Jump to content

Lincoln Introduces the Corsair Grand Touring: Comments


Drew Dowdell

Recommended Posts

Los Angeles - At the Los Angeles Auto Show, Lincoln introduced the Lincoln Corsair Grand Touring, a plug-in hybrid trim.  Based on the standard Corsair, the Grand Touring's powertrain consists of a 2.5-liter Atkinson-cycle four-cylinder gas engine and a permanent magnet synchronous motor.  The combined output based on Lincoln's calculations would be roughly 266 horsepower.  Electric All-wheel drive powers the rear wheels.  EV range is targeted at 25 miles EPA. 

Power is conveyed through a PowerSplit electric continuously variable transmission with two electric motors working together to provide very smooth acceleration. 

In addition to the five modes normally available to Corsair drivers, two additional modes are available on the Grand Touring;  Preserve EV mode recharges and saves battery power for later, the engine and motor work continuously to deliver full power.  The battery can be recharged up to 75 percent while in this mode. Pure EV mode is designed to keep the vehicle in all-electric mode as much as possible, only using the gasoline engine when the power demands exceed the electrical capabilities of the vehicle. 

The Lincoln Corsair Grand Touring will be built in Louisville Kentucky and will go on sale summer of 2020. 


View full article

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

when i was traveling the other day i passed two newer state fleet vehicles that would normally likely not otherwise be fleet vehicles.  A plug in hybrid Pacifica and a hybrid RAV4.  MN passing cheesy renewable energy mandates, they must have been extending orders to start spending big bucks on purchasing EV fleet vehicles to appear to be in sync with being green.  I suppose in some cases the hybrid costs more; in the case of the Pacifica, a lot more then buying a cheap ass grand caravan.  Not that state fleets will be buying Corsairs, but you never know....... at least the new Escape is a hybrid again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, regfootball said:

when i was traveling the other day i passed two newer state fleet vehicles that would normally likely not otherwise be fleet vehicles.  A plug in hybrid Pacifica and a hybrid RAV4.  MN passing cheesy renewable energy mandates, they must have been extending orders to start spending big bucks on purchasing EV fleet vehicles to appear to be in sync with being green.  I suppose in some cases the hybrid costs more; in the case of the Pacifica, a lot more then buying a cheap ass grand caravan.  Not that state fleets will be buying Corsairs, but you never know....... at least the new Escape is a hybrid again.

Hybrids make better sense for State, County and City fleets. They waste so much fuel idling their auto's that the higher mpg of a Hybrid makes sense as even in the case of a 5 year turn, they probably save money even with the higher initial costs.

Police auto's should all be hybrid with the amount of fuel they burn just idling. Plus they could benefit from the electric instant torque to get going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, dfelt said:

Hybrids make better sense for State, County and City fleets. They waste so much fuel idling their auto's that the higher mpg of a Hybrid makes sense as even in the case of a 5 year turn, they probably save money even with the higher initial costs.

Police auto's should all be hybrid with the amount of fuel they burn just idling. Plus they could benefit from the electric instant torque to get going.

in the case of a pacifica, its not worth it for a state fleet to spend 10 grand more, or more, for a multipassenger vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2020 at 12:36 PM, regfootball said:

in the case of a pacifica, its not worth it for a state fleet to spend 10 grand more, or more, for a multipassenger vehicle.

How do you quantify that? I see so many state auto's just idle in parks, on the roads, etc. They probably burn away $10 grand in a couple years just idling.

Washington state says they base replacement of an auto on mileage then years, so 150,000 miles or 5 years old if the auto has a record of problems. Otherwise the auto can go longer in the fleet if it has a low cost of maintenance.

Savings on 10 grand of fuel can easily make this up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, balthazar said:

I don’t even USE $10K of fuel in 5 years, never mind idling away $10K of fuel.

Correct, the City of Seattle here averaged 28,000 miles a year on their fleet vehicles and during sporting events, the Seattle Police auto's are constant running at idle for 6 to 8 hrs. All that fuel is wasted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dfelt said:

Correct, the City of Seattle here averaged 28,000 miles a year on their fleet vehicles and during sporting events, the Seattle Police auto's are constant running at idle for 6 to 8 hrs. All that fuel is wasted.

While a hybrid will save somewhat money on idling it will not be as significant as you think.  My wife drives currently a hybrid and at idle or even slow speed the engine indeed will be cut off.  However,  that will be the case only until the battery gets low and than the engine will kick in to recharge the battery.  When the weather is cold or hot and the load on the battery is high (plus municipal and police vehicles have additional equipment that will increase the load) the engine turns on quite often.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, ykX said:

While a hybrid will save somewhat money on idling it will not be as significant as you think.  My wife drives currently a hybrid and at idle or even slow speed the engine indeed will be cut off.  However,  that will be the case only until the battery gets low and than the engine will kick in to recharge the battery.  When the weather is cold or hot and the load on the battery is high (plus municipal and police vehicles have additional equipment that will increase the load) the engine turns on quite often.

I have thought of that and thank you for pointing it out, the Hybrid systems seem to be more efficient, your running a much smaller motor in generation mode than a big V8 idling all that time. 

Not sure who it was but I think it was @Drew Dowdell or @dwightlooi who pointed out that for a hybrid, you could have a very small 1L diesel generator that would be super efficient at recharging a battery pack.

I still think hybrids can be more efficient than a city, county or state, heck even federal just buying a ton of V8 auto's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/20/2020 at 7:36 AM, dfelt said:

How do you quantify that? I see so many state auto's just idle in parks, on the roads, etc. They probably burn away $10 grand in a couple years just idling.

Washington state says they base replacement of an auto on mileage then years, so 150,000 miles or 5 years old if the auto has a record of problems. Otherwise the auto can go longer in the fleet if it has a low cost of maintenance.

Savings on 10 grand of fuel can easily make this up.

https://carfromjapan.com/article/car-maintenance/how-much-gas-does-idling-use/

at 1/2 a gallon of gas per hour and 2.50 per gallon of fuel.......it would require 8,000 hours (333.33 days) of idling to burn 10k in fuel.  In the case of the Pacifica being a plug in, now you're burning electric energy created from fuel anyways or inefficient and costly and toxic renewable energy. And storing it in a big ass battery with toxic materials.

Edited by regfootball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/20/2020 at 1:03 PM, Robert Hall said:

As far as fleets, postal and parcel delivery seems like the use case where EVs could work the best.   Lots of stop and go low speed daily use. 

this i agree.

On 1/20/2020 at 10:31 AM, dfelt said:

I have thought of that and thank you for pointing it out, the Hybrid systems seem to be more efficient, your running a much smaller motor in generation mode than a big V8 idling all that time. 

Not sure who it was but I think it was @Drew Dowdell or @dwightlooi who pointed out that for a hybrid, you could have a very small 1L diesel generator that would be super efficient at recharging a battery pack.

I still think hybrids can be more efficient than a city, county or state, heck even federal just buying a ton of V8 auto's.

on the new Chevy Trailblazer it's only got a 1.2 to start with!

On 1/20/2020 at 12:53 PM, balthazar said:

Cops of course are the extreme. But not all fleets run that high; school buses average 12K but some are only 8K.

Regardless, it has to be the north end of the extreme to idle away $10K of fuel.

particularly for a state fleet vehicle that may only serve to be a company car for a desk employee to drive up to meetings and back a handful of times a week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/25/2020 at 3:40 PM, regfootball said:

now you're burning electric energy created from fuel anyways or inefficient and costly and toxic renewable energy.

Gonna Say some states might be toxic using Coal, but BS on the inefficient, costly toxic renewable energy. That is NOT TRUE!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ there are some numbers / facts worth consideration. Oils, greases and petrochemicals are required to build a wind turbine, a 2 MW unit costs 3-4 million & only lasts 20 yrs (with 3 gearbox changes along the way). Any discussion of efficiency must also take into account base costs and longevity. 

There’s a hydro-electric turbine that at least circa 1990 was using the same main bearing installed circa 1902. I believe the turbine was of mega-tonnage. Sorry I don’t recall the details, but it may very be still running. 

It was a major disappointment for me to learn a modern, new millennium turbine, that turns so incredibly slowly, isn’t built to last 75-100 years. That’s unquestionably, an inefficiency.

Edited by balthazar
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ there are some numbers / facts worth consideration. Oils, greases and petrochemicals are required to build a wind turbine, a 2 MW unit costs 3-4 million & only lasts 20 yrs (with 3 gearbox changes along the way). Any discussion of efficiency must also take into account base costs and longevity. 

There’s a hydro-electric turbine that at least circa 1990 was using the same main bearing installed circa 1902. I believe the turbine was of mega-tonnage. Sorry I don’t recall the details, but it may very be still running. 

It was a major disappointment for me to learn a modern, new millennium turbine, that turns so incredibly slowly, isn’t built to last 75-100 years. That’s unquestionably, an inefficiency.

Pretty much all the Hydro dams in my state, Washington have had their turbines running since installation. You are right that these old mega dams were built to last compared to newer stuff. 

I understand that oils, grease and petrochemicals go into building solar / wind generation equipment. If built right it should last a long time, but I also get that companies have looked for the cheapest way to build things. At least they do not require petro on going long term like a gas / coal power generation plant and motor along with no emissions once in production of electricity.

Nothing is perfect, but some are better than others long term when you look at what it does. I have not looked but I suspect that emissions of a wind turbine other than when in production of the motor is significantly less than a Coal or Natural gas electric production system.

Regardless of where the power comes from, we are in a new era of how auto's are looked at and powered and I honestly think we are back in that time of a major change that happened in the 1920's as plenty of auto companies came and went and we are there now again with the Hybrid / EV auto's. Sadly this also means billions spent and lost as many of these companies will get bought up or go bankrupt. What we have in the end will be interesting to see.

One thing I know, we will never loose our trucks, after all regardless of sci-fi movies like A.I. where you saw all these electric auto's that were 1, 2 or 4 person, you never saw a truck. Yet we know we will always need trucks as constructions to basic hobbies will always require hauling and people will always have a need for the usefulness of a truck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, balthazar said:

^ there are some numbers / facts worth consideration. Oils, greases and petrochemicals are required to build a wind turbine, a 2 MW unit costs 3-4 million & only lasts 20 yrs (with 3 gearbox changes along the way). Any discussion of efficiency must also take into account base costs and longevity. 

There’s a hydro-electric turbine that at least circa 1990 was using the same main bearing installed circa 1902. I believe the turbine was of mega-tonnage. Sorry I don’t recall the details, but it may very be still running. 

It was a major disappointment for me to learn a modern, new millennium turbine, that turns so incredibly slowly, isn’t built to last 75-100 years. That’s unquestionably, an inefficiency.

not to mention already needing to retire and dismantle recently built turbines and disposal or recycling of said items is an issue.  10 years maybe in some cases.

Edited by regfootball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, dfelt said:

Pretty much all the Hydro dams in my state, Washington have had their turbines running since installation. You are right that these old mega dams were built to last compared to newer stuff. 

I understand that oils, grease and petrochemicals go into building solar / wind generation equipment. If built right it should last a long time, but I also get that companies have looked for the cheapest way to build things. At least they do not require petro on going long term like a gas / coal power generation plant and motor along with no emissions once in production of electricity.

Nothing is perfect, but some are better than others long term when you look at what it does. I have not looked but I suspect that emissions of a wind turbine other than when in production of the motor is significantly less than a Coal or Natural gas electric production system.

Regardless of where the power comes from, we are in a new era of how auto's are looked at and powered and I honestly think we are back in that time of a major change that happened in the 1920's as plenty of auto companies came and went and we are there now again with the Hybrid / EV auto's. Sadly this also means billions spent and lost as many of these companies will get bought up or go bankrupt. What we have in the end will be interesting to see.

One thing I know, we will never loose our trucks, after all regardless of sci-fi movies like A.I. where you saw all these electric auto's that were 1, 2 or 4 person, you never saw a truck. Yet we know we will always need trucks as constructions to basic hobbies will always require hauling and people will always have a need for the usefulness of a truck.

the speed of adoption of more electric propulsion on cars will depend more on refueling infrastructure.  When we can fill our cars in 5-15 minutes, literally in nearly the same number and prime locations of places where we currently get gasoline, while we stop to pee and grab snacks..... and i don't see jack in terms of that happening in ten years at this time.  20 years out, maybe.  Need electrical service and grid and FAST chargers to everywhere where gas is now.    And they know this, that is why we are still only seeing incremental technology on automobiles with electric.  Battery design will also need more time like that till we get to the point where the battery is not so huge, not so expensive, not so dangerous, and not requiring so much toxic metals from kids in 3rd world countries.  And finally price of electric cars will have to become nearly equal with gas equivalent for the average consumer vehicle.

 

https://www.wired.com/story/segway-bringing-hoverchairs-wall-e-life/

 

Edited by regfootball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, regfootball said:

not to mention already needing to retire and dismantle recently built turbines and disposal or recycling of said items is an issue.  10 years maybe in some cases.

Further adding to my dismay at the short lifespan of so-called "sustainable energy source" wind turbines was learning that there are already 'wind turbine junkyards".

Edited by balthazar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Further adding to my dismay at the short lifespan of so-called "sustainable energy sources" was learning that there already are 'wind turbine junkyards".

Just like there will be 'EV junkyards'...no one is going to keep an EV for 10 years or 150k miles...they will be obsolete and expensive to repair, just lease for a few years then junk/recycle...

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




About us

CheersandGears.com - Founded 2001

We ♥ Cars

Get in touch

Follow us

Recent tweets

facebook

×
×
  • Create New...