stranger267

I changed to premium gas (91) last time, and it DEFINITELY for 100% sure improved mileage (at least 2 - 4 mpg but maybe more). It is in California and regular gas has 10% of etanol (alchohol). On the other hand, in mountains areas, using Premium gas dont make any sense at all, even from Octane number point of view (actually you can use Gas 87 in ANY car above 6000 - 8000 ft - this explains why some nointains gas stations has regular gas only).

Probably it was set becasue of lower EV power (remember, Energy was designed to run on EV power only for the first 10 - 20 miles, while noin energy use EV only occasionly). But even this should not prevent system from using EV on fast speeds. There are uphills and downhills, and when I ride below 63, car run ICU on uphills (and use excessive power if any to charge the battery, as ICU definitely has the best economy mode and try to run in such mode, and sometimes it provides more power then required for the drive), and then it switch to EV mode on downhills. Rememer, even when ICU runs on idle, it still provides heat and use a gas, so turning it off makes sense. If we run downhill below 63 mph, and grade is good enough, car stops ICU; but if speed is above 63 mph, it continue to run ICU so spending gas for nothing.

I made a few trips yesterday and today. The best REAL result was 47.8. Today-s trips show some 39+ some 40+, but they involved mountains, fast moving traffic, rain and wind and night time with climate control working (but A/C off). What I find out: - Premium gas in CA makes some difference - Tires must have 38 - 48 psi pressure (they had 34 when I checked them first time) - Night time, rain, wind, working climate control dramatically decrease mpg - The best results are when I ride on cruise with 63 mpg and then in small city (as usual, 35 - 40 mph and almost 100% on breaking) - Mountains drops mpg too, as even if battery have enough capacity to charge on discent (our is not big enough, even in moderate mountains), energy do not recuperate 100%. - Break in time is important too - moleage was dramatically low until 1000 - 1200 miles. - Cruising faster then 63 mph eliminates EV mode and it decreases mpg. So I think that EPA tests can show about 42 - 45 mpg, especially if they never drive 70 - 75 or in mountains.

I tested Prius, CMAX, Prius V, VW TDI Golf , Subaru Impresa CVT. Out of this list, all cars feels good except Priuses. I hate it all together. Yes, it makes better mpg for sure, but not much better, and makes it by the cost of the very poor driving and underpower (I can't even think how it wil behave on Old Priest Road or on HW 108, in Sierra). (MY personal rating by driving experience was - Sumaru Impreza, CMAX, TDI Golf, TDI Jetta, Prius, Prius V). Adding futuristic controls of Prius, it was ruled out. But I can recommend it to those who live in the flatland or in the big city (if they can deal with prius controls and visibility). CMAX is de facto a compromise - it allows a very good mpg (if you cruise on 63 mph it really shows what was promised) but is still a very good car by driving feelings. // The best highway runner by mpg is TDI Golf out of any doubts. But unfortunately California went against diesel and VW by itself is not very reliable car in average. I think that CMAX with TDI diesel and CVT (if exists) will show better freeway mpg then any hybrid (record in VW Passat was 1,000 miles on tank, but it was record of course). Europe got course to diesel and not hybrids and it was by the reason - diesel don't have battery issues. Hybrids must be Plug-In (CMAX Energy) to be a winners, as it allows to use cheap energy for every day commuts.

I got promised 47 mpg on freeway. Recipie is simple: - Premium gas - Good tire pressure (I set up 39). - Good weather - No climate cintrol - Cruise control in eco mode on 63 mph (not 65!) And then it shows 46 - 48 mpg (I got 47.8 but had few miules on the city). If cruise on 65 mph (+1 mile) it shows about 38 - 39 becasue EV mode is blocked on >= 65. I believe that Ford must update software to allow EV moide up to 70 - 75 mph, else this 47 mpg became almost useless on California freeways (traffic speeds 70 - 75 mph). Of course, it will not show 47 on 70 mph but it can definitely show 43 - 45.

It is pretty accurate except 'miles yoiu can still drive on tank' which has some hidden reserve (I think, maybe about 5 - 10 miles). I reset the trip 1 when fill in the tank, then drive, and then compare trip report and gas station reading - both show me '12.1 g used / 12.1 g purchased' (trip reports 12.1 and I added exactly 12.1 g of gas). We used to have a 'yellow' sign about 40 - 50 miles before 'empty'; CMAX show it about 30 - 40 miles before empty - little too late, but acceptable.

THis is not accurate. ICU is used to charge battery as well as to rotate the wheels. For example, when I drive after the night on the short 5 miles daily trip, ICU works first 5 minutes as it must warm up engine and the cabin. So it runs on 2K rpm until everything is warm, and it uses excess of power to charge the battery (which is used later to drive car for the last 1 - 2 miles). Overall idea is that ICU always works in 'best economy' mode, (2K rpm) except when you want so much power that 2K RPM + EV is not enough (then it runs in 4K RPM which is best power). Running on 'best economy' may provide extra power which is used to charge. Once battery is charged, ICU stop and car ride in EV mode for a while. Problem is that it does not work well on 65 - 70 mph, which kills economy on california-s freeways.

Tested today in optimal mode: 55 miles freeway 100% on cruise 63 mph cruise sharp (was 64 but it sometimes drived to 65 and it broke EV mode so I decreased it to 63) Results are here - 43.5 mpg - first on free way and second short leg to home after it. I wiuld add 1 mpg on the night time. So I would say that CMAX shows EPA numbers in ideal conditions. The same trip during the rain and wind and without cruise shows 35 mpg. So the big issue is 65 mph maximum on EV - you actually can't drive so slow on main freeways and car stops using EV mode over 65 (and traffic flows in California are about 70 - 75). Ford should increase this to at least 70 = it can improve average mileage a lot. Short leg: Average for the full tank is not so good, of course

Actually it is not a bad idea, and if they make a button 'Economy mode' (when computer use more EV and sacrify power to effectiveness) it can be great. For now, I feel as system can provide 1 - 2 better mpg by just better tuning. One really BIG problem is EV mode on freeways - California freeways (not highways) never runs slower then 65, usually 70 - 75, it is stream speed and if you want to go slower, you became an obstacle for everyone - so if ford allow EV mode up to at least 70 mph instead of current 65 (65 is noncense as you never drive below 65 on freeways), it can improve freeway mileage 1 - 2 mpg.

Energy should show slightly better mpg, as it has bigger battery and can drive in EV-only mode faster, so I should expect for MAX 43city/40Hvy rating, which is well consistant with the practice.

My best trip for now: Walnut Creek - Byron, and back. Few country roads, 45 - 50 mph. Back (darkness so results are lower) few more pictures with data here - https://picasaweb.google.com/104011126278844356239/201211Misc3?authuser=0&authkey=Gv1sRgCK7qrqqBpIeZdw&feat=directlink So, in the best possible conditions it show 42 - not bad but far behind 47.

This all is true - small road grades makes a big difference, temperature play great role (all pilotes knows DA term - air is dense when cold and sparce when hot, it change drag and engine efficiency), wind and so on. But what is EPA test? It is not 'hypereffective driving' test - when driving hypereffective, some people reported 60 mph in CMAX and got range of 1,000 miles for VW Passat TDI. EPA reports average mpg in good driving conditions. So cars should show 40 - 42 mpg for average driver in non ideal conditions, and not 33 - 35. Especially on freeway where nothing depends on the driver except speed and weather. Regarding short trips in CMAX (not Energy) - they are not very efficient just becasue computer wants engine to be warm and so it runs it a few minutes - just enough to kill mileage on the 5 - 6 miles first in the day trip. So this low mileage on them is normal. Low (34 - 36) mileage on freeway on ECO cruise is not normal. I don't see too, except the theory that recent cars has some hidden defect (or feature, such as break-on oil which creates more traction? stock tires with extra drag?) which do not allow to get good mileage. I will test car on flat road on 55 mph, no wind, no traffic, warm California-s weather, tomorrow, but until now no any driving style could show better then 36 - 37 mpg on freeway (and 40 - 42 in the city on a very slow route). The mileage reports are TOO different to be explained by the driving habits (except maybe car software behaves so that it likes one stype and dislikes another...) PS. Absolutely agree Max vs Prius - Prius is futuristic boring car, while MAX is fun to drive. Normal controls are plus, too /no joystik, buttons, parking breaks as in the truck, and so on/

This is true, if electricity comes from the network (CMAX energy after charging) or breaking (so if we go downhills/uphills EV mode improve mileage). But when you ride the flat road, EV comes from gas engine and it is less efficient to use gas to charge the battery and then use battery to power EV mode, vs. directly use GAS to drive the wheels. So EV mode is advantage in the city, on the uphills (if there are downhills) or on the quick accelerations (if you then slow down) and for the power burst (as engine works better on average power vs high power), but it is disadvantage on the flat road with constant cruise speed.

EV mode on highways should not make sense _in theory_, as energy comes from the same ICE and ICE -> Wheels is more efficient then ICE -> Battery -> Wheels. So EV should not kick on at all on flat road. If EV mode shows more effieiency, then something wrong with transmission or something else, as it should not improve mileage (flat freeway only!). I am more curious, why some people has consistent 42+ mpg (42 - 47 difference in inside 'driving habit' variations), while others shows consistent 33 - 37 mpg (on freeways). PS. I don't know many places where we can drive 48 for a long. Most highways has streamline traffic on 55 - 75 mph, or has a lot of curves (hw 1 on the west). And more important, EPA uses the same tests for CMAX and PRIUS, so if CMAX shows 47 in ideal conditions and 40 in real PRIUS should do the same. But we do see the different - all PRIUSES are consistent with EPA and _SOME_ CMAXes (maybe drivers, maybe cars) are consistent and some are not. If you read reports.. First tests show EPA 47 and records up to 60. 13 difference. Now people reports 37 and records up to 50, 13 difference. So it, again, looks as first CMAXes had 47 hw mileage and production ones now has 37.

This is impossible. It may explain SOME difference in city mileage. But freeway mileage is simple thing - set up cruise (in ECO mode) and drive 30 - 40 minutes. The only habit which can influence is the speed, and we know for sure that if we have 35 mpg on 75 mph then we can expect maybe 38 on 55 mph, not more... So it CAN NOT explain, why some people reports 44 - 46 mpg while others reports 33 - 36. The ONLY explanation whuch I have is that something is DIFFERENT in the cars (not sure what, but there are many options; looks as early CMAXes show mpg near EPA and new ones shows 10 mpg less, all consistant!). Mpg results, yes, depends of the driving habits in city ; but they do not depends on then on freeway except in heavy traffic. We should do simple test. Come to dealeship and look onto Live MPG on different cars in stock (they usually have 10 - 50 miles driven) and see how different are they. I can't explain why new car had 25 mpg indicated on dealership with 60 miles driven - test drives are relatively good by the route and it should have 35 - 40 mpg if it reach 47 eventually. For my car it had 27 initially and have 35 now and this 35 is not going to improive much. If I drive exceptionally slow on freeway, it can show 36, but never 40+. If FORD did not make huge fraud by creating false numbers for EPA (and I don't think so, as some reports are in 43 - 45 range so SOME cars make EPA numbers), then the only explanation can be that today-s CMAX is different from tested one. /For example, they replaced low drag tires to the stock ones, started to use mineral oil instead of synthetic, issue new software release... you add your version easily./ If anyone can make such test - find someone with really GOOD report and someone with really BAD report, and ask them to drive each other-s car, and compare... it may provide an answer. For now, it is total mystery, I never saw anything like this. For example, VW TDI shows exactly what is posted and it does not depends on your driving; Prius shows what is posted and depend on driving slightly only; Subaru Impreza CVT shows better then posted, and so on...

Morning trip is 1 miles street, 4 miles highway, .6 miles street. Shows 26 - 28, with .1 / .2 gal used on 5.6 miles. I can't understand 37 on freeways. Some people (especially those who have earlier car-s) reports 42 - 44; EPA reports 47. The ONLY explanation which I have is that these are different cars, tires, oil, software or anything else. 70 mph is absolutely common freeway speed; but even if I keep 65, it does not change much. Problem is that reports are SO different that it can't be explained by different driving habits and even by different terrains. It can be explained only by something wrong in the newer cars. I dont think that FORD frauded EPA when they tested and got 47. I suspect that first cars had 47, then something was changed on the factory and recent cars have 37. (I have about 200 EV miles out of 1000, approx).

Have it (CMAX SE) for 2 weeks, with 1000 miles now. Average mpg is 35 and it does not imrpove much - it is about 28 mpg on short 6 miles morning trips, and about 36 on long 100+ highway trips. Sometimes got 40 - 41 in city if car is warm (travelled before this trip). I don't think that it is driving technique as there is nothing to improve on highway - you select the speed, click CRUISE, and go. And it shows stable 36 - 37 mpg on 70 mph. Car had 26 mph on computer when purchased (with 60 miles total). I started to think that these low milage reports has nothing with drive technique. More likely these are different cars or different setting - what I mean are - tires - if car has low drag tires as Prius it makes much better mileage - tire pressure - higher pressure improve milage - oil - synthetic oil is expected to improve mpg - maybe some engine tuning... It all looks as some cars has good mpg and some not. As I can't image, how my car can reach numbers close to 42 (at least) - I can count 2 mpg to California-s gas and maybe 2 more to the hills, roads and so on, so I am ok if it shos 42 - 43 mpg - but for now it stick on 35 - 36 and do not move forward anymoe (it moved first 500 - 600 miles). (Everything else is almost perfect - I'd like to have fog lights in SE and map ligh inside, but these are small cons remembering that SE is just base model). But mileage - this is mystery; they definitely demonstrated 47 to EPA< so why regular cars (some) shows only 35 - 38?