raadsel

Looking at TrueCar for my area, these are the "TrueCar" price I get without needing to sign in: S: 20,389 S Hybrid: 22, 609 Diff: $2,220 SE: 20,957 SE Hybrid: 23,319 Diff: $2,362 Titanium: 27,303 Titanium Hybrid: 27,803 Diff: $500 It appears that the S and SE models include a few things not found on their gas counterparts. For example, Dual Automatic Climate control is standard on both the Hybrid models but not on the gasoline, also the S stereo is slightly upgraded on the Hybrid (6 speakers instead of 4). There may be a couple of other things I missed.

But that was exactly my point. The hybrid system on the older Malibu is a completely different design, being a mild hybrid on the previous Malibu. I'm sure part of the reason GM ditched that hybrid is precisely because it was a disaster. Because the new Malibu is using the Volt's technology, the reliability is likely to be much closer to the older Volt, since the powertrain is based on that -- though still not the same because of improvements to the tech in the latest Volt/Malibu models, as well as the Volt being a plug-in hybrid.

The problem is the sample size on the Fed's testing is 4 -- so any problem they have will tend to be exaggerated. Kind of like some people who complain about how terrible anything is because they bought one and it didn't work right; regardless if in the real world the failure rate was 0.0001%, for them it was 100%.

I was interested, as I mentioned above, in that it actually gives Ford a bit more competition in this segment, as well as at least giving us an additional option if Ford were to stop producing the C-Max. At least from how the car looks in pictures, to me it seems to be designed to directly compete against the C-Max, at least as much as the Prius.

I'm not saying it will be as efficient as a CVT, at least in the city, but it is likely equally (or even slightly more) efficient on the highway (depending on the gear ratio); and it will be more efficient in the city than Kia/Hyundai's current hybrids with an automatic transmission. So, my point was the Niro will likely have better highway fuel economy than city; I'm guessing likely about 2 mpgs better highway than city. The current Hyundai/Kia hybrid power train, with a conventional automatic, is about 4 mpg more efficient on the highway than in the city; I'm guessing the DCT should improve the city efficiency by 1 or 2 mpgs. Another interesting thing I've found, while the CVT is more efficient driving, what I've read states that a geared automatic can recapture more energy in regenerative braking than a CVT, which can offset some of the inefficiency of the gearing. Having driven the previous generation Hyundai Sonata for a few months, one thing I noticed was that I seemed to regenerate quite a bit more energy braking in the Sonata than in my C-Max. It is also worth mentioning the Hyundai Ioniq, which was introduced in Korea in January. It is a sedan version of the Niro put out by Hyundai, with the same powertrain and chassis. The Ioniq is supposed to be available in the US in the third quarter of this year; with the hybrid, followed shortly by a full electric, with the plug-in hybrid released last. If the Niro can get close to the 50 mpg they are shooting for (and I assume it must, or I don't think they'd be pushing those numbers now, when they are preparing to start production), it will be interesting to see what fuel economy the Ioniq can get, with the lower roof and 0.24 drag coefficient.

It is worth noting that you can't compare the 2013 Malibu with the new Malibu hybrid that is being released. The 2013 was more of a mild hybrid, with a very small electric motor connected via a drive belt. The new Malibu hybrid will be using the same technology that is in the new Volt, just without the large battery and ability to plug in. I'll be interested to see how it holds up and what fuel economy they get in real life. The big expense is Ford claiming the entire powertrain must be replaced, you can't replace the CVT alone. Perhaps someone here is more knowledgeable, but it sounds like the electric motors are integrated into the powertrain, meaning it is very labor intensive to fix only the parts that failed -- not to mention, a part in the CVT failing likely has a good chance of damaging other parts of the powertrain. The other point is that it seems there is a flaw in only some of the original CVTs, such as Ford possibly getting a bad batch of bearings that weren't caught before they were installed. So, if your car has one of the defective parts in the CVT, the car likely is a "ticking timebomb" until that part fails (such as the 1 car of the 4 that went to Advanced Vehicle Testing). But, that testing would also seem to show that if you didn't get the bad part, your C-Max should run reliably over 100,000 miles (one C-Max currently has 131,000 miles with no major issues) -- though we'll see how the remainder of the testing goes (they are scheduled to be driving to 195,000 miles). It is worth noting that all the cars used in the Advanced Vehicle Testing seem to run a similar City/Highway mix, basically all being used by the government as messenger cars in the Southwest US.

Except highway mpgs will be aided by the DCT, rather than having the CVT. Hyundai/Kia's hybrid system traditionally (with the auto transmission) does about 4 mpg better highway than city. The DCT will help city mileage; I'm guessing that mpgs will likely be fairly equal between city and highway; and it will be interesting to see what kind of mileage they can eek out. I don't know if they can get 50, but I do believe they'll likely get in the high 40s. I'll be interested to see how comfortable it is, as well. It does appear it will have the high roofline. I'm guessing, based on other Hyundai/Kia models that the driver's seat will be fairly comfortable; other seats it may depends on how high the seats are, their other cars have a tendency for the passenger seats (without height adjustment) to be a bit low. As for the 12V, it says they are using the HVB. I'm just curious how they'll do that, at least in a way where the HVB can't be completely discharged. I'll also be interested in hearing how the car will be jumped, if the HVB were to get discharged. I suppose my hope in this is that we have a bit more competition in this "segment," that it makes Ford realize they need to improve the C-Max (such as including some of the newer tech and a new front end that has better airflow control). At worst, it will hopefully at least give us another alternative, that hopefully retains most of what we like about the C-Max, if Ford does discontinue the C-Max.

I found a bit more information on this. First, they are using Aluminum in some areas, such as on the hood and tailgate, to save on weight. They did state that cargo capacity would be larger than the C-Max, but didn't state how much larger. It helps that they've stored the battery under the rear seats, rather than the cargo area. Also, they eliminated the 12V battery, to save weight -- that would seem to make sense that you could eliminate it. I'll be interested to hear more of how it will work without the 12V battery and what issues it might cause. It will also have a heat return system to heat the engine more quickly, again to improve efficiency. They've also expanded on the navigation that they have in the Kia Optima and Hyundai Sonata Hybrids, which tells you when to start coasting to get the most regeneration when exiting a freeway or coming up on a stop sign/light. On the Niro it will also take altitude into account, delaying or going into EV mode earlier to improve efficiency. They expect 3% mpg gains with this feature. It will be interesting to see if they can meet the 50 mpg number. With the smaller engine and weight saving measures, they might be able to get there. Hyundai first used the six-speed DSG in their Veloster, and I believe they had some early issues, though I believe they have been ironed out. Hyundai/Kia use a seven-speed DSG in some of their larger cars that is supposed to be quite good. There is no required maintenance on their DSG, though the fluid is supposed to be checked and topped up every 40,000 miles. However, for Extreme conditions the fluid is supposed to be changed at 80,000 miles. Of course, it will have Kia's 10 year/100,000 mile warranty if there are issues. The Niro will also come with all the latest tech; auto emergency braking, lane keep (likely warning but haven't seen specifically), adaptive cruise (likely to a complete stop), and blind spot monitoring with cross traffic alert. The audio system (at least with navigation, though I'm guessing also with the base audio) will support Android Auto and Apple CarPlay. It is scheduled to be released in the US early next year.

It appears Kia is introducing a car that will be a direct competitor to the C-Max; the Niro. The exact dimensions have not yet been released, other than the wheelbase is 106 inches (slightly longer than the C-Max), it has a 0.29 coefficient of drag, and that it is expect to get 50 mpg, with 146 hp and 195 lb/ft. of torque. It will run with a 1.6L engine, electric motor, LiPo battery, and a six speed dual clutch transmission. It will be interesting to see more details about this car, particularly driving dynamics and interior space. Obviously, their main goal is to take sales away from the Prius with this style; to do that they claim the car will be fun to drive.

Here's the Prius chase commercial that aired during the Super Bowl: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MYeM-8hO3hM&ab_channel=ToyotaUSA While I agree it is pretty laughable; still wish Ford would do something like this for the C-Max.

I can't remember where I saw this (forgive me if it was posted here) but Toyata is running a Prius ad during the Super Bowl, "Heck on Wheels": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxIIi6SVuII&ab_channel=ToyotaUSA Be nice to see the C-Max get that kind of love from Ford. I'm interested to hear what people here think of this ad, this seems to be a rather polarizing commercial -- most I've seen seem to either love it or hate it.

I have a similar issue with my C-Max, though apparently mine may make a bit more noise (it is bad enough to bother me). I agree about touching it stopping it, at least temporarily. I touch it right by the pano window (just above my head) and it makes something like a velcro noise, and apparently "sticks" it enough that it stops making noise.

Congrats and welcome!

I've had issues where I've updated my phone book but the changes aren't uploaded to MFT, even after a month or two. You might need to manually tell MFT to manually update your address book. Unfortunately, I don't recall exactly how to do it, but it seems like, once I found it, it was fairly simple.

From what I know, they aren't on dealer lots. The last I went by, it seemed that the VW lot by the Port of Houston had a lot of cars parked, I'm thinking many of those are the diesels that were shipped before the scandal broke and that were never shipped to dealers. This is what the VW lot looks like on Google Maps. At the bottom, it claims the satellite image is from this year -- that does (at least to me) seem like a lot of cars on the lot for January that are waiting to be shipped to dealers.

I may be recalling wrong, but I seem to recall the third row is an option on the Grand C-Max. Regardless, you have the option of folding the third row down and still having the first two rows usable, if you need the extra trunk space.

Most of what you mention is something we are unlikely to get, as it seems Ford doesn't think the Grand C-Max would sell well here (in its place we basically have the Edge). Personally, I wish our C-max was based on the Grand C-Max, the sliding doors make a lot of sense even without a third row of seats and the extra length would be useful for more cargo space and possibly a larger HVB (and could really help with the Energi). I'm thinking we likely see the new C-Max in 2015, assuming they keep the C-Max model, but that the biggest difference will be the redesigned front end. The new European C-Max (not grand) doesn't show many differences compared to ours, other than the new front end.

I don't believe VW can sell any new cars with their 4 cylinder diesel engines until the engines, with whatever fix they create for the emissions, have been approved by the EPA.

I'm not sure it is fair to state that Ford hasn't improved things. Carmakers have gone to roughly a 4-5 year cycle for their various models. So, for Hyundai, the Sonata Hybrid was introduced in 2011, and they updated their model, including the hybrid powertrain, for the 2016 MY (was supposed to be 2015 but the hybrid was delayed by a year). You can argue that the Sonata had a "mid-cycle refresh" of their drivetrain in 2013 but it was minor, and was needed because of issues. This isn't that much different than the various recalls/CSPs, by Ford, that have improved gas mileage and reliability on their hybrid systems. As for the Prius, that is just being updated for 2016, with the last update in 2009. The 2017 Fusion has just been revealed, a "new model"; though in terms of interior and exterior design it almost appears to be more a refresh. The improvements to the Fusion Hybrid powertrain should also be copied into the C-Max. What wasn't announced is what changes they will have for the hybrid. For example, to get the range of the new Sonata PHEV, Ford largely needs to just put a similar sized battery in the Fusion/C-Max Energi models (currently 7.6 kWh, the new Sonata has a 9.8 kWh battery) -- the Ford's don't really even need much of a mpg upgrade to compete, just the larger battery. Until the new hybrid powertrain changes are announced for Ford's 2017 models, I think it is premature to criticize Ford. I would also expect that a new C-Max would be updated to something closer to the European C-Max designed (updated in 2015), which should hopefully improve air flow (and fuel economy), particularly if Ford tweaks it to make it more aerodynamic. It does appear that Ford is planning on updating the powertrain and trying some new ideas. For example, we know of a 2017 C-Max Energi concept car that would include solar energy panels on the roof. While I can see some challenges to implement (such as weight of the solar panel), it does show that Ford is working on improving their hybrid technology. I've got to admit, this type of solar paneled car could help me -- depending on the effectiveness/durability of the solar panel. My car sits outside much of the time, so I could likely run it a fair amount electric only without needing to plug the car in. I'll agree, if the 2017 hybrid drive trains are announced and little has changed, then we will have reasons to complain. However, the mere fact they didn't talk about the drive trains for the hybrids would seem to support the idea Ford is making updates, just that the updates weren't quite ready to be announced.

It would be interesting to see what the difference is. The only display I can think of as "missing" from the 2013 is the lifetime average. Though the 2015 does have an advantage in that you can have the Fuel History (5, 10, or 30 minutes) on the right side, as well as the coach, instead of just the efficiency leaves. Beyond that, it seems like same displays are there, though arranged a bit differently on the newer models.

After buying gasoline, and with gasoline prices being at their lowest point in a decade, I'm just curious what the cheapest gasoline you've bought for your C-Max. I ask because I was shocked when I went to Costco and it was $1.399 tonight, I spent under $15 to fill my tank with over 10 gallons of gas. Never expected to see that price again in my lifetime.

I've spent some time on a Hyundai Sonata Hybrid forum and many there have really liked the Continental Pure Contact EcoPlus. Granted, they have either Kumho or Hankook as the original tires; but it seems like most there have found the EcoPlus as their favorite tires on their Hybrids, that it offers good performance with equal mpgs.

I was tempted to include this website in that last post, which I find interesting for the MPG for Speed calculator. Of course, the "issue" is that it is geared largely for sedans, I believe the speed penalty is greater on an SUV and other less aerodynamic vehicles. The final drive ratio for the transmission will also make a difference. I'll also admit I "cheat" a bit. Rather than providing the EPA number, I instead try to plug in the number that it seems most people get while driving at highway speeds. I figured the C-Max at 46 mpg @ 55 (which can be beaten by a bit of hypermiling, or even using the grill cover). Using 46 mpg still shows a drop to 44.6 @60, 42.3 @ 65, 38.2 @ 70, 35.4 @ 75, and 33.1 @ 80, which I think are relatively close to the results people have seen here. If the OP was averaging 75 or above, mid to low 30s would be the expected mpg at those speeds on most cars; and this is in ideal conditions (70 degrees, no wind, or precipitation). If you put in the actual EPA highway mileage of 37, it shows you should only expect about 30 mpg @ 70 mph; so the OP was doing better than the standard speed calculations.

They seem to have taken a huge hit since gas prices dropped below $2/gallon. From what I've seen (not that I've looked closely), it is affecting most/all hybrids and not just the C-Max. It also seems like a lot of fleet 2013 C-Max fleet cars were dumped on the market in 2015, I'm sure that hurt resale value, as well.

One think that is worth noting is the fuel economy of the Escape, which is also built on the Focus chassis. I believe the Escape is slightly larger but still weighs about the same as the C-Max; slightly longer and higher but the same width. But the interesting thing is that it only gets 32 mpg, at best. While the C-Max would be expected to get slightly better mileage, because of the lower height (length shouldn't make much difference), the fact that it gets 40, to me, shows that the Hybrid system -- at least at lower speeds -- is helping it run more efficiently on the highway. In fact, the highway fuel economy of the C-Max is close to the rating for the base Focus, around 40 mpg, yet the Focus is much shorter and lighter. Of course, the Focus does better as speeds increase -- both because the hybrid/CVT is less effective at higher speeds, as well as the height is more heavily "penalized" as speeds increase. The same is going to hold true for the Fusion -- the lower height is going to translate to less penalty as the speed increases. That is primarily a difference between a sedan vs. a CUV.