.
Nickel-based cells all have the same voltage behaviour. The quoted voltage is a nominal value, because the voltage changes with the state of charge and load on the cell. Toyota/Panasonic EV Energy have chosen to quote the low value of 1.2V; Sanyo/Ford quote 1.33V; sometimes you see cells quoted as 1.25V. Similarly lead-acid cells are nominally quoted at 2V, so a 6-cell battery is quoted as 12V, but they're expected to be over 13V in good condition (under no load) and charge at up to 14V. Lithium-ion cells are normally quoted at 3.6 - 3.7V.
So they did everything they could to "squeeze" every mile er gallon they could out of the car, but then the article says it is not as aerodynamic as the Camry. So I guess they didn't squeeze too hard. Still, nice work on Ford's part. As an aside, I was listening to an NPR discussion on the X prize and they interviewed several contestants. At least a few of them said they were using small cameras as side rear view mirrors with a mirror sized monitor inside each door. They claimed the mirrors caused significant aerodynamic drag. If this is the case, why hasn't Toyota done this?
For the same reason the production Aptera will have conventional mirrors instead of the cameras used on the concept. Cost. A camera and display costs quite a bit more than a piece of glass and a plastic housing.
With the cost of cameras and lcds so low, I can;t imagine it would add more than a few hundred dollars to the cost of the car - but what do I know. Never having to wash a side mirror again is worth something isn't it?
You still need real mirrors for backup in case of camera or electronic failure. The X prize cars probably aren't road-worthy in terms of safety regulations. I'd pay extra to have folding mirrors that house sideview cameras when folded (even better if they can eliminate blindspots).
I'd guess it's a combination of three factors. One is safety regulation. The regulations are dated and likely do not have any flexibility in them to allow a camera to substitute for a mirror. The second is the "feel". As I understand, one of the things Toyota has strived for with the Prius is that it is, more or less, a "normal" car. Changing such a fundamental piece of equipment would really break that paradigm. The third issue, and in reality this might be the biggest one, is the screen brightness. As we all know, in direct sunlight the MFD is almost useless. I would not like to look over to the side mirror and find that I can't see anything because it's a bright day. LCDs for outdoor use exist, but they use lots of power and are more expensive than traditional LCDs (~$600 USD for a 6.5" screen, according to one vendor).
I'm sure several hypermilers on this board would have no problem getting that to happen. Probably like getting into our warp-stealth S4 mode. About the mirrors, paradigm shift and LCD brightness are probably the main factors. I'm not sure safety requirements really cover that - you don't need the RHS mirror for instance, at least ten years ago you didn't. Trucks (like U-Hauls or utility vans) don't have the windshield mirror. The Aptera I think would be ideal for camera & LCDs - mount the cameras on top of the outboard wheel wells to eliminate blind spots.