2020 Escape Hybrid

[plus 3 golfer]

The width of the 2020 Escape excluding mirrors is 74.1”. Height is 66.1" without roof rack. Weight is 3554 and 3706 AWD for hybrid, 14.2 gallon tank. PHEV FWD only is 3884 pounds and 11 gallons.

The 2020 Escape has a frontal area that is likely about 6.5% greater than the C-Max. Weight of Escape is slightly less than the C-Max. The 2019 Escape has a 0.34 Cd. My guess is that the 5 % aero improvements of 2020 over 2019 relates to a lower Cd for the 2020 of likely around 0.32.

IMO, 40 mpg for the 2020 Escape hybrid will be a stretch.

https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North%20America/US/product/2020/escape/2020-Ford-Escape-Tech-Specs.pdf

Edited April 4, 2019 by Plus 3 Golfer

[ptjones]

I had a 2010 Escape Hybrid that I was getting 42City/35HWY without Aero and tire pressures and EPA was 34city/31hwy. I would think it is possible to improve 2020 Escape EPA # by  5 mpg , maybe more. :)

 

Paul

[plus 3 golfer]

People are estimating the Escape Hybrid MPG at 38 mpg as Ford has said the range will be about 550 miles.  With a 14.2 tank, the mpg = 550/14.2 = 38.7 mpg. 

 

The 2019 Rav4 which is AWD (for comparison to the 2020 Escape AWD) has a Cd = 0.30, a height of 67" and a width of 73".   This will yield about the same frontal area as the Escape.   The weight of the Rav4 is between 3755 - 3800 pounds.  The Escape hybrid with AWD weighs 3706 pounds.  EPA for Rav4 is 41/38/40.  I would expect the Escape EPA highway mpg to be below 38 mpg, since the Rav4 Cd is likely 5-7 % lower than the Escape (estimated at 0.32).

 

Of course as Paul says, one should be able to average above the EPA estimates with conservative driving and so forth.

[fbov]

https://media.ford.com/content/dam/fordmedia/North%20America/US/product/2020/escape/2020-Ford-Escape-Tech-Specs.pdf

Excellent link. The two 2.5L options, are FHEV and PHEV, hybrid and plug-in respectively. Note the plug-in has more HP and less fuel tank capacity. It makes sense that the plug-in would have a smaller tank to make room for a larger battery. According to this, there will also be an AWD hybrid, but no AWD plug-in. This is a hybrid in the mold of the Fusion Hybrid; just another drive train for a popular SUV. Look at the tires... big 17- and 18-inch rims with 25% greater load capacity than a C-max, in a lighter vehicle. It gets an inch and a half lift from the tires, alone. Ground clearance will be much greater, step-in height will not be car-like... it's an SUV. 

 

Have fun,

Frank

[raadsel]

It seems to me that too much is being made of the Escape PHEV having more horsepower than the FHEV. To be clear, the PHEV should have the exact same drivetrain (including electric motor and gas engine) as the FHEV, just that having a larger battery pack provides a higher amperage to the electric motor, which allows it to deliver more power (higher HP).

[joe]

Someone above said, "The cargo area is about 3 cubic feet smaller in the hybrids (37.5 to 34.4 behind the second row) due to the placement of the 12-volt battery in the rear."  I thought the difference had to do with the fact that the rear seats slide forward (37) and back (34). . .?

 

Regarding the 12-volt battery - it would be nice if Ford switched to a lithium battery instead of a lead acid battery.

[ptjones]

Someone above said, "The cargo area is about 3 cubic feet smaller in the hybrids (37.5 to 34.4 behind the second row) due to the placement of the 12-volt battery in the rear."  I thought the difference had to do with the fact that the rear seats slide forward (37) and back (34). . .?

 

Regarding the 12-volt battery - it would be nice if Ford switched to a lithium battery instead of a lead acid battery.

I'm sure a lead acid battery is cheaper, and more available.

 

Paul

[fbov]

It's not the price of the battery, its logistics: it's costly to maintain two different chassis electrical configurations. Production of complex machines is a death of a thousand cuts - the sheer number of parts needed to make these cars is staggering. Far easier to containerize drive trains separate from chassis as much as possible, since there will be several gas-only configurations on the same assembly line with the hybrid. 

 

I may go sit in a 2019... 

Frank

 

Huhh... just saw this:

"... vehicle comes with a liquid-cooled battery located beneath the second row of seats..."

 

The 11.2 qt. (electric) coolant is for the battery... perhaps overheating was an issue? Interesting innovation...

Edited April 6, 2019 by fbov

[plus 3 golfer]

Overheating is certainly an issue with battery degradation when charging PHEVs or EVs especially with an air cooled battery - just ask Phoenix area Leaf owners. There are several months where night time lows don’t drop below 90F and garage temp may not fall below 95F. IIRC, Li-Ion battery cell temps want to be below 130F. Add 240V level 2 charging with 30 Amp circuit and one is charging at 7.2 kW and air cooled would likely be insufficient to prevent significant degradation.

 

Active liquid cooled is more expensive plus the cell have to be protected from the liquid and hence won’t be in direct contact with the cells as air would be for heat transfer. So, the question is can the liquid cooling keep cell temperatures low enough when charging at 7.2 kW at high ambient temps. Charging at 120V takes too long and not very efficient. Perhaps, there’s a point in between to balance charge time, charge level, charge efficiency, and operations for minimal degradation. But how many “hoops” does the average owner want / have to jump through to preserve their HVB. Just go to the Energi forums.

 

I would not buy the Escape PHEV as I believe this overheating degradation will be an issue especially with faster charging. To an extent, the overheating degradation issue can be “hidden” from the customer by installing a larger battery and limiting charging to significantly less than 100%. So, the usable EV range will stay fairly constant over the life of the vehicle.

 

The “iCE” age will continue until HVBs are a commodity and one can pull up to an “energy” station and get a recharged “energy capsule” as Ford envisioned 60 years ago. A 40 mpg FHEV is fine for me at this time. :)

Edited April 6, 2019 by Plus 3 Golfer

[fbov]

I think both versions have the same electric coolant capacity, so I wonder if there's plumbing involved? I also wonder if battery temperature control has advantages for battery operating range, given Ford will sell me the same configuration they sell you. I run into cold limits (32 F for charging, 0 F for discharging), while your environment might require we all use a lower maximum charge level. Looking at Battery U., there's room for more than 75% upper limit, before life is substantially degraded from 75-25% operation.

https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/how_to_prolong_lithium_based_batteries

 

I wonder if active thermal control is used to extend the SOC range to 85-25%, allowing a smaller hybrid battery to have the same performance. Conversely, might it also keep mine warm when it's below zero. Might it also provide a degree of puncture protection, if the coolant seals off oxygen? 

 

Wondering...

Frank

[jestevens]

So if I was ready to go all electric and the price was right the plug in version would definitely be a contender..still have some range anxiety.  It would be no problem for a daily commute but I do sometimes like to take long trips on weekends.  We'll see.  Hopefully my C-MAX will still be going strong for at least another two years.

 

Oh, it's a plug in hybrid like the Energi - I just figured that most new plug in cars would be all electric 5 years from now..

Edited April 8, 2019 by jestevens

[joe]

I figure that when the electric only car has a range of 500 miles with a recharge time of ten minutes or less, then gasoline engines will be phased out.

[fbov]

That requires a battery swap system that doesn't exist yet. 

[fbov]

And the more I look at the spec sheet, the more I think they're using the same-or-similar HF35 transaxel. 

- "system power" is up 10 hp, but that's easy to get without EV changes, given a 25% ICE displacement increase

- total transaxel load is unchanged. Weight is down 2%, and once you account for tire size, final drive ration is only 1.5% higher. 

 

HVB is also a wash; if Ford can operate the smaller HVB up to 85% SOC with cooling, effective capacity becomes 0.66 kWh vs. our 0.7 kWh. 

 

If this is correct, operation should be very similar to our cars at lower speeds, with slightly worse highway mileage based on Cd and greater vehicle size (published range and tank size imply 10% worse mileage than C-Max, based on the same data). 

 

Specs comparison Cmax Escape.pdf

 

Have fun,

Frank

 

PS I also there's more interest in the car here, in the C-Max forum, than in any of the Escape forums because we're a bunch of hybrid drivers frustrated by the lack of current replacement options.

Edited April 9, 2019 by fbov

[SnowStorm]

Nice comparison!  A few thoughts:

• Still assembled in US!
• ICE:  Displacement up 24%, bore up 1.5%, stroke up 20%, compression up 5.7%
  I still wonder if the increases in stroke, displacement and compression, without much apparent increase in power, means that the new engine is more efficient (farther into Atkinson cycle territory).  Let's hope so.  (Trivia Note:  When I was a kid my dad decried the move to "short stroke" engines, feeling that "long stroke" gave better torque at low RPMs so you didn't have to downshift as much.  He would test drive a car up a certain mountain grade and if it could go up in 3rd gear it passed the test!)
• No more left-over oil from a 5 quart jug after an oil change!  (But better yet - EV with no oil change!)
• 4.7" taller with 1" less headroom had better give more ground clearance or seat height or both.
• More cargo space is great - and there should be a greater distance between wheel wells.

Still wondering about:

• Towing capacity for all variants
• Price of course
• Where's the Model E?????

[jestevens]

Maybe Ford reserved the "E" just to annoy Elon Musk - now he only makes S_XY cars..

[fbov]

• ...I still wonder if the increases in stroke, displacement and compression, without much apparent increase in power, ... "long stroke" gave better torque at low RPMs ...
• ...More cargo space is great - and there should be a greater distance between wheel wells.

• ...Towing capacity for all variants

You answered your own question. I expect more torque from an "oversquare" design (stroke/bore >1) than an "undersquare" design. Our stroke/bore is 0.95 and torque rather anemic and in need of EV assist. The 2.5L ratio is 1.125, so if HP is up 10, maybe torque will be closer to the EV side's 177 lb. ft? That would be impressive!

 

I think I saw a number in the low 40's for wheel well spacing...

 

If it's the same transmission, I expect the same towing prohibition. If this motor has a bunch more torque, perhaps it's a different tranny. 

 

Have fun,

Frank

[fbov]

"The Escape... hybrid models can each tow 1500 pounds. "

 

From a Car and Driver comparison with RAV-4 and CR-V. First time I've seen a tow ration confirmed. 

Frank

[nsteblay]

I think Ford should also produce a smaller Hybrid / Plug-in SUV similar in size to the Honda HRV and maybe they could call it something like, I don't know, C-Max II.  I'm really going to miss the C-Max form factor - it has been perfect for me.  I'll have to say I see more C-Max on the road than ever before.  They're a fantastic deal on the used car market and appear to have some longevity.

[ptjones]

I think they were saying that they are working on a small Hybrid SUV off of the Mustang format. :headscratch:

 

Paul

[markd]

I look for a Ecosport hibryd next year.

[fbov]

I think Ford should also produce a smaller Hybrid / Plug-in SUV similar in size to the Honda HRV... I'm really going to miss the C-Max form factor...

Ditto.

I look for a Ecosport hybrid next year.

That's the smaller Ford SUV all right, but I would be surprised if it wasn't an EV. 

 

Remember, too, that the Escape platform has a 2-door variant. I don't see it getting a hybrid option... but the bigger the family, the better the chances a hybrid option remains in the order book. 

[fbov]

Speaking of order books... 

2020 Escape Order Guide.pdf

 

And pricing

2020MY Escape  vs. 2019MY Escape - MSRP Price Comparison

• 2019MY Escape S FWD - MSRP $24,105
• 2020MY Escape S FWD - MSRP $24,885
• 2020MY Escape S 4WD - MSRP $26,385 (New Model)
• 2019MY Escape SE FWD - MSRP $26,500
• 2020MY Escape SE FWD - MSRP $27,095
• 2019MY Escape SE AWD - MSRP $28,000
• 2020MY Escape SE AWD - MSRP $28,595
• 2020MY Escape SE Sport FWD - MSRP $28,255 (New Model)
• 2020MY Escape SE Sport AWD - MSRP $29,755 (New Model)
• 2019MY Escape SEL FWD - MSRP $28,445
• 2020MY Escape SEL FWD - MSRP $29,255
• 2019MY Escape SEL AWD - MSRP $29,945
• 2020MY Escape SEL AWD - MSRP $30,755 (301A)
• 2020MY Escape SEL AWD - MSRP $33,040 (2.0L w/301A)
• 2019MY Escape Titanium FWD - MSRP $32,620
• 2020MY Escape Titanium FWD - MSRP $33,402 (Hybrid 400A)
• 2019MY Escape Titanium AWD - MSRP $34,120
• 2020MY Escape Titanium AWD - MSRP $34,900 (Hybrid 400A)
• 2020MY Escape Titanium AWD - MSRP $36,685 (401A)

All 2020MY Escape Models - Destination & Delivery = $1,095

 

... per posts in the blueovalforums' Escape & Kuga forum. 

 

Have fun,

Frank

Edited May 17, 2019 by fbov

[ptjones]

$1,095 delivery charge, Really? :drop:

 

Paul

[SnowStorm]

So is SE Sport FWD at MSRP of $28,255 the cheapest Escape hybrid?  (That's about a $4k jump over the C-Max.)  Love it that the "sport" model is hybrid only!  The hybrid image has finally changed!