plus 3 golfer

Read the warranty manual specifically the disclaimers, the dealer and Ford are not required to pay for a rental while warranty work is being performed. Otherwise, everyone dropping their car off in the morning will want a free loaner. But generally for warranty work that runs days, the manufacturer will pay for the rental.

It sounds like the compressor isn't running, a refrigerant circuit problem, or a refrigerenant sensor issue. If you can set up My View on the left display to show the climate consumption in kW, then you can see if there is any energy being consumed by the electric compressor when you push the ac button. That would eliminate the fuse if there is power being consumed when the ac is on. So, then one needs a Ford scan tool to scan the appropriate modules for fault codes. Fuse 29 which is a 10 A fuse is for the AC Control Module which controls the compressor. It's in the fuse box in the engine bay next to the + 12 V battery terminal. The owner's manual says one should see the dealer to change fuses in this box so it's probably a trip to the dealer.

Recompence, your definition of winter is different than mine in AZ :) - morning winter lows are usually not below 32 F in Phoenix and more like low 40s.. I should probably not have said "winter temperatures." The OP was referring to the Ford statement of a loss of up to 5 mpg if the ambient is 40 F vs 70 F. Also, I am talking about the reviewers and not driving in Northern Illinois in single digit temps at slower speeds where it takes a considerable amount of time for the engine to reach 190 F (if it ever does). I don't recall any of the reviews I've read being done in single digit temperatures let alone below 40 F. My point is that the reviewers are likely driving around in above 40 F with a warm engine and the affect is minimal and less than 5 mpg. Ford is simply backpedaling to respond to Consumer Reports Dec. 13 press release. I believe the CR auto test facility is in Connecticut and the test were likely done in Oct / early Nov on the Fusion and C-Max as video shows fall foliage. CR states they drove the car 2000 miles before measuring FE. Cleanmpg likely did most testing in Southern CA and their trip to Phoenix. What matters is the fleet average not one specific driver's experience. There's probably a C-Max owner in Miami and his "winter" fuel economy numbers offsets a Minneapolis owner's FE number and vise versa in the summer period. As I said before, let's wait for a year and then see what the average FE numbers for the C-Max.

Did you check fuses? When you say nothing happened, what does that mean? It helps to know what actually "works" on the climate control system (if anything). Does the blower work? Was the temperature set below the cabin temperature? Is it not blowing cold air? and so forth.

I don't think the EPA tests will be any different. If some of the stuff that I've read is correct, the EPA allows certain tests to be skipped and numbers for the tests not run to be "extrapolated" (for lack of a better term) from the tests run based on what I'll call a "multiplier" or maybe it should be called a "fudge factor". In any event, it appears that those who know more about the EPA tests and ratings than me believe that it's this fudge factor that may not be appropriate for hybrids / especially the C-Max and thus the reason for the higher ratings. I've got to believe Ford is / was aware of this and took advantage of whatever they could to get the highest numbers possible. This is not illegal with respect to the EPA tests but it certainly (if true) casts a bad light on Ford. So, it's possible that even if one drives like the 5? EPA test cycles, one may not get 47/47/47 because of the application of this "fudge factor" in lieu of running all the tests. From C&D:

I think you will see that in the "real reviews" that the cars did have significant miles on them. Second, even in colder weather, once the car is at operating temperature, the affect of lower temperatures on FE is minimal. It's the short trips in the winter that kill FE. Thirdly, most of the reviews likely did not use AC much if testing in colder weather. Lastly, one should wait until the C-Max is out one year before drawing conclusions about Fuelly data as those in warmer climates (like Southwestern and Southern states) will likely get lower FE in the summer using AC than in the winter period. For example, it is difficult for me to get my current fuelly average of about 41 mpg if I run the AC on my normal trips. I expect my average tank FE to go down in the summer in AZ and thus my overall average FE will likely not climb any higher and possibly go down. I believe Ford should have been more forthright in their advertising about the affects of different variables on FE. Saying your FE will vary in small print is not enough if you "know" real world FE will likely be considerably less than the EPA number. If their sales have been hurt by the "bad publicity", they can only blame themselves - it's their car. Also, in case others may not have seen this, here is a Cleanmpg review of the C-Max tests / reviews. Note: the C-Max used in Cleanmpg tests had 6000 miles on the odometer. I think consumer reports put 2000 miles on cars before testing. I also believe that Ford provides the cars to most reviewers and shame on Ford if they gave the reviewer a car that was not "broken in".

That 8-10 mpg is pretty much what fuelly shows as the difference between the C-Max and Prius. When the C-Max came out at 47/47/47 EPA, I was also leery of what real world numbers would be given the extra weight of the C-Max (nearly 600 pounds over the Prius and 366 pounds over the Prius V). That alone is likely the majority of the difference in real world driving FE. That's why I waited before purchasing a C-Max. I wanted to see the reviews / tests and what real world FE might be for me. If was obvious to me after the reviews that I would likely not get 47 on average but in the low 40 s on average. But, after the test drive and reading reviews, I purchased the C-Max. IMO, the Prius is about FE not about "driving and comfort". I will not own a Prius or Prius V at this time as FE ranks behind the driving experience and comfort.

Delete

Next time when one uses AC, set up MY VIEW to monitor the Climate and Other kW loads. Set AC to AUTO. You will see that the Climate load can be over 3 kW when the climate system is initially turned on especially if the interior is hot. The blower will probably be running at a very high speed and the OTHER load will likely be about 1 kW. After driving a few minutes, the Climate load should drop as the cabin air becomes cooler. The Other load will also drop as the fan speed decreases. When a balance point temperature is reached, the Climate will likely drop to between 1/2 - 1 kW. Of course, the temperature that the climate system is set at and ambient temperature will affect the time and level of kW load to maintain the set point. If we could record the Climate and Other load and get the total kWh used at the end of a trip, we could then convert that load to BTUs. For the Hybrid, all those BTUs come from the gas burned to run the engine (which likely has a thermal efficiency of only around 35-38% or so). I ran a few tests last week and estimated that the average Climate load was about 0.7 kW which would equate to about a 7% reduction in FE. This was very close to the actual reduction I saw from the same trip without AC. However, had the compressor continued to operate at say about 2 kW level instead of about 0.7 on average, the FE decrease would have been around 20%. As I've said in several other threads, the % fuel economy reduction due to using the AC will be significant in the C-Max because the base FE number is high in the C-Max. It's fuel efficient and burns less fuel than an inefficient vehicle. So, using a small amount of fuel for AC is a significant % of the total fuel consumed in the C-Max relative to an inefficient vehicle.

That is a big difference. Like Bob999 indicates it could be fuel related. You could have filled with a bad batch of fuel. You might consider throwing in 2 bottles of Techron (IMO, the best I've used and it works) in the gas tank. Also, make sure you didn't shift into low accidentally and also that the hill assist is off. I have occasionally found myself dropping the gearshift into low (mimicking what I would due on my TDI to go into Sport mode) and forgetting about it for a mile. You can set MY View to show rpm and watch rpm. When you run in EV mode, does the FE show like it did prior? US it would show 60+ mpg. Any gas smell after driving as you walk around the car? When coasting without braking, is it normal? After driving, feel wheels to see is any are hot indicating brakes dragging. I would think any other issues that would cause very poor FE, would throw a dignostic trouble code, check engine light, or message.

:nonono: although it does depend on what "it" refers to. Are you referring to AT&T? :headscratch: or something else? Sometimes, Bigger is not better despite what the kids say (what do they know anyways). How about, Bigger "pics" is better if one beats all previous records :rockon: and Bigger always trumps posting :censored: thumbnails. :)

Good question. When you push the start button on the C-Max, the battery voltage does jump up to 14+ volts. But the question is how long does one really want to crank the other vehicle with the other vehicle's starter motor draw through the DC/DC converter. The converter is cooled by the HV battery cooling fans. From the workshop manual, the bold implies one can connect load to the battery terminals under the hood. -- "External customer loads must only be connected to the vehicle at the customer battery connection point. If an external customer load is connected at the negative battery post, the Battery Monitoring Sensor accuracy cannot be guaranteed. It is recommended that the Battery Monitoring Sensor pole clamp is not removed unless a battery replacement is required.Should the battery need to be isolated, this should be done by disconnecting the ground eyelet at the chassis ground." Also, the DC/DC converter is protected by a 30 A high side fuse and can provide 145 A of low side power: "The Direct Current/Direct Current (DC/DC) converter control module is protected by a 30 amp high voltage low current fuse located in the High Voltage Battery Junction Box. The Direct Current/Direct Current (DC/DC) converter control module steps the high-voltage down to a low-voltage (between 13 and 14.9 volts, depending on vehicle needs), providing power to the vehicle low-voltage battery systems. Depending on the vehicle and environmental conditions, the Direct Current/Direct Current (DC/DC) converter control module is capable of outputting as many as 145 amps to the 12-volt battery." So, I don't see a problem but I'm not going to try unless it's an emergency. :)

Guys, you do know you can post smaller sizes than large simply by selecting options under the photo in the gallery or right clicking on the photo: thumbnail, small, medium, and large? Medium usually works best. If you're in photobucket or other pic host, there will be editing options to re-size (I usually re-size to 600 X...) to get the equivalent of about the size of the medium image shown below. Here's medium for the above: Here's small:

You can get X-Plan pricing with the current Private Cash Offer of $750 plus the current incentive of $750 (Hybrid only). There may be other applicable incentives like military, police and so forth that can also be tacked on. Also, remember that X-Plan limits the dealer Fees to $100 where normally these fees are around $395. So, that generally saves about $295 over Truecar, Costco and other buying services. So, if negotiating with the dealer you would have to beat these discounts available under the X-Plan. The last time I checked (April 9th for a Wisconsin zip code shown below), the discounts using X-Plan would be about the numbers shown below: SE = 1092 + 750 (incentive) + 750 (private cash) = 2592 + 295 (dealer fee savings) = 2887 SEL = 1270 + 750 (incentive) + 750 (private cash) = 2770 + 295 (dealer fee savings) = 3065 Energi = 1528 + 750 (private cash) = 2278 + 295 (dealer fee savings) = 2573

My 2 cents. I am not a fan of built in GPS especially for a $1200 upgrade charge (I know includes Sony also). Why, because we travel a lot and want the most up to date maps. IMHO, you can't beat a Garmin with free map updates (4 X a year) - the works for less than $400 or a darn good one for about $200. How often are the SD cards updated? How much are the SD card updates? and besides apparently it still doesn't work correctly for some. With regard to the Sony, when we travel I use Sirius so I doubt Sirius will sound any better on the Sony than the OEM. Besides my hearing isn't what is use to be. :)

If you use a/c, I'd uncover both grills completely as you want to be able to effectively remove heat from the condenser. Otherwise, the compressor may work harder and use more energy (similar to when the ambient temperature is higher and less heat is extracted from the condenser). Also, the transmission and inverter coolers are behind the lower grill opening. Watching the temperature gauge is really not going to tell you much about coolant temperature unless the PCM initiates Stage 1 Strategy: "Stage 1 of the strategy commences if the engine starts to overheat. The CHT sensor transmits a signal to the PCM, which moves the temperature gauge pointer into the red zone." A better way to monitor coolant temperature would be to put the left display into Engineering Test Mode and monitor coolant temperature during longer trips when the ambient temperature is higher. You should then be able to get an idea of how the coolant temperature varies with speed and ambient temperatures with the grill covers and without the grill covers. I would remove the covers if the coolant temperature stays consistently above 100*C (212 F). I have yet to find out under what conditions the cooling fans come one. I believe ptjones noted that he observed them on at around 215 F. You certainly don't want the air flow to the cooling fans restricted by grill covers.

So, it looks like it would be beneficial for everyone to get this new calibration performed prior to their warranty running out since it's not a recall. After warranty, Ford dealer will likely charge for it. From the TSB:

Good article. The strategy apparently benefits Ford more than other manufacturers in two ways 1) Ford gets better mpg in the "actual" tests because the electric motor can propel the car up to about 62 mph with little use of ICE (slow acceleration speeds help this) and 2) Ford can then apply the "fudge factor" for the other higher speed tests to get even higher EPA numbers. So the questions are 1) did Ford take advantage of the apparent EPA testing "defects" and cleverly develop ads / commercials to exploit this full well knowing the average consumer would not likely get close to the EPA numbers and 2) is # 1 a violation of any unfair trade and consumer protection statutes.

Just tested my climate control while in the garage and all displays were properly recorded virtually instantaneously with changes either via MFT or push buttons. On the MFT, the buttons are displayed on /off by a simulated rectangular LED on the button not by changing the color of the entire button like the auto button. Maybe it's your glasses, try a new pair glasses. ;) :) I put my polarized sun glasses on and no part of my screen was blocked.

Exactly my reason also. My old home was served by APS and my new one by SRP. I couldn't financially justify any larger system than around 5 kW (even though the installers push the larger systems). This size will hedge about 80 - 85 % of my kWh usage and costs. After this installing additional capacity began to increase the incremental payback period significantly because a greater % of the additional solar generation was being sold back to SRP at very low rates than being used to offset home usage. The addition of off-peak load from charging an Energi offset some of this but not enough for me to justify financially increasing the size of my system and buy an Energi instead of the Hybrid. Of course, people do make decisions on other than financial reasons.

I had a solar system on my previous house and will have a 5 kW system installed hopefully in June on my current home. When looking at buying a C-Max, I did a detailed analysis of installing a slightly larger system and using excess solar energy to charge an Energi. If you assume you can get 21 miles on a full charge and do this once per day, that's about 7600 miles a year. If you assume 7 kWh to charge each day, you're talking about 2500 kWh a year. I have a detailed monthly model and can run various scenarios, if you desire. I would need to know your monthly on-peak and off-peak usage and the actual on-peak and off-peak generation or the specs on the current panels and their orientation. If you are on APS, I assume you know that they have had two forums recently on how solar energy affects on their electric system and how they are currently losing revenue being made up by non-solar customers. They will likely within a year file with the ACC to modify the net metering and how much they pay for excess energy. Worst case is that they will eliminate net metering totally and reduce the buyback rate significantly. So, in essence there would be no banking of energy and either use your excess If you are on SRP, their buyback rates are already significantly lower than APS and also the net metering tariff is significantly worse than APS. I figure that there's precedence for the ACC to look at namely the SRP net metering structure. If APS would adopt something similar to SRP, an APS solar customer will likely lose between 15 - 20% of the on going solar benefit.

DRLs can be insignificant to safety. Thus, it's may not be a good idea nor is it a bad feature with respect to safety. Conclusions on two NHTSA studies below.

Yes, if the amount of energy to cool two vehicles was the same but one vehicle got double the FE as the other, the affect on the fuel efficient vehicle would be twice the % as the inefficient vehicle. For example, if one gallon of fuel was used for AC on a 400 mile trip but one vehicle got 20 mpg and the other 40 mpg, the affect of the AC on the inefficient vehicle would be 5% (1 gal/(400 miles/ 20 mpg)) while the affect on the efficient vehicle would be 10% (1 gal/ (400 miles / 40 mpg). So without AC, the inefficient vehicle would normally get 21.1 mpg (400 miles / 19 gallons) - not a big mpg affect of AC on mpg. But the efficient vehicle without using AC would have got 44.4 mpg (400 miles / 9 gallons) or a difference of 4.4 mpg - quite noticeable. I said this before that once owners begin using AC in the summer period, there FE will drop considerably more than they likely think it will (especially owners "stepping up" from inefficient vehicles.

Welcome. Search is your friend. There are several threads on this problem. If you have the small display and your car is built prior to 2/5/13, check to see if this update was ever done.

Consumer Reports numbers are the "bumper clearance" numbers which will be more than the curb to curb turning numbers which are normally reported by the manufacturer. The CR numbers are more relevant when pulling into parking spaces between parked cars or making u-turns with obstacles / cars on the side of the road.