plus 3 golfer

Sometimes old technology is still the best for some applications. Yes, I looked at Fordparts.com and saw the brake vacuum pump ($370). I remember my 1982 MB 300 SD with plastic vacuum lines running everywhere: door locks, a/c flaps, and I think cruise control (could be mistaken on this one). I owned it for 15 years (275 k miles) and had to be very careful when doing anything in the engine bay. The lines had a propensity to break if one tried to move them being extremely brittle after about 5-7 years.

Are your sure the C-Max uses vacuum in the HVAC control system? Do you have a reference? That's an antiquated system in that it requires electrically operated, vacuum solenoids and vacuum lines. I believe most modern automatic climate control systems in cars have a control unit with position sensors and electric motors to open / close blend doors and to operate flaps to route air flow.

Make sure you copy and paste the full fuelly URL and not just the IMG portion into the signature.

C-MaxSeatle I edited my above post with a link to the HV battery removal and you can see the upper vents.

After searching and looking at the parts diagrams It now looks like there are 2 upper inlet ducts laying flat on the left and right side behind the seat backs under the window glass. I can't really tell where the exhaust vents are but believe they are under the car. Here's the one link I recall looking at some time ago and the other link is the Fordparts.com parts diagrams. I believe the other 2 covers are for access to the tail lights but could be exhaust vents.

When I saw the thread title I had flash backs of Johnny Carson doing the salesman skits.

I thought the days of the unscrupulous dealers like Ralph Williams were long gone. Warning: subject matter matter rated "R". http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=johnny%20carson%20used%20car%20salesman&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CD8QtwIwAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D0hjgIF71lio&ei=XNcyUcDQBefdyAH_zIGoAw&usg=AFQjCNF6v7FkVwu9U9ttSQq1y6Gsds6G_g&bvm=bv.43148975,d.aWc

I used sisal mats in the Pittsburgh area for at least 15 years. There were no issues with snow, slush, and water. I'd just wash them at the car wash in the winter when they got too dirty from cinders and salt, then threw them in the trunk, and dried them near our Vermont Castings wood stove.

C-Max Hybrid ===> 1.4 kWh battery C-Max Energy ==> 7.6 kWh battery It's also my understanding that the hybrid also has 1.1 kWh for use in EV operation but can't locate the source. There needs to be a reserve in the 1.4 kWh battery. It cannot be drained to zero.

The point is that if you travel more miles simply to get better fuel economy than traveling less miles to get from point a to b and get poorer FE, FE based on mpg in not the correct measure for comparison of the two trips. The correct measure is the overall cost including fuel, wear and tear, depreciation and so forth.

We haven't bought a sun shade yet. We have 2 that were from other vehicles but are waaay to small. I usually order custom shades but that can be expensive. I'll check Walmart.

I feel for you. We try to park (with most of our newer cars) far out in the parking lots close to the curb of an island. Sometimes that's not practicable though. I was fairly lucky with my 2009 Jetta TDI that I traded in. In about 40 k miles no dings. But in the next 30 k miles we had 2 small door dents like you are describing and one scratch from a shopping cart on the rear bumper. Guess what, we quite being diligent about parking away from other cars.

Paul, the problem for me with seeing a FE increase with higher temps (if you call this a problem) is my wife uses a/c when she's leaving the fitness center since the car has been in the full sun for 3 hours even when the ambient is 70 F. She won't roll down the windows and leave a/c off. When I drive (alone), I roll down the windows at 86 F. Remember it's dry heat in AZ. ;) Actually, during the Monsoon season, it can get rather humid (30-50%) but the humidity generally keeps the ambient below 110 F. Sunday afternoon when the temp is above 80 F, I'll make a run at 70 mph without covers just to check FE and compare with my run at 27 F without covers. Edit: I just remembered I won't be able to run that section of US 60 Sunday as their is a festival going on and cops and traffic are everywhere.

Rachel, AFAIK, the C-Max comes with mats the same color as the carpet and snap into the posts. The factory mats don't cover the foot rest. I don't know whether my wife uses the foot rest but I do and it's easy to see that that area will likely wear down rather quickly (my guess less than 75 k miles). Secondly, the factory mats don't have a heel plate either for your right foot, so that area will also likely wear down quickly. I have used sisal /coco mats in several prior vehicles and like wamba says they "wear like iron" and are easy to clean even with a pressure washer. I hope the ones I'm getting are of the same quality. To give you an idea I had a set of sisal mats in another car that after about 200 k miles the driver's side was finally starting to wear with the rubber heel plate coming loose.

I did another search and called up cocomats and after talking with them ordered #54 just for the front. It appears the taupe dots in #54 match perfectly with the carpet color. They are expensive but I believe these are the mats I had in my previous MB and they were very high quality. The guy checked and said the Ford C-max mat measurements aren't in their system yet He will go to the Ford dealer and measure and include the dead pedal. He said their backlog is 2-3 weeks fabrication plus shipping time until I get them. He also said that they put grommets in the driver side to fit over the posts but would suggest not getting the grommets and just laying them over the existing mats for a cleaner look. I'll post pics when I get the mats.

Agree, it's really about the overall cost of the variable components of operations which fuel is virtually certainly the highest component, not mpg and ones value of time as I indicated above - "we feel that the extra time spent by taking the slowest route isn't worth the fuel cost savings over taking a faster route."

I think the true testament to FE is ones overall mpg (Fuelly badges for example). Getting 50+ mpg on a trip certainly helps ones overall FE. But if ones overall FE is 40 mpg, there are trips where ones FE was less than 40 mpg. My wife goes to a fitness center 5 days a week about 21 miles RT with over half the miles at 65+ mph. Since the fitness center is in a huge shopping complex, we drive there quite often. I currently get about 42 ish mpg RT if I take the freeway but can get 50+ mpg if I choose to take the parallel roadways (average about 35 mph) instead of the freeway and go about 50 ish instead of 60 ish for 9 miles with 4 traffic lights before hitting the freeway. At least for now, we feel that the extra time spent by taking the slowest route isn't worth the fuel cost savings over taking a faster route. So, as I've said before a C-Max can certainly get over 50 mpg. But few have a fuelly badge showing 50+ mpg (see below). Now, that this is saved, we will be able to compare this fuelly data with later data. And staff please don't ban me: we are to hit 79, 82, and 86 F today, Sat. and Sun. :)

I believe the EPA's tests attempt to encompass too many variable in two numbers city and highway FE that simply don't apply for most drivers. There is no way that these tests can cover the combination of real world conditions and driver style. EPA needs to re-examine the intent of the FE numbers especially as cars become more efficient and driving conditions and style have a larger impact on the FE numbers. I don't believe two numbers can adequately capture their original intent. I believe there needs to be virtually an unlimited set of FE numbers where the prospective buyer can input various driving conditions and style and get a custom set of FE numbers. Why not develop sets of curves of speed vs FE like constant speeds and stop & go driving and so forth under several varied conditions like ambient temperatures, number of stops per mile, use of a/c and so forth. Then, the consumer can chose what might be more in line with their driving conditions and style and the % of time that they operate under such curves. Have interactive software at dealers, EPA web site, and so forth so the consumer can run comparative numbers for different vehicles. Also, I can't believe that manufacturers haven't already developed software to simulate emissions, FE and so forth for their vehicles under virtually all operating conditions.

I'd also would like to find sisal mats but in a matching color to the stone interior. I searched a month or so ago and couldn't find any. My dead pedal carpet is also wearing.

You know VW gets a lot of things right. Looks like they took my suggestion. :)

Couldn't agree more. I've looked at buying a Prius since mid 2008, and Toyota has simply not improved handling and performance to my satisfaction to warrant a purchase. If one places a premium on FE especially at less than freeway speeds and short trips, buy the Prius otherwise test drive the C-Max or VW TDIs especially at or above freeway speeds and compare comfort, handling, and performance.

Good to hear. Just some more food for discussion below. :) Have you tried to assess how much energy you capture on these hills? Does "grade assist" help going down steep grades or will the car still pick up speed? I haven't driven on any road with long/steep enough grades to really test. According to the manual, it appears that the logic is to keep speed constant going down hill using regen braking. I would think that means maximum regen braking if warranted. If I had such a hill I'd take my VCDS and record charge level and other variables and test various strategies to see what might maximize regen charging. Although with just a Hybrid, there's likely not enough battery storage to make a difference in strategies on a long grade. My data shows that exiting a freeway on a downhill ramp of about nearly 1/2 mile in length at 70 mph increased the battery charge level by 8% with a 100% brake score in my hybrid. Since the Energi's battery capacity is over 5 X that of the hybrid there's the potential to capture a lot of energy through regen going down long hills. But on the contrary as an example, there's a 24 mile stretch of US 60 that I travel a few times a year that drops from 5850' to 3450' and climbs back up to 6000' with about 6 miles or so having numerous hairpin curves going up /down the canyon walls of the Salt River and 10+ miles of gradual slope (maybe average 1.5% grade) at the beginning / end of the 24 miles. That's about 3.6% overall grade but with many sections over 6%. With my TDI I could downshift from 6th to as low as 3rd and not have to use my brakes but for entering many of the hairpin curves (15-20 mph) or for slower traffic. Speed limit was 65 mph on the gradual down slopes dropping down to 55 on the steeper sections and of course significantly less in the hairpin sections. My speed on the 65 mph sections could approach 75+ mph had I not downshifted to 5th. So, I then wonder how much energy can be captured through regen with an Energi over and above "normal use of brakes" including anticipating conditions and use of "grade assist" on such a hill since the characteristics of the hill (including max safe speeds) and flow of traffic would seem to be the primary determinants as opposed to how the driver applies the brakes like when maximizing regen when coming to a complete stop. Of course every hill is different. Secondly, is there enough potential energy in a stretch of highway with a 2400 vertical drop to fully charge an Energi? No, a 3900 pound car at 2400 feet elevation has a potential energy of about 3.5 kWh. Take out drag as one converts that potential energy to kinetic energy, inefficiencies of charging and so forth and that number will fall significantly. So, I'm curious as to what the potential energy one can expect from the hills you travel compared to how much the battery level actually increases. That to me is the $64 question. Now, let's make an estimate of the energy I recovered in my recorded data above. The kinetic energy in my hybrid at 70 mph = 0.228 kWh. My charge level went up about 8% or 1.4 kWh*0.8 = 0.112 kWh. That's a recovery of slightly less than 50% of the kinetic energy yet my brake score was 100%. IMHO, there's way to much emphasis placed on "brake score". Yes, it helps FE to get the brake score as high as possible but not as much as most likely believe. Edit: I forgot to add the PE of my car since the exit ramp was down hill maybe 25'. That would make the total energy = PE + KE = 0.263 kWh. So, the recovery is now around 43% = (0.112/0.263).

My logic is simple, safety first while braking. It's about adding a feature where the perceived benefit requires taking ones eyes off the road even if momentarily while braking. It's not about looking at gauges at appropriate times. It's not about how you or I drive. Yes, I can glance at gauges while driving. It's about the tailgaters, the weavers and so forth on the road that I don't trust. If Ford decides to implement such, I'd use it but I'm not in favor of it. I would prefer paddle shifter like devices on the steering wheel to control generator braking. BTW, read the warning about operating the audio / MFT while driving. Lastly, why the personal stuff?...

I don't want it as an option. I don't want other to have it as an option. I don't want the car behind me to be potentially distracted by watching a display on the dash while braking instead of what's happening in front of him. I have no problem using something else to help in regens but not something that requires taking your eyes from the road. I don't want people believing that such a swirling, changing color display is their ticket to value during normally braking. What I suggested for hills was to have the ability to "shift the downhill energy" to the generator in stages much like a tiptronic can up/downshift gears. If you had to slow down more than the generator load allowed, you simply apply the brakes. This principle could easily apply to normal braking also. It requires more hardware but the logic is similar to applying the brake pedal position to generator loading except in discrete steps. The algorithm factors in battery charge and adjusts the mechanical braking accordingly when downshifting. So, if half way down the hill the battery is full, the brakes are applied to simulate the generator load.

So what is your brake score???? I can't beat ptjones, but ours is 95%. So, removing the "dogs run out in front of you stuff" and not impeding traffic and so forth, I'll bet my wife and I would be close to 99%. So, I really doubt a red spinning wheel could add much value for most people. Let see how much value one might add with improving ones brake score. I've got 178 miles in regen miles out of 2300 miles total. So, let's assume 100% of the regen miles is recovered via braking and none by coasting (very optimistic assumption). Lets also assume that I could improve my brake score from 95% to 100% (also very optimistic assumption). Lastly, let's assume that the brake score represents the energy that is recovered (in miles) and is linear. So, currently I'm 5% short of the 100%. So, the maximum regen miles that I can recover would be (178/.95-178)= about 9.37 miles over 2300 miles. So, after 100 k miles, the best I can do is recover an additional 9.37*100,000/2300 = 391 miles. At 40 mpg and $5 gas that's less than $50 in value over 100 k miles and likely a lot less than that. Hardly worth the discussion. So, even forgetting about it being a potential distraction while braking, there is virtually no value especially if one is realistic vs optimistic in the calculation. :)