Before E-Power Makes It Here, Nissan First Has to Send It to the Gym

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

Whether the buying public likes it or not, there’s a tsunami of electrified powertrains headed for U.S. shores. Automakers the world over hope to beat their rivals in the race to a “fully electrified” lineup, which just means there’ll be — at a minimum — a hybrid variant in each model line.

It’s far less sexy than headlines make it sound. Still, if you’re into technology and saving money at the pumps (not necessarily at the dealer), it’s hot stuff. Nissan’s taking an unconventional route in this race, forgoing a conventional hybrid setup for an inexpensive stopgap solution all its own.

The system, called e-Power, is already a hit in Japan. But before it makes its way into high-end Nissan products (read: Infiniti), it first needs to upsize the system for American-sized vehicles travelling at American-sized speeds. That’s not as easy as it sounds.

e-Power combine an electric motor and a conventional gasoline engine, but, unlike a normal hybrid, the two powerplants do not take turns handling propulsion duties. The continuously running ICE (operating at a fixed rpm) continuously feeds a small battery via a generator, which in turns powers the electric motor that drives the wheels. Propulsion always comes from the electric motor, but the battery’s juice always comes from an ICE. (A small amount of energy is recaptured via regenerative braking.)

Launched in Japan in late 2016, the little Nissan Note e-Power hatchback utilizes a 1.2-liter four-cylinder running at a constant 2,500 rpm for its electricity generation. The automaker claims 70 percent of Note buyers in that market choose e-Power, making the vehicle line quite a profitable one. Nissan has since added e-Power to a midsize minivan.

Unfortunately, flitting around the crowded urban streets of Japan is a very different situation than intercity travel in Europe or the United States. For the vehicle to be ultra efficient, the engine needs to operate at an optimum speed. However, sustained high-speed cruising would deplete the battery faster than the engine/generator could replenish it.

This is what Nissan’s trying to figure out as it contemplates launching e-Power in Europe — and whatever lessons learned on the continent will surely be applied to the U.S., where Nissan promises e-Power availability in the near future. Its Infiniti division plans to go “electrified” by 2021, and it’s much easier to hide additional powertrain costs in a pricier vehicle’s sticker.

Ponz Pandikuthira, Nissan’s vice-president of product planning, told Automotive News Europe that “Japanese driving rewards e-Power,” but the equation falls apart outside the city. Still, the system’s efficiency still tops that of diesel propulsion by 10 to 15 percent, he said. Because of the system’s benefits, it seems Nissan plans to do whatever’s necessary to adapt it to Western roads.

“EPower is far less expensive to execute than a plug-in hybrid because you don’t have the extra costs and 400 kg of the battery weight,” Pandikuthira said, calling e-Power “a great bridge technology.”

Testing is ongoing at Nissan’s UK R&D facility with a Nissan Altima outfitted with a 2.4-liter engine/generator, he added.

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
3 of 29 comments
  • "scarey" "scarey" on Jun 15, 2018

    AHA ! Thank you, Best & Brightest !

  • Conundrum Conundrum on Jun 15, 2018

    This is what a BMW i3 turns into when the biggish battery runs down and the Mighty Powerhouse 700cc two cylinder "range extender" allows you to mope along to a charging station. There's zero to see here technically. Nothing at all. It's a Mark 1 series hybrid system chosen by no one else for an obvious reason. It only works properly in city traffic. On the highway, a gas engine encumbered by driving a generator as well as a battery driving an electric motor both involve energy conversion losses that a straight gear drive avoids. In town you can juggle things about for a gain. GM's mild hybrid from 2008 on, and the new German 48V hybrid system, also picked up by Chrysler for the new V6 RAM, are somewhere between Mark 0 and Mark 1. All pimples on the path of progress, but no doubt soon to be deified by overenthusiastic PR donkeys trained to bray appropriately as if the world had been transmogrified for the better in a startling way. What they really do is provide a darn good fast start in a stop/start system, or drive an engine for a few seconds to cover up low rpm main turbo lag, still not really covered up by all these new designs.

    • Car driver Car driver on Jun 16, 2018

      Not exactly, nissan system is a range extender that behaves like a regular hybrid, something more similar to the new honda hybrid system in the insight, because it has a buffer battery and the engine RPM is constant, volt and the I3 does not a carry a buffer battery. The buffer battery in the e-power allow it to shut it engine off for 3-5 miles in the note after each charge, and only come back on when the battery need charge or the car need help going up hills, it takes no time to recharge the battery, when done, the engine is shut off. The I3 and the volt has there engine constantly running.

  • Kmars2009 I rented one last fall while visiting Ohio. Not a bad car...but not a great car either. I think it needs a new version. But CUVs are King... unfortunately!
  • Ajla Remember when Cadillac introduced an entirely new V8 and proceeded to install it in only 800 cars before cancelling everything?
  • Bouzouki Cadillac (aka GM!!) made so many mistakes over the past 40 years, right up to today, one could make a MBA course of it. Others have alluded to them, there is not enough room for me to recite them in a flowing, cohesive manner.Cadillac today is literally a tarted-up Chevrolet. They are nice cars, and the "aura" of the Cadillac name still works on several (mostly female) consumers who are not car enthusiasts.The CT4 and CT5 offer superlative ride and handling, and even performance--but, it is wrapped in sheet metal that (at least I think) looks awful, with (still) sub-par interiors. They are niche cars. They are the last gasp of the Alpha platform--which I have been told by people close to it, was meant to be a Pontiac "BMW 3-series". The bankruptcy killed Pontiac, but the Alpha had been mostly engineered, so it was "Cadillac-ized" with the new "edgy" CTS styling.Most Cadillacs sold are crossovers. The most profitable "Cadillac" is the Escalade (note that GM never jack up the name on THAT!).The question posed here is rather irrelevant. NO ONE has "a blank check", because GM (any company or corporation) does not have bottomless resources.Better styling, and superlative "performance" (by that, I mean being among the best in noise, harshness, handling, performance, reliablity, quality) would cost a lot of money.Post-bankruptcy GM actually tried. No one here mentioned GM's effort to do just that: the "Omega" platform, aka CT6.The (horribly misnamed) CT6 was actually a credible Mercedes/Lexus competitor. I'm sure it cost GM a fortune to develop (the platform was unique, not shared with any other car. The top-of-the-line ORIGINAL Blackwing V8 was also unique, expensive, and ultimately...very few were sold. All of this is a LOT of money).I used to know the sales numbers, and my sense was the CT6 sold about HALF the units GM projected. More importantly, it sold about half to two thirds the volume of the S-Class (which cost a lot more in 201x)Many of your fixed cost are predicated on volume. One way to improve your business case (if the right people want to get the Green Light) is to inflate your projected volumes. This lowers the unit cost for seats, mufflers, control arms, etc, and makes the vehicle more profitable--on paper.Suppliers tool up to make the number of parts the carmaker projects. However, if the volume is less than expected, the automaker has to make up the difference.So, unfortunately, not only was the CT6 an expensive car to build, but Cadillac's weak "brand equity" limited how much GM could charge (and these were still pricey cars in 2016-18, a "base" car was ).Other than the name, the "Omega" could have marked the starting point for Cadillac to once again be the standard of the world. Other than the awful name (Fleetwood, Elegante, Paramount, even ParAMOUR would be better), and offering the basest car with a FOUR cylinder turbo on the base car (incredibly moronic!), it was very good car and a CREDIBLE Mercedes S-Class/Lexus LS400 alternative. While I cannot know if the novel aluminum body was worth the cost (very expensive and complex to build), the bragging rights were legit--a LARGE car that was lighter, but had good body rigidity. No surprise, the interior was not the best, but the gap with the big boys was as close as GM has done in the luxury sphere.Mary Barra decided that profits today and tomorrow were more important than gambling on profits in 2025 and later. Having sunk a TON of money, and even done a mid-cycle enhancement, complete with the new Blackwing engine (which copied BMW with the twin turbos nestled in the "V"!), in fall 2018 GM announced it was discontinuing the car, and closing the assembly plant it was built in. (And so you know, building different platforms on the same line is very challenging and considerably less efficient in terms of capital and labor costs than the same platform, or better yet, the same model).So now, GM is anticipating that, as the car market "goes electric" (if you can call it that--more like the Federal Government and EU and even China PUSHING electric cars), they can make electric Cadillacs that are "prestige". The Cadillac Celestique is the opening salvo--$340,000. We will see how it works out.
  • Lynn Joiner Lynn JoinerJust put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
  • Lynn Joiner Just put 2,000 miles on a Chevy Malibu rental from Budget, touring around AZ, UT, CO for a month. Ran fine, no problems at all, little 1.7L 4-cylinder just sipped fuel, and the trunk held our large suitcases easily. Yeah, I hated looking up at all the huge FWD trucks blowing by, but the Malibu easily kept up on the 80 mph Interstate in Utah. I expect a new one would be about a third the cost of the big guys. It won't tow your horse trailer, but it'll get you to the store. Why kill it?
Next