plus 3 golfer

The point is not how it is done or whether it's worth it. The point is I want assurance from Ford that if I am entitled to an upgrade or other item from an extended warranty or otherwise that such shows up on owner.ford.com as a Field Service Action or Sync update. I'll say it again in bold "What's even more bothersome is the lack of Ford's response via the Ford reps on this site with updates on why 3.8 doesn't show up and when it will show up. I've got less than 2 years until I reach 5 years of ownership at which time IIRC the extended warranty on the APIM module and software expires." I sent my VIN to the Ford Service rep Rebecca on Oct. 21, 2015 with an acknowledgement the next day. That's over four months ago and have yet to hear anything. Quite frankly, that's poor customer service.

That's too bad you couldn't pull over sooner. I wonder how long the nail was in the tire before the TPMS went off. You might want to consider a smartphone app like ForScan to monitor tire pressure and other data. IMO, ForScan is the best $30 investment one can make for their C-Max. ForScan might have saved you from buying a new tire and maybe even a rental as usually nails and screws in the tread start out as very slow leaks. IIRC, the US DOT requirement for TPMS alarm is that the alarm must go off if the pressure drops below 75% of the placard rating of 38 psi for 2013 C-MAX) which in this case is 28.5 psi. I check pressure every time I drive the car and multiple times during shorter trips. On long trips, I have a mount for my smartphone that suctions to the side window and extends to the steering wheel. With respect to the posts on emergency road service via ones insurance, I pay $8.62 per year (total rate for two cars).

Still waiting too. :)

I doubt we will ever know what the design improvements are unless some action requires Ford to disclose the issue. It also appears that this SSM doesn't apply to the Energi. Since the statement says the noise will be present ... when the vehicle is moving ... but not ... when stationary or in park, implies that ICE can run and charge the HVB with no noise when stationary. This "no noise" condition suggests that the planetary gear set is likely okay as: 1) the ring gear (the outer gear that spins when the car is moving) would be stationary, 2) ICE would be spinning the planet carrier, 3) the planet carrier would be spinning the planet gears, 4) the planet gears would be spinning the sun gear, and 5) the sun gear would spin MG1 - the generator charging the HVB. So the issue is likely between the ring gear and the differential. It was theorized in another thread, IIRC, by DrDiesel that the issue may be related to TFT as the Energi has an externally mounted auxiliary electric transmission fluid pump in addition to an internal pump. The Hybrid only has the internal pump. The internal pump only spins when ICE is running. I'm not sure I buy this is related to TFT as I do monitor TFT and never have seen high TFT while stopped or the several times where I hit traffic jams where it would take 15-20 minutes to go 3 or 4 miles. TFT seems to be more dependent on use of the traction motor during regenerative braking. I can certainly see why the Energi has the aux, pump. as one can drive 20+ miles without running ICE. The only other difference that I know of between the Energi and Hybrid transmission is the final drive ratio. Could the issue be something with the final drive hardware where there was a defective component in the Hybrid and not the Energi. So, then why did Ford seem to imply this SSM only apply to taxi service and not all Hybrids? Taxis are generally driven harder likely with more stop-and-go driving (trying to increase waiting time) and will likely be driven many times the miles in year than a typical driver. Is it simply mileage related and/or a batch of bad components?

Duplicate post

XXX

I'm somewhat leery on using the HVB to replace the 12 V battery. It seems that Hybrids do have no starts due to a discharged 12 V battery and that apparently engineers haven't found a way to detect and prevent this. I doubt it matters as to the source of the power. At least with a 12 V battery, Hybrids can be "started" via conventional methods. How will one "jump start" a HVB? Remember, the generator (operated as a motor) is used to start ICE from the HVB. I assume Kia will be similar. I'd hate to be stranded hundreds of miles from a Kia dealer. Also, the usable energy in a 1.4 kWh HVB may be less than what's in the normal 12 V battery. Hence, a parasitic load could discharge the HVB quicker. I don't know how low one can discharge lithium-ion HVB before the knee of the voltage discharge curve is reached. The knee is dependent on discharge rate. Anyways, if one assumes that the HVB could be near 30% SOC at shutdown and the knee is at say 15% SOC, that leaves nominally 1.4 kWh * (30%-15%) energy = 210 Wh of usable energy in the HVB. At 12 V, that's equivalent to 17.5 Ah (assume 20 hour rating) as Ah capacity depends on the current draw. IIRC, the C-Max 12 V battery has a rating of around 30-40 Ah (but probably only 60% of that is usable as voltage may be too low to operate the electronics). It may be wise to see how Kia's system is designed and performs before jumping in to buy one. :)

You can pick up salvaged, low mile eCVTs IIRC last time I looked for around $1600+ rather than buying new unit. I doubt a shop would be able to repair one any cheaper. I also would think that eventually Ford or others will offer rebuilt units but the cost will likely be a lot more than $1600. But one would likely get a longer warranty with a rebuilt one than the typical 30 day on salvaged units.

Yes, first check the fuses. Make sure you use a multi-meter to check the resistance of the fuse as a fuses can "look" good but are bad. Are you saying the heater switch lights on both switches are not lit? Try fuse F85 (7.5A) is both seat heaters don't work. F34 (20A) is the fuse for the heating element for the drivers side and F35 (20A) is for the heating element fuse for the passenger side if only one seat heater doesn't work.

I'd ask a SA at the dealer and have them give a quote. The SM says to get to the oil separator: Remove the following items: Refer to: Air Cleaner Intake Pipe (303-12 Intake Air Distribution and Filtering, Removal and Installation). Refer to: Air Cleaner Outlet Pipe (303-12 Intake Air Distribution and Filtering, Removal and Installation). Refer to: Air Cleaner (303-12 Intake Air Distribution and Filtering, Removal and Installation). Refer to: Cooling Fan Motor and Shroud Then, there's maybe 20 various connections, ties and so forth around the intake manifold to disconnect. The manifold is attached with 8 bolts. The SM says the manifold gasket can be reused if not damaged. The air cleaner stuff is easy and maybe take 10 minutes. The fan and shroud apparently requires something (maybe fan) to removed from underneath the car. Probably easy with a lift - 10 minutes. The various connections although a lot of them should be easy - 10 minutes. Then it looks like the 8 bolts are easy to get to. The question though is maybe there's shortcuts and one doesn't have to do all this. Maybe one can get to the PVC from the sides of the manifold or bottom once by removing enough stuff to access to PCV.

It's behind the intake manifold. Open the hood, take a flashlight, and shine it between the center of the intake manifold on the engine. You should see it. I don't see how you can get to it without removing the intake manifold. I highlighted the PCV in yellow which shows up as green over the blue. :) How do you know it needs replaced?

Below is the excerpt from the 2013 warranty booklet which says: "This booklet explains in detail (emphasis added) the warranty coverages that apply to your 2013-model vehicle." The hybrid continuously variable transmission is a covered component under the 8 / 100 k miles extended warranty. The transmission is only available as a complete unit with the planetary gear set and the electric motors - MG1 and MG2 internal to the transmission case and per the Service Manual is replaced as a complete unit. There are no internal component exclusions listed. However, that's not to say that at a future date should an internal component fail, Ford could choose to just replace the failed part or replace the transmission with a rebuilt unit under warranty. It's pretty obvious the CSR was reading the coverage for the powertrain which is 5 / 60 k miles for a transmission. The hybrid transmission doesn't have many of the parts listed under the 5 /60 for a conventional transmission (my guess is the CSR doesn't no the difference). I'm not an attorney, but I believe one would win a complaint against Ford should Ford choose not to honor the "words" in this booklet.

King-max, virtually all of your engine break-in should be complete at 6000 km. I can't say there was improvement in my FE that I can attribute to "break-in" but there might be some in the first 1000 miles or so. My first fill-up was at around 150 miles so that I could begin recording "my" FE.(car had 79 miles on it when purchased with dealer fill up). So, given that engine tolerances are better today than decades ago and some factory run / test time is on the engine, break-in is not what it used to be (several thousands of miles maybe up to 10k miles). It seems to me that your 5.8 L/100km (40.6 mpg) is pretty good for Ontario in the winter if your trips are short (cold engine), use the heater, and have no grille covers. BOTTOM LINE: Don't hold your breath waiting for additional break-in to increase your FE. If you want to increase FE, be pro-active in taking steps that should increase FE. For reference, on my current tank I have 74.9 miles and averaging 45.1 mpg on the trip gauge in suburban, hilly driving between 2-5 miles one way several times a day with ambient temperatures ranging from 20*F to 35*F. I have grille covers and don't use the HVAC heater on these trips. I do use the seat heater. On these short suburban trips ICE coolant temp will seldom be above 140*F. In addition to this suburban driving, I will likely make several trips on the interstates of around 50+ mile round trips.at around 70 mph average FE on these trips will likely average around 37/40 mpg depending on ambient temperature. I will use the HVAC heater as ICE coolant temp will generally run between 185*F-205*F and up to 230*F when going up longer grades at 70+ mph with grille covers. Without the grille covers, the coolant temps would be considerably less since the grille shutters will begin to open around 192*F. I do watch / record data via ForScan and grille shutters begin to open around 192*F+ and are fully open at 212-214*F. Higher coolant temperature generally means more efficient ICE operation. Decreasing air flow through the engine compartment generally decreases aerodynamic drag. With 800 miles on my C-Max, I ran tests at 70 mph with and without grille covers with ambient temperature around 27*F. See the link as my results support Paul's graph.

Ford's statement of 80% is likely the efficiency to capture and store the available kinetic energy of the moving C-Max in the HVB via regen braking. Thus, there are likely 20% losses in the C-Max just like DOE calculated for the Prius. In normal coasting in D or in regen braking, capturing and returning 64% of the available KE is very good when compared to friction braking or engine braking where none of the energy of the moving vehicle is captured. Also, remember there are still drag forces that slow the car down. The associated energy with these drag forces would not be part of the available kinetic energy to be captured by regen. I think we now have a good number as to the overall efficiency of capturing regen energy and returning it to energy at the wheels. Your 50+ mpg is testament to the FE benefit of coasting in N albeit not always "safe" to do.

Frank, you've got the Wh and kW labels reversed (eg, 25 Wh should be 25 kW and 300 kW should be 300 Wh). Then, the numbers make sense. :) There's a lot of good info in the AVT data. One interesting piece of data is the regeneration efficiency of the Prius iii. DOE says for regeneration: "...system losses can be determined as the difference between energy available from the vehicle and energy into the battery.Although each component of loss cannot be determined, the total system loss can be measured by this method. Also, it should be noted that this calculation does not take into account losses at the battery due to charge inefficiency and that the charge current limitations of the battery may prevent all of the regenerative energy from being captured, thus forcing the use of friction braking." DOE calculates about 20% losses to get the energy available from the vehicle into the battery. If we assume another 20% losses to get the energy from the HVB to the wheels, the likely maximum overall efficiency of the coasting regen process would be 64% = (0.8*0.8). This supports the regen braking modeling studies / tests I've read and as I've said in the thread on coasting in N vs D, indicates why coasting in N should yield significantly better FE than coasting in D.

Lift up the lid to the storage compartment in the rear hatch. The funnel is to the left of the storage compartment. The owner's manual has a pic and description.

This TARP report (Jan. 28, 2015) shows the final accounting of the "auto bailout" program. Taxpayers lost $16.6 billion. :) IIRC, the total funds lent was around $80 billion to Ally (formerly GM financing), GM and Chrysler. Taxpayers will likely be on the hook with Ford's ATVM debt until 2022. A lot can happen in 6 years.

In both Ford's ATVM debt and other manufacturers' "bailout" debt, the people of the US are funding the debt and are at risk as the Federal government is "the lender." Should all or any potion of the debt be "forgiven", the people of the US will bear the consequences. The owners / management of a company bear the responsibility to pay back the debt through the operations (business and financial) of the company (not their personal pockets). With the cash infusion from these debts, the owners likely will get a greater return on their investment in the future than without the debt funding. R&D funding whether earmarked for R&D (Ford's ATVM debt) or from the "bailout" debt is important for auto companies to remain competitive. Below is an excerpt from Ford's 2014 annual report (2015 will be out soon) on the ATVM. "Engineering, research, and development expenses for 2014, 2013, and 2012 were $6.9 billion, $6.4 billion, and $5.5 billion, respectively." -Ford 2014 AR

Same issue with my 2008 Rogue (nearly 8 years old). It was getting so bad that several times I had to put the transponder near the door and more importantly by the ignition switch to start. So, I went to Battery Plus several months ago to get the battery replaced in the Rogue. While there I had them check the C-Max battery as many time I couldn't unlock the door unless I turned my right side towards the door (FOB in right pants pocket). The FOB had to be maybe within a foot or so to work consistently. Battery Plus checked it and suggested I replace it also which I did. No more issues with opening the C-Max door. :) My C-Max was out of the B2B warranty (over 36k miles). So, I got just shy of 3 years life out of the C-Max FOB battery. My wife's C-Max FOB still seems okay at 37 months. IIRC, the cost was around $5 / $6 or so per battery at Battery Plus. I could have probably gone to Walmart and found a pack of 2 for the same price as one at Battery Plus but then I'd have to open both FOBs up.

Every time I've been to the dealer (at least 1/2 a dozen times), Ford does an inspection of the car including tires The inspection report (Vehicle Report Card) is always attached to the service order. You should have the same. What does this inspection report show for tread depth of the tires and any other issues with the tires??? Who is sending the emails and mail? the dealer or some other entity. Can you unsubscribe to the emails?

It still applies but IMO harder to do post 13b07. At highway speeds if one can operate in negative split mode, ICE will run at a more efficient point because the generator is being operated as a motor to reduce the rpm of ICE while the torque level of ICE is still high. In order to get into this mode, the HVB has to be at a high level of charge which is the key. Pre 13b07, it was easier to maintain a high level of charge because one could not go into EV mode which would discharge the HVB above about a nominal 62 or so mph . So, maintaining negative split mode operation was fairly easy to do on fairly level roads above the nominal 62 mph. Post 13b07, the PCM algorithm can use EV up to a nominal 85 mph. So, now it's more difficult to maintain negative split mode since the algorithm can / will use EV at higher speeds and discharge the HVB. One can still do it by feathering the throttle appropriately (generally reducing speed and thus load on ICE) so EV doesn't kick in. Basically if one truly wants to hyper-mile, one can do it pre and post 13b07 and likely get similar FE especially if one use P&G techniques.

I know you can buy foot rests for the passenger side. Just google. ;)

With respect to whether the Road Huggers make financial sense if you lose some FE with the Road Huggers, let's say you save $230 on the cost of four Road Huggers over the Michelins (you can usually wait for the $70 or so rebate on the Michelins), both tires last 60 k miles , and you get 40 mpg on the Michelins. So, you will use 1500 gallons of fuel at 40 mpg. At $3 / gallon, that's $4500 in fuel cost with the Michelins. Again, assuming both brands last the same miles, the break-even FE = 60,000 / ($4730 / $3) = 38.1 mpg. So, as long the loss in FE with the Road Huggers is less than 4.9%, the Road Huggers make financial sense. If gas is $2/ gallon, the break-even fuel economy will be 7.1% lower than the base 40 mpg. If gas is $4/gallon, the break-even FE will only be 3.7% lower than 40 mpg. Now one can compare these break-even % with a tire vs FE test conducted by TireRack (see below). The question is where does the Road Hugger Eco fall. I would hope the Road Hugger (being labeled an "ECO" tire) would be as good as the Goodyear Assurance Fuel Max - but who knows. ;) :) Also, the test is over 5 years old, used a Prius, and different rated tires than on the C-Max and thus may not be relevant. On the performance of the tires other than FE, I always question the ability of consumers to rate tires since it is very subjective when not comparing side by side. Also, there isn't a statistically significant sample size for the ratings on the C-Max. Even the 23 overall ratings for the Road Hugger is rather light in sample size.

With regards to the 12 V batteries being replaced in the test C-Maxes, one needs to understand that the tests are being conducted in the Phoenix area and batteries simply don't last as long in the severe Phoenix heat as in milder and colder climates. I replaced my C-Max battery at about 2 1/2 years of ownership. In my nearly 9 years of living in the Phoenix area, I had to replace six - 12 V batteries in my vehicles. Since I always owned 2 vehicles at any one time, that's a battery replacement on average about every 3 years per vehicle. So, IMO the 12 V battery replacements in the test C-Maxes are indicative of normal shorter battery life when in service in very hot climates. Here's a map of battery life that I posted previously.