ECO Cruise for the FFE

[Green Roger]

I would like a ECO cruise (like on the Ford C-Max).
The C-Max has the best cruise control I have ever used!
In ECO mode it will back off going up hills (maybe 3 to 5 mph) and allow the vehicle to regen going down hills.

I cannot believe Ford did not put it on the 2014 FFE.
At least they put the garage door opener back on the 2014.
And I am glad that Ford did come up with a fix for the SSN message but I was hoping that there might be improvements on the 2014 that would make me trade-in my lease on a purchase.

Lets see what happens next year...

 

[Astrand1]

I just bought a 2014 and I can tell you there is no homelink available on it. Sucks. But I agree should have Eco cruise.

 

[WattsUp]

In ECO mode it will back off going up hills (maybe 3 to 5 mph) and allow the vehicle to regen going down hills.

The FFE will regen when going down hills, even with the cruise on. You might need to shift to L to get the most benefit.

I don't understand why slowing down on hills helps anything in the long run. When you crest this hill and start regen, you'll be simply be going faster and get a higher level of regen. Seems like it would be wash.

 

[davideos]

Seems like it would be wash.

For the most part, I agree; however, if you can tolerate a little slowdown, there could be some benefit...ok, very little benefit. I think the thought is, let the car slow down because once it crests the hill, it will start to pick up the lost speed. Since the car cannot recoup all the energy in regen, it becomes more economical to use the kinetic energy in the moving vehicle to get over the hill than to use power in the battery and then recoup it on the back-side.

Perhaps the Cmax does it to try and preserve the estimated distance. Since wind resistance is proportional to the square of the speed, the programming might be attempting to trade losses due to wind resistance for losses due to gravity. Every hill and situation is different but perhaps there is a study out there somewhere that backs up the decision.

As for me, I'd rather just go with the flow and keep it simple.

 

[Astrand1]

Well I had a cmax energi which I traded in for the FFE. I really got used to Eco cruise simply for the fact that it would roll into the speed set nice and easy. On the FFE when I cancel the cruise and then re engage the cruise it will throw me back in my seat trying to get upto speed. I would much rather have it just roll in easy like I do with my foot. Lol

 

[EVA]

Since this is an area to make suggestions for Ford to add to the car, I am going to strenuously rally against putting in that slow down going up hills cruise control. No never ever do that Ford. The rule is, you are to keep up with traffic while driving, maintain a constant speed. This concept of slowing down for hills is so wrong. No do not ever do that Ford.

The only benefit this slowing down derives is making the people behind you mad. And there is no way you are looking in your rearview mirror all the time to see if somebody is close to you - you just slow down on the hill causing traffic jams and delays.

 

[davideos]

...The only benefit this slowing down derives is making the people behind you mad.

Although I agree with you, it seems that people slow down anyway on hills...maybe Cmax is just trying to "keep up with the Jones'" :lol:
How about that adaptive speed control...that would be something I'd like to have.

 

[Green Roger]

I am going to strenuously rally against putting in that slow down going up hills cruise control. No never ever do that Ford. The rule is, you are to keep up with traffic while driving, maintain a constant speed. This concept of slowing down for hills is so wrong. No do not ever do that Ford.

Sorry they already did it...
It is not just that it slows down on hills it "limits acceleration" and saves fuel.
Davideos, I don't know if you could call it adaptive.....well you might.
In my tests we get 43 with regular cruise and 47 with ECO cruise (of the same hilly 20 mile test route).
You can turn it off if you do not want to use it (you have to enable it).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HEnOYmic94Y&feature=plcp
This is a two part video the fist part is about EV+ the second part is about ECO cruise.
The EV+ mode is every nice on the C-Max but would not really be a benefit in the FFE.

 

[Focused_Driver]

Eco Cruise would be a great energy saving/range extending feature, especially in hilly areas. Allowing the car reduce speed on uphill sections and increase speed on downhill sections would reduce the energy required to propel the car up the hill as well as at the bottom of the hill. I already do this manually, especially on downhills, and it noticeably increases range.

Having a selectable feature that basically doesn't fight gravity so much just makes sense. You don't have to stay at target speed uphill if there is no one behind you (and you can just push the pedal down a bit if there is), and getting some free speed on a downhill is an added bonus! I'm pretty sure this feature could be added to the system settings as a selectable item, maybe even allowing a speed range input for under target speed on uphills and over target speed on downhills.

Come on Ford, let's see an update! I would pay to have this added to my FFE because I am confident it would extend my range at least 5% in hilly areas. I can't make the battery bigger but smart programming can help extend the range of the battery I have.

 

[paw160]

I've decided to entertain myself by crunching some numbers on Eco-cruise and whether it is really beneficial for an EV. And I'm pretty sure that the answer is that Eco-cruise actually provides almost no benefit for an electric vehicle.

In an ICE car the vehicle can't deal with "negative" power. That is, when cruising downhill it must use engine braking to "burn off" the extra energy to keep the constant velocity. Eco-cruise allows the vehicle some flexibility for accelerating which means that energy is being converted into kinetic energy and not heat.

In the FFE the motor can regen power to maintain constant speed.

I worked out a spreadsheet to calculate the energy used to climb a hill and then descend the other side. This included Rolling Resistance and Air Drag.
It had variables for grade and distance(uphill and downhill). It also assumes that the vehicle returns to the initial velocity (at the beginning of the uphill) when it reaches the bottom of the downhill.

Just for the point of comparison I set the ICE energy usage to 0 when the energy would go negative. Really though because the ICE is still running this would be a positive number (and therefore the difference would be even greater).

The main point is at the very bottom... the EV has no net savings with Eco-Cruise, whereas the ICE does. There may be some other minimal forces at play that could make it more friendly but I think this shows why they didn't bother with Eco-cruise. The annoyance to other drivers wouldn't improve the efficiency.

**** EDIT ****
I realized that I was not properly calculating drag for the eco-cruise case. Since drag is proportional to velocity^2 it certainly does affect the outcome. As a result there is a small net gain for the FFE, but much smaller than for the ICE.

Numbers updated below
**** /EDIT ****

That's not to say that driving style doesn't matter. On local roads (where you aren't using cruise control anyway) you would certainly benefit by careful driving up and down hills. This analysis is obviously a relatively perfect scenario.

I will happily share the spreadsheet with anyone who asks. Feel free to check my numbers, I could have made a mistake.

Constant Speed (Standard Cruise)	
		FFE		ICE		
Energy (total)		276.7584949	320.5135982	Wh
Uphill		320.5135982	320.5135982	Wh
Downhill	-43.75510332	0		Wh
			
Eco Cruise			
Energy		267.4741485	286.2745674	Wh
Uphill		286.2745674	286.2745674	Wh
Downhill	-18.80041884	0		Wh
			
Net Energy:	9.284346363	34.23903084	Wh

 

[davideos]

Wouldn't ECO cruise make sense if considering that regen doesn't really capture 100% of the reduced kinetic energy of the car into the battery? If speed is maintained uphill till the top, the amount of regen will be greater than if the car were slowed on the uphill and used potential energy (height) to regain speed? I'm also presuming that ECO mode will not re-engage the engine/motor at the top of the hill to regain speed, but wait, following some curve, to re-invest energy for velocity. In addition, the speed reduction will decrease wind resistance providing even more economy.

However, with that said, I don't think I would want to use ECO mode cruise anyway. It would have to make assumptions about the road ahead. For instance, if you crest the hill and it is flat for 100 yards before it decends again. Would the car speed up just before the downhill is encountered.

Also, the current cruise control does not always maintain down hill speed. I believe it puts in a set amount of regen. If that amount is too much, then it will reduce regen to maintain set speed. If exceeded, the driver can still apply the brake to add more regen or mechanical brakes. (based on my own observations.)

It would be nice if ECO cruise were an option, but I don't think I'd use it.

 

[WattsUp]

Also, the current cruise control does not always maintain down hill speed. I believe it puts in a set amount of regen. If that amount is too much, then it will reduce regen to maintain set speed. If exceeded, the driver can still apply the brake to add more regen or mechanical brakes. (based on my own observations.)

Yes, the "set amount of regen" is the same amount you could apply be simply lifting your foot of the accelerator (when not using cruise). It's just the normal level of "coasting regen", let's call it.

Cruise will apply the maximum amount of coasting regen available, which actually comes in two flavors, D or L, controlled by the gear selector. Basically, when no acceleration is required, cruise is "applying" the maximum amount of coasting regen (just as you could manually, by not using the accelerator). But, it can modulate this (just as you could manually, by using the accelerator), and it does so whether you're going down a hill, or even just slowing down (by reducing the set speed via the steering wheel controls).

In my experience, unless the hill is too steep, cruise can and does maintain the set speed going down hills. In cases where the car starts to roll downhill faster than the coasting regen can resist, you can always shift to L (if you aren't already). Even then, the hill might be steeper still than even L regen can resist. (But, that's a pretty steep hill that you might want to be manually braking on anyway.)

 

[jmueller065]

It would be/have been so much nicer if Ford would have included negative numbers on the power displays. Instead of the power consumption graph showing 0 - 5kWh it could show -5 - 5 kWh then when in regen it could show the graph/bar/etc. going down into the negative values as it pushes the electrons back into the battery.

Then at least we'd know what the different "levels" of regen are (and it wouldn't need the whole 100% regen gimicky thing..just show us the # and let us maximize it via driving...sigh)

 

[WattsUp]

It would be/have been so much nicer if Ford would have included negative numbers on the power displays. Instead of the power consumption graph showing 0 - 5kWh it could show -5 - 5 kWh then when in regen it could show the graph/bar/etc. going down into the negative values as it pushes the electrons back into the battery.

The (horizontal) energy meter that goes from 0-5 kW (not kWh) only shows the "extra" energy used by climate, etc. It has nothing to do with the energy used by the drive-train, or regen. It would not make sense for these meter to show negative energy.

Or, did you mean the (vertical) energy meter, with the white line that goes up and down? That goes from 0 to 600 Wh/mi. It would make sense for this to show negative energy (reflecting regen).

I agree, it would be cool/useful if we could monitor negative Wh/mi.

 

[jmueller065]

Or, did you mean the (vertical) energy meter, with the white line that goes up and down? That goes from 0 to 600 Wh/mi. It would make sense for this to show negative energy (reflecting regen).

Yeah that one...

 

[ZapMan]

If the cruise would not cause the Cruise ranking in the Energy Coach screen go from blue to black then I would agree with not putting a ECO cruise on the FFE.

The cruise control works fine on a flat and level road but if you are going over 45 and start going up and down hills the bar will start to turn black. On a recent 60 mile trip I had the cruise ranking in the yellow from using the cruise too much.
It seems silly since the car is controlling the speed it should be able to keep the "Cruise ranking" in the blue.

 

[Bloggin]

Maybe the new $6,000 Cash Back on the 2014 Focus Electric will incise you to make the purchase?

Now that it's only $29,995 or $22,495 after tax credit, it might be time to buy. But then again, there is the refreshed 2015 coming later in the year, that is expected to offer a Combo Charger, which would be helpful if it's a purchase and one plans to have the EV for more than 3 years.

 

[jmueller065]

There are rumors that the 2015/2016 Focus will also have an Energi option..

 

[ZapMan]

Or an "ECO driving mode" that would keep you within the Energy Coach (blue bars) as long as possible.
I find it fairly easy to keep all the bars blue while I am driving but it would be cool if the car could help you do it.

 

[Lithium]

It would be useful to have a function that allows you to tell the car to accelerate at an more efficient level than my size 14 winter boot on the gas pedal. Something that optimizes your energy usage to get you to speed. The Blue Cup and floating bar are insightful but difficult to work with in real world. I find the car barely accelerates with the white line on the cup. Cruise control seems to be more efficient than my boot at working with the blue cup. I guess patience is a virtue.
No ECO button only comes into play when you know you're on the limit of your range. I think ford may just want you to drive it like any regular car and try not to worry about it. I'm trying that approach.
H