fbov

That's why I linked to the Nexen site... they show the same size, but specs are different and there is no "EV" tire. Frank

There's a wallpaper thread that will tell you the specifics, like image size. Frank

I had an interesting result... my installation failed. At least the car told me it failed, right down to the error message, but I know better. The trick is that I think I started the installation twice. How is a good question. All the messages at the start showed up twice, but of course, a second update would not find the correct target software, so the closing messages include a "failure" set. Health Report comes back fine... In case anyone else gets a failure message! Have fun, Frank

Good set of specs; not everyone gets the center bore, and it's the most important. I avoid wheels that require a spacer to achieve the correct center bore, as spacers get lost, and without them, the wheel will never balance. I like the idea of finding Ford wheels for that reason. Be aware that offset is a function of wheel width. That's +55 from the center plane of a 7" wheel. On a 6.5" wheel, a +55 offset will pull the wheel in 1/4" from stock, while giving 1/4" more clearance to the strut. This is where you're missing a few things. If you like the Nexen N Blue's, use the 215/55-17 on stock rims for a best-fit option. Exactly the same 93V rating as OEM. I'll grant you don't need a V-speed rating, but you do need the load capacity. The 205/60-16 is a 91H rating, and 77lb. lower load rating. It would be a very bad idea to reduce the tires' load capacity 300 lb. in the variant with a weight problem. This leads to things like loss of insurance coverage when you have an accident. What if your insurance company finds out you ran undersize tires and had a blowout? What if the guy you hit finds out, or his lawyer.... This is a real "better safe than sorry" issue. That assumes that anyone would sell them to you. Tire Rack will not ship this tire for this car. You'll have to mislead them. Or find a dealer that carries the right size.... It would be very interesting to hear from users of other tires. Just find one that fits; Tire Rack is servicing the Kia EV OEM demand with the 205/60. Then you want a narrower tire. For a given tire pressure and axel load, the contact patch of a tire is constant. It's due to Pascal's Law, which states that: force = pressure x area A 185/65 will contact the same area as a 235/50, but one patch will be 6.2" wide, the other 8.2" wide (assuming the full tread width is in contact). Since the contact area is the same, the wider tire can only be in contact with the road over 3/4 the length of the narrower tire. And the last bit is that tire traction is greatest in the direction with the greatest tread contact patch length. A long, skinny tire won't corner worth a dang, but it will start and stop extremely well. It's why "narrower is better" for snow tires; better traction in the "most important" direction, and less snow to push aside in front of the tire. Have fun, Frank

One reason we gravitate to the X-Ice is rolling resistance, very low, while maintaining very good grip in a snow-storm for example (we get a lot of squalls). I got a look at the Firestone Winterforce in person this weekend, and it's a far more aggressive tire than the Michelins. Edge lugs are 2-3 times wider spacing, which should shed show much better than a more tightly packed tread. These were studded, too!. Blizzaks vary; there are several tread designs in the family. An open tread line would likely do well, too, but with the foam rubber tread, life with good ice traction will be short. HAve fun, Frank

Too bad! I was hoping folks were getting lost... it's buried quite well. Frank

Let's do a little calibrating here, as the X-Ice is not what one would call an aggressive tread. When I say aggressive, this is what I mean: http://www.photos-public-domain.com/2014/04/13/studded-snow-tire-texture-close-up/ or if we can stretch things a bit, these are for industrial plowing (scroll down to see the snows) http://www.nebraskatire.com/industrial/skid-loader There are two different things going on in snow. Most of the time... ... the snow isn't very deep, but it gets packed and very slippery. This is the domain of the "Euro-style" snow tire like the X-Ice, to the point where I had a hard time finding the links above!. The tread surface is smooth, and the profile gently rounded, as any good road tire. Tread blocks are not monolithic "blocks" but rather a tower of thin panels, separated by grooves known as "sipes." Deform one of the X-Ice tread blocks and the surface parts at each sipe to reveal an edge that will bite into packed snow, and a space to collect any pressure-melt water on ice, improving traction there as well. Add in hydrophilic rubber compounds and you get a great snow and ice tire... most of the time. In deep snow... ... the relatively narrow grooves between tread blocks of a Euro-style snow tire fill with snow, and traction degrades significantly as the tire must climb the pile of snow and compact it down to gain traction from the siped areas. A pile of packed snow can be very hard to climb and compact, so you get stuck, have to back up a little and try to rock your way through the snow. An aggressive snow tire has far larger grooves that do not hold snow, and the treat profile is flat due to large lugs at the sidewall transition. These lugs act as paddles in the compacted snow, and unclogged tread grooves can get a good bite as the snow compacts. Think of it this way - in deep snow, you compact several inches of snow, so you need several inches between tread elements - in packed snow, you compact a fraction of a millimeter under the tire, just enough for the tread blocks to deform and the sipes to bite. And all are going to have a problem in more than about 5" of snow, as all bets are off when the snow is deeper than your ground clearance, and your C-Max becomes a snowplow. Good judgment is always required in snow storms, as cold is deadly. Have fun, Frank

I suspect there may be a lot of variation in oil monitor methods across auto makers and their product lines. Another pointer to Ford using a "real simple" approach is that I've used different driving styles for long periods. The first year, I took the highway all winter, for the heat, which runs 60/40 ICE/EV. The next year, it was mostly rural surface roads, where the car runs more like 33/66 ICE to EV. One would think there would be a difference, but the biggest difference is the miles between the notice appearing, and the oil change. And I can see where auto makers would keep quiet about it, because someone is going to blame an engine failure on a faulty oil monitor. You know they will. HAve fun, Frank

Congrats on the purchase! I'd recommend a different size to maintain speedometer calibration (7.5% error), and 205/60-16s have a bigger problem. If using WS 70's in this size, you'd be 44lb short on the tire load rating, a very, very, very bad idea. OEM tires are 1433 lb., and I wouldn't go any lower. That said, there are 10 WS70 sizes that will give you less than 2% error, 8 of which have sufficient load ratings. I'm curious that you ask about studs, in the context of deep snow. Studs are for ice; they have no effect in deep snow. They will leave you with a scarred driveway if you need to spin the tires to get up, and degrade your dry handling compared with an unstudded tire. The guys running the local winter rally series love them with 4WD... which is the real solution to a deep snow, uphill problem. That said, I would suggest a very aggressive conventional snow tire. Something with a lot of void around the tread block, and perhaps lugs on the sidewall, a "mudder" among snow tires. I'd point to a link, but all I'm seeing is Euro-style packed-snow tires, even from Nokian, because they're what you want for just about everything except deep snow. BTW, I run 215/60-16 Michelin X-Ice3 on steel rims, a little over $800 at Tire Rack today; I paid $1000 in 2013 - oil prices affect things made with oil! The only time traction control kicks in is in deep slush, where nothing works but following a snow plow. Those Generals don't look bad either! Have fun, Frank

I know nothing about the functional design of Ford's oil monitor, so I can't comment on its operation. From my observations, it seems to be a mile counter, nothing more. Now, mileage on the oil is a good predictor of oil quality, one we've used for over 100 years. That's why a mile counter may be all Ford needs... keep people from forgetting to change the oil! Have fun, Frank

Why not use the front door, now that it's open? Go to owner.ford.com, log in, or register (need your VIN) Click on "Sync & How To's" at the top. When that opens, click "Sync" then "software updates" I see 6 articles, the last, "get the latest software update" In the article, click the link for "Check for updates" I already downloaded it, so from here on, I get the "Confirm update" screens you see that allow you to complete the update by notifying Ford (via the thumb drive). Have fun, Frank

Let me just note that if you are interested in the quality of your oil, you should have it tested. I feel my oil needs changing when the oil monitor say it does. My oil analysis shows it has lost most of it's acid buffer, and typically has a lot of fuel with a reduced flash point as a result. Viscosity is fine, additives and wear are fine, and the fuel percentage might be a lot lower after long high-speed trip. That's not how I use this car, typically less than 1/3 ICE. The issue with oil in a hybrid is the high fraction of run-time below operating temperature. The engine sees all short trips at lower speeds, and never gets truly hot, especially in the next 6 months! Have fun, Frank

Interesting... there is an update available to MyFordTouch/Sync, which recently became available again in a second revision, it would appear. Possible that it could help... And 15B04 is not one I'd skip. 12M04 just makes the MFT update a covered action past the normal warranty period. Frank

You haven't linked to a review... this is an ad, copy not withstanding. Nothing here that isn't already in the sales brochure. Your fondness for this piece is suspicious. You may be an honest, first-time poster, but you're carrying the mantle of a troll. You may want to change before posting again. Have fun, Frank

With 1500W, it ought to!!! Nice job, Tomasz! Frank

In reading through all this, I'm seeing a lot of fit and finish issues, and that's about it. Door and panel alignment should be right from the factory, but receiving inspection is still part of normal car delivery process. Cosmetic issues are cosmetic, not functional. I generally find the first service for a new car, they'll fix just about anything. Now, if there were functional issues - failure to start, strange loud noises, malfunction indicators flashing, or the like - we'd be having a very different conversation, and I'll bet Ford would too. At least, they did when my Restraints Control Module shorted out and the dash lit up because the air bag system was off. My hope is you get past this little stuff, and get to enjoying what remains, for me, a wonderful car after 40K miles and 27 months. Have fun, Frank

I've had problem that sounds like yours, and it required a module replacement. Look next to "Zoom Out" button for a little GPS icon with a red X. This showed up when mine malfunctioned, which was temporary. I could fix it by removing and reseating the SD card until it was corrected. TSB14-0037 R/R GPSM fixed it. No issues since, although you can confuse the poor thing if you know where you're going. HAve fun, Frank

Currently downloading the Gen2V38...Rev2.zip file now.

So buy it! It looks right. I see a part number sticker on mine, but it's black text on a black part - completely illegible. Frank

I find the sound system more than adequate, but I think I've heard your problem. Master reset is a good idea. I've had an issue that I think you might find sounds familiar. The key feature is the radio switches to the nasally mode and won't turn off when you turn the car off. The fix to this problem is pulling the radio fuse, located in the passenger-side foot well, under a panel. See the owners' manual for location. I don't recall the fuse number off hand... HAve fun, Frank

14S21 - my RCM broke. I got the short with associated dash lights and disabled restraints. This one's important, but there have been a shortage of parts. Mine malfunctioned, and it took 2 months to fix. 15B04 was just done to mine, with no obvious change 12M02 is the persistent warrant extension you can safely ignore. 14E02... I recently got the 15E03 PCM update, but I recall an update last year that didn't show on the invoice (but had to reprogram MyView). Also possible that this update qualifies you for a subsequent one (a la Microsoft updates). Have fun, Frank

We've had quite a lot of individual issues show up, which may or may not matter to you. Always check the car's recall status, as there have been a lot! Supposed to be a new one coming shortly, 14B07, for early-build cars like mine. Note that 12M02 is just a warranty extension, but any others should be applied before you buy. Tranny issues would be big in my book, given even some low mileage cars have needed replacement. Noise under regen was mentioned, grinding noises... check the threads. Folks who reported had fairly consistent symptoms. Next is the ubiquitous 12V issue in SEs. Nothing worse than getting stranded or not starting. It would be worth it to get a small battery monitor like this. See if you can enter a cold car (not one that's been warmed up), and stick one of these in the lighter to find the at-rest 12V system voltage. Cars with issues will not have a full charge (~12.4v). Lots of data on this issue here. Then there are the squeaks, rattles and howls. I get the latter at certain speeds and RPMs, but its easily stopped by changing speed. For some folks, it's a noise suppression system failure that's really hard to fix. I also have an occasional rattle behind me that could just be the umbrella under the back seat. That said, in 40K miles on a September, 2012 build, I've paid for oil and inspections, but no repairs to date, and things are working well! HAve fun, Frank

Bunk. This is the result of "classical" thinking, a method that led us to the Earth-centered universe, among other things. It seems reasonable that if a hammer can break a stone, a gear can break an oil molecule. The statement above was not spoken by an organic chemist. The flag is the "crushing between gear teeth." An organic chemist would know better on two fronts, size and strength. Metals are held together by chemical bonds. So are oil molecules. The chemical bonds are far stronger than the mechanical stresses imposed in a properly designed gear train. This is not cutting edge stuff; gears are very well known, and profiles designed to maintain contact area so film strength of the lubricant isn't compromised. It's a film of oil that lubricates a gear, a layer many molecules thick. Unlike the metal lattice in the gear, the oil molecules are like little strings that refuse to tangle with one another. They are long compared with the metal finish, but much smaller than the metal's surface finish in cross section. When you get metal-on-metal contact, the oil isn't in the way, it's hiding in the surface texture, in very small groups now that the film has been broken. A little research yields the real reasons oils degrade - chemical breakdown due to high temperatures, oxidation, or, ironically, entrained air (micro-dieseling I hadn't heard of). http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/475/oil-breakdown http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/989/fluid-degradation-causes Have fun, Frank

I did it at the dealer's... and I didn't lock the car. I pulled into the drop-off, put the fob in the cup holder, and left the car "on," figuring they'd be moving it soon. The car was in park, and empty. It locked its doors. The dealer couldn't open it. Hilarious! When the tech started pounding a wedge into the door frame, all the while holding a coat hanger-like device, I asked him to stop, and called my wife. Have fun, Frank

Hover the mouse over a user's name in a post and you get the option to send a message.