robodog61

I find it funny that people are so quick to trash these articles and defend Ford. I remember many years ago that Consumer Reports trashed my favorite car, the Plymouth Horizon. I couldn't believe what they wrote and thought the article was biased. After owning a 1992 Civic, I finally realized what they were talking about and they were correct on their opinion of the Horizon. Most of these articles are objective, the Consumer Reports test in particular. I respect their tests and testing methods and it is more like real drivers would get. You can't have it both ways. A new rating of the Chevy Impala was super high. Is that biased too? Try to be objective. Not everyone is educated super car fan. They just expect that a car that says it gets 47 MPG should at least approach that 1/2 of the time. I drive like a Prius driver (I own one) and I can squeeze out terrific mileage. But I can also see where people would get the low 40's, particularly on the highway. I love my C Max, but Ford has a lot of work to do to gain people's trust.

Wow, a fellow NYer with a C Max and a Vibe! I have a Prius also. How do you like the C Max? We have about 7800 miles on ours.

I don't know what version of the firmware I have. How do I check? I haven't had time to read all the battery issues, but from what I have read, the problem is with the SE version with the smaller display. It all sounds related

Please help. I recently noticed a change with the way the climate control works. The 8" nav display lost the time and all my presets. I also notice that the climate control comes on every time the car is started. That is new - it didn't do that before. How do I disable this auto on feature? Anyone else notice that? Thanks

Did anyone get any more C Max codes? I got inside air temperature and HV battery volts, but that's it. Thanks

Hello, does anyone have the proper x gauge codes for the C Max? I am looking for HV battery volts and amps, in particular. Thanks

That was a very good article. I think they hit the nail on the head. Ford is going to piss a lot of people off if they continue to advertise 47/47/47.

Why then is the Prius much closer to the advertised MPG numbers? Why did Hyundai recently get in trouble? They should have come up with a more realistic testing method.

I average about 41 mpg, driving very conservatively and with the grill covers in the extreme cold. That is not bad at all. I really like the way the C Max drives, also. However, it was going to be this or the Prius V. The 47 MPG was just one of the factors that I considered, but it put it in the plus column for the C Max over the V. Now that I know both would probably be about 40-42 MPG overall, I am not sure which way I would go I read and tend to think that the Prius would be much more consistent with the MPG, where with the C Max, a lot depends on the way I drive - annoying everyone behind me. I would have to seriously reconsider if I had to do it again. I really don't know what Ford was thinking. For a competitive product like this and with the reliability reputation of the Prius, I think they blew it. A lot of people will have ill will towards Ford. They can't afford all of this negative buzz about the MPG. They had to know that a normal driver would never get 47 MPG city and highway. Why advertise it that way? You may get some people in the short term, but stuff like that really pisses people off. Most people in forums like this can't be truly objective. Human nature wants to make you believe you made the best decision. It is no one's fault - we were relying on the information that Ford gave us. But objectively, I would probably lean toward the Prius V if I had to do it again. I could have gotten it cheaper and I know the product I am getting. I just hope that there are no reliability issues with the C max. I am taking a leap of faith to think there won't be.

Hello PT Jones. I have some weird data with the Ford and grill covers and my Prius with foam blocking. The Prius comes up to temp much quicker. I can get to 180 fairly quickly and the max temp I have seen is about 193. I think that is the normal temp range for the Prius. It is very stable around that temp with outside air temps from about 10 degrees to the mid 20's. I have noticed that the Prius engine runs more often and spends less time than the Ford in EV mode. However, with scan gauge I can tell that the gallons per hour is quite a bit lower under load that the C Max. With the foam covers and driving in mix of local and highway, I can run the heat and get about 50-51 mpg. I think that is about 2-5 mpg more than before I installed the foam With the C-Max, I tend to take it on shorter trips. Even on a 15 mile trip, the water temp never went above 180 and was usually about 150-170. It spent a lot of time in EV mode, but when the engine ran, it took about 2-2.5 GPH vs. 1-1.5 with the Prius. I really couldn't run the heat since the WT was so low. With this extreme cold and the grill covers on, I have been getting about 40 mpg and that is driving in order to maximize my mpg. These are just some observations about the differences between the 2 cars. I don't know how I can get the WT higher in the Ford on local trips, even long ones.

Very nice. I have the same color, with the tan interior. Good combo.

Hello, I just covered up the front grill with the covers made by PTJones. He has some excellent data on gas savings and expected coolant temperatures. I was wondering if there is any effect on the inverter cooling system. In other words, assuming that the normal coolant temp is maintained where is should be (about 205), is there any deleterious effect on the inverter and the inverter cooling system. What temperature should that be at and does the scan gauge measure it? Thanks

I just foamed up my grill today and used the car's water temp gauge to monitor. Temperature seemed to be more consistently in the middle and didn't drop too fast when the engine shut off like it did before. Today was 40 degrees, so that may have had something to do with it. I saw a small MPG gain and am up to 44 mpg on this tank of about 75 miles. I think there is a big hit on mpg due to low temps in this climate. It was about 10 degrees a few days ago and the engine would cool down rapidly when the engine shut off. I also notice that I don't hear movement of the coolant when you shut off the engine, like you do on the Prius. The Prius has a "thermos bottle" that stores warm coolant when the engine shuts off. It uses this warm coolant to more quickly heat up the engine when cold so you get up to the most efficient temps more quickly. I cover about 90-95% of the openings with the pipe insulation foam. It was real cheap and easy to install, but looks kind of crappy. I am really worried that if I block off all of the grill, there is a chance of engine overheating. I mean, if all of the grill was covered and the fan kicked on, would there be enough cool air that the fan could suck on to prevent overheating? I am starting to worry about causing damage. All I have is the installed temp gauge. Do you think it is OK to cover all or most of the openings?

What is your opinion of blocking the radiator grills to increase coolant temp? I took it on a 25 mile ride in very cold (about 10 degree) weather and noticed that when the EV mode is on, the coolant temperature would drop rapidly. I have read other posts that advocate blocking and it sounds good - I just don't want to damage and want to make sure I have proper cooling.

After 1000 miles, I get about 41 MPG lifetime. With the colder weather, that is about as high as I can get. I think I will try to block off some radiator vents in the front grille. I noticed that Trip 2 odometer keeps the miles and the gas used for that trip odometer. I think it would be need to see how many gallons of gas I use over a long time - I never thought I would have that data I had used this trip 2 odometer on other cars to keep track of how many miles on the oil change, but if I just do it every 10,000 miles it should be easy to track.

Hello Seymour Bears. I purchased the oil drain valve from Fumoto. Do you think it will fit based on the lack of clearance you described?

Isn't that the brake coach? I mean, if you are 100%, then no friction brakes. If you are 85%, then 15% of the stopping force was by the friction brakes. That is how I interpret it