fbov

Snow performance is all about tires. It's a great car in snow when using snow tires. Our OEMs are horrible in snow... but there's an article following this Worst 5 list that negates CU's Top 5 list: https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine/2015/09/do-you-really-need-awd-in-the-snow/index.htm Bottom line remains, as always, that snow tires are worth more than any 4WD/AWD drive train in snow. But when is a snow tire a "snow tire?" Michelin has a new tire with the "3-Peak Mountain Snow Flake" designation found on "real" snow tires, that claims the kind of all-season longevity only seen in summer tires. http://www.tyrereviews.co.uk/Article/What-changed-with-the-new-Michelin-CrossClimate-Plus.htm https://www.tirerack.com/tires/tires.jsp?tireMake=Michelin&tireModel=CrossClimate%2B&partnum=155WR7CCPXL Interestingly, they're only being sold in the sizes that fit the C-Max, and my wife's Hyundai Sonata Hybrid... which needs tires that work in the winter, thus my interest. Porter still gets its X-Ice3's, but this is the last season on the OEM tires. Interestingly, the CrossClimate+ tests show it has very low rolling resistance, too. Achilles Heel appears to be wet performance in cold weather, if I read all the reviews right, due to rubber compound limitations. Sorry for the tangent... Have fun, Frank

Not driven hard, per se, just on the highway in the rust belt. He's getting 25% EV long term average. I see less than that in long trips, implying a lot of highway miles even if he didn't talk about a long commute. He's also got snows, which may add rolling resistance depending on the brand, and implies he does a lot of winter driving. I have tanks below 33 MPG in mostly highway winter driving. It's part of what makes Recumpence's mileage impressive; winter uses more fuel for most of us. Have fun, Frank

I've added a couple thing to the underside, with good and bad results. The 1.5" side skirts have been fine for several years,. The 2" front chin spoiler, attached at the front of that cover, didn't make it through the first winter. The damage occurred right where yours did, when I made a left turn coming off a speed bump, hit a pot hole and the corner of the spoiler caught pavement. I find it's the suspension travel that's getting us into trouble... Best of luck, Frank

Welcome and enjoy! Then tell us what you think. Frank

Welcome! This car's hybrid system is very similar to Toyota's "Synergy Drive" found in the Prius, but with larger engine and battery. Anything you find on Prius drive train likely applies, with only slight modification. Note those differences amount to a big deal, but that's the stuff of test drives. Have fun, Frank

You'll understand some confusion. This is the classic description of a noise suppression system issue. I'd call it a droning sound, but it starts around 35 and get louder as you accelerate, but will disappear if you back off the throttle. At least in my car, where it's a rare event at best. Given the failure is very common in, and limited to 2013s, I would expect Ford to cover a failure past warranty. If not, I'd make a stink until they did. If there's a tranny failure... my tranny's still behaving. Have fun, Frank

Is the noise throttle-dependent? Many folks have had a problem with the car's noise suppression system, going so far as disabling microphones. The worst I get is a droning sound at certain throttle positions, certain temperatures, certain loads... happens rarely so I can't complain, but some have so YMMV. Have fun, Frank

In 90 tanks, I've had 6 where the car thought it used more fuel than the pump put in. All were less-than-empty fill-ups, most around 9 gal. FWIW, Frank

So they do a very good job of emulating "consumers?" If people weren't clueless, you might fault CU for it, but they just evaluate cars at the level of their audience. While true, this is a sad commentary on our society. Most people want what they want, regardless if they've done anything to earn it. But when it comes to comparing vehicles, I see nothing in these test reports that would lead me to consider this Kia/Hyundai design. It's not a very good car. If we weren't fixated on fuel economy, this would be a short discussion. K/H is still a car company that's learning how to make a quality vehicle. No sign this is one of their hits. HAve fun, Frank

Time to replace your brakes. My car disagrees with your assessment. If you have a high regen braking score, you're using your rear brakes all the time. Look up "electronic brakeforce management." My rear brakes wore out, and my front rotors rusted out, both around 50K. Rarely good to ignore warning lights. HAve fun, Frank

Good reminder, Paul!

Check your link... brings me back to this page.

Yep; unless you have an Energi, all power comes from gasoline. The parasitic load is just routed through the Charger side of the power split device to the HVB. As to the second part, what were the controls on AC use? I only use AC when it's really hot. If you did too, you know why your conclusion isn't well founded. Have fun, Frank

We've clearly had different experiences in cabs.... and perhaps it would be more accurate to say high acceleration driving. Frank

Bov Oil data 170627.pdf Latest update. This change is the first requested at 12 months instead of 10K miles, so mileage is 1500 miles low... but ICE miles is within 200 of prior data, so I'm pretty much expecting similar data, with a higher residual level of TBN. And that's what I get, once you account for oil content (Mb and Mg are oil additives). There's also a mini-experiment going, comparing 5W20 and 0W20 for impact on oil dilution by fuel, and associated reduced flash point. I had seen an average of 0.9% fuel using 5W20 Ford blend, and 2.65% using 0W20 full synth. This change was a repeat of AFE 0W20 oil, but with a difference. My daughter had the car in Vermont, and I drove it home just before the change, including a good 3 hours at ~70 MPH on the last leg. This is exactly what's needed to get oil hot, not just the engine. This time, with a heating step before the change, there's only trace fuel, and flash-point is back at 400F like it was 30K miles ago. That leaves run mode as the most likely cause of the fuel contamination. And it's likely a subtle process, as I've included one of Paul's oil analyses, which shows no fuel even with a lot higher ICE miles on the oil. But he's on the highway regularly, with cross-country trips while I was just driving back roads to work... Have fun, Frank

It's a bearing oil pressure issue. The stress mode was high speed driving on a cold engine. High mileage in 2012-2014 would be a warning sign. Mine only had 30K before 14E02 recall was applied. After that, start-up behavior changed. Control system firmware updates now prevent the ICE from delivering torque when cold. Floor it out of your driveway and you'll EV for the first ~15 seconds (haven't timed it) even though the ICE is running, albeit at low RPM. The end of this period is fairly obvious; engine speed rises, engine noise increases and all signs of EV disappear. HAve fun, Frank, who's now at 55K

Looking at my records, I see these service items. 3/31/2015 31,980 Van Bortel Ford 819077 Sound System TSB14-0037 R/R GPSM 5/1/2015 33,540 Van Bortel Ford 823233 Electrical back-up camera guides not visible, see latch 5/1/2015 33,540 Van Bortel Ford 823233 Electrical Cannot lock vehicle, see latch 5/1/2015 33,540 Van Bortel Ford 823233 Electrical TSB14-0070 did not fix; R/R latch, latch motor My GPS was repaired under warranty, 3/31 and when I got the car back, the doors wouldn't lock and guides were missing in back-up camera. In fact, the tailgate latch had failed, so the tailgate couldn't fully close, preventing locking, and guide display. System interactions... Have fun, Frank

A few links to basic research... https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290771543_Analysis_on_car_aerodynamic_drag_for_open_windows Modeling, identifies critical velocity (90 km/h) where break occurs with their assumptions http://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJVSMT.2014.066502 Modeling, confirmed with wind tunnel testing, showing greater drag when windows are open. https://www.quora.com/How-the-aerodynamics-of-a-car-change-with-the-opening-of-each-window-sunroof And a good example of the kind of response to ignore.... Frank

This is patently false, as we'll see, again demonstrating the true technical competence of CR. The only justification of the statement is "He says...." This is called "argument from authority." Jake is a "tester" at CR, so he must know what he's talking about. In truth, if he's any good, he can PROVE either result beyond any doubt. Without data and the test plan behind it, this means nothing. Here's a documented proof that AC gives better mileage, thanks to Mythbusters. And documented proof that AC gives worse mileage, a conclusion they accept. I can't find the test I remember, where they found no difference, so they decided to drive slower to they'd get this conclusion. The problem is poor experimental design, ignoring known facts, specifically the effects of speed. This guy does a good job explaining. http://physics.info/drag/ Key bits are the drag force dependence on velocity raised to a power - velocity^n - where that power depends on conditions. Turbulent drag depends on v^2, while laminar flow depends on v^1, which is just v. In our cars, we have laminar flow just about everywhere above the wheel wells http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/3129-tuft-testing-a-c-max/ That means most of the drag force is a v^1 dependence - v^2 doesn't kick in until you open the windows. Bingo #2. Mythbusters tested an SUV that never hit 12 MPG in their test. When on, AC ran full time, full load all the time because that's how Detroit classically designed it. When you get too cold, you don't turn down the air, you add HEAT! CR is similarly clueless, failing to understand that Volvo gave AC a knob so you could turn down the AC. Current electric AC technology uses variable capacity compressors that are extremely efficient at low load. We added AC to our house last year, and the electric bill didn't change (fans use a lot of power). In our cars, akin to the ICE, most of the AC drain comes getting to operating temperature. So... To prove windows-open is more efficient, drive a high-drag vehicle at low speed with high-capacity AC on max. To prove AC is more efficient, drive a low-drag vehicle with modern AC at higher speed for a longer time. HAve fun, Frank

Nope; no change in gear ratio, beyond the Hybrid/Energi difference that Plus 3 has documented repeatedly. My 2013 now has a different warm-up behavior, that I think started with the 2014 PCM update. You see it in Paul's video. When the engine starts cold, it sends no power to the wheels - EV only - for about 20 seconds. Then engine speed rises, and the Split Power display in "Engage" or "My View" screens shows a shift from blue EV to white ICE power delivery. And given all the SW updates, it makes sense that the transmission SW must be the same version as the car. That's different from system level SW updates. HAve fun, Frank

Rather than explain again, I'll wait until I get data from this change. I'll look at the flash-point and fuel content. You'll want to look at the insoluble percentage, a few tenths of a percent historically, but 0 last time. Have fun, Frank

Check the tail gate, too. My camera stopped working when my tailgate got misaligned, so it didn't close properly. Camera doesn't work if it thinks the tailgate is open. Frank

I'm trying to warm the oil, not the engine. I want the oil at operating temp for an extended period. I'll let the car cool down before changing the oil, though. Run mode is one major possibility, as is month oil is changed. However, those two factors are aliased in my data. The only winter oil change was also the only time I drove mostly highway. However, the three summer changes show the full range of variation in fuel percentage and flash point, from 0.5%/400F to 3.0%/325F. The data points to oil... 5W20 gave the 0.5% point while 0W20 averages 2.7% fuel in the oil. However, I'm about to change my third fill of 0W20 oil, right after a 300 mile trip. so we'll see... If fuel content is still high, the lighter weight oil is implicated independent of run mode. I'll be putting in a 5W20, likely Mobil 1 EP. But I've retired, so miles are down and trips are shorter still, and that's a different driving mode altogether! Results from here will be slow to come, and not as consistent. Cie la vie! HAve fun, Frank

The idea behind draining a hot engine is left over from the old days of straight 40W, additive-free oil. Modern additives keep dirt suspended and low viscosity oils flow well at room temperature. You're far warmer. I've taken to driving the engine a while before changes, because I've seen a high level of fuel in the oil, with associated reduced flash points. My oil changes show a pattern that seems to correlate a switch from 5W20 Ford OEM blend, to 0W20 full synthetic oils, with the fuel percentage found. Data says 5W20 is better than 0W20, but is a high EV, high mileage operating mode to blame? That's why I take it or a long drive now. Have fun, Frank

When did sedans get so hard to get into? After near 4 years in a C-Max, I'm spoiled. Enjoy! Frank