fbov

Glad to hear!

And to be clear for Jjarman123, the data plotted above was taken from your car through the diagnostic port using FORscan. It's not what "should" happen, it's what "did" happen. This design intent is consistent with requirements for Li-ion battery longevity. https://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/how_to_prolong_lithium_based_batteries FWIW, I just got a new robot vac, with Li-ion batteries. When running, it returns to recharge before dropping to 30%. Sitting in its dock, it's app currently reports 77% charge. Very reasonable for applications in environmentally controlled spaces. Ford is more conservative because cars have to live outside. Have fun, Frank

In reverse order, No, and beats me! Perhaps ask in the Energi forum? It might be plug-in specific. Frank

2013 with about 63K miles on it. Bottom of the doors has started to rust. Makes me wonder what else might be. We drive on similarly treated roads.... Frank

Battery?

Continuously Variable Transmission once meant a continuous range of gear ratios were available... but this style CVT only uses two shafts, an input and output shaft. Their speed ratio will always be positive number greater than zero; if the input turns, the output turns. Our CVT has a third shaft, Charger, to use the TRW nomenclature. It allows an even wider range of input shaft (ICE) and output shaft (Tractor) speeds, since any single shaft can be stopped. The neat part is that it does all this without actually changing any gear ratios. All gears are in constant mesh, so speed ratios never change. It's the sun/ring/planet arrangement that's allowing two of the three shafts to run any speed, even backwards (reverse). The price is that Charger has to run from +10,000 RPM to -10,000 RPM. Neat thing about electricity is that it can generate the same polarity turning either way, or run with no load at all. Neat engineering. https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/f0/cb/cb/8a9045b4dc5afb/US3732751.pdf I would be driving a 2018 except I started looking too late last year. Avoid the tranny issues (which is the only reason I'm looking) and you have one very nice car. Bigger and more powerful than it's hybrid competition, it's a very flexible drive. If you want to play the "hybrid game" on 60 MPH roads, you can do very well. It works even better on 35 MPH roads, while mileage really tanks at 75 MPH. Speed matters. Cold matters (winter), but with a long, fast commute, you won't be sitting at a stop light wondering why the engine just started (you wanted heat, remember?). Have fun, Frank

See if you had the RCM replaced, under recall 14S04. Mine died in 2014 when I hit a pothole, and the dash went Christmas Tree, so I got moved up on the retrofit list. You may have been missed. Just a thought. Frank

You too, eh!

Perhaps my response was too specific, given I spent Sunday in a Sonata Hybrid trying to get it to perform. But we only took the Sonata because it has newer tires. I'd take the C-Max any day. They got the aero right; it's very stable at speed. In fairness to the OP, you should mention the many aero modes you've done that enable this kind of result. Frank

Given what we know today, the Energi/Hybrid question is Hybrid. Plus 3 talked about the reason; falling battery life with the common plug-in charge/discharge cycle. Hybrid c/d cycle is less stressful. There are better hybrids for highway, even if the C-Max is hard to beat in city and rural driving. I find it hard to get out of the mid-high 30's on interstate highways, while I had no problem getting low 40's in the wife's Hyundai Sonata Hybrid yesterday. Hyundai uses a conventional transmission, low-speed electric motor and variable valve timing, in a sedan body with very low Cd (0.24 claimed). At speed, valve timing switches the engine to Atkinson mode in top gear for more efficiency, or uses EV if HVB charge is high and throttle use light. You do get some throttle lag if you punch it, but so does the C-Max. Conversely, there are things about Hyundai engineering that I don't like, even as my wife seems pleased. HID headlights are as bad as it gets. I have had the head lights go out at night on twisty roads trying to find high-beams. Neither factory nor dealer can aim them properly, even using the very nicely engineered adjustment mechanism. Aim the low-beams right and the high's still aim for the trees. Conversely, the C-Max headlights are among the best I've ever driven, right from the factory. Safe in a white-out because you can see the road. Finally, there is (was?) a web site with data on hybrid and EV performance and reliability. https://avt.inl.gov/ Sadly, has been gutted, five years after it was prematurely truncated. Not all cars made the 160K mile goal, so they never did the high-mileage battery testing. The big message was that 2013 C-Max reliability was excellent, save for the transmission issue, resolved by 2015. Here's a sample report I had downloaded. batteryCMax2158.pdf Welcome! Frank

+1 It really is known, with work around but no fix. Frank

In the FWIW dept, I've been following a "blueovalforum" forum for Escape/Kuga. It makes this forum seem the hotbed of activity. Four threads have June posts, half on the 2020 model, yet someone's keeping the place going. Frank

Thus the use of peer review in technical, scholarly and research publications, to separate the wheat from this sort of chaff. My comments were intended to add perspective, that driving conditions vary, as do driving styles, so that not everyone needs to use conservative criteria. In my case, I want to stretch the original tires for one more summer, before trading-in the car. Rain just means taking the slower roads, or slowing down a little in the downpour. Of course, we have are lucky enough to have a second car, with new tires, for long trips. No disagreement there! Have fun, Frank

Good stuff, Plus, but I'd like to comment on the approach of this report rather than it's predictable and expected results. Two passages are telling. "AAA has traditionally recommended that motorists replace their tires at a tread depth of 4/32”." and "For wet stopping tests, an average water depth of 1.0 mm is an appropriate approximation for typical rainfall ...." It's important to know an organization's motivation, it's point of view, when examining "scholarly" works such as this. The first quote appears early in the 4/32" test methodology, and it's key to knowing why they spent the money. AAA thinks 2/32" is an unacceptable legal limit, and wants the law changed. It's equally important to know how the test was conducted, as the details matter. Water depth is the critical detail here, given the focused nature of the study. These results only apply while you're driving in heavy rain. Their use of "wet" to describe their test road is misleading. The road was flooded. It would have been very interesting to see a range of tread depths tested in this manner, to see how "worst-case wet" performance changes with tire age. That would have made even more obvious that there's a huge variation among the tires at any price. Certain tires (Michelin Premier) were much better than others. Only by artificially grouping them by price, and not performance, can these conclusions be supported. More evidence of political, vs. scientific, motivation... Where I live, it rains all the time... light soaking rain that barely fills the space between the aggregate on an asphalt roadway. Plus, I'll bet AZ doesn't get much rain... although I understand it can rain very heavily when it does. Now Paul is another story, as AAA's choice of the southeast as a model region was a good choice for lots of rain. Bottom line is that a required driving skill is the ability to judge "road feel" when it rains, because the car will tell you when you're driving too fast, puddles not withstanding. Every tire and every wet road will hydroplane/lose traction if you drive fast enough. And thanks for the NHTSA report; dated but comprehensive in the extreme! Kind of like Hucho's book on aerodynamics; basic science doesn't change. HAve fun, Frank

:lol2: I never use these things, but I know of no words that express it better. Well put, Plus! Frank

It's heat soak. You stopped the engine, and so coolant flow. Without bulk movement, hot coolant in the cylinder head rises to the sensor. On startup, temps ought to dip a little, as it draws in coolant that cold-soaked in the radiator. Frank

The alternative is to loosen lug nuts a turn, and take a spin around the cul de sac. Oh, you don't live on a cul de sac? Get a big hammer. Frank

Just wait... I listen to the radio, but on occasion, it defaults to BT all on its own. It was really odd the first time as we had just started a road trip, and wondered why songs were playing in alphabetical order. Have fun, Frank

Plus, is it still a problem with a 12/2014 build date? We know my 10/2012 is so afflicted; when did they cut in the hardware fix? Frank

+1 to the fuse. I hate the phrase "They all do that" but they do. Happens to mine every 18 mos., four times in six years. If you don't pull the fuse when the radio stays on, the battery drains. I only had to prove that to myself once. No residual issues, however, if you do pull it. Frank

Per the order guide, hybrids get either 17- or 19-inch wheels. Tire Rack lists 98 choices in 225/65-17, including our Michelins, so it's a possibility. They list only 21 tire options for 225/55-19, two of them Michelin. One of these, their Premier LTX, is available in all three OEM sizes so they might use it across the product line if consistent ride is desired across the product line. From my perspective, I don't see a bad Michelin option. Tire Rack's LTX test report is really good. HAve fun, Frank

Speaking of order books... 2020 Escape Order Guide.pdf And pricing 2020MY Escape vs. 2019MY Escape - MSRP Price Comparison 2019MY Escape S FWD - MSRP $24,1052020MY Escape S FWD - MSRP $24,8852020MY Escape S 4WD - MSRP $26,385 (New Model)2019MY Escape SE FWD - MSRP $26,5002020MY Escape SE FWD - MSRP $27,0952019MY Escape SE AWD - MSRP $28,0002020MY Escape SE AWD - MSRP $28,5952020MY Escape SE Sport FWD - MSRP $28,255 (New Model)2020MY Escape SE Sport AWD - MSRP $29,755 (New Model)2019MY Escape SEL FWD - MSRP $28,4452020MY Escape SEL FWD - MSRP $29,2552019MY Escape SEL AWD - MSRP $29,9452020MY Escape SEL AWD - MSRP $30,755 (301A)2020MY Escape SEL AWD - MSRP $33,040 (2.0L w/301A)2019MY Escape Titanium FWD - MSRP $32,6202020MY Escape Titanium FWD - MSRP $33,402 (Hybrid 400A)2019MY Escape Titanium AWD - MSRP $34,1202020MY Escape Titanium AWD - MSRP $34,900 (Hybrid 400A)2020MY Escape Titanium AWD - MSRP $36,685 (401A)All 2020MY Escape Models - Destination & Delivery = $1,095 ... per posts in the blueovalforums' Escape & Kuga forum. Have fun, Frank

Seems that way... but it's not. Straight line has a 0.994 R^2 for my Michelins (blue curve). Tire life 2019.pdf

The 13:1 CR is a bit of a red herring; it assumes a normal 100% intake cycle. Our Atkinson engines use intake valve timing to reduce that to 90% of displacement, so actual compression ratio, in the cylinder, is more like 11.7:1. Our cars are 11.1:1. I have a robovac that uses NiMh batteries. They last a year, running it twice a week. I'm not impressed with that technology's longevity. HAve fun, Frank

You're thinking like it's a shifting transmission. Plus 3's right about your approach perhaps helping a conventional "hydromatic" transmission. From everything I've read, if we have the bad bearing, it's just a matter of load on the bearing and time in service. I'm at 62K miles, so I've got you on the latter. A noisy bearing might respond to a viscosity increase, but an under-lubricated bearing won't. Mine is 10/2012 vintage, so nearly certain to have the bearing issue. The 2014 PCM update added a cold start ICE drive shut-out. The car is EV-only for a short time after cold starts. Driving out of my driveway, engine speed is low, and independent of throttle position, and I've got lots of EV oomph. By the top of the hill, the engine speed is up and we're driving normally. This change gives the problem bearing a chance to get some oil before it gets load. It's another reason you might want to rethink the 75w90. For the record, I have found one engine oil additive with positive benefits, Moly-Slip. Adding molybdenum disulfide when it's not already present will reduce fuel consumption. I drove Volvo wagons for decades. Adding Moly-Slip gave me 5-10% improvement in mileage, a couple MPG/tank. Of course, my C-Max's oil analysis shows a consistent level of Mo in base oil, and no change through life, so oil companies have figured this out. Best of luck, Frank