Raj Nair discusses Hybrid Mustang at 2017 NAIAS

[OX1]

The top three selling sport utilities in the US are Rav-4, CR-V and Nissan Rogue, the smallest (except for HR-V) most fuel efficient SUV's in each of their respective lineups.

JD power says in terms of vehicle criteria for decision to purchase is the following:
1. Reliability
2. Comfort
3. Styling
4. Mileage

because it's relevant to the arguments in this thread vehicle performance comes in at number 7.

Again I am enthusiast so I'm not arguing for taking the fun away but we all need to be honest about what is happening

And the cars of the same size as those, would be more fuel efficient than any of them. As you found out, fuel efficiency is nowhere near the top priority.

The premise was people care so much about gas mileage, they would flock to a hybrid mustang. Now we know your average honda and toyota buyers, who wouldn't care if they were literally driving a washing machine (as long as Toy or Hon put their badge on it), don't care that much about MPG's, why does anyone think mustang buyers would?

And I could care less what they do to the 2020, if the 18 is any indication of where they are taking the styling :barf:.

Sponsored

 

[dron_jones]

And the cars of the same size as those, would be more fuel efficient than any of them. As you found out, fuel efficiency is nowhere near the top priority.

The premise was people care so much about gas mileage, they would flock to a hybrid mustang. Now we know your average honda and toyota buyers, who wouldn't care if they were literally driving a washing machine (as long as Toy or Hon put their badge on it), don't care that much about MPG's, why does anyone think mustang buyers would?

And I could care less what they do to the 2020, if the 18 is any indication of where they are taking the styling :barf:.

Tell yourself whatever you need to, to believe that you are right. It's clear that you are not interested in understanding whats going on.

Don't let the sky hit you on the head.

 

[Norm Peterson]

You lost me here, not sure i understand the point you are making.

By implication if you're not following the crowd that the mfr/mfrs are chasing, they'll gradually be giving up on you and people like you.

That becomes clearer - and a lot more personal - after you've been through it once or twice.


Your item 4 above is a better attempt at explaining customer awareness than mine. They may not know the details of why mileage is important beyond the scope of their monthly budget, but they sure are getting inundated with the message that mpgs and mpge's are things to be chased even if the monthly gasoline bill isn't already getting the point across.

Not that I'm against efficiency, but it's not #1 on my own list of priorities. Choosing between two cars of essentially identical performances, comparable driving enjoyment, and similarity in a few other areas, I would tend to favor the one getting better miles per gallon.


I'd be interested in seeing JDP's entire list, just for grins to see how differently I'm looking at the same criteria.


Norm

 

[dron_jones]

By implication if you're not following the crowd that the mfr/mfrs are chasing, they'll gradually be giving up on you and people like you.

That becomes clearer - and a lot more personal - after you've been through it once or twice.


Your item 4 above is a better attempt at explaining customer awareness than mine. They may not know the details of why mileage is important beyond the scope of their monthly budget, but they sure are getting inundated with the message that mpgs and mpge's are things to be chased even if the monthly gasoline bill isn't already getting the point across.

Not that I'm against efficiency, but it's not #1 on my own list of priorities. Choosing between two cars of essentially identical performances, comparable driving enjoyment, and similarity in a few other areas, I would tend to favor the one getting better miles per gallon.


I'd be interested in seeing JDP's entire list, just for grins to see how differently I'm looking at the same criteria.


Norm

Just keep in mind that the decision on what customers a supplier chases is not binary, its not one OR the other. Performance cars and aftermarket parts represent a multi billion dollar industry, no one is turning their backs on it, thats why all this "sky is falling", death of the v8, its not a mustang any more is so preposterous. Ford is just recognizing that there is a meaningful group of automotive people who care about fuel economy. They are also betting for the mustang that there is a group who see the performance benefits of the hybrid systems and want to see that at a level affordable to the every man/woman. Not at the expense of the v8, in addition to it.

Fuel efficiency is not atop the majority of peoples lists, and to be honest its importance rises and falls with the prices of fuels, unfortunately manufacturers can't turn development and R&D off an on like the fuel prices so they stay the course understanding that generally speaking the public awareness and desire for improved fuel economy is trending up.

Here is the total list, obviously each year is different so take it with a grain of salt, its not an exact science but does show you generally whats important to people.


1. Reliability
2. Interior Comfort
3. Styling
4. Fuel economy
5. quality of workmanship
6. Dealership
7. Performance
8 advanced technology
9 Image
10 Safety

 

[Norm Peterson]

They are also betting for the mustang that there is a group who see the performance benefits of the hybrid systems and want to see that at a level affordable to the every man/woman. Not at the expense of the v8, in addition to it.

Concerns arise because of the V6 situation.

unfortunately manufacturers can't turn development and R&D off an on like the fuel prices so they stay the course understanding that generally speaking the public awareness and desire for improved fuel economy is trending up.

Understood. But the biggest bang for your research and development buck means you concentrate on the biggest segments of the market that you compete in. MPGe in the Mustang isn't going to be nearly as beneficial to Ford as MPGe in a Fusion or an Escape.

Here is the total list, obviously each year is different so take it with a grain of salt, its not an exact science but does show you generally whats important to people.

1. Reliability
2. Interior Comfort
3. Styling
4. Fuel economy
5. quality of workmanship
6. Dealership
7. Performance
8 advanced technology
9 Image
10 Safety

Thanks for this . . . the positions of a couple of items surprise me.


Norm

 

[dron_jones]

Concerns arise because of the V6 situation.

Understandable but two comments, 1. the v6 was not an iconic mustang/pony car engine 2. the v6 represented an entry level option to the mustang, the person buying the v6 typically considered price over performance. It was also a large volume for fleet sales at rental car (who would just buy the cheapest version to rent at a premium). The ecoboost sales showed that the market accepted this engine and still provides an entry level option for the cost conscious consumer while still offering performance benefits. The point being that the consumer for ecoboost 4 and v6 are on paper, not so different. the V8 and hybrid on the other hand are quite different, with the v8 enthusiast being extremely apprehensive of the change. This is why both options will almost certainly be available. Is there a risk of the v8 going away, sure, if the adoption of the hybrid is high and the v8 shrinks dramatically its a real possibility, but if the v8 sales remain strong i don't see it going anywhere.

Understood. But the biggest bang for your research and development buck means you concentrate on the biggest segments of the market that you compete in. MPGe in the Mustang isn't going to be nearly as beneficial to Ford as MPGe in a Fusion or an Escape.

This is a simplified way of looking at it, with a big company like Ford they have many irons in the fire, some will be the next big thing, some you will never heard of. Just because a hybrid mustang is a project does not mean that they are not focusing on hybrids in a fusion or an escape, nor does it mean that they aren't focusing on ford performance vehicles. In the latter they exist in completely separate groups so really minimal overlap in resources. Vehicle designs or ideas work in stage gates with each gate having its own criteria to be considered successful and move to the next round of development, the fact that the hybrid mustang has been announced means that the due diligence on the size of its market is already established and a known variable and green lighted. Does it mean that it can't change, no, of course they could still decide to can the idea, but the $ being invested are becoming more and more significant each day so the probability that it doesn't get released shrinks accordingly.

Thanks for this . . . the positions of a couple of items surprise me.

No problem. I wouldn't take this list as gospel, the ranking of these change quite a bit year to year, reliability is typically locked in at number one but other items can vary quite a bit based on demographic of respondents, geographical regions, fuel prices (as stated earlier) etc etc.... The list as a top 10 means more to me than the actual ranking order. Some would look at it and think "how can safety be less important than fuel economy", but the average person would answer that safety is important to them but at the same time when they go into a dealership and they ask questions about the car not many will ask about what the crash ratings are. I imagine many folks here who bought a mustang here would be in the same boat, safety is important to you yes, but it wasn't a main factor in your decision to buy a mustang.

 

[SnoopisTDI]

When talking about SUVs, you have to be honest about the different types of SUV buyers. You have the "too cool for a minivan" crowd, you have the people who just want AWD and maybe to sit a little higher, and you have the people who actually want old-school sport utility for things like 4x4 trails and hunting and fishing. Very few fall into the last category anymore, which means those of us who want that will end up paying more and more as we become a niche customer. So the venerable "SUV" becomes a minivan without sliding doors, a VW Golf with an extra two inches of ground clearance and a shitty AWD system, or you pay big money for a 4runner. The same can happen to affordable "sports cars" if we aren't careful. End up with a choice between bunch of somewhat sporty crap-wagens or an ever-more expensive sports car.

Hybrids make sense because trying to get up to speed is what really consumes gas. Maintaining speed is the easy part. I would think the people driving a v8 would appreciate getting more than 10 mpg around the city. Especially with unstable gas prices in our lifetime.

10mpg? Why stop there? I would think people driving a v8 would appreciate getting more than 100mpg! But of course that's ridiculous because the cost is outrageous. But doesn't getting just a few more mpg also have a cost? You can't just ignore the economics of the situation. Remember how disappointed people were that the M6G wasn't lighter than the previous generation? Now you are talking about adding more weight with batteries and motors(or expensive weight-loss methods). Remember how we were all saying the Camaro's sales sucked because it cost too much? Now you're wanting to make the Mustang more expensive.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered, but you can't just say "well everyone wants to be more efficient" while ignoring the costs of doing so.

 

[Norm Peterson]

This is why both options will almost certainly be available. Is there a risk of the v8 going away, sure, if the adoption of the hybrid is high and the v8 shrinks dramatically its a real possibility, but if the v8 sales remain strong i don't see it going anywhere.

One certainly has to hope that clear distinctions will continue to exist, and that any advantages of a hybrid don't run roughshod over the ICE-only trim(s).

This is a simplified way of looking at it, ... but the $ being invested are becoming more and more significant each day so the probability that it doesn't get released shrinks accordingly.

At this point with the announcement already made, 'put on hold' would be more realistic than outright cancellation, should CAFE requirements be relaxed (I'm not expecting them - in some energy usage form - to ever go away completely).

No problem. I wouldn't take this list as gospel, the ranking of these change quite a bit year to year, reliability is typically locked in at number one but other items can vary quite a bit based on demographic of respondents, geographical regions, fuel prices (as stated earlier) etc etc.... The list as a top 10 means more to me than the actual ranking order.

IOW, those various criteria should perhaps be viewed as fitting into a "very important", "sort of important", "not so important" scale???


Norm

 

[dron_jones]

At this point with the announcement already made, 'put on hold' would be more realistic than outright cancellation, should CAFE requirements be relaxed (I'm not expecting them - in some energy usage form - to ever go away completely).

Yes and no... if CAFE standards were drastically relaxed tomorrow i'd bet my paycheck that we would see no change to the plans to release the hybrid mustang. As stated before the demand is consumer driven and also to help show people that performance and hybrid are not mutually exclusive terms. Ford will meet its CAFE requirements easily with or without the hybrid mustang. If however consumer interest in such a vehicle were to change drastically then yes i could see it being put on hold. Realistically the only way i can imagine this happening is if another manufacturer is first to market in a similar way and their vehicle is colossal failure.

IOW, those various criteria should perhaps be viewed as fitting into a "very important", "sort of important", "not so important" scale???

Precisely. I can't speak to how exactly JD power performs their surveys but the ones I'm familiar with use a scale similar to the one you describe. The hardest part about most of these surveys is technically all these things are important to people but usually it comes down to only a handful that drive actual decision making. To complicate it even further you layer on what people are willing to pay extra for. Safety is a good example, its important to everyone but its almost a core expectation and people aren't willing in general to pay more for it. Technological advancements on the other hand people will pay through the nose. Just think back to about 5-7 years ago, people were willing to spend 4-5K just to have navigation as an option in their car, try getting someone to spend 5K extra on a car just because it has a higher crash rating - good luck with that!

 

[SnoopisTDI]

Yes and no... if CAFE standards were drastically relaxed tomorrow i'd bet my paycheck that we would see no change to the plans to release the hybrid mustang. As stated before the demand is consumer driven and also to help show people that performance and hybrid are not mutually exclusive terms. Ford will meet its CAFE requirements easily with or without the hybrid mustang. If however consumer interest in such a vehicle were to change drastically then yes i could see it being put on hold. Realistically the only way i can imagine this happening is if another manufacturer is first to market in a similar way and their vehicle is colossal failure.

If it's consumer driven, why do CAFE standards exist?

What would be the reaction of consumers if they were suddenly given a choice of paying $2000 more than the current car for a hybrid, or pay $2000 less because we no longer have to do this and that because of regulations? Yes, I pulled those numbers from my rear. But I don't think people are going to pay extra for the hybrid version. There have been many hybrid optioned vehicles offered - Jetta, Fusion, Tahoe, etc. From what I've seen, they all get luke-warm reception at best. The only successes are the dedicated hybrid platforms like the Prius.

 

[dron_jones]

If it's consumer driven, why do CAFE standards exist?

What would be the reaction of consumers if they were suddenly given a choice of paying $2000 more than the current car for a hybrid, or pay $2000 less because we no longer have to do this and that because of regulations? Yes, I pulled those numbers from my rear. But I don't think people are going to pay extra for the hybrid version. There have been many hybrid optioned vehicles offered - Jetta, Fusion, Tahoe, etc. From what I've seen, they all get luke-warm reception at best. The only successes are the dedicated hybrid platforms like the Prius.

Cafe standards came about in the 70's so if you are asking why they exist it was due to the oil embargo, if you ask why they exist today the government answer would be to ensure automotive manufacturers are improving fuel economy to reduce our carbon footprint and the associated environmental impacts.

The difference between the mustang hybrid and those you describe is that the mustang hybrid will be a purpose built performance hybrid, not one to offer better fuel mileage as its primary selling feature. If it happened tomorrow it would be the first time in history that there would be a production sub 100K hybrid performance car. Only time will tell how it will be received but my guess is that its success will be completely dependent on what it can deliver from a performance perspective.

 

[mikeyjobu]

Ages ago I floated the idea of a Mustang hybrid on Ford Social -- I got flamed -- cremated for it -- and Ford thanked me for the input. I hope they can marry it to a manual like Honda did with the CRZ. It's nice to see some people come around. Now if they can just do a V8 with a manual, and make it a plug-in hybrid... Funny though -- if lincoln did something like this without a V8, I'd be game -- but if it's a Mustang, it's got to be a V8.

 

[The Wizard]

Cafe standards came about in the 70's so if you are asking why they exist it was due to the oil embargo, if you ask why they exist today the government answer would be to ensure automotive manufacturers are improving fuel economy to reduce our carbon footprint and the associated environmental impacts.

The difference between the mustang hybrid and those you describe is that the mustang hybrid will be a purpose built performance hybrid, not one to offer better fuel mileage as its primary selling feature. If it happened tomorrow it would be the first time in history that there would be a production sub 100K hybrid performance car. Only time will tell how it will be received but my guess is that its success will be completely dependent on what it can deliver from a performance perspective.

A Tesla-killer, correct.
I would think a huge heavy battery pack won't be needed, just one that can send max current to the front wheel motors for a few seconds.
It will be an interesting software tuning job to optimize takeoff performance of this hybrid!

 

[dron_jones]

A Tesla-killer, correct.
I would think a huge heavy battery pack won't be needed, just one that can send max current to the front wheel motors for a few seconds.
It will be an interesting software tuning job to optimize takeoff performance of this hybrid!

I don't think mustang has any intentions of trying to bring down Tesla in the 0-60 ludicrous mode. To me thats a gimmick, i'd be must more interested in a more well rounded performance handling package.

No guarantees that it will offer AWD functionality even through electric motors.

Its possible that the car could be a RWD only, turbo engine with a supplemental electric motor to fill in the gaps in the torque curve. If this was the case the battery could be very small as the car probably wouldn't even have "electric only" option. The addition of the rear motor and battery and smaller front engine could help with weight distribution on the car.

 

[Norm Peterson]

The addition of the rear motor and battery and smaller front engine could help with weight distribution on the car.

There's a downside in that for handling - even if the total weight can be held constant. Putting the big masses out toward both ends of the car increases the yaw moment of inertia (slows/dulls steering response, may complicate stability control calibration).

I'm not denying the potential for improved acceleration, but what I don't want to see is gains for that necessitate losses on the corner-carving side of the coin. Too much of the Mustang's history has been life only in straight lines as it is.


Norm

Sponsored