plus 3 golfer

I didn't do anything to the configuration to use the OBDII function. I'm using the USB port selection. Make sure you push the start button on the car. Otherwise, VCDS won't connect. That's all you "should" need to do. If you can scan your Passat, the OBDii function should work on the C-Max. You don't access specific modules like with VW. On the Main Page, there's a "OBDII" button. That brings up another page with a series of Mode buttons. Select them just to see what's available. Mode 1 has the real time data which you can select, log and graph. I believe you can change the frequency of sampling the data with the turbo button but I didn't monkey with it. The data log shows that the selected data was scanned sequentially on about a 0.66 second cycle. Once, you have a log of the data saved, you can then open the log in VC-Scope and "play" the data. You can download VC-Scope from Ross-Tech but it should already be in the Ross-tech folder for VCDS. The data will move across the screen as time advances. "Pause" the playback and then you can use a "screen shot" program to capture the graph and save it. If you look at the first graph, you will see at the lower left an "8X" to scale the time which puts about 10 minutes of data across the graph. You can select a value as low as 0.5 which will show about 40 seconds of data across the graph. The 621.95 in the lower left is the number of seconds from the beginning of the log until I paused the playback. I then restarted the playback and paused the playback again at 1244.27 seconds as shown on the second graph. I forgot that if you look at the VCDS manual, it will show you some of the things I described.

You know, I've used the OBDII function in VCDS on non-VWs (it won't work on all cars) more than I've needed VCDS for my VWs. This is the first time I logged data and used VC-Scope.

I connect a VCDS cable to the OBDII port and to a USB port on a laptop. It's an old HP laptop running XP. The data points are selected and then logged into a csv file which I transfer to my desktop. I then load the data file into VC-Scope to graph. I notice there's a data field for something like % fuel remaining. I wonder if this is simply the fuel tank sensor reading or a calculated value based on estimated fuel delivered via the injectors. Later this week for 4-5 days it's suppose to be very cold (for here) with the morning lows in the mid - high 20's. I should be able to test on four consecutive mornings with cold engine at two constant speeds with / without covers for say about 15 mile round trips. The first and last mile will be residential to /from US 60, then 55 mph to a traffic light (which if I go early enough in morning I should hit green). Then, about 6 - 8 miles with speed limit at 65 mph. I'm not sure what speeds but I'll start with 55 mph (so ICE can shut down) and 70 mph. I will also make additional freeway only runs with "hot" engine at same speeds as above with and without covers. This will be a start. Once I look at the data, I may make additional runs especially with respect to speed and distance. When the weather warms up, I'll make runs at higher temps like 60F, 70F, and 80F (may be a few months for this). Any other suggestions are welcome.

There's likely a dead band range in the temperature gauge. VW has had such for quite a few years. Last I knew, the VW temp gauge has a deadband such that when the coolant temp is between about 167*F and 225*F, the gauge will read a rock solid 190*F. Looks like Ford has similar.

This morning I drove about 30 miles starting from home (1835 feet elevation) to a shop (1170 feet elevation) to get a clear bra put on and got 45.8 mpg. I used VC-Scope along with VCDS (Ross-Tech product) to record the ambient air temperature (yellow), the coolant temperature (red), my speed (white), and ICE rpm (green) for the initial trip to the shop. There are four graphs below that show these variables for the 30 mile trip. Each major horizontal division on the X axis should be one minute. My overall fuel economy for the round trip of 60.0 miles was 42.5 mpg with 11.0 EV miles. I averaged just under 52 mph. From the graphs, the ambient temperature and coolant temperature started out at about 16C (60F) since the car was garaged. The outside temperature was about 5C (41F). After about 7-8 minutes the coolant temp climbed to about 93C (200F) edit: should be 83C (181F) as I forgot that the temp scale starts at -10C. Maximum speed was about 70 mph. I moved with the general flow of traffic. It's about one mile from my home to US 60 which is a 4 lane divided highway with a speed limit 55 mph with 3 traffic lights. After about 5 miles, the Superstition freeway begins with a speed limit of 65 miles/hour. I exited the freeway about 1 1/2 miles from the shop. There was congestion on the freeways for the last 4 - 5 miles. I have ordered grill covers from ptjones and I will run tests and a lot more logging of data with / without the covers. Stay tuned. :)

First, get a sunscreen for the front window (and use it) and high UV tint for the other windows or maybe try to park with the rear facing south. :) I've used Lexol products for about 30 years. I've never tried anything else but I've got to believe most leather care cleaners and conditioners will perform about the same. The long term condition of the leather likely depends on the frequency of cleaning and conditioning as opposed to the product used and exposure to UV.

Like most purchases, if you buy something and don't use it, it likely was not a smart economic decision to purchase it. One pays a premium for a C-MAX hybrid. If you don't drive it at least 100k miles, you'll likely never recover the additional cost of a hybrid (42 mpg) over a gas vehicle (30 mpg). At $4.00/ gallon that amounts to $3800 in fuel savings in 100k miles. Same applies to the grill cover. In my case even living in the desert southwest, I'll likely get at least 10k miles per year use of covers at 70 - 80 mph as we travel back East usually in March / April and Oct / Nov each year.

Yes, I've thought about the potential risk of overheating and warranty. But as your math shows the return on investment is very good. Manage the risk and reap the benefits.

I think you will find there is no touch up paint for the tri-coat paints- base color, "sparkle" coat, and the clear coat. What you get is simply the base color. I had the same issue with my 2008 Nissan which is a pearl white tri-coat. I used http://www.drcolorchip.com/ and found it's the best for small chips up to maybe 1/8". With chips much larger than 1/8", it's difficult to get the paint level with the surrounding area.

3M film but not full hood. Price is $240 for the film + 8.8% tax and $275 for installation includes bumper, part hood, fenders, mirrors, and door pockets. Most were $599 with some charging tax on the film, some all inclusive, and some $40 more for door pockets. Door edges and rear bumper ledge added more $. I didn't get full hood or door edge guards on my Jetta and had no chips at about 70k miles. So, I opted not to do it on the C-MAX. I have the Ford exterior protection package so didn't need the rear bumper ledge. I called a guy on craigslist who comes to your home and advertised $250 installation but he never responded. tax

This is what Ford says about the active shutters. So if the C-MAX has a Cd = 0.30, the shutters reduce the coefficient to 0.285. This will equate to roughly a 3.3% improvement in FE at 70 mph all other things being equal (assume reasonable values for frontal area and rolling resistance). So, from the graph the MPGs at 70 mph at 63*F are about 41 and 44 or a difference of 3 MPG. That's about a 7.3% difference over 2X what I would expect from the shutters alone per Ford's 5% improvement statement. But, It's conceivable that the covers could improve the laminar air flow significantly over the shutters which are "inside" the grill and thus lower the Cd to near to Prius range. If the Cd could be brought down to 0.25 (a reduction of about 17% from the 0.30), the fuel economy impact should be about 10% at 70 mph. I think we need more tests at higher and lower temperatures and at a few more speeds. When I get my covers, I will run tests but unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) i won't be able to run low ambient temp tests. :) Edit: what we don't know is if the 0.30 is with the shutters closed or open.

When you are on your vehicle page, on the right hand side look for "Share Your MPG". There's a link to the badges. Copy the URL for the badge you want and paste in your signature under your profile settings.

LOL, if my wife had to bundle herself up to drive the car, the car would be gone tomorrow. :) Are you aware of the grill covers that ptjones is making for sale?

I've had the clock wrong twice in 11 days of ownership. The first time I thought maybe I screwed up something and simply forgot about it. But this time it happened after spending noon in a restaurant. The clock was fine when we pulled into the parking lot as I checked the time at 11:30. After lunch while driving I noticed the clock said 6:00. I fiddled with the menus and reset the clock to the correct time 12:43 (with PM still showing). I noticed the date was also incorrect as it indicated Jan. 4th instead of the 3rd. I reset that also. I'll now check the time / date every time I get in the car to see if I can determine when / what might be causing this change.

Got it but can't reply until 50 posts. I'll contact you later - going out to lunch.

Some have claimed excellent results doing the clear bra themselves. But, I watched my previous installation on my '09 Jetta and feel it's worth the $240 or so to have it professionally done and they will generally fix any issues free down the road (edges lifting, bubbles and so forth). In fact, they pieced a portion in on the underside of a corner of my bumper when I scraped it on a high parking curb a year or so ago for free. It took them about 15 minutes to cut the 3x10" ripped section out, clean the area, apply film over the section overlapping on the existing film, and then trimming the overlap and resealing - all for free. I'm scheduled to have a clear bra installed Monday. :)

Paul, I tried to PM you yesterday and looks like I need 50 posts before given permission to use (afraid of SPAM). How are you handling the sales of the covers? If you are doing it by PMs, maybe if you send me a PM, I can respond. Otherwise, I'll just have to "spam" about 35 more posts today. :) Thanks, Ken

Lot of paranoia here. I'm not concerned about not having a spare tire and I do a lot of long trips back East. I've logged nearly 1.5 million miles in 49 years of driving and only one time did I suffer a blowout with my 1979 Honda Accord when I hit the side of a massive pothole on a 2 lane road on a rainy, cold night. Also, I've never had to change a tire on the road albeit I've had too many nails / screws in tires to count. With the odds of a blowout being very slim, for me it's simply not worth buying and hauling around a spare.

Couldn't have said it better. If I didn't care about a, b, and c, I'd likely have bought a Prius. I test drove the Prius prior to buying the C-Max and again just like 4 years ago when I bought my Jetta TDI, the Prius is still woefully lacking in a, b, and c. I was also well aware of the hullabaloo surrounding the fuel economy of the C-Max prior to my purchase. I couldn't be more pleased with my C-Max. As far as my FE goes, I decided to fillup early since I didn't know whether the dealer topped off the tank when I purchased it at 31 miles or not . So, excluding the 31 miles I got 38.2 mpg on 7.234 gallons of fuel (which is what I reported to fuelly to be conservative). If I include the 31 miles, my fuel economy jumps to 42.8 mpg. Factoring in the cost difference of diesel fuel ($3.779) vs. gas ($2.959), my Jetta TDI would have needed to get 49.2 mpg to be equivalent in fuel costs to my C-Max. My lifetime average on my Jetta was 42.0 mpg. To repeat: "the C-Max fit better than anything on the market I could find for the price" and I expect my FE to increase.

So, I assume that the covers are flat and must be bowed slightly to fit the curve of the grill when installing. Have you considered 3M Dual Lock Tabs? I believe the tabs have a higher tensile strength than Velcro and very good sheet strength. I've used them to do frameless sunscreens and they work exceptionally well when stretching the fabric for a sag free fit. The tabs come in two "engaged" thicknesses. It looks like you might be able to use a combination of the tabs stacked to get the covers at or just above the grills. For installation, you would simply stack the tabs to the applicable height leaving the top and bottom backing in place on the tab. Then clean the contact surfaces of the grill and cover with alcohol. Peel off the bottom backing and stick tabs to the black part of the grill where applicable. Once the stacks are in place, you peel off top backing of each stack and align the cover over the grill opening and lightly attach the cover to the stacks. If alignment looks good, firmly press the cover into the stack of tabs to get a good seal of the adhesive. For removal, you'll want enough space so that you can grab a corner of the cover near a tab and pull outwards until the lock tabs start to release. Then, it should be easy to remove the rest of the cover. Also, I was able to find the tabs a lot cheaper than at the link I posted above. I probably have sufficient tabs (albeit clear) to attach 2 grills. I just need to find a thin sheet of lexan or other plastic to give it a try.

Great graph. Wow what a difference. If you can find a way to attach the covers without the mounts (velcro or whatever) showing with the covers off, I'd buy them. Did you have the climate control on or off (are you heating the cabin) in the two curves? If it's off, do you have curves with it on? Do you have curves at other speeds? say 35ish and 55ish? or do you believe the effect would be the same at all speeds? Very interesting project. My runs in the Jetta were all done around 60 - 75 *F but with engine fully up to temperature. I believe Bob Wilson also did his tests with the Prii up to temp. Don't know about the others. Thanks, Ken

I'm not talking about efficiency loss of operating a vehcile at one elevation vs another elevation. That 2.3 mpg only applies to the 12 miles that I traveled. I should have said that the drop is very gradual at about 30 feet per mile per the topo maps. In essence, if I started a car on a 300 foot ramp, I could coast in neutral without using any fuel for a good ways maybe 1.5 mile. Then for the next 10.5 miles I traveled on flat ground and got 47 mpg. What is my overall mpg? It would be 53.7 mpg for 12 miles. There would be some starting elevation such that I could coast the entire 12 miles and burn zero fuel. Again the point of that example was that ptjones got XX mpg but he was going downhill. I wanted to show the difference a 300 ft change in elevation made in 12 miles. A 3600 pound car uses / has to overcome the potential energy of 300 feet in elevation. Elevation change has a significant affect on fuel economy as do other conditions. BOTTOM LINE: Drive more, worry less about how your mpg compares to others as there are simply too many variables to take into account (including grill covers, drafting and so forth). :)

I only have 284 miles on the car. So it's really too early to talk about my mileage. Also, you do realize you dropped 150 feet from Bell Ford to Surprise? Today on a 12 mile trip to Home Depot, instead of taking the Superstition Freeway (US 60) the whole way, I took a parallel street for the last 6.5 miles with either stop signs or a traffic light each mile and speed limits of 35 - 45 mph. So the trip was 1 mile of residential to US 60, about 4.5 miles on US60 with speed limit of 55 mph and 3 lights and then the Freeway. Temperature was about 47*F and wind was calm. My home is at 1830 feet and Home Depot is about 1530. I got 54 mpg to Home Depot and 47.0 mpg for the entire trip. So, that means that the return trip average was 40 mpg. So, that's about 2.3 mpg per 100 feet in elevation change. I made the same trip yesterday but took the freeway and the average going to Home Depot was about 46+ mpg and overall was about 41. My point is driving conditions make a huge difference in mpg. As is said I will run tests on speed vs mpg (as I did in my Jetta TDI) and post the results once I get about 5k miles on the car. Can you post comparative data showing several runs (different speeds, temperatures, and so forth) of say 10 miles with and without the grill covers? If you really want to sell them, I suggest you do such.

I don't buy the 5 mpg improvement either after the car is broken in. Maybe a few % gain but not say 5 mpg / 37 mpg or 13.5% gain. But time will tell. What makes more sense to me with respect to reviewers / owners seeing significantly lower fuel economy than EPA relates more to the responsiveness, available power, quietness of the C-Max vs most hybrids. If I don't set cruise, it's very easy for my speed to creep up well above the speed limit whether that's cruising where speed limits are 45 or 75 mph. This just doesn't happen in a Prius. Give the Prius gas and you can hear the engine reving. Not as much in the C-Max. The C-Max is simply more responsive to slight variations in throttle and is significantly quieter (less road and engine noise in the cabin) at highway speeds. IMHO, it is harder to drive the C-Max for economy than the Prius. An eco button would make sense. Probably in the Spring, I will run some mpg vs speed tests and see how the C-Max stacks up against this graph. The W11, W20, and W30 are the Prius 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation models, respectively.

I've always driven to anticipate conditions including stop signs, traffic lights, and traffic movement. In suburban and ciry traffic, I accelerate with the flow but will back off and coast in anticipation of conditions ahead so as to conserve momentum and not have to use the brakes. I also tend to drive with the flow on freeways and interstates which generally is above the speed limit. So, my driving style won't change except when I have to brake. I'll shoot for a 100% braking regen score which I can achieve virtually all the time.