Bugs and odd decisions in the Outlander PHEV

[elm70]

GKN make all kinds of transmission components, including my 'wish list' 2 speed electric back axle. (as used by BMW to allow increase of performance at low and high speeds)

http://www.gkn.com/driveline/our-solutions/edrive-systems/integrated-edrive-systems/Pages/default.aspx

Possibly GWN is doing more "hardware" then not "electric" ... but as you "linked"

They offer integrated solution with EV motor bundle by gear and differential too.

It is looking to me like a "logo block" to put in the middle between two wheels , connect battery and ECU .. and it is ready to go.

Since they offer bundle solution ... if GKN does not make their own EV motors, they have a dedicated partner(s) for it .. that possibly is not the car producer that buy the GKN bundle

In the specific case of Outlander PHEV and GKN .. since this direct drive from ICE is "unique" .. the PHEV front EV motor .. must have been either a Mitsubishi "design" realized in joint venture with GKN .. or a GKN idea which find only 1 customer (or this customer paid and extra for have in exclusivity the solution)

PS: I'm wondering if GKN has any competitor in this EV motor bundle solutions ... :?:

PPS: Personally I like simple things .. 2 speeds transmission is not needed on EV motors .. EV cars should also be as simple as possible for be as maintenance free as possible ... on top ... a single gear offer the most smooth acceleration without any "burst" and/or "delay" when the gear is changed
Also .. for hybrid design .. I believe BMW i3 Hybrid deign is the "best" for my view ... ICE engine decoupled from the rest ... and only for charge the battery. This make more simple and economical the end result (unfortunately i3 is done by BMW, and they like to have massive profit margin on each i3 sold in the market .. as well i3 is just a compact "city" car, not a more generic family car)

Integrated eDrive Systems

This eDrive system integrates EVO Electric’s AF-130 three-phase permanent magnet motor with GKN Driveline’s Family 2 two-speed eTransmission and achieves a peak efficiency of 92.2% with a maximum speed of 150 kph.

 

[jaapv]

The i3 ICE is just an auxiliary engine to an EV car not a full-blown hybrid concept like other PHEV vehicles. Not a valid comparison, in truth.

 

[elm70]

The i3 ICE is just an auxiliary engine to an EV car not a full-blown hybrid concept like other PHEV vehicles. Not a valid comparison, in truth.

:?

Remove the parallel mode of Outlander PHEV .. and our PHEV is exactly like a i3 just with a smaller battery and a less efficient ICE

In my view ... PHEV should be simple ... so i3 is the model .. and Outlander PHEV is what is close to it .. compared to the other PHEV

i3 with extended range .. is consider a Hybrid car .. so a PHEV

 

[jaapv]

600 cc and 28 kW is nothing like an engine like a hybrid has. It is just meant to relieve range anxiety, nothing else.
Nor does removing the ICE from any PHEV make sense as it is a hybrid first and foremost.
Sorry to say so, but it is really a nonsense comparison.

 

[elm70]

Added few more points on the first page ... quite a long list I have to say of "defects"

Just back from a mid range trip .. 240km without recharge .. mainly at 140km with CC ... started with full battery .. from apparently 3/4 of tank I end up with "request" to tank as soon as possible ... dash reported 9.5L/100km ... at 140km this car consume a lot .. actually it does consume a lot as soon as the battery is empty .. definitely not motorway cruiser .. since it will be also annoying to tank every 350km .. while a diesel SUV could be tanking every 600km

Anyhow ... since my main usage is for 25km a day trip ... now I'm sure that for the next 3 months I will not get ICE start due to "old" fuel ...

 

[zzcoopej]

dash reported 9.5L/100km ... at 140km this car consume a lot

At 110km/h I get around 7L/100km unladen, I'm surprised that it would go up 2.5L just for that extra 30km/h? Were you using Save or Charge at all? What is your tyre pressure and were you carrying any cargo or other people?

 

[elm70]

dash reported 9.5L/100km ... at 140km this car consume a lot

At 110km/h I get around 7L/100km unladen, I'm surprised that it would go up 2.5L just for that extra 30km/h? Were you using Save or Charge at all? What is your tyre pressure and were you carrying any cargo or other people?

I did not use any save and charge .. I let the car do all automatically
Tyre pressure is in line with manual ... but I have winter tyres which may have extra resistance then normal tyres
No cargo, no towing just 3 adults in the car without any baggage ...

110km/h is too slow for my taste .. here is allowed 140km/h .. that means up to 150/155km/h on the clock there is no risk of any penalties.

Without the first 25/30km done on battery .. I will end up with over 10L / 100km

PS: At 110km/h I would have expect below 6L/100km .. I'm sure the diesel version does just over 5L/100km at that speed

 

[anko]

PS: At 110km/h I would have expect below 6L/100km .. I'm sure the diesel version does just over 5L/100km at that speed

Mitsu marketing materials say combined fuel economy is 5.7 l / 100 km. So, below 6 l / 100 @ 100 km/h would be exceptionally good. This is not a diesel ;-)

 

[elm70]

Mitsu marketing materials say combined fuel economy is 5.7 l / 100 km. So, below 6 l / 100 @ 100 km/h would be exceptionally good. This is not a diesel ;-)

These consumption number are tricky ... if car start with fully loaded battery .. and does 100km .. yes .. 5.7L/100km is realistic ... but if battery is empty at start ... I don't see almost any situation when 5.7L/100km is manageable with this PHEV

I think the selection of this 2L aspirated engine was a bad one ... they should have put a turbo diesel instead ... it will not had the issue on "ageing" fuel, and it will have had a way better fuel economy

Only issue .. economical .. Not sure how much saving in cost is this "old" 2L block vs a modern 120HP turbo diesel (1.6L turbo diesel would have done the job)

Yes ... using 1.6L turbo diesel parallel mode could have had only a very narrow usage band .. but .. I don't see the value of this parallel mode, since it does not make the car fuel efficient anyhow

As said ... a i3 approach could have been better ... independent generator .. and all time running in "EV mode" .. with limitation that for power above 60kw, ICE and generator need to provide juice to the car .. but ... 60kw are enough for most of the usage .. moving it to 70kw .. over 140km/h is possible in pure EV mode.

 

[jaapv]

I do not think you would be happy with a 600 cc motorcyle engine churning out all of 28 kW trying to push a two-ton car.

These are two so totally different concepts that any comparison must fail The BMW is an electric town car that offers an auxiliary ICE with a mini-fuel tank as an optional extra. Regard is as a kind of "spare wheel" to reduce range anxiety.
The PHEV is a hybrid with plug-in EVcapability which can be driven as a full hybrid in absence of charging faciities.

BTW - frequent cold starts is not something that does either diesel engines or turbos much good. I think I can understand the choice for an aspirated petrol engine.

I agree that the Mitsubishi is not a typical Autobahn Cruiser, although it is comfortable enough on long distances. That niche is reserved for the Volvo V60 PHEV. Frontwheel drive Diesel, rear axle EV motor, 285 kW. But no luggage space to speak of...(and considerably more expensive )

 

[anko]

Mitsu marketing materials say combined fuel economy is 5.7 l / 100 km. So, below 6 l / 100 @ 100 km/h would be exceptionally good. This is not a diesel ;-)

These consumption number are tricky ... if car start with fully loaded battery .. and does 100km .. yes .. 5.7L/100km is realistic ... but if battery is empty at start ... I don't see almost any situation when 5.7L/100km is manageable with this PHEV

You talk about consumption after the battery is depleted. So, I give you the official number for after the battery is depleted. Nothing tricky about it.

What I don't understand is this: First you say you expect well below 6 liters in that situation. Then, when I say that will be very hard as the official number is 5.6 liters, you say you don't see any situation in which that is achievable. You kill me :mrgreen:

 

[Fecn]

I think the selection of this 2L aspirated engine was a bad one ... they should have put a turbo diesel instead ... it will not had the issue on "ageing" fuel, and it will have had a way better fuel economy

I think they had to use a petrol engine as a deisel would require a DPF, which would in turn require that the DPF got up to about 500C to operate properly... not really viable when the engine is only running for short bursts to provide some extra oompf. I certainly wouldn't have bought one if it had been a diesel as a chap at work has been having endless problems with the DPF on his Audi due to only having a 15 min drive to/from work.

 

[elm70]

I do not think you would be happy with a 600 cc motorcyle engine churning out all of 28 kW trying to push a two-ton car.

These are two so totally different concepts that any comparison must fail The BMW is an electric town car that offers an auxiliary ICE with a mini-fuel tank as an optional extra. Regard is as a kind of "spare wheel" to reduce range anxiety.
The PHEV is a hybrid with plug-in EVcapability which can be driven as a full hybrid in absence of charging faciities.

BTW - frequent cold starts is not something that does either diesel engines or turbos much good. I think I can understand the choice for an aspirated petrol engine.

I agree that the Mitsubishi is not a typical Autobahn Cruiser, although it is comfortable enough on long distances. That niche is reserved for the Volvo V60 PHEV. Frontwheel drive Diesel, rear axle EV motor, 285 kW. But no luggage space to speak of...(and considerably more expensive )

Ok .. you don't like BMW i3 .. what about the Fisker Karma ... actually I should have took this one :ugeek: .. it was for sale here for less then 50k euro .. but .. not really a daily car ... (plus I read bad review of it)

Mainly for say that a design with decoupled ICE and power train .. is not bad .. and actually for this PHEV, I'm sure decoubling with a more efficient engine will have made better economy results

Anyhow ... there is no need to have frequent engine start ... with 9kwh useable , engine start is needed in worst case every 30min .. something like 15min EV mode and 15min recharge (actually recharge could be much longer) ... but optimize cycle can be find out .. without the need to run the engine for only 2 seconds like this PHEV is doing right now.

I really believe a 120HP Turbo Diesel engine would have been better .. but I guess the economy of having a 2L block available, made to pick this engine

 

[elm70]

You talk about consumption after the battery is depleted. So, I give you the official number for after the battery is depleted. Nothing tricky about it.

What I don't understand is this: First you say you expect well below 6 liters in that situation. Then, when I say that will be very hard as the official number is 5.6 liters, you say you don't see any situation in which that is achievable. You kill me :mrgreen:

I did not know your number was from empty battery .. not sure where you got it.

I see the advertise mpg is "faked" up by adding the usage of battery and without considering the engergy or cost involved on charger the battery from the net.

I believe the outlander diesel does around or even less then 6L every 100km at 120km/h speed .. but on this PHEV .. with empty battery at start .. I don't see any situation that 5.6L per 100km is possible.

 

[elm70]

I think they had to use a petrol engine as a deisel would require a DPF, which would in turn require that the DPF got up to about 500C to operate properly... not really viable when the engine is only running for short bursts to provide some extra oompf. I certainly wouldn't have bought one if it had been a diesel as a chap at work has been having endless problems with the DPF on his Audi due to only having a 15 min drive to/from work.

Must have been bad luck ... I'm not even try to blame Audi (which is a trademark which I don't like)

I used for many years both VW, Dacia and BMW, turbo diesel .. for a daily drive less then 10km per direction .. never had an issue with DPF

BMW in their diesel have the system that switch off the engine at traffic light ... that works as long as the battery is in good charge and good shape ... again .. DPF just work fine also in this condition.

Also the petrol catalytic in theory need high temperature for operate well ... something that this PHEV does ignore

 

[anko]

You talk about consumption after the battery is depleted. So, I give you the official number for after the battery is depleted. Nothing tricky about it.

What I don't understand is this: First you say you expect well below 6 liters in that situation. Then, when I say that will be very hard as the official number is 5.6 liters, you say you don't see any situation in which that is achievable. You kill me :mrgreen:

I did not know your number was from empty battery .. not sure where you got it.

I see the advertise mpg is "faked" up by adding the usage of battery and without considering the engergy or cost involved on charger the battery from the net.

Two fuel consumption numbers were quoted by Mitsubishi in 2013: 5.7 l/100 km (sorry, not 5.6) for driving around with an empty battery and 1.9 l/100 km for starting with a full battery and driving 25 km on fuel to reach the next charge station after the battery is depleted. If you make a little effort, these numbers can be found and interpreted easily. And of course, a number that expresses liters / 100 km does not include electricity.

Personally, I have never allowed myself to be 'fooled' by these numbers

 

[jaapv]

Also the petrol catalytic in theory need high temperature for operate well ... something that this PHEV does ignore

Really? The exhaust runs exceedingly hot, leading to many complaints about a burning smell... :roll:

Anyway, my previous diesel car (Jaguar) had to run for at least 100 km @ 120 kph to clear the filters from time to time, and that was with twice daily 25 km runs.

 

[jaapv]

I do not think you would be happy with a 600 cc motorcyle engine churning out all of 28 kW trying to push a two-ton car.

These are two so totally different concepts that any comparison must fail The BMW is an electric town car that offers an auxiliary ICE with a mini-fuel tank as an optional extra. Regard is as a kind of "spare wheel" to reduce range anxiety.
The PHEV is a hybrid with plug-in EVcapability which can be driven as a full hybrid in absence of charging faciities.

BTW - frequent cold starts is not something that does either diesel engines or turbos much good. I think I can understand the choice for an aspirated petrol engine.

I agree that the Mitsubishi is not a typical Autobahn Cruiser, although it is comfortable enough on long distances. That niche is reserved for the Volvo V60 PHEV. Frontwheel drive Diesel, rear axle EV motor, 285 kW. But no luggage space to speak of...(and considerably more expensive )

Ok .. you don't like BMW i3 .. what about the Fisker Karma ... actually I should have took this one :ugeek: .. it was for sale here for less then 50k euro .. but .. not really a daily car ... (plus I read bad review of it)

Mainly for say that a design with decoupled ICE and power train .. is not bad .. and actually for this PHEV, I'm sure decoubling with a more efficient engine will have made better economy results

Anyhow ... there is no need to have frequent engine start ... with 9kwh useable , engine start is needed in worst case every 30min .. something like 15min EV mode and 15min recharge (actually recharge could be much longer) ... but optimize cycle can be find out .. without the need to run the engine for only 2 seconds like this PHEV is doing right now.

I really believe a 120HP Turbo Diesel engine would have been better .. but I guess the economy of having a 2L block available, made to pick this engine

Where did I say I did not like the BMW? rather the opposite. You are still fishing for that designer's job in Tokyo? :twisted:
BTW Mitsubishi has the Astron Turbodiesel engine available, developed since 1975, so I guess your supposition lacks any foundation in fact.

 

[ian4x4]

One more feature for my wish list - automatic variable energy recuperation. (In the Smart Fortwo)

The energy recuperation system employs a radar-based sensor to provide anticipatory operation. It continuously monitors the traffic conditions and sets an energy recuperation level that suits the driving conditions.
As a result, the off-throttle braking effect varies. There’s also an Eco mode, activated by a simple press of a button next to the gear selector. It adjusts the mapping of the throttle and limits top speed to provide more efficient operation and a longer range.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/smart/fortwo/first-drives/2017-smart-fortwo-electric-drive-review

 

[greendwarf]

I think the selection of this 2L aspirated engine was a bad one ... they should have put a turbo diesel instead ... it will not had the issue on "ageing" fuel, and it will have had a way better fuel economy

I think they had to use a petrol engine as a deisel would require a DPF, which would in turn require that the DPF got up to about 500C to operate properly... not really viable when the engine is only running for short bursts to provide some extra oompf. I certainly wouldn't have bought one if it had been a diesel as a chap at work has been having endless problems with the DPF on his Audi due to only having a 15 min drive to/from work.

Also the whole point of the car is to be "greener" - which is almost impossible for a diesel :mrgreen: