Prius C outsells Volt, Nissan in 3 days

Agree with usbseawolf2000, the resale difference value may be more than $2400 after 4 or 5 years. The Honda Fit may be a better alternative to the Prius c than the Fiesta.

See what Automotive News had to say about the Fiesta.
Rechtin's Subcompact Shootout

 

I have lived with a 2011 Fiesta for just over a year and I don't agree with anything that dude says.

I do agree that resale will absolutely be better with the Toyota by leaps and bounds.

Here you pay more in insurance for hybrids, our Prius actually cost us more than the Explorer did so you will be paying more vs. the Fiesta.

Interest over time? I'm not going to do the math but that adds some.

Remember, the C is aimed at young, relatively poor people. Several thousands of dollars NOW means a lot more than dollars in five years...if they are even driven that long.

The subcompact market is tough, people generally "settle" on a small car because it is what they can afford.

I love ours because it is a secondary car, a strict commuter and sometimes day-tripper. If it was my only car I would have some issues.

That being said, unless something better comes along we will probably be buying a C to replace the Fiesta when the lease is up, especially if I can get into one around the same payment.

 

Yep, its the focus and fiesta in europe, the fiesta in the US. I doubt Americans will get overwhelmed by a 3 cylinder engine, they don't sell well over here. fiesta with 1L ecoboost should get around 38mpg combined, which may not be enough of a boost to buy a 3-cylinder instead of a 4. Highway mileage should be about the same as a prius c. They are quite different cars, but I would expect the prius c with slightly less power but a more conventional 4 cyl to sell much better. The c will grab sales from the prius and corrola but many competiors c and b segment cars.

 

They claim the 3cyl will not suffer any performance loss but that is to be seen. The torque is supposed to make up for the hp loss (100 vs 120 for std. fiesta). If it is no more of a dog than the current one I would swap. 38mpg in town in a conventional car is a good thing but I would expect better, as I said I average 33 and my hwy use is the first (or last) 3 miles of the day on a 24mi route, the rest is city. I'm going to guess 40/48.

The funny thing (that is not funny at all) is they will tout it's 0-60 and bash the Cs even if they are the same because that's how the non-hybrid vs. hybrid world seems to work.

 

There is a distinct prejudice against 3 cylinder engines in the US whether they perform as well or not. There is a 100hp and 120hp version of the 1L, I'm not sure which makes it into the fiesta. Sonic with the 1.4L 4cyl turbo seems to sell fairly well though. People like the low end grunt.

There is a lot we don't know about mpg on the new car. I don't think we will see anything close to 40mpg city since there is no regen, but the car should be great for hyper-milers.

 

Based on the numbers for the 2.0 and 3.5 liter ecoboosts, I'd say they are right. Keep in mind, a naturally aspirated engine produces its power in a peak, a turbo charged one's power curve is a flat plateau. The base engine may have a higher peak output, but the ecoboost will produce more over a greater rpm range.

Ford isn't the only making improvements either. Others or working on small turbo or miller cycle engines, and also improvements to transmissions and other fuel saving technologies.

 

We can do some analysis. In the Euro Focus the 120hp 1.6l 4cyl has a combined euro cycle of 44.1. The 1.0l 100hp has 58.9 combined. This is a 26% increase in econ.

Taking the combined rating of 33 of the current Fiesta and applying a 26% bonus gets you 41.58.

The current city is 29 and the hwy is 38.

City is 12% below average so 12% off 41.58 is 36.5
Hwy is 13% above average so that gives you 47.05

36/47 for combined 41.

41mpg for several thousand less completely changes the game.

Ford claims 10% for start stop so you could up to 39/47 for a combined of 43-44ish with that feature (seems a little high to me).

 

As Prius c has shown, we can't simply take the non-US MPG increase and apply it. Using that technique, we were expecting Prius c to have about 55 mpg but it turned out not to be the case.

 

HSD type hybrids excel on the non demanding tests of Japan and Europe though. The gen2's excelling on the old EPA is a major push for finally updating it.

The above comparison does have flaws. It really should be Fiesta to Fiesta, not Focus to Fiesta. We also need to account for transmission. Does Europe get the dual clutch six speed yet? Start/stop systems don't show up in EPA testing because the stops, if there, aren't long enough. Kia has one available now that only gets a 1 mpg improvement in city test..

 

55 and 51 aren't that far apart (less than a gallon over a tank).

It gives us a rough idea of what is going to happen and there are way more variables in hybrids than conventionals (even grade or road quality could sway results).

Yes, europe and US Focus have 6spd DCT.

It should be Fiesta to Fiesta but Fiesta doesn't have the engine yet, Focus does. The above numbers were Focus to Focus and then the differential applied to Fiesta.

 

start/stop systems have even worse tendecies in europe, not to mention 3cly turbos... Ford will be lucky to get 35 mpg... problem is that start/stop wont do anything and that higher speed and faster acceleration of US tests will not do well for 1.0l 3cly engine, as turbo will worK morE, and when turBo worKs more, efficiens goes down, down.

you can compare it to their diesels, their cheapest diesel gets 20% better efficiency and best eco diesel gets 40% better in Focus.

did ford say if they will bring it to usa actually? i think its faster variations are a lot more interesting.

 

I think it's a strong rumor at this point, but 2013-14 should be a refresh year for the Fiesta. If it happens, it will be then. Because of margins in the B segment, I think it's likely. Saving the hybrid resources for a model with more wiggle room in costs and profits.

The 2.0 ecoboost gives a 2 to 3 mpg improvement in combined over the V6 in the Edge and Explorer. Doesn't sound like much, but it impressed me because the Explorer has the same ratings as my 2006 HHR. The newer HHR does better(maybe the same as the Edge?), but there is a major size difference. The 2.0 has roughly the same performance as the V6. Which has me wondering why it's not offered with AWD, or given a tow rating. AWD leads to more use of boost, and no improvement in testing?

No start/stop system in them. Seems that's saved for debut in the new Fusion, which will get the 1.6 and 2.0 ecoboost. The Focus ST is only other upcoming model on Ford's site getting an ecoboost, the 2.0. Probably, no start/stop there. Press reports has the 2.0 going into the Taurus and F-150. Plus the 3.5 into the full size Transit van.

 

I poked around on the F-150 forums, Ecoboost specifically, and there were countless complaints about poor mpg, way under EPA, and various other complaints about transmission shifting and throttle tip in issues etc.. I seriously considered the EcoBoost F-150 for my work vehicle to replace my '05 Prius but the number of complaints made the Prius Economy Forum appear tame. lol

 

We, the consumer, don't know all specifics of the vehicle tested for the EPA. We actually don't learn the specifics of cars on the lot, without some digging. The specific I'm thinking of isn't on the car's window sticker, and likely isn't on the manufacturer's site. Which isn't that big a deal, because it something that rarely is offered options on. So it isn't a variable to consider between your car and the EPA test vehicle.

For trucks on the other hand, it is something that the consumer generally has multiple choices with. That is the axle ratio. The ecoboost F150 has a choice of four with 2WD. The higher the ratio, the more Torque that is transferred to the road, and the higher the payload. That gets traded off with lower ratio for better fuel economy.

The smallest available, and the one on the truck used in Cleanmpg's F150 ecoboost challenge, is 3.15. Those looking for maximum payload and towing would opt for the 3.73. 4.10 with 4WD. I haven't done any test shopping of trucks on the lot, but they are likely the middle range ratios.

I'm sure 3.15 was used for the EPA test, and many people likely don't consider that the numbers on the window sticker might have come from a truck with an axle ratio different than theirs. Then a heavy foot can be more detrimental when turbo boost is involved. As to other complaints, it's more evidence to wait at least a year after a change or new model.

An academic question for those not getting EPA with ecoboost is if they would get it with the 6L V8 it has performance comparable too?

 

Gleaning what I could from all of the posts on that forum it appeared that most had the 3:15 or 3:73 rear gearing. With my knowledge of fuel efficient driving I looked for key works like traveling speed and aggressive driving and these guys were driving fairly low speed at 50-65mph and taking it pretty easy or simply on long trips. Some didn't have any problem getting close to EPA on the highway but most seemed to be well into the 13-16mpg range instead of 20-22mpg. I do understand that a few WOT tire spinning romps will really hurt a tank with a turbo and I am assuming some of these guys are no taking that into account. lol

My point is that there are a lot of MPG and performance complaints associated with the EcoBoost technology. Sure it's great for power (area under the curve) but there are also a lot of tradeoffs.

 

start stop in non hybrids is almost useless, and waste of money... Since it doesnt help EPA, most US cars dont have it.

Problem with start/stop is that there are many situations where it will not work - Toyota estimated that for average driver, their start/stop in Yaris will work around 29% of the time. When engine is cold, or battery is not full or A/C is used, or too much electricity is used, etc, etc, it will not turn off the car. Plus you always get shudder during start/stop which annoys people so most people in German diesels turn it off via button since they find it annoying.

I think 1.6l Ecoboost might be one to watch, as you get much better mpg and good performance compared to 2.0l-2.5l petrols usually found in these cars. 1.0l 3cly probably wont come in US due to limitations I wrote above.

 

A glance at reports at true delta shows that there are a couple of TSBs out for the transmission, and I recently read Ford has an updated the transmission coming out for the F-150. A faulty transmission alone can be cause for low mileage and other complaints.

There is a TSB about the ecoboost shuddering. The 3.5 in the F-150 has some redesigned components, like the intake. I mention this because there have been less reported problems with the 3.5 in the Flex and Taurus. Deposits on the valves might be a problem with them, but that can be a problem with any DI engine.

We all need to remember that internet forums, like the news, can focus on the negative. People looking for help are going to be more vocal than the ones without problems.

The 2013 Taurus is out now, and available with the 2.0 ecoboost. The EPA numbers haven't been released yet.

That is the original topic, right?

 

original topic was Prius c sales, not Ford ecoboost .

 

But we have two threads on that now.

 

The original topic was a attempt to bash the volt/leaf using an irrelevant statistic of sales the Prius C. I don't see discussion of the ford ecoboost is no more irrelevant than the original thread concept. At lease I learned something meaningful about ecoboost.