Darren Palmer: 5-second limit on full power acceleration will be "changed"

[Jimrpa]

@Mach1E , @HuntingPudel and @Kevin P - thanks for your patience and explaining these (probably basic) concepts so clearly! I think I’ve got everything now. The only thing that I’m still trying in is that 1/5252 number? What are the units and what does it represent as a “constant”? (In other words, why isn’t it just 1/5,000, or 7, or any other value? What makes HP and lb feet equal at 5,250 RPM and what can change that value?)

Sponsored

 

[Kevin P]

This video explains it really well. 2*pi/33,000 is where the 1/5252 comes from. If you convert to KW and N-M (metric) they cross at 9549 rpm.

 

[Mach1E]

@Mach1E , @HuntingPudel and @Kevin P - thanks for your patience and explaining these (probably basic) concepts so clearly! I think I’ve got everything now. The only thing that I’m still trying in is that 1/5252 number? What are the units and what does it represent as a “constant”? (In other words, why isn’t it just 1/5,000, or 7, or any other value? What makes HP and lb feet equal at 5,250 RPM and what can change that value?)

It’s explained well in the video below.

But what does this mean for car motors and why do they advertise peak torque and peak horsepower????

Peak torque gives you an idea of low end maximum power (peak acceleration).

Peak horsepower gives you an idea on how long that peak acceleration lasts (because rpm comes into play) and how well you can use gearing to your advantage.

Why is the GTPE so brutal in down low acceleration? 634 lb/ft of tq.

Does that brutal acceleration last??? Nope. Only 480 hp.

This tells us the acceleration is much weaker by 5252 rpm (or else we would have at least 634 hp).

 

[Pushrods&Capacitors]

Math looks pretty good.

The $65,000 question is what will you do if the GTPE beats the Blazer SS both in 0-60 and the 1/4 mile after the update? And without having to go into some 12 step button pushing WOW mode.
?

I really don’t know tbh. It’ll be for my wife so it’s up to her. Either way is fine with me if the GT is really fixed. If the Blazer SS has more interior room and/or cargo space that might sway her, otherwise the GT has the looks part covered. Besides, the SS has now been pushed to 2024, so, they’re likely be another contender by then anyway. As long as my Commodore is still faster on the highway, I’m happy.

 

[DadzBoyz]

I'm hopeful about Darren's statements.
That said, a couple of thoughts:

Update Possibilities

1. Simply do an always on increase of the limit to 7, 9, 11 seconds, or something like that. This would require little thought on the part of the customer, but it would also create more likelihood of failure from repeated full-power sprints that require little or no thought.
2. Derby Mode - Theoretically, this would leave the 5-second limit in place but give drivers a seperate boost mode that they would have to actively select to increase the limit and/or enable full power beyond 0-60 mph. (And I called it Derby Mode after horse races, in keeping with our Mustang pony/horse theme. @Ford Motor Company , you get that one for the low low price of putting me first in line. )
3. A staggered update. I don't think this is likely, but a possibility.
   1. GT: 7 or 8 seconds
   2. GT Performance: 10 or 12 seconds

Update Considerations
Increasing the 5-second limit will increase the flow of energy from the batteries, through the HVBJB, to the motors for a longer period of time (6, 8, 10 seconds). This flow of energy increases the heat that runs through the HVBJB. This could/will, bring more defective HVBJB's to light, which will require replacement.
Ford did not do a blanket recall replacing all of the HVBJB's for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:

• Supply constraints
• Cost management
• Lack of service techs, which was determined by the dealer, but is now influenced by the Model E program

They have a statistical model that tells them the potential number of HVBJB's they will have to replace and the costs associated with them. I'm certain they have been reconciling the number they have done against that model. In all likelihood, as they are testing increases to the 5-second limit, they are also modeling the number of additional HVBJB's that will have to be replaced by doing so.
They'll weigh those numbers to determine:
a) How much to increase the limit
b) How much that will cost in HVBJB replacements
If they ultimately do release an update, it will be when they get to a comfortable place with those things. Hopefully that is sooner rather than later.

 

[Mach1E]

I'm hopeful about Darren's statements.
That said, a couple of thoughts:

Update Possibilities

1. Simply do an always on increase of the limit to 7, 9, 11 seconds, or something like that. This would require little thought on the part of the customer, but it would also create more likelihood of failure from repeated full-power sprints that require little or no thought.
2. Derby Mode - Theoretically, this would leave the 5-second limit in place but give drivers a seperate boost mode that they would have to actively select to increase the limit and/or enable full power beyond 0-60 mph. (And I called it Derby Mode after horse races, in keeping with our Mustang pony/horse theme. @Ford Motor Company , you get that one for the low low price of putting me first in line. )
3. A staggered update. I don't think this is likely, but a possibility.
   1. GT: 7 or 8 seconds
   2. GT Performance: 10 or 12 seconds

Update Considerations
Increasing the 5-second limit will increase the flow of energy from the batteries, through the HVBJB, to the motors for a longer period of time (6, 8, 10 seconds). This flow of energy increases the heat that runs through the HVBJB. This could/will, bring more defective HVBJB's to light, which will require replacement.
Ford did not do a blanket recall replacing all of the HVBJB's for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:

• Supply constraints
• Cost management
• Lack of service techs, which was determined by the dealer, but is now influenced by the Model E program

They have a statistical model that tells them the potential number of HVBJB's they will have to replace and the costs associated with them. I'm certain they have been reconciling the number they have done against that model. In all likelihood, as they are testing increases to the 5-second limit, they are also modeling the number of additional HVBJB's that will have to be replaced by doing so.
They'll weigh those numbers to determine:
a) How much to increase the limit
b) How much that will cost in HVBJB replacements
If they ultimately do release an update, it will be when they get to a comfortable place with those things. Hopefully that is sooner rather than later.

Pretty good analysis.

What’s also being considered is future and repeat sales.

They know they screwed the pooch on the performance aspect from the beginning.

The car got glowing reviews on almost every aspect.

This is literally the one thing to fix after which…….. what’s there to complain about from a reviewer standpoint?

They’re getting a 2nd chance for redemption. Let’s hope they don’t blow it a 2nd time.

 

[SWO]

When one gets to use both a Mach-E and a Lightning, the true frunk usability is seen with the automatic opening that the Lightning has. We never use the Mach-E frunk for that reason and the fact that it has things in it that in the Lightning are in under seat storage or in a tub in the bed. Blanket, towels, bottle of V8, trim tools for gaining access to battery if needed, ... With the truck, click the fob button or push the button and it is open.

It also is a great dinosaur mouth for our 3 year old granddaughter. "Mom, Grampy's truck is a dinosaur!"

Your Lightning has a V8 under the hood?

 

[DadzBoyz]

Pretty good analysis.

What’s also being considered is future and repeat sales.

They know they screwed the pooch on the performance aspect from the beginning.

The car got glowing reviews on almost every aspect.

This is literally the one thing to fix after which…….. what’s there to complain about from a reviewer standpoint?

They’re getting a 2nd chance for redemption. Let’s hope they don’t blow it a 2nd time.

I'm with you.
The only other complaint(s) are with the max charging speed and the charge curve.
I know there are some hardware limitations there, but I believe they can make some changes and improvements to the charging curve.

They could be a concern or an inconvenience on roadtrips, but I'm fortunate to have a Level 2 EVSE at home, so day-to-day these do not impact me.
That said, not everyone has that option.

 

[AKgrampy]

I'm hopeful about Darren's statements.
That said, a couple of thoughts:

Update Possibilities

1. Simply do an always on increase of the limit to 7, 9, 11 seconds, or something like that. This would require little thought on the part of the customer, but it would also create more likelihood of failure from repeated full-power sprints that require little or no thought.
2. Derby Mode - Theoretically, this would leave the 5-second limit in place but give drivers a seperate boost mode that they would have to actively select to increase the limit and/or enable full power beyond 0-60 mph. (And I called it Derby Mode after horse races, in keeping with our Mustang pony/horse theme. @Ford Motor Company , you get that one for the low low price of putting me first in line. )
3. A staggered update. I don't think this is likely, but a possibility.
   1. GT: 7 or 8 seconds
   2. GT Performance: 10 or 12 seconds

Update Considerations
Increasing the 5-second limit will increase the flow of energy from the batteries, through the HVBJB, to the motors for a longer period of time (6, 8, 10 seconds). This flow of energy increases the heat that runs through the HVBJB. This could/will, bring more defective HVBJB's to light, which will require replacement.
Ford did not do a blanket recall replacing all of the HVBJB's for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:

• Supply constraints
• Cost management
• Lack of service techs, which was determined by the dealer, but is now influenced by the Model E program

They have a statistical model that tells them the potential number of HVBJB's they will have to replace and the costs associated with them. I'm certain they have been reconciling the number they have done against that model. In all likelihood, as they are testing increases to the 5-second limit, they are also modeling the number of additional HVBJB's that will have to be replaced by doing so.
They'll weigh those numbers to determine:
a) How much to increase the limit
b) How much that will cost in HVBJB replacements
If they ultimately do release an update, it will be when they get to a comfortable place with those things. Hopefully that is sooner rather than later.

Not necessarily disagreeing with you but even though it appears a higher percentage of HVBJB’s failed on GT’s I have never seen an update on the overall failure rate. If the outstanding number of GT’s with old style HVBJB factor into Ford’s rollout timeline we may have to wait awhile. I know there are still a few of us on the forum who have not yet failed and I would imagine there remains a large number. That being said I really do not know as there has been no failure rate percentages released but at one time it was fairly low in the 1% range. Even if it has climbed significantly that leaves a lot of GT’s out there with original HVBJB. Still hope they roll this out sooner rather than later for the people who have the need for speed.

 

[RickMachE]

Your Lightning has a V8 under the hood?

Both of my EVs do. One of the first mods I did.

 

[Mach1E]

I'm with you.
The only other complaint(s) are with the max charging speed and the charge curve.
I know there are some hardware limitations there, but I believe they can make some changes and improvements to the charging curve.

They could be a concern or an inconvenience on roadtrips, but I'm fortunate to have a Level 2 EVSE at home, so day-to-day these do not impact me.
That said, not everyone has that option.

That’s fair.

It was also in the video on the list of things they’re working on.

It also has not effect on me as I’ve never DC charged and don’t plan to.

It’s also not really a topic in most reviews, except maybe BEV vs BEV very specific to charging reviews. So while it’s a topic of concern, certainly not the Achilles heel and really not much different than the competition.

Especially since range and charging aren’t why people pick the GT.

 

[DadzBoyz]

Not necessarily disagreeing with you but even though it appears a higher percentage of HVBJB’s failed on GT’s I have never seen an update on the overall failure rate. If the outstanding number of GT’s with old style HVBJB factor into Ford’s rollout timeline we may have to wait awhile. I know there are still a few of us on the forum who have not yet failed and I would imagine there remains a large number. That being said I really do not know as there has been no failure rate percentages released but at one time it was fairly low in the 1% range. Even if it has climbed significantly that leaves a lot of GT’s out there with original HVBJB. Still hope they roll this out sooner rather than later for the people who have the need for speed.

I don't think they have decided that all, or even a majority, have to be fixed/replaced. I think there are several factors that they are considering.
For instance, as time passes, the number associated with replacing HVBJB's change. The cost becomes:

• Cheaper, as supply chain issues subside and the price of the replacement hardware goes down (scarcity increases prices, more availability makes them decrease)
• Cheaper, as the Model E program (and its requirements) ramp up and dealers have more BEV techs, training, equipment, etc.
• Cheaper, because more techs means they can get cars in and out of there faster and pay less for rental cars
• Cheaper, because getting those HVBJB replacement jobs out of the shop faster means they can use that car bay for paying customers

I also think that as the above is true, Ford will have some motivation to "rip the Band-Aid off" and get this problem behind them. Right now, it's just hanging over their head like the sword of Damocles.

Ultimately, they have a number in mind in terms to the HVBJB issue and when they get there, they'll feel more comfortable making updates and changes to the powertrain, performance, charging, etc. I think that Darren making comments like these, now, means they are probably approaching that number.

 

[Stang68]

When one gets to use both a Mach-E and a Lightning, the true frunk usability is seen with the automatic opening that the Lightning has. We never use the Mach-E frunk for that reason and the fact that it has things in it that in the Lightning are in under seat storage or in a tub in the bed. Blanket, towels, bottle of V8, trim tools for gaining access to battery if needed, ... With the truck, click the fob button or push the button and it is open.

It also is a great dinosaur mouth for our 3 year old granddaughter. "Mom, Grampy's truck is a dinosaur!"

Agreed, I would use the frunk a lot more if it was powered. A luxury, yes, but I don’t want fingerprints all over my hood from closing the frunk! When I do use the frunk I close it with a microfiber kept in my glovebox.

 

[ChasingCoral]

Most of us did. ?

Was it really that long ago? And did he really even say that job 1 would? Feels more like a scary story we tell our kids at this point.

Once upon a time there was a rich man who lived in a tower. He had a tall hat and tall shoes and a long tie. One day he went out and proclaimed, “all shall have a remove frunk release, and I shall make it so.”

And almost everyone got this release.

But there in the woods lived a poor forgotten job 1 owner named @Jimrpa

Jimrpa would yell “what about me? Where is my button?” But no one would listen as he was banished to the woods along with all the forgotten Beta testers.

The end.

Now that you're making me think hard about this, the promises started with the very first dog and pony shows with the Mach E. Remember the ones right after the Los Angeles reveal? I think it was one of the promises then about how the car would get better and better with over the air updates. So, you're right, it may not have been 2020. It may have been November 2019.

 

[Mach1E]

Now that you're making me think hard about this, the promises started with the very first dog and pony shows with the Mach E. Remember the ones right after the Los Angeles reveal? I think it was one of the promises then about how the car would get better and better with over the air updates. So, you're right, it may not have been 2020. It may have been November 2019.

Well, I would definitely argue they HAVE fulfilled that promise (and continue to do so).

Sooooo many features added and bugs squashed in a relatively short time period.

Plus charging speed increases, battery capacity increase, and now (soon) a power increase?

Sure, the pesky frunk button hasn’t happened yet, but it’s still coming.

Sponsored