StoBro2

For over 35 years I drove nothing but manual transmission-equipped vehicles. That streak ended with the C-Max mainly because I thought the operation of the CVT transmission was much less annoying than automatics with fixed ratios. I'm very attuned to anything this transmission does because it's all very new to me. I've never experienced any "bouncing" of any kind when releasing the brake pedal from a stop while in drive. The only vertical motion is the slow subtle rise of the front end as the weight shifts toward the back as the car slowly takes off.

I track all of my fuel purchases through Fuelly. Everything is based on trip odometer readings and actual gallons delivered by the pump. I am assuming THOSE numbers are accurate, but who really knows...? My last fill up clocked in at 48.6 MPG. All of the computer generated numbers are interesting to look at but I don't use them in any official capacity.

Hey! I get to join the club today. Here's my very blurry shot of the display: SE 38 PSI in tires 87 octane Mobil No mods

I've been driving 2 and 4 wheelers for about 35 years, too. I've had at least a half-dozen flats and only 2 were repairable. My last flat was a blowout at 70MPH on I-57. There's nothing like having your car up on a jack and getting buffeted by the wind kicked up by 18-wheelers zipping by. At least the weather was nice that day.

I brought my car into my local dealer for some warranty work. I purchased the car from a different dealer several miles away. The local dealer provided a loaner free of charge to me.

With the onset of truly spring-like weather this past week, I was getting at least 50mpg on just about every trip. My weekday trips are usually 10 miles or less. This weekend the temperatures are going to plummet so I'm not expecting to see over 50mpg on my longer weekend errand-running trips. I once got 80.6mpg on a 4-mile trip- I wish I had a camera with me!

Do you still have flashing green traffic lights in Canada? The first time I drove up there I had no idea they mean the same thing as a steady green left turn arrow!

My local utility gets its power this way: Coal 42% Nuclear 35% Natural Gas 19% Wind 2% Hydro 1% "Other" 1%

That list also says machined aluminum wheels and as far as I know, all C-Maxes have cast alloy wheels that are silver painted. Either Ford changed the tires AND wheels or someone uploaded the wrong info there.

Hmmm, I usually have my heat set at 20C (68F) in the winter and my AC set at 25C (77F) in the summer. With the AC set at 20C or 18C (64F!) the compressor is sure to get a workout. I guess you like things cold up there in Canada!

The specs brochure says 225/50. Exactly where did you see 225/55?

I've complained about the excessively hot seats before on this forum. I can't imagine what it must be like on settings higher than 1. Thankfully, with my cloth seats, I don't really need to run the heaters.

Maybe the end result of all of this is that the EPA devises a new, more detailed disclaimer listing several reasons WHY "your mileage will vary" and require it to be used for all hybrids, plug-ins and other electrified vehicles.

The EPA has strict rules about advertising fuel economy numbers. Technically, advertising non-EPA fuel economy figures is permitted, with many restrictions. A manufacturer would have to be crazy to supplement the EPA figures with their own if their own are worse than the EPAs. A few years ago, Volkswagen considered publishing extra fuel economy figures for their TDI diesels because they thought the EPA figures were unrealistically low. I don't think they ever followed through with it. § 259.2 Advertising disclosures. (a) No manufacturer or dealer shall make any express or implied representation in advertising concerning the fuel economy of any new automobile1 unless such representation is accompanied by the following clear and conspicuous disclosures: (1) If the advertisement makes: 1 The Commission will regard as an express or implied fuel economy representation one which a reasonable consumer, upon considering the representation in the context of the entire advertisement, would understand as referring to the fuel economy of the vehicle or vehicles advertised. 21(i) Representations about city, highway, and combined fuel economy, or any combination of the three, the advertisement must disclose the applicable estimated fuel economy information for each type of fuel economy represented in the advertisement;2 (ii) A representation regarding only city, only highway, or only combined fuel economy, the corresponding EPA fuel economy estimate must be disclosed;3 (iii) A general fuel economy claim without reference to any estimated fuel economy determined pursuant to EPA requirements, the estimated city fuel economy must be disclosed.4 (2) That the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is the source of the estimated “city fuel economy,” “highway fuel economy,” and “combined fuel economy,” and that the numbers are estimates.5 (b) If an advertisement for a new automobile cites: 2 For purposes of §259.2(a), the “city fuel economy,” the “highway fuel economy,” and the “combined fuel economy” must be those applicable to the specific model type being advertised. Fuel economy estimates assigned to model types (see 40 CFR 600.208-08(a)(2)), should not be used for other vehicles in a car line that have different fuel economy ratings. For example, if a manufacturer has a model named the “XZA” that has fuel economy estimates assigned to it and a derivative model named the “Econo-XZA” that has separate, higher fuel economy estimates assigned to it, these higher numbers assigned to the “Econo-XZA” cannot be used in advertisements for the “XZA.” 3 For example, if the representation clearly refers only to highway fuel economy, only the “estimated highway fuel economy” need be disclosed. 4 Nothing in this section should be construed as prohibiting disclosure of both the city and highway estimates. 5 The Commission will regard the following as the minimum disclosure necessary to comply with §259.2(a)(2), regardless of the media in which the advertisement appears: “EPA estimate(s).” For video, if the estimated mpg appears in the visual, the disclosure must appear visually; if the estimated mpg is audio, the disclosure must be audio. 22 (1) The “expected range of fuel economy” or similar language, the advertisement must state with equal prominence both the upper and lower number of the range, an explanation of the meaning of the numbers (i.e., city fuel economy range or highway fuel economy range or combined fuel economy range or any combination of the three), and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is the source of the figures. (2) The “range of estimated fuel economy values for the class of new automobiles” or similar language as a basis for comparing the fuel economy of two or more automobiles, such comparison must be made to the same type of range (i.e., city, highway, or combined).6 © Fuel economy estimates derived from a non-EPA test may be disclosed provided that: (1) The advertisement also discloses the “estimated city fuel economy,” the “estimated highway fuel economy,” and/or the “estimated combined fuel economy” as required by §259.2(a), and the disclosure required by §259.2(a), and gives the “estimated city fuel economy,” the “estimated highway fuel economy,” and/or the “estimated combined fuel economy” figure(s) substantially more prominence than any other estimate;7 provided, however, for any advertising medium in 6 For example, an advertisement could not promote a vehicle’s fuel economy by comparing the vehicle’s estimated highway fuel economy to the city estimates of other vehicles in its class. 7 For example, the Commission regards the following as constituting “substantially more prominence:” For video: If the estimate derived from the non-EPA test appears in the visual portion, the estimated city, highway, and/or combined mpg should appear in numbers twice as large as those used for any other estimate, and remain on the screen at least as long as any other estimate. Alternatively, if the estimate derived from the non-EPA test appears in the visual portion, the estimated city, highway, and/or combined mpg should (1) appear simultaneously and with at least equal prominence as the other mileage estimate(s) in the visual portion, and (2) be stated in the audio portion. Each visual estimated city, highway, and/or combined mpg should be broadcast against a solid color background that contrasts easily with the color used for the numbers. 23 (continued...) which any other estimate is used in the audio, equal prominence must be given the “city fuel economy,” the “highway fuel economy,” and/or the “combined fuel economy” figure(s);8 (2) The source of the non-EPA test is clearly and conspicuously identified; (3) The driving conditions and variables simulated by the test which differ from those used to measure the “estimated city fuel economy,” the “estimated highway fuel economy,” and/or the “estimated combined fuel economy” and which result in a change in fuel economy, are clearly and conspicuously disclosed;9 and (4) The advertisement clearly and conspicuously discloses any distinctions in “vehicle configuration” and other equipment affecting mileage performance (e.g., design or equipment differences which distinguish subconfigurations as defined by EPA) between the automobiles tested in the non-EPA test and the EPA tests. 7(...continued) For print: The estimated city, highway, and/or combined mpg should appear in clearly legible type at least twice as large as that used for any other estimate or in type of the same size as such other estimate, if it is clearly legible and conspicuously circled. The estimated city, highway, and/or combined mpg should appear against a solid color, contrasting background. They should not appear in a footnote unless all references to fuel economy appear in a footnote. 8 For example, the Commission regards the following as constituting equal prominence: The estimated city, highway, and/or combined mpg should be stated, either before or after each disclosure of such other estimate at least as audibly as such other estimate. 9 For dynamometer tests any difference between the EPA and non-EPA tests must be disclosed. For in-use tests, the Commission realizes that it is impossible to duplicate the EPA test conditions, and that in-use tests may be designed to simulate a particular driving situation. It must be clear from the context of the advertisement what driving situation is being simulated (e.g., cold weather driving, highway driving, and heavy load conditions). Furthermore, any driving or vehicle condition must be disclosed if it is significantly different from that which an appreciable number of consumers (whose driving condition is being simulated) would expect to encounter. 24 (d) If an advertisement contains an estimated cruising range for an alternative fueled vehicle that is not determined in accordance with FTC’s Labeling Requirements for Alternative Fuels and Alternative Fueled Vehicles (16 CFR Part 309), the advertisement must disclose clearly and conspicuously: (1) The estimated cruising range required on the FTC label (16 CFR Part 309) with substantially more prominence than any other estimate; provided, however, for any advertising medium in which any other estimate is used only in the audio, equal prominence must be given the estimated cruising range that is required on the FTC label;10 (2) The source of the cruising range estimate; and (3) Any material differences between the method used and the method required by the FTC’s labeling requirements at 16 CFR § 309.22. By direction of the Commission. Donald S. Clark Secretary.

I live halfway between Chicago and Milwaukee. We get our fair share of snow and ice around here. The C-Max is a fairly heavy front drive car and the weight of the battery pack being down low and toward the rear kinda helps to keep the front/rear weight distribution reasonable. Many front wheel drive vehicles are very nose heavy. Also, despite the height of the car, the center of gravity is reasonable as well. So handling overall is pretty good, which helps in winter as well as the rest of the year. The brakes can feel touchy at first, but I've gotten used to them. If you want to maximize your winter confidence, I suggest you get yourself a set of dedicated winter tires, preferably mounted to their own set of wheels for quick swapping without potentially damaging the tires and/or wheels by remounting. I have Michelin X-ice XI3 205/60-R16 tires on their own rims that I used this part winter. I never had any problems getting where I needed to go. Using winter tires that are narrower than the OEM size will allow them to bite down into snow instead of floating over the top of it. By the way, nice dog! Rescued racing Greyhound?

I'd like to have all of the dashboard displays and gauges visible when I'm wearing sunglasses on a bright sunny day. Between the excessive streaks of glare reflecting off of the nearby decorative bright trim and the small-yet-stylishly-faint text of some of the readouts (like outside temperature, for example), it makes me wonder if the sun ever shines at the Ford R&D center.

My SE has the 202A package, which is MyFord Touch and Sirius, and the winter package, which includes heated mirrors and heated cloth seats. It does NOT include rubber mats and cargo liner. I bought those separately from an online Ford parts/accessory dealer. I garage my car so it never gets really cold overnight. I could easily live with the cloth seats and no heaters. The heated mirrors are handy, though.

and all of us with C-Max hybrids still have to wait...

The bolt pattern on a 2012 Fusion is different than the bolt pattern on a C-Max. 2012 Fusion, Escape= 5-114mm 2013 Fusion, Escape= 5-108mm pre 2012 Focus= 4-108mm 2012 & 2013 Focus= 5-108mm 2013 C-Max= 5-108mm

Could there be an issue with the active noise cancellation feature built into the C-Max audio system?

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one left in the world that still uses both hands when driving! (However, I MAY be the only one left in the world that never uses cruise control.)

Just as a C-Max is a taller version of the Focus, the B-Max is a taller version of the Fiesta. How tiny must an A-class vehicle be?

Since the sticker covering the driver's side weep hole in my hatch was buckled so there was an opening anyway, I just removed it completely. I removed the passenger side one as well. It seems to me if they were supposed to be permanent, they would have been more substantial. I had a few things that either Ford or the dealer missed at delivery, like a couple of loose screws that should have been holding some interior door panels on, one of the in-the-edge-of-the-door reflectors sitting in the door pocket, the sunglass holder only hinging on one side, etc. And I never got the center console cupholder divider-thingy, either.

Maybe Ford doesn't quite have the "Pull-Drift Compensation" aspect of the electric power steering assist fully dialed in?

Eastern Screech Owl?