Ford to lower fuel economy rating on C-Max hybrid!

I think there was something really more interesting. The epa allows car makers to rate cars with the same engine and transmission and similar weights to be the same without testing even if its drag, wheels, and tires are different.

The epa has not addressed the slow speeds of the test, which allowed ford to use software to game the test for better mileage. I would hope they address that in the near future. It doesn't suprise me at all that it negotiated with ford to allow it to change the software for the retest. The old test (on the fusion) was legitimate under EPA rules, and EPA would rather do a mea culpa with 43mpg, than fight about the rules. I think many of us want the rules changed now after seeing this though.

 

I'm confused. I looked at a C-max a couple of days ago. The 1st thing I noticed was all the cheap feeling buttons on the steering wheel. Then I sat in the back seat. Sure there is plenty of headroom, but the seat seemed narrower that my Gen III. Then I opened the hatch. The space seemed more like the Prius C. I really have no desire to even test drive it.

 

Fuelly data suggests Fusion Hybrid is 41-42 MPG, about 1 MPG more than Camry hybrid with bigger engine. Not sure how that slipped through. Perhaps with how C&D suggested, using 2 cycles instead of 5.

 

Sure it wasn't the Energi model? It is a plugin version with big battery pack so you get smaller cargo.

 

When did the EPA test the car and find 41 mpg ? I find it hard to believe that the EPA let Ford publish 47 mpg if the internal test was 41 mpg.

As for the reports that the EPA lets 'twins' get by without testing both cars, I doubt we have a clear picture of requirements. No way the c-max and fusion should be considered twins.

 

In the Forbes article AG linked in post #13.

GCC has some more info. 2014 model would get more tweaks so, expect higher than 43 MPG.

- Gearing changes that result in a more efficient transmission drive ratio
- New hood seal, front and rear tire deflectors, A-pillar moldings and the addition of rear lift gate deflectors to improve vehicle aerodynamics
- New engine oil with reduced friction

Green Car Congress: Ford relabels 2013 C-MAX Hybrid to 43 mpg, upgrades 2014 C-MAX Hybrid to boost fuel economy; pitfalls of the EPA “general label” rule

 

Hopefully the EPA will now talk to car and driver so we can find out. I can understand why they didn't want to talk to them before the announcement. It wouldn't surprise me if ford used the 2 cycle test on the fussion, and use the 5 cycle on the 2014 model and it drops. Its embarrassing that the government let car makers just put the ratings on similar cars. Toyota appeared to test the camry xle with bigger wheels/tires separately and got different ratings. The fusion hybrid titanium has 18" wheels and tires (not low rolling resistance) and we know they must get worse mileage than the lower model with 17" wheels and low rolling resistance tires.

 

$550 compensation is low. Over the lifetime (150k miles), the difference between 47 MPG and 43 MPG is 296 gallons. At $4 per gallon, the extra cost in gas is $1,184.

 

Ya, Toyota went above and beyond with Camry hybrid trims. I guess they knew hybrid buyers are sensitive to efficiency.

Toyota didn't do the same with Prius FIVE trim though.

 

Directly from EPA. With the original firmware/software, it would be 42 City and 40 Highway.

http://www.epa.gov/otaq/documents/fueleconomy/420f13044.pdf

 

My interpretation which I probably stole from someone else here, is Toyota seems to be about 5-10 MPG ahead of competition on hybrid MPG. MPG is not everything of course since 1/MPG is key point, not to mention comfort etc. But 50 MPG sure sounds nice.

 

Just checking fueleconomy.gov, interesting comparing prius v and cmax now with the updated EPA, cmax 1 mpg better in city, equal highway. Still a little off from real world results obviously but much closer than before.
What I don't get is the ford fusion hybrid, it remains unchanged at 47/47, did it just not sell as well as the cmax, meaning nobody made a fuss about it or did i miss something?

 

NPR said/confirmed/implied that the new C-Max rating is based on the 5 cycles test. The 47 MPG rating copied from Fusion hybrid was based on the 2 cycles test.

They should run the Fusion hybrid in the 5 cycles test. 47 MPG for both city and highway is of suspect.

EPA To Crack Down On Accuracy Of MPG Claims By Car Makers : NPR

SAMILTON: <snip> That had industry insiders wondering if Ford actually gamed the system in some way.

Chris Grundler of the EPA says no. He says Ford - as is permitted by the rules - took the fuel economy number for the Fusion hybrid and applied it to the C-Max. But the vehicles aren't identical.

CHRIS GRUNDLER: So small differences in design - in this case, it's less aerodynamic than the Fusion, it has a different wheel and tire - made a big difference in the result.

SAMILTON: And when Ford went back and tested the C-Max independently, it also switched to that five-cycle test.

 

FORD has had mpg problems on the C-Max and Fusion, but also the Escape does not get the MPG ratings also all the engine problems with the 1.6 Eco Boost .................. I'll just stay with a proven Toyota

 

I like this quote !!

 

There is the 'guilt by association.' Ford inflated claims will be used as a broad-brush against all hybrids, even our Prius. Well we've already been accused of mowing down the blind, pedestrians, and busting through crosswalks.

Bob Wilson

 

don't forget holding up traffic, causing road rage and strip mining canadia!

 

Absolutely. At a minimum EPA should be requiring the 5 cycle test on any decent volume high efficiency vehicle. They also should be looking into addressing the highway test to use speeds that Americans are driving.

 

Yes, unfortunately the articles seem to link consumer reports' bad testing here for exposing that hybrids don't get their gas mileage, and that hurts the prius. Here is one, though luckily buried at the bottom of the article.

Ford Cuts C-Max Hybrid's Fuel-Economy Claims - WSJ.com

Something to point out how flawed CR's tests are compared to fuelly, fueleconomy.gov would be helpful, and that CR does not try to simulate the real mpg or the epa test. A better epa test along with making high efficiency cars do all 5 cycles would be helpful.