stranger267

Ok, so I had #3 flat tire event on my CMAX in 1 year and 1 month. #1 was by hitting the brick, #2 and #3 was just 'flat rire, no one was able to find a reason after we used mobility kit, which actually helped'. It looks as Ford genuine tires had some defect are are not reliable. And in addition, spare tire is a MUST for any long trip, not the mobility kit. This kit can be a great add-on, and can be very helpful for metro-area-only' drivers. It actually helps. But... when you use it, you never sure, how well it works, and default limitation 50 miles / 50 mph (which of course can be ignored if became necessary) is absolute nonsense. I would like to take the designers, who decided to drop spare tire, to the mountains, make their tire flat in 15F in night on the road covered by the snow, without cellular coverage, and let them try their mobility kit etc... I think they wil select to drive 50 miles on flat tire vs waiting 6 hours in winter on the road. PS. I had 2 flat tire events on my Subaru Outback in 10 years and 300,000 miles. So something wrong with CMAX tires for sure, I am going to replace both front tires by the normal one (not Ford recommended) for reliability (even if it cost me some mileage).

Ok, so now I have 14,500 miles and 8 month on CMAX. And you know what - I already lost 1/2 day because it does not have spare tire. Tire was broken in halves by the brick on freeway. - and in other case I used their kit (tire had small puncture) and it worked fine, through I prefer to have both, mobility kit + SPARE. SPARE is absolute, 100%, MUST for any long trip. No way to use service if you are sticked with flat tire on mountain road 100 miles from big cities. What I think they could do or even they MUST do: - offer spare tire KIT. It can have some holder to fix it outside on the back, or inside, and protective case. So if we make long trip, we can take it (even if it takes some MPG). Else, as I said, car became useless for any trips. - their SERVICE which they offer for free should bring SPARE tire. Not tow you (and then you lost 1/2 day as for example no one can fix your tire Sunday evening) but just bring and install spare tire. They can charge for it or just lease, no matter. Else... I don't know,. I love this car, but spare tire became a show stopper - I can;t actually use it (car) for the long trips, especially in bad weather. Maybe, _NO SPARE_ is OK for all electric ar (which definitely never will make long trips, such as SFBA - Yellowstone - Moab - Grand Canyon - Death Valley - SFBA) or for small city-only cars like Smart, but it is 100% MUST for any other car.

Regarding chains - I don't know, cable chains can work but they are very unreliable themselves. Chains are not big headache, there are few replacements available. Tires are another story. I can accept an idea of not having spare in the car, but only if 2 other conditions satisfied: - road assistance service has spare tires and can bring them to the road, instead of towing the car to the (most likely closed for weekend or long holiday) ford dealership. - we can purchase optional spare (maybe smaller size) and a way to fix it (even if it uses some space), so that we at last are not doomed in the long trip. Problem is that Ford sacrificed spare and did not offer any of these 2 things.

Not all 4. 2 was just nails or similar. 2 other was - one - tire side was damaged by the curb, fortunately it was 100 foots from tire shop so they replaced it in a blink; - two - hit the failed object on the road, tire cut in two together with the wheel which was damaged. One more, not so bad fortunately because Subaru-s tire survived - big rock on the road, it cost me only slightly damaged wheel but tire was intact. If it was CMAX wheel (with low profile tires) would not survive. So, I agree, no need for spare in metro areas if road assistance trucks have spare wheel; but as they do not have such wheel, any simple tire incident can cost you 1 - 2 days without the car. So if Ford actually want to replace spare tires by road assistance service, first thing they should do is to make sure that tow trucks can bring new tire to the site and replace it instead of towing you to the (closed as it is 10 pm for example) FORD dealership. For back-country, spare is absolutely necessity.

ONLY for CITY and METRO AREA dwellers. Spare tire is absolutely a must for any long trip, any mountain winter trip, any desert or back-country trip. Even in California, if you drive more then 200 miles aside of SFBA or LAX areas, you MUST have a tire. Else simple 'hit a rock on the road' incident became a real challenge. How long it takes to wait for the tow, then tow to the ford, then replace broken tire, if it happens for example in Lassen NP Butt lake area? Answer is 'you will spend the whole day on it'. How long it takes to do it if it happens in winter in the mountains? You can froze to the death and never got a help. So 'no spare' suitable only for small 'city only' cars like SMART or for the drivers who drive 99% inside the metro areas. Regarding CMAX, they could do something - for example, offer optional spare with some way to fix it (even outside, as on old SUV-s) - this way people could got it when they need it on the long trip, but do not sacrifice the space and weights inside the metro areas.

I did the same and fully agree. I don't count mileage as significant drawback of CMAX - it shows 37 - 39 in normal driving and I can get 40 - 45 if I actually need to. What is more important for me, and makes me think sometimes about changing CMAX to Prius ( :)) is spare tire problem and snow chain problem. Both makes CMAX unsuitable for the multi-day long trips. Having spare so that you can always change broken tire and then drive 1 - 2 days (even if slow) so that you trip is not totally destroyed, and you are not sticked in the disabled car in the middle of nowhere is very important thing. All these 'tire repair kit, ford assistance and so on' are absolutely useless if you hit a rock failed from he wall somewhere in the back-country road, without cell coverage (which is absolutely normal on the long trips) and with 100 - 200 miles to the nearest FORD service (and on weekend when tire shops are closed). This is main drawback of CMAX for me, as the rest are bearable (no chains, too, through not so bad as there are suitable replacements). Mileage - yes, Prius shows more, but driving Prius on the long mountain trip... brr...

Actually these numbers are correct. CMAX shows 35 on normal (70 - 75 mph, few ups and downs) freeway driving and about 40 on normal city driving. Of course, it can get 47 if you drive back-country road in good weather and not big up and down hills, but average is actually between 35 and 40 (my stabilized on 37.2 - 37.5 on approx 6,000 - 7,000 miles in a 3 month). And this (35 - 40) is exactly what average driver will see. I drive as most drives in CA - 70 - 75 miles on freeways, 60 - 63 on highways, fast ramp acceleration to merge with the traffic on 60 - 65 mph (and not on 30 - 35), and so on - and have 35 - 40 mph on most (maybe 80%) trips. If weather is good and road is slow it can show 42, even 50; but this is usually good luck, or very slow driving.

I had sad confirmation that SPARE TIRE is a MUST. Just yesterday, I hit something failed from the truck on the freeway. Tire almost cut in half and wheel need replacement as well. Even if it was in 1 mile from dealers service, I lost 1.5 hours on towing and then must wait almost 2 days when they have a tire and a wheel. With spare, I would lost 15 minutes today (to replace the tire) and then call dealers, wait when order shipped, and then replace the tire - a huge difference. But what is more important, what happens if we had the same blow-out during the mountain trip (which is very possible)? No cell coverage, so instead of _replace the tire and continue_ you lost 1/2 day in going to the c4ell covered area, calling fro the service, waiting, dealing with closed services and so on... Actually, 2 big problems with CMAX (biggest for me) are - no spare, and no chains. It prevents us from using CMAX for long multi-day trips (especially in winter). PS. I had 4 flat tires cases during my 500K miles driving. 2 was not repairable by any kits.

Actually they do not complain, as freeways (ones which post 65 mph) are designed for 75 mph and police almost officially encourage 70 mph ttraffic flows as this increase freeway bandwidth (there are even cases when drivers was ticketed for 65 mph in left line, while line was going 75). So cars should run well on 70 mph and not 60; and this satisfy almost all drivers . Other story is that drivers try to keep EV limit speed for beter mpg; 63 mph is too slow and so most drivers go faster and once going faster, it does noyt make much difference to drive 70 or 75; but if maximum EV speed was 70, it cound encourage drivers to drive about 70 and not 75.

Problem is, that we don't need a car, which can make a record. We need a car. which shows good MPG in normal everyday driving without extra skills from the driver. 'Driving mode' button is OK, but special techniques, required to get good results - are not. So we need an estimation for the 'average' driver and not for recordsmen. I can reach 42 - 44 mpg on most trips, but it means (not always but often) very annoying driving. if I drive normally, I have 37 - 40 mpg. There are routes, which can show 47 easily, but average routes shows 39 - 40 if do not use special techniques.

Real world HW speed (FW speed, not HW) is 70 mph not 65 mph. Traffic flows in CA runs mostly 60 - 80 mph, and I guess that peak is about 70 mph. Most lanes runs +5 but sometimes +10 mph plus sped limit. which is 65 - 70 mph on most freeways. 65 is little too slow, 70 is optimum for driving here.

I guess, how system works: - ICU has _best economy mode_ - if battery is approx 50% charged, then computer try to keep ICU on this mode, or shut it down. So * it runs in BEST ECONOMY, if it provides too much power, it charge the battery; if not enough power, it tru to use battery (add EV power) a little before adding power to ICU * if it charge battery more then something and it still dont need much power, it kicks on EV-only mode and stops ICU for some time * and so on. So the best for economy is to have battery half charged if no big hills around. Else computer runs ICU in less-power mode (less economical) or more-power mode (less economical too). Other story is that system has some troubles when you has battery 100% charged (it happens on downhills often) and you want to combile engine-breaking (downhill) and small uphills... I feel some rawghness few times when car run in such configuration (fortunately, it disappear quickly once battery is discharged a little).

Overall idea is to make sure, that you battery is as emply, as possible before the long downhills. So when going uphill, keep power high so that car use EV at least partially and not charge it (battery). This way you have more capacity to get energy back on the downhill. So, generally speaking, if you drive uphill slow, results will be worst vs driving uphill fast (so that system use battery even if it empty it). When moving slow, system charge battery by extra power engine provides, and you dont want to be on the top of the hill with fully charged battery.

Checked it; it is absolutely perfect (unusual as usually speedometers shows 5% faster then real speed, on most other cars).

Agree partially. It is 40 - 42 mpg car, which can be driven up to 47 - 50 in some conditions. Average driver with normal behavior will have 38 - 41 mpg (37 - 39 in mountain areas such as California). (I started to get 48 - 49 mpg in some trips, and I _do not use_ hypermiling techniques. But getting 47 means one of _very good conditions such as slow highway without big Uphills and Downhills _ or _very annoying driving 60 mph on 65 mph freeway (which is de facto 75 speed limit), 5 - 7 mph slower then normal traffic, trying not to make a problem to others and still keep car in blue area on left screen_. So about 20% of drivers will have average of 47 (because they live in such conditions) but most will have 38 - 41 mpg.

I can only confirm my previous observations, after few middle - size drives (20 - 100 miles) over the mixture of freeways, highways, streets and mountains: - 47 mpg is absolutely REAL mpg for the freeway. Conditions are VERY simple * day time * no wind, no rain, no water on the road * end point elevation the same or lower then starting point elevation (very important) * premium gas (if in CA) - I see a difference in 2 - 4 mpg. * climate is turned off for the first 5 minutes if car was cold (else car runs engine on 2000 rpm for the first 5 minutes to prodiuce a heat) * no big up or down hills (100 feet ups and downs are OK, maybe even 200, through any UPS and Downs decrease mileage) * !! KEEP ECO cruise on 50 - 60 mpg * Have 2000 - 3000 total miles. I got a few 47 - 49 mpg this way. Elevation and speed are 2 most important factors - I have Livermore, 400 feet elevation, and Walnut Creek, 100 feet elevation, WC - LVK is about 39 - 42mpg; LVK - WC is about 48 - 49 mpg if I keep speed low enough. Keep in mind that if it is uphill in one direction, average will not be 47 but lower. The same in other trips. Elevation is #1 factor, speed is #2 (if cruise > 63 mpg results will be 3 - 4 mpg lower because of EV mode limitation). Small highways are the best for mileage (where we can drive 60 mpg for a long time). Unfortunately 63 mph EV limitatioin is too low for California as most lanes move with 65 - 70 mph speeds and so driving 63 is more difficult (vs. 68 - 70) and can create an obstacle for others /but it is only in middle load time; not a problem at night when not traffic flows are created, or in peak time when traffic is slower/. I think Ford should make this limit at least 68 mph and it could improve average mpg as it is almost always easy to keep 68 but not 63 /remembetr, rule #1 on freeways - move WITH TRAFFIC and not pay too much attention to speedometer/. As a result, as I drive 70 - 75 mph on freeways most times, exept when have a purpose of good mpg, average mpg looks as more realistically about 40 - 42 and not 47. But if I want 47 - just slow down to 55 - 62 and make sure that end point is not higher vs. the start point (and try to find a lane when 63 mph creates less problems for others) and no big up / down hills, and I have it.

Quick question - any chains other then very expensive K-Summit system? (Chains are required in mountains on non 4x4 cars, sometimes even on 4x4). (The small wheel clearance is a big drawback of C-MAX, together with _no spare wheel_ feature :)). I made quick research and all I could find is this =- almost $500 total: http://www.backcountry.com/thule-k-summit-snow-chains-for-cars?CMP_SKU=THU0355&MER=0406&CMP_ID=SH_SHP001&mv_pc=r110&003=7163546&010=THU0355&mr:referralID=54e54f7f-3c47-11e2-97b3-001b2166becc (Fortunately, we use Subaru as a primary car for mountain trips, but I'd like to use CMAX at least in moderate weather as these are 400 - 500 miles trips. But 'no snow chains allowed' is really a big problem).

For everyone who test the car on short drives - if car is cold when you start, turning off climate control for the first 5 minutes makes a big difference sometimes (for me it changed mpg from 26 to 37 - 39 on 5.6 miles drive). The reason is that, when climate is on and outside temperature is cold, car turn on engine to warm the climate system up, and so prevents car from driving on EV for the first 3 - 5 minutes. When climate is off, car normally drives on EV first minutes (while on the streets) and then behave as usual. Engine warms up in approx 5 minutes anyway, so you can turn climate on after it; but first 5 minutes makes a difference. (Of course, if we measure difference in gallons, it will be only 0.05 gal or less). Reality is that CA traffic go on 70 - 75 miles on most noncongested freeways (posted 65 + 10 miles tolerance) in the good weather (remember, freeways was desigend for 75 mph and not 65) and so most good cars like Subaru are optimized for this speed. But I agree that in day time speed vary between 60 - 70 mph so even CMAX switch to EV often enough.

And then come to the final point 10 - 30 minutes later (the difference for 200 miles trip, which is typical here in CA - SFBA Tahoe for example. or SFBA - Shasta area, or SFBA / Los Angeles area - last one is about 450 miles most on 70 speed limit freeways)... Some freeways dont have trucks on them and all lanes go 65 - 75. Some has trucks which go 55 - 60 and left line going 75; and you have a choice of 60 or 75 (or 80) only except if you go left/right all the time. FW 5 is a good example - youc an drive 60 or you can drive 80; but if you try to drive 63 you are in trouble. Left lane drive 80 and right has a trucks and go about 60, sometimes 65. 200 miles trip, 65 means 185 minutes and 80 means 150; 35 minutes difference (and 80 is in the police tolerance limits as posted limit is 70 for the autos). When you drive 25,000 - 35,000 miles per year (my record was 36,000 / year and usuall number is about 24,000 and most not on daily commute) 60 vs 75 makes a difference. Many freeways in California has speed limit in 70, and some in Nevada and Utah has 75. It all is in purpose as it increase system bandwidth. The most common speed in CA (and in overall USA) on freeways is 65 - 75, so it is better if cars are optimzed for this speed and not for 63. Those who want to see a record mileage can drift after the truck and have 55 mpg, but it is important to satisfy average drivers with average driving behavior. CMAX stopped a very short of it - if they optimize for 68 and not 63, they could get much better feedbacks from the average drivers.

Doing this you create obstacle for others; not mentioning decreasing of the freeway bandwidth. I drive 100 - 150 miles / day often and sometimes I can keep speed under 63 mph on _freeways_, but mostly can not do it. I think that main issue here is that Prius is not optimized for EPA test (and is optimzied for real freeways) while CMAX was optimized for EPA test. As a result, in Prius people get what is posted (as driving on real speed do not make much difference with EPA as both are far from the best scenario) while in CMAX EPA test runs in the _best scenario_ and so any real drive makes not so good results. I drive 2 x 90 miles in the mountains yesterday; it was a set of small highways, and I kept speed under 63 easily. Result - 43 mpg on my way back (I had a lot of freeways with 70 mph speed and then really big summit on the way there, and used smaller highways and more flat route on the way back), even with last 10 miles on 75 mph speed and few long uphills and downhills, where battery could not take all energy from discend. So 47 looks as a REAL number - good weather, day time, 70F outside, flat road, 50 mph, 40 psi pressure in the tires, climate system off, radio off - and you will have it for sure. (My average is about 36 now and looks as it will go to 38 - 39 and stay there eventially).

Regardig limit - now I am 99% sure that it was because of maximum rpm limit for the EV1 motor (one which sits on the planetary gear transmission, second source on this transmission is ICU and EV2 sits over the output; output speed is EV1 + ICU speed (with some coefficients of course) - when ICU is stopped EV1 motor rotates on the speed proportional to the wheels (vehicle speed) and 65 mph is the speed where this rotation reach the limit - then system must rotate ICU to protect EV1 motor from overspeed. (Something like this; I am not sure about exact terms but idea is simple). So they made a compromise; problem is that they optimized for too low speed - they should do it for +5 more mph and this could save a lot of objections, but in price of lower EPA numbers. PS. High tire pressure improves mileage, but decrease tire traction _in some cases_.

Problem is that 70 mph is REAL LIFE - yes, we drive 65 - 75 mph and we NEED this speed as driving 60 mph on our freeways slow down the traffic and creatses driving obstacles for others. So it is important to have cars OPTIMIZED for these speeds and not for strange 48mph. And yes, 47 mph is real number - but for unreal scenario unfortunately (even if we drive on highways average speed is about 55 - 60 mph). This is why people complains - that they need numbers that match real life and not 'the horse in the vacuum'. I, too, reached 47 mpg and see 43 on real trips (not 47 because of mountains, dark time and so on) but if I got VW TDI, it posts 42 mpg, and I can get 44 - 45 on 70 mph freeways - so people expect that EPA post REAL numbers for hybrids (drive 65 - 75 mph, 10 - 20 miles, and not mystical 48 mph - it is not freeway speed!). If they do it, maybe Ford should optimize their gears too, as CMAX is not optimized for the 65 mph (to compare, all my subaru-s are optimized for 65 - 70 mph). Btw, I know why they have 65 EV limitation - I think it is because of rotation speed limits for EV motor 1 in the gear (when ICE is stopped, EV1 motor rotates on it's maximum speed proportional to driving speed).

Your poll do not allow to asnwer _No problems at all_ as it require to vote inj each categories even if there is nothing to vote about... Add 'N/A' category into each poll below.

Maybe they need oil pressure in transmission above some speed, and this explains why ICU works. But even with this... 63 mph is a very bad chocie having freeway speeds in 65 - 70 mph most of the time, and they can find some compromise to allow better mpg in 65 - 70 mph range. I dont think that it is sharp boundary which can not be changed. (If Energy has different gear ratio it explains the difference as the speed of transmission can be the same in 65 mph hybrid and 85 mph energy).

Strange but I can not find, how to navigate between the folders if I use mp3 disks (data disks with 1 level of folders and mp3 files inside)? It was easy on all my mp3 players but I can't find such option here.