plus 3 golfer

For clarity so when people read the thread title and thread, the Ford Communication posted yesterday says Ford is developing a software update to increase Charging System Output. TSB 12-11-8 referred to in the communication is not a Charging System Output update.

I understand some have strong feeling about buying domestically (for many reasons) but if our elected officials choose to allow international trade with countries or trade on certain commodities, I see no reason not to participate. Globalization is here and I believe we must defend our interests in such although some may believe isolationism is better. I do appreciate the service of all in defending our interests around the world. :)

I really tried to justify an Energi. In my analysis I assumed about 1/3 - 1/2 of my mileage would be longer distance trips (4-5 k per year), so that pulls the overall mileage down for the Energi. Also, most charging stations in the Phoenix metro area aren't where we frequent. So, any RT over 20 miles or so would lower FE. Also, I'm about to ink a deal to add solar PV (I had it on my previous house). So, in analyzing a PV and Energi purchase, I looked at PV systems with and without the charging load of the Energi. Bottom line, the Energi load made little difference in overall cost savings (PV electric and gasoline benefits) other than if I increased the size of the PV system, I would be better hedged against electricity cost increases. There's generally a "sweet spot" PV size where the overall PV return increases until the "sweet spot" and then decrease beyond that point. Although the overall return was still good beyond the sweet spot up until about 120% of my total energy usage, the incremental return drops generally because of the net metering provisions and buyback rates for excess generation. Also offsetting off-peak load with PV doesn't add to the benefits as much as offsetting on-peak load. Of course this is all dependent on ones local utility tariffs and rates. My previous utility PV net metering and buyback rates are significantly better than my current utility.

That's 57% EV miles. That in itself goes along way in explaining your high mpg. My EV miles are about 36% at 3100 miles and 40.4 mpg.

Typically, the power control unit uses injection duration, injection rates and so forth to calculate the quantity of fuel injected. The injection quantities are accumuated. So, now the PCM can calculate instantaneous mpg, trip mpg, ect. and gallons used. In some cars like my 2009 TDI, I could adjust the calculation in 1% increments with a diagnostic tool to get a more accurate result. Because this calculation is not 100% accurate, the best way to get your FE is to keep track of the gallons you put in your tank and then divide such gallons into the miles traveled between fill ups. I don't know whether this can be adjusted on the C-Max by the dealer via their diagnostic tool.

Great can't wait for the highway mileage reports since your car is broken-in.

Yes, an Energi would likely have been a good choice for your commute wamba2000. We have no daily commute but on average travel between 20 - 40 miles when we go out at least once a day and sometimes twice a day. When I looked at the Energi, the payback was just too long plus for longer trips the extra weight likely represents a FE penalty. I figured I'd have to average about 70 mpg with an energi for an acceptable payback period. There was at least one Energi available which I could have purchased at X Plan pricing even though the dealer had a significant market adjustment on the car (probably why it was available). Yesterday afternoon we put 40.0 miles on the car, got 46.7 mpg, used a/c (around 83*F), and had 19.6 EV miles. I took it "easy" on the Superstition Freeway (62-65 mph GPS) generally accelerating to 65 going up the overpasses and using EV on the down slope for a mile or so until the next overpass. Hence the nearly 50% EV. If I run faster than about 65 mph, I have very few EV miles. On the arterial streets and US 60 around Gold Canyon, it's difficult to P&G because of traffic and traffic lights so I generally get significantly less than 50% EV. My overall EV miles are 35.6%. It might be interesting to tabulate ones lifetime EV% vs lifetime FE and plot on a graph.

Congrats on your high mileage (I guess)! :) We'll likely see how long the HV batteries last at that rate of mileage accumulation in a few years. I'm curious as to whether you have tried to determine the effect of the grill covers on your FE. Also, could the first 2 hours of lower FE be because the ambient temperature is usually lower in the morning than in the afternoon? That effect is very noticeable in Phoenix where one can have a 30+ *F temperature difference between 8 am and 2 pm. Ford states "a temperature difference 40 °F and 70 °F can result in a 5 mpg difference." Since you have 14 k miles on your car and well past break-in, do you have an estimate of your FE at steady highway speeds of say 65, 70, and 75 mph? I wonder how your FE compares to the graph below. Lastly, what are your typical driving conditions when you see 50+ mpg for example, speeds and distance, terrain and so forth. Do you use any special driving techniques to achieve that?

Don't get me wrong, I do believe Ford's ads do take advantage of their EPA numbers. The fuelly data and fueleconomy.gov data show a wide range of the FE numbers for vehicles. The average for most vehicles don't meet the EPA numbers. I tell those that ask about my FE numbers for the C-Max what others report and that I and likely most will not achieve the EPA numbers unless we drive in certain ways on a very consistent basis. I'll say it one more time, IMO, your email is not an encouragement to potential buyers (the 1/2 empty glass). Why because you have have postulated that you've done certain things and still haven't got 47 mpg average. Nothing is wrong with 42-44 but if a potential buyer expects 47 and only get 42-44 after significantly changing their driving style, I'd say they are going to be somewhat disappointed. Can a C-Max average 47 mpg - yes. But, the normal driver is not going to average 47 mpg. If that's half empty so be it. Simply because one likes the car for non-FE reasons, I fail to see that helps "potential future clients to see through the muck of bad mileage vibes". I'd suggest you give each C-Max owner and suggest the dealer give potential buyers Raj Nair's (FORD Group VP) letter which nails the reasons why customers may not be seeing 47 mph: designed for performance not FE, and speed and temperature kill mpg. This helps potential future clients to see through the muck of bad mileage vibes although they may not like what they read. Then you can explain strategies on how to best extract FE instead of performance from the C-Max. Today, we went out for errands, drove 40 miles and got 46.7 mpg with a/c on and it was only 83*F. Wait until it's over 110*F. I doubt I can do much better unless I turned a/c off and dropped my speed another 3-5 mph for 26 of the 40 miles from the so called "sweet spot" of 62-65 mph. I'd likely have been over 50 mpg but it's not going to happen. I've also owned solar panels on my previous home. So, what's that got to do with the C-Max getting 47 mpg. My return was over 32% a year (about a 3 year simple payback). Why because I sized the PV system to maximize the return given the utility's rate structure, tax credits, and incentives. I "worked at it" one time for the return. For the C-Max apparently one has to "continually work at it" to average 47 mpg. :) Evidently, some like the challenge and some don't. I have owned many diesels including a 2009 Jetta TDI and several Ford products and have driven around 1.5 million miles. Again what's that got to do with why the C-Max has a hard time making 47 mpg under normal driving. Bottom line: there's enough data on the internet about the C-Max for a consumer to make an intelligent decision. I bought a C-Max knowing that my FE will likely be in the low 40's based on my climate and driving style. The Forum you neglected to refer a C-Max owner to in your email is the cleanmpg.com forum where there is a more realistic measure of expected FE for the C-Max compared to other hybrids.

Truth doesn't hurt me. :) Don't even know why you brought that up. I do research before buying. I guess some buyers don't. Sounds like you are a disgruntled customer. My above post is not about truth. My post is about what the OP believes he is doing with his email. The intent of the OP is - "to help encourage his [the dealer's] potential future clients to see through the muck of bad mileage vibes." IMO, the OP has not accomplished this objective and likely has reinforced any "bad mileage vibes" that a potential customer might have. One can state "facts" in a positive or negative way. My guess is the email would not be viewed by a buyer as encouraging. Send "the truth" to FORD.

Quite frankly, when I read your email and if I were looking at buying a C-MAX because of FE expecting around 47/47/47, I'd likely look elsewhere. You hit on virtually everything that will turn off the average driver. That's my opinion. I highly doubt a Ford dealer would deem this a glowing report worthy of giving to / discussing with a potential customer. - after 7500 miles only 41.1 mpg - have to drive the car different than a normal car (and still can't get 47) - have to accelerate differently, brake differently, learn to hyper mile - have to find sweet spot, drive at 66 mph, back off to get EV mode when in Eco cruise - the $hit people come up with (and still don't get 47) - always driving the posted speed limit (and still don't get 47) - IF YOU THINK THAT YOU CAN DRIVE A HYBRID LIKE A REGULAR CAR and get the published EPA estimates then your dreaming….really.

Who paired it initially? Try the reverse pairing. Also, I believe there is a way that you can let your phone generate a pin and enter the pin in MFT.

Sorry to hear. Do you know if OR allows claims for diminished value? Even if the car is repaired to 100%, the resale value of the car has diminished especially since the air bags deployed. It will be a black mark on the vehicles history. I would seek to have the car totaled and be compensated for the cost of a new car less your usage. Good luck.

Agree, I would never drive 10 feet or even 20 feet behind at freeway speeds. At 88 feet per sec. at 60 mph, for an average reaction time of 1/4 second, that's 22 feet before one starts to remove foot from accelerator after seeing the issue.. Then probably a few tens of a second to actually step on the brake pedal and start slowing down. Yes, a truck can't stop instantaneously and continues moving forward, but that is cutting it close. I've drafted in my TDI (Cd=0.31) at various speeds (65 - 75 mph) at about 50+ feet and I can see about a 20% jump in instantaneous mpg. The issues I have are 1) it takes concentration / alertness to maintain a 50 foot distance so others don't cut in between if the interval increase too much and 2) since trucks typically run at the speed limit and go slower up hill, travel time increases. I typically run 3-5 mph above the speed limit on my cross country trips of 2080 miles one way with one night layover. So, I may draft for a few miles but as soon as the truck loses speed, I'm gone as if I continue running that slow for hours on end I will likely have to spend an additional night on the road and the fuel savings by drafting and lowering my speed is offset by an extra night lodging.

Your facts are incorrect.

Your facts are incorrect.

Actually, that makes the most sense from an engineering control perspective but again this now is the third Ford description of how the shutter system operates. When I monitored via the webcam the shutters correlated to coolant temp but the shutters didn't operate consistently between about 90C and 100*C - my point 5. I was varying speed as there was traffic. So since ambient temp was constant and no a/c, speed may have been the other major driver of the shutter operation that I observed and why the inconsistent operation. In your subscription, can you download and save / print files?

It's not about winning. It's getting what one pays for. It's to let buyer's know that if they want the trailing edge covered and the OEM appliqué has been trimmed, then don't accept shoddy workmanship or excuses from the dealer. Make them install another one correctly.

Well, you can't think of everything. I did not try it with just air flow only. But I don't see why using the cabin blower would affect the shutter operation. Maybe MTB9153 can test it. Although it only takes 5 minutes for me to tape the webcam and cable in place, I don't feel like trying it now.

Here are my observations from watching the active shutters on my C-Max for about 25 miles of driving with an ambient temperature of 89*F with no grill covers in place on fairly flat terrain. I set up my webcam to monitor the shutters (would only fit through the lower grills) and set ETM to watch coolant temperature. I ran about 15 miles or so at above 65 mph with spurts up to 80 mph. Bottom line, my observations support ptjones tests. It certainly would be better to record the shutters with commentary as to coolant temperature and speed during the test run but my laptop is too slow to support recording. 1) Turning on a/c opens the shutters. There appears to be no other contingent conditions. 2) Below about 90*C coolant temperature the shutters remained closed except for 1). 3) I did not observe speed alone affecting shutter position. It would be beneficial to operate in city driving conditions to see if this still holds. 4) Between about 90*C - 100*C the shutters could be in various stages of opening / closing. I never saw a coolant temperature above 100*C. 5) There appeared to be a time / temperature lag in opening / closing the shutters. For example, sometimes when I reached 100*C, the shutters were not fully open. Many times when the coolant temperature was in the low 90*C and the shutters went fully closed. Most times I had to reach 95*C before the shutters would open and then the shutters would open to 1/2 way. So it wouldn't surprise me if the algorithm smooths the data and / or looks at rate of change and so forth so as not to continually change the position of the shutters. I never saw a 3/4 shutter opening. 6) Cruising below about 65 mph / low 90*C coolant temperature the shutters would remain closed. I noticed one time when the shutters opened to 1/4. Also, below about 60 mph, I could not maintain coolant temperature above 90*C and the shutters remained closed. 7) When the shutters would open / close (partially of fully), I would see a virtual immediate affect on coolant temperature.

If you look at the accessories pic you can see 4 surfaces: the top of the bumper cover, two angled surfaces from the top of the bumper cover to the vertical surface of the bumper cover. The C-MAX logo-ed protector starts on the top forward surface that is hidden by the tail gate (surface not visible in the pic because the tail gate is closed) and ends virtually at the junction of the lower of the bottom angled surface and the vertical surface of the bumper cover (about 6" total).

Mine was installed as part of the exterior protection option package (mudflaps and rear bumper protector) and is the standard OEM product. It measures about 6" which will clearly cover the trailing edge. I seriously doubt the dealer would trim it to a smaller size.

I just installed the logitech webcam driver on my laptop and will not be able to record (just monitor) as my old 10+ year old HP laptop won't support the logitech video software.

Shipping from cablesforless.com was more than the cable. So, I stopped by Fry's Electronics and picked up a 10 foot one for $4.34 including tax.

My OEM clear bumper protector wraps down to the surface of the bumper that is perpendicular to the ground (maybe 3/4" below the top surface). So, I'd say it covers the trailing edge corner. :) Also, it extends forward across the top of the bumper to about 1/4" of the perpendicular surface of the metal below the hatchback opening. A quick measurement shows the size to be about 6" X 37" and it clearly covers significantly more of the bumper than the pic of the black vinyl protective strip shown in the first post. The OEM protector appears to be a few mils thicker than the clear-bra film I have on the front end.