fbov

Yes, 91E0 to 87E10. I want the contrast, since I'm now getting from 91E0 what I used to get with 87E10. Plus, it'll be October before I do it... got to empty the tank of the good stuff first. And the loss is nothing compared with Winter! Frank

This is what happens when technology advances... the old rules of thumb become old wives tales, which spoil into snake oil very quickly. ALL our tires have " a layer under the tread that flattens out the tire even at higher pressure." That wasn't always true... Once upon a time, all tires were "bias ply" tires. the tire carcass was constructed around a pair of skewed sheets of rubber bonded to fabric. The sheets were oriented so the fabric weave crossed at a specific angle to give both strength for pressure containment and flexibility. This is still a common method of making heavy-duty tires, such as agriculture and aviation. Major drawbacks are poor cornering traction and poor tread life. These are very sensitive to inflation pressure, since they are just a balloon. In my youth, this began to change. There was an odd French company with a roly-poly mascot named Bibendum that made their tires differently, and always included a circumferential ply or "belt." Other tire makes studied Michelin's approach, shying away from the radical radial construction, but picking up on their tread belts. The result was the bias-belted tire, a bias ply carcass with several steel or fabric belts under the tread area of the tire. These belts stiffened the tread area, making it harder to pull up the edge of the tread, as bias ply did, but this came at a cost. When pushed hard, that entire belted tread area would come up, and traction would disappear. These were hard tires to drive at the limit. At the same time, the belt stabilized the tread when rolling in a straight line, and the tread life improvement resulted in quick adoption of belted tire technology. But belts were not a cure, rather a bandage to stop the bleeding. It took some Arabs shutting off our oil to start the next revolution. You see, Michelin had it right. By orienting the carcass plys in the same direction, not skewed, and perpendicular to the tread, Michelin had developed a radial tire that liked to bend. By stiffening the tread with belts, they created a tread area that was decoupled from the sidewalls, allowing a single tire to be soft in the sidewalls, for smooth ride, but stiff in the tread, for performance. They cost more to make, required different manufacturing equipment, and they were harsh on the road, when installed on cars optimized for bias ply. However, their rolling resistance, and so fuel consumption was much lower than even belted bias ply, and CAFE had just come along... As a result, VERY FEW OF YOU have ever owned a car with bias ply tires. I had them on my first car, a 1970 Maverick, moving up to belted bias ply when the first one dies at 20K miles. My second car, and all since, have radials. In contrast, NASCAR is still transitioning from bias ply to radial tires, for some very good reasons. Anyone remember the Firestone 500 debacle? Per the web site linked above, it was a result of making radials on the cheap, using bias-ply equipment. So, no, inflating a tire above the door placard will not hurt tire life, but it remains foolish to inflate above the sidewall rating for any period of time, regardless. HAve fun, Frank

Or there was a little capacity recovery. After all, this meter measures voltage, and voltage on a cell is just a proxy for its energy content. I'm not surprised the SOC is a little lower after a long rest at low temperature. Frank

I'm going to BJ's next tank, too. Just curious, before the weather turns... Frank

Do a search on air cleaners and posts from "ptjones" as I know Paul has changed his. Frank, who is trying to get newer folks to use the features... this forum is full of useful info if you know how to find it.

Nice description. Thanks for quoting. This explains my Sister-in-law's comments about the rear brakes sounding rough... (It was her Father's car.) The transition is quite evident if it occurs while I'm turning, similar to clutching a manual tranny entering a turn. Frank

A lot of good data that a new owner may not understand. Plus3 is one of our most technically savvy posters, who is using a data logging system to capture data from the car while driving. He has plotted data showing actual HVB charge vs. the dash display. The key message is that this is how Li-ion batteries should be operated for maximum service life. As to the HVB SOC bar display... there's a lot more going on when you look at the HVB bar with the other display modes. EMPOWER display includes a curved power display that changes color from white to blue when you switch to EV mode. The blue outline is an on-off threshold for the switch back to ICE (internal combustion engine) power. That ICE on/EV off threshold depends on SOC and vehicle speed. When you have high SOC, the car lets you use more EV power. As the SOC falls, it becomes easier to switch on the ICE. I'll wager that's what was happening on your drive home: you were switching back and forth between ICE, EV and EV-assist (uses both ICE and EV). The beauty of this car is you can do that and never notice the change. Now, drive down a long hill, and regen braking will max-out SOC. Same thing in winter, when the ICE runs because it's too cold to operate properly, regardless the driver's needs. Become sensitive to the on/off threshold, and use EV+, and you can run charge down quite a ways, and that's a good thing. EV+ is a location-based mode that raises the on/off threshold when you get close to common destinations. Ford wants you to store the car at low SOC, because that's good for HVB life. Regardless, welcome, and HAve fun, Frank

Sorry, Adrian, the black thing is a locking sensor. The front doors have a black locking sensor, and it's not what we're talking about. The black one allows me to lock the car after closing the door, as with a key. Behind it (and on the back door) is a second sensor that unlocks the door. This one is not externally visible, but the door unlocks... intermittently, of course. Frank

Welcome; you've come to the right place! Yes, there have been two long-term reliability issues with the car (12V battery, transmission bearing), both of which occur in 2013's, not 2015's. I'm pushing 40K with a build date of 19.9.2012 and no issues to date. High voltage battery life projections are excellent, and high mileage members report no noticeable loss in fuel economy. As to Sync... ignore it if you like. I left a '94 Volvo, so I had the same sense of astonishment at how much is under voice control. But I like touching controls with my hands, so I do. I only use voice commands for phone calls. CALL MARJORIE CELL wasn't hard to learn. Finally, you have a new car. Temper your mileage expectations. Your mileage will drop in the coming months as the weather gets colder, but at the same time, your mileage will be slowly rising as the car breaks-in. It may be April before you know what you'll really get, and it will be speed-related. The faster you drive, the more fuel you'll use. Enjoy! Frank

Hang on... you're talking apples and oranges here. The automotive dealer associations' opposition to Tesla is far more deeply seated. They have made it illegal for a car manufacturer to sell a car in their state. Since Tesla has no dealerships, they are not allowed to sell the car in that state. Yes, direct-to-consumer sale of new automobiles may be illegal in your state. If that's the case, simply go next door and buy the car. So, I agree it's about money, but not your service dollars. Frank

Remember, some of us didn't have a recall, we had a broken RCM and a dash full of malfunction indicator lamps. We would reasonably have first crack at updated parts.... Frank

Two things. I don't see 91E0 as an economic choice, but rather a performance choice. That first tank was like Spring all over again! (For those who stay above 0F all year, mileage sucks in Winter. Rolling resistance is up, and the car won't glide like it ought to.... until Spring.) I found my SOC was higher, with the same burn timings. The car felt like there was more energy in the fuel. And I liked being in the 60MPG club... 800 mile tanks were in sight!! This car's dropped my fuel expense a lot, so I don't mind spending a little time and money on experiments. You may recall I have added several things to the car, and been able to assess the objective effect of each. For my front air dam, side skirts and vortex generators, if they have any effect, I didn't see one; not even a slight mean shift. Switching fuel to 91E0 and adding front grill blocks are two changes that give a real and consistent performance difference. There is some value to separating snake oil from the good stuff. I'd love to see someone else replicate these studies, to see if the results are real. HAve fun, Frank

I have to disagree in the most strenuous terms. This is bunk. Back it up with some real data or delete it. Frank

That was probably a smart thing to do. The Tire Rack ratings for the Premier line are excellent, especially the winter performance. One look at the tread pattern confirms that expectation. I hope she's happy with the "upgrade." Frank

Just to be clear here, both of these links deals with the dangers of under-inflation. We're discussing the opposite. Is there any reason not to increase tire pressure from door placard values to tire sidewall values? Have fun, Frank

Gents, I did a little experiment to see if E0 had an effect. In my area, if you want E0, you get 91E0, so I really switched from 87E10 to 91E0. The initial results were very clear. I changed fuel and mileage went up from 55 to 59 MPG. I even controlled for temperature... this data is for a consistent 15.3 mile commute, taken around 9AM and 6 PM each day. The average speed for this tank was up, so it appears to be a real improvement. MPG vs Tank for 91E0 fill 25d.pdf Time passes. I have a panic stop one day (smelled brake pad), over very rough road surface, resulting in several pot hole-like impacts. The last time I hit a pothole this hard, the traction control blew out (known issue covered by TSB). This time, my mileage dropped. Everything else seems fine. - I'd filled up at a differenet station on 7/31, making that tank suspect - 8/4 was a rainy day - panic stop was 8/5 MPG vs Tank for 91E0 fill 120d.pdf Average for 3 days before the rainy day was 59.9. Average for the 3 days after is 55. Improvement gone overnight, as it were. (Note the several really low values all have root causes unrelated to the fuel - rain, used AC, took the expressway) The good news is I hit a 64.5MPG the other day... but my son had driven the car so I started with very high SOC. Ford's bugged me twice about recall 15E03, which some folks have reported to affect mileage. We'll have to see what additional data tells us, but for sure, my fair weather test period is ending, so perhaps I will know more next year. Oh, BTW, the energy content change was quite obvious switching to 91E0. For the same driving pattern, I had higher charge for no apparent reason... save there's more energy in the fuel, so the car's putting it in the battery. This is gone, too. Have fun, Frank

No, you just have intermittent or non-functional sensors in your rear handles. I assure you they were present in at least one car built 19.9.2012. Intermittent operation, as I've reported, is far more likely than random feature deletion. Like I said, it's the backup to the front handle that's always malfunctioning half of the year (been fine the last few months... wait, it's summertime!) Have fun, Frank

Now that's a testimonial! Glad injuries are minor and you're all well.

You may find this thread of use. http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/1422-installing-the-torklift-central-hitch/?hl=hitch I installed this hitch, and given what I learned beforehand, I agree it's about a 30 minute job... the second time. Learning curves are hard to avoid. My only tip involves that little tab you need to bend. I used Vise-Grip pliers to get it started, and a rubber mallet to complete the bend, with little paint damage. Really like the 3-point attachment, but it does interfere with the "kick" tailgate. Have fun, Frank

Porter's build date is 29092013. All driver's side door handles will unlock the car intermittently. They seem to know when it's cold and windy. (Can't say about passenger side.) There's a TSB on the driver's door, but it's been done twice to no effect. Third time, it didn't malfunction for the tech, even though I demonstrated the problem to the SA. When the driver's door malfunctioned, I got used to grabbing the back door handle to unlock. Then the back door started malfunctioning... intermittently, of course. Have fun, Frank

Got to love conflicting advice! Adrian's on the right track but Taz method will improve fuel economy. Adrian's right that you can consume a lot of battery charge to accelerate. But the amount of energy needed varies with speed. It's that pesky exponent in the kinetic energy calculation. Energy depends on the speed squared, so 0-30MPH uses 1/4 the energy of 30-60MPH. And that's where Taz hit the nail on the head. Use EV from a stop, but only to get rolling. 20MPH is a guide. The other really good trick is counter-intuitive: run the ICE slower but longer to increase EV miles. As noted, HVB charge comes from running the ICE. Your throttle position varies both engine speed (output power) and the power split between drive and charge. Backing off throttle may not slow the engine RPM, but rather alter the split between drive and charge. That's what you want. The idea is to run the engine slower for a longer period of time. You use the same amount of fuel, but spend more time charging the HVB, so the resulting EV glides can be longer. Yes, traffic behind you will not know what to do about the slowpoke in front of them, but remember, they're in 1st gear with a 15:1 torque multiplication off their overly large engines. After a few feet, they'll shift to 2nd, then 3rd, reducing available torque dramatically. But the slowpoke keeps accelerating, long after following traffic has hit top gear and stopped accelerating, so the final situation is one of a line of traffic traveling at normal speed and spacing. Have fun, Frank, whose just playing the hybrid game.

Paul, The K&N belongs in a race car, where the goal is optimizing full throttle operation, and pressure drop is important. The C-Max isn't a race car, rarely runs unthrottled, and is designed to minimize fuel consumption. Doesn't sound like a good fit, does it? Since you've had that K&N in there a while, the proof should be in your oil. What's your oil's Si level after 10K miles of low-efficiency air filtration? Mine's been dropping and klatoo's Si levels are similar to mine (when normalized for oil mileage) so there's the beginnings of a basis for comparison. Have fun, Frank

Indeed! And these make sampling easy. Just realize it's not a self-priming pump... http://www.amazon.com/Shoreline-Marine-Oil-Changer-Volts/dp/B004UOU6L0/ Have fun, Frank

Given you have a standard operational mode that's not available (EV at speed) after service, and you can demonstrate the problem, I don't see a dealer refusing you.