raadsel

The point remains, the C-Max is around $1000 cheaper than the Escape Titanium. The C-Max is just currently in the weird spot that it shows the 2016 on the Ford website, which is not yet available so has no incentives -- at this point you have to compare the 2015 C-Max which isn't on the Ford website any longer. There is also the fact that being end of model year, dealers are likely more willing to deal on the C-Max, to get rid of the "old model" to make room for the 2016. This may be particularly true with the 2016 having Sync 3. Additionally, if the C-Max does not sell because of the low gas prices, that means that the incentives will become larger in an attempt to move the cars off the lots. I agree much depends on the driving dynamics, if there is a feature they want that is only available on one of the cars, how the car "feels" to the buyer, and if they want to tow.

If you look at MSRP, the Escape Titanium is $34,185 compared to an MSRP of $33,000 for the C-Max. It is incentives that make that make the Escape appear cheaper -- the 2016 C-Max does not have any incentives because they are not yet on dealer lots. The 2015 C-Max appears to have $3,000 in incentives (though this can vary by local area), which would make the price $30,000, so $2,000 less than the Escape after incentives.

Yes, there is a way to open all the windows. You can find it on page 77 of your Owner's Manual. As for a bike hitch, that has been discussed here in a couple of threads, such as this thread.

I was talking pure MPG on long road trips, the diesel (at least currently) does give much better fuel economy. And this isn't just VW, the Chevy Cruze apparently does around 45 MPG at 70 mph -- and presumably it does have proper emissions controls. Now, I'll agree that diesel tends to be more expensive, you are having to add Urea on a regular basis, and other maintenance costs are likely to be higher than a hybrid. The Chevy Cruze diesel may be a good car to compare in this instance. Except it may be possible that there is an easy fix here for VW. They can make the car pass emissions tests, so it appears VW just needs to leave the emissions controls on all the time. The one issue I see with it is if the emissions controls cause other issues if they are left on all the time. As for Urea, based on the test that were done, it does appear to be fairly effective -- emissions without urea appear to be at least 4 times higher. We know this because the Golf/Jetta emissions were typically 40x higher than the EPA limit per the test. By contrast, the Passat only was found to have emissions 10x higher than the EPA standards, and there were times in the testing when it apparently came close to the EPA standards -- times when the Golf/Jetta still had very high emissions. Assuming the same emissions software on both vehicles, it does appear the urea aids a lot, and makes it much easier to meet EPA standards.

I'd be interested to see what you "built". The problem I could find is that you really need to compare the C-Max SEL to the Escape SE, and the SE does come out cheaper, but the Escape SE doesn't have all the options that an SEL C-Max does. To get all the options, you need an Escape Titanium but then the Escape has some extra features. The problem is how you actually value the different options, particularly things like the Sony stereo; and that is a call only the OP can decide for himself. Also, in my search of available vehicles locally, all the Escape SE models that have options to compete with the C-Max SEL also come with the upgraded engine -- so unless you were to special order the car, the Escape SE in my area are still more expensive. Of course, in other areas that may not be true.

The one argument I'd make about this is that, with a Hybrid, to get the EPA highway mileage you typically can't go faster than about 65. Diesels do much better at meeting, and in cases even exceeding, their highway mileage when driving at 70 and above.

I found this article by Wired rather interesting: The Real Winner in the VW Diesel Scandal? Hybrid Cars

Except they pass the emissions testing, due to the fraudulent software. Though my point was that the US isn't going to make people quit driving their TDIs prior to VW rolling out a "fix", since the people who would be punished did not do the crime. The bigger issue, at least as I see it, are those that refuse to get the recall performed because they don't want to take the power and/or MPG hit to their diesel car. Again, the current tests used will not catch these people, since the software is designed to kick in if it detects an emissions test. While there are ways to ensure it is done, such as requiring TDI owners to provide evidence that the recall was performed, that requires states to actually pass a law/regulation (and possibly pay extra money) to enforce that the recalls are performed. I suppose there might also be ways to change the testing procedure, in such a way the car does not recognize it is being tested, but that would likely be an expensive process.

From what I can see, to get all the options on the C-Max SEL (particularly with the 301A package) you'd have to compare it to the Escape Titanium -- you can't get things like the Sony sound system, interior lighting, or push button start without buying the Titanium model. You can get an SE Escape similarly equipped, minus items like the above, to the C-Max SEL for maybe a little less -- but you will need to get things like the 201A package, the leather Package and add Navigation separately, so the price ends up being very close. As for incentives, it appears there may be some for the Escape but not as much as what is offered for the C-Max, though for specifics you'll need to check locally. Incentives are often based on what is selling/not selling regionally.

If it is true that some German Ministers knew about the problem and did nothing, I'm thinking that could bring down the German government (a call for new elections). Environmentalism is much bigger in Europe than the US; and the Green Party currently holds about 10% of government elective positions. With this effecting 11 million VW cars worldwide, and not just 500,000 in the US, I can't see the German people happy with this. It will get even worse if other German manufacturers have also been cheating. As for the pollution, I'm not sure what more can be done, at least for the moment. You can't really ban these cars from being driven because of the harm it would cause on the innocent owners of those vehicles. At least in the US (and I would assume in other countries), VW is no longer selling diesel cars. The question will be how quickly can VW accomplish the recall on those 11 million vehicles. And maybe the more interesting question, how will it be insured these recalls are actually done. I think this may be the larger issue -- if you owned a VW diesel would you go in for the recall voluntarily, knowing it will reduce your power and fuel economy. I suspect some type of "incentive" is required to ensure people get the recall done; whether a positive incentive, such as VW paying those for the reduced economy, or punitive, such as the government requiring the recall to be done before the car can have it's registration renewed.

I'm going to guess that at least part of that is due to gasoline prices. Currently you can find gas for less than $1.80/gallon here, which really destroys the incentive to buy a hybrid. From looking on the web, it appears gas is around $4/gallon (over $1/liter) in Calgary. Additionally, Houstonians love their trucks (even if a lot are starting to be in the form of SUVs). There may be other reasons but Hybrids just don't seem to sell well here; at least compared to other cities I've visited in the last couple of years.

I feel bad for any VW owner that is currently trying to sell their VW diesel -- they've also lost a lot of value since this was announced. Likely also not a good time to be a VW dealer/salesman.

All 2015 VW diesels already have Urea systems, so it won't help those vehicles. It might be an option on 2014 and older Jetta/Golfs (and I'm guessing Beetles, though not sure) but it is going to be very expensive to retrofit urea systems to those vehicles -- if that is one of the things VW does. It is looking to me like the greatest cost to VW might not just be in fines, but in recall costs combined with the lawsuits by VW owners -- particularly as there could be large punitive for the fraud that was allegedly committed by VW.

In Arizona, they just call those people Snowbirds. Texas seems to be less popular with the Snowbirds, likely because of the humidity here.

I can't see where it would be an option, it seems to me VW has to fix this no matter what it might cost them. Basically, these cars do not meet the required emissions standards. In states/communities with emission requirements, these cars cannot be legally licensed, as they do not meet emissions standards.

Yes, that makes the C-Maxes a bit harder to spot in Europe, the lack of Hybrid badging (since they don't sell it), and the fact that they have some older and newer C-Maxes that look different (the 2015 model in Europe was redesigned). Not to mention the Grand C-Max. I wish we'd get the new style on the US C-Max:

I hate the burning hot summer months -- at least in terms of MPG. I've had to make some short trips recently in the middle of the day (90+ degree heat and high humidity), between the A/C and short trip it absolutely destroys my fuel economy. I'll be glad for those mild winter days that are coming in another month or two. ;) Funny how geography changes our perceptions.... Seriously, I've had some short drives (between 1 and 5 miles) in the last few days on a full tank that is hurting my current mpgs (I think I'm in the low 30s for this tank) -- not to mention I had some type of road debris in a rear tire last Tuesday and had to replace the tire.

It will be interesting to see how this effects fuel economy as these vehicles are fixed.

If the parts are now widely available, I'll make an appointment to get it done in the next few weeks. Since I've not had an issue, I just want to make sure that there is now sufficient inventory.

I don't think anyone here was recommending pressure above what the sidewall is rated. The tires that seem to come with all of our C-Maxes are rated at 52 psi on the sidewall, and it seems like most here don't recommend about 50 psi. Of course, that is far higher than what Ford recommends on the door panel, which is 38 psi -- likely a primary reason for this is to give the C-Max a softer ride. It could also be for safety reasons, in case they had supply issues, and swapped out with the other Michelin Energy Savers that only recommend 44 (as I recall) on the sidewall. Of course, inflating over the maximum on the sidewall is dangerous, as well as over loading the tire's load rating (which is factored into the car's load capacities). Driving faster than the speed rating of the tire is also bad, but likely isn't an issue with the C-Max). I suspect, with the stock Michelin tire's (ensuring it is rated to 52psi on the sidewall) that we are safe inflating between 38-50 psi -- wherever the ride and mpg is where the owner is happy with it -- and then check the tire pressure frequently.

Have we found out the status of parts for this recall?

My understanding, and I fully admit I don't know for certain, is that rear brake pads are not used during regenerative braking; they are only used in conjunction with the front physical brakes.

I wonder if upgrading Sync was something Ford considered, even thought they were going to do, until they found that the computing power of the current Sync units isn't powerful enough and the cost of porting the code.

It looks like this may help you. I'm finding the same thing you are on the Ford website, all the pages for the 2015 seem to only reference a 6 month traffic trial.

It seems like I've seen some people claim that fuel economy is maybe 5% better. Now, just to be safe, if we use a 10% improvement on gas economy, basically you'd need the price difference to be less than 10% to be worth the extra (so, gas at $4 for E10 would need to be less than $4.40 for E0).