Nice!
This is a concept we will see on the road shortly.

Maybe we don't need better batteries.

The electric $upercharger may give way to a wee bit more (low cost?) direct electric low speed torque) and a more aggressive (variable) turbocharger.

Sounds like these guys have at least created more options for mild hybridization.

Right now the geeks and kindergarten teachers still provide the market for BEVs and they support the last 15% mpg for 30% more cost (and shun the mild hybrids).

When gas goes back up and mpgs are sold in cold fiscal terms, the mild hybrid (with state of the art ICE and it’s “economical” use of batteries) may finally shine.

There are many other ways to make much lighter, lower cost, more efficient vehicles. HYboost SSV is one good example of what can be done.

BEVs will do much better.

Street-Scooter will soon produce a street and highway legal 2-passenger BEV for $7500 (without the recommended 24 Kwh battery pack). Battery monthly rental will be as low as $99/month, i.e. a lot less than monthly fuel savings. The major advantage of battery pack rental is much lower initial cost and easier battery upgrade to get improved e-range at same or lower cost. Changing modular batteries should not be more complicated than changing tires.

The Hyboost concept works better for Europe and Asia, where cars are taxed based on the displacement, but not as well as full HEV for America, since people drive a lot more, and the pint-size and highly-stressed engine won't last as long as the low-stressed and cool-running Atkinson-cycle engine.

Furthermore, extensive city driving will need significant amount of energy recuperation that only a full HEV can provide. That's the law of physics that cannot be negotiated. With plummeting prices of battery and decreasing prices of electrical components, strong electric boost will give better city mpg than strong turbo-boost at similar cost. An optimal maximal mpg vehicle with good acceleration performance would be a PHEV with 15-mile of all electric range, with a significantly down-size engine running Atkinson cycle, for example, a 1-liter Atkinson-cycle engine for the size of the Ford Focus or Toyota Prius, with larger electric motor to compensate for the downsized ICE.

This is a technology that could be used now! What is wrong with that? The Toyota series/parallel system is too expensive, PHEVs are way too expensive and BEVs are prohibitively expensive. And, yes, we are all the time waiting for the new batteries that will be so cheap and have such good performance but it never happens... For the foreseeable future, BEVs will be considered the solution for an even more distant future. The Ricardo concept shows that we can achieve as good fuel economy as the Prius can but at a much lower cost. As I can see, many of you claim that you have better ideas. Please, go ahead and try to sell your ideas to the motor industry. Come back and tell the GCC forum if you are lucky. Ricardo’s concept (or anything very similar) would be good enough to me. I have no reason to present my objections to this concept, since I do not have many (as I sometimes have in other cases…).

In the past, people would not accept downsized engines, especially not in the USA, where anything smaller than a big block was not accepted. This is changing now. For example, people in Europe love the downsized VW 1.4 and 1.2 liter engines. Such engines can be used even in cars of the Passat size. Car tax in most European countries is not based on weight or volume any more but on CO2 (indirectly, the fuel economy). The fuel is also heavily taxed compared to USA. Eventually, you do not need much more incentives than that. People are buying cars with the downsized VW engines because they are efficient and nice to drive. I have even seen comments by motor journalists that they are as nice as diesel engines to drive due to the good low-end torque. Who would have thought that a couple of years ago (i.e. this concern both the diesel engine and the downsized gasoline engine)? Do not come and tell me that small downsized engines will have a short life! Thermal and mechanical issues can be handled. Look, for example, on the development where turbocharged engines have more than tripled the specific output compared to naturally aspirated engines. Yet, engine life has more than tripled in the same timeframe. Needless to say, passenger car diesel engines have just recently seen the same development. This can be done also on gasoline engines (in fact, it has already been addressed by Ricardo). A turbocharged downsized engine that has high low-end torque will actually run at much lower rpm than a naturally aspirated engine and will not be subject to the high cylinder/piston/ring wear at high rpm. Regarding drivability, compare, for example, with a Honda Insight hybrid. This car is a disappointment, since the engine is revving very high as soon as you even slightly touch the pedal but absolutely nothing happens when it comes to acceleration. The contrast to the VW engines could not be greater; in this case you hear nothing but the car actually starts to accelerate. I suppose people will like that feature better than the former.

In the UK, a Prius starts at 21055 pounds. The most efficient current Ford Focus (ecoboost 1.6 Titanium) is 19750 pounds. The 'Hyboost Focus' is substantially more complicated (supercaps and regenerative braking and so on) so it remains to be seen whether the Hyboost would end up being substantially cheaper than a Prius.

Of course there are other reasons that the Hyboost might be preferable to a Prius.

@Dollared, probably if you wanted to match trim levels, the T4 at 22780 is closer. The top model ecoboost focus is actually the Titanium X at 21250.

Probably you wont get much change out of 2000 pounds once you add all the Hyboost bells and whistles.

Thanks to Roger Pham and dashpool for bringing the dollars and cents issues into full focus.. its a fact that a Prius does not use: conventional transmission, torque converter, starter, alternator, turbocharger or $upercharger and no direct fuel injection, lots of savings and simplicity there..

@TT,
You can get a Prius c for ~$19,000 which is capable of >60 mpg. Do the math! How much saving in gasoline yearly?
You'll be smiling every time you'll drive past a gas station.

There'll be NO belted accessory items to replace or readjustment of belt tension. No water pump replacement needed, nor AC compressor replacement nor freon recharging for the life of the car. No brake work nor repair needed for the life of the car if you regen for most of your driving!
No transmission to repair, maintain, nor to replace...No replacement of lead-acid battery every few years. The NiMh battery will likely last the life of the car.
You'll drive past a car repair shop with a smile each time. Do the math! How much saving in car repair for the life of the car?

How much resale value of the car, when so few repairs will be needed? Do the math again!

I smile every time I try to calculate the total amount of $ saved to operate the Prius. So did most taxi service owners who have used the Prius. They're all greens, and I love all of 'em!

A COCSEPT Hyboost car may almost match Prius III performances and price when it is produced. By that time the next generation Prius (IV?) may do another 20% better?

When the NIMh battery is exhausted, the car is worth close to... nothing. Prius owners are then crying all the way to the bank.

HyBoost technology is available now.

Why one technology should not be compared to another? That is part of the evolution game. Interim solutions will have meaningful benefits but the final solution will probably be closer to 100% electrified vehicles with 100+ Kwh modular battery packs and/or FC genset with smaller batteries for cars and/or larger FCs for heavier vehicles. Either way, ICE will be progressively phased out starting in 2020 or so.

Right, cost effectiveness should not be the only factor influencing purchasing decision. Trying to help one's local economy and the environment would be other factors.

Since the bulk of batteries are made in the Far East, European buyers should weigh more heavily on turbocharging solutions, since the technology is far more developed and predominantly manufactured in Europe, to help the European economy.

Far East buyers would favor electric hybrids more, since more batteries and electrical components are made there.

American buyers should demand that more battery manufacturing and turbocharging technology be made domestically, and try to support domestic manufacturers. Try to influence the government to enact laws (tariffs) to limit job outsourcing, instead of signing free trade agreements wildly and indiscriminately, that will result in more and more exporting of jobs and manufacturing out of the border.

If all citizens world-wide are trying to help their local economies and the social well-being of their own countries, the global economy will be a lot better off, and more people will have jobs. Ditto for being environmentally-concious citizens of the