raadsel

From what I can think of, there are two conditions that cause the ICE to start just after turning on the car. The first is if the battery is too low, then the ICE will immediately start to recharge the battery. And because of EV+, where the car keeps the car in EV mode as you approach commonly visited locations (such as your house), it intentionally tries to keep the battery charge somewhat low when you turn off the car (to improve the battery life). The second reason is if you have the heater turned on -- the ICE will start since that is what provides the heat for the climate control system. Many here intentionally turn the climate control off before it starts the engine, and rely on the seat heaters to help keep them warm, so the ICE will not turn on when they first start the car.

My first question is if you've had the various recalls done? You can check them out for your car at owner.ford.com, or some here would recommend etis.ford.com (etis doesn't require a log in but some information will display incorrectly, such as likely showing your Hybrid as an Energi, as it is a Ford Europe site). Next, to try to give a small tutorial -- when you start the car, the first time the Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) turns on it will want to stay on until it has warmed up to it's normal operating temperature. So, the first few minutes after your ICE starts the car will not go into EV mode -- even if you are driving using the Electric motor (such as in reverse). This is worse in the winter; the cabin heater uses heat from the ICE to heat the cabin, so the ICE will stay on longer, or keep turning on more frequently to get warm enough to heat the cabin and to stay at that temperature (since the cold air it is warming will cool the engine). On short trips, say less than 10 minutes, your car will not spend a lot of time in EV mode as the ICE will be on for several minutes -- and this is worse when temperatures are below 70, particularly if the heater is on. Once the ICE is up to temperature, it will start turning off and on based on the state of charge in the battery. At this point, at speeds around 30-45 mph you should be able to get stay in EV mode 50% of the time (or even more). As your speeds get higher, you won't be able to stay in EV as long as the higher speeds will drain the battery faster. If you watch the videos and read the posts on this thread, and there are other threads in that area of the forum that also may be helpful.

From what I've seen, Tesla advises their owners that they should typically only charge to about 80%, only fully charging to 100% if they absolutely need the range. I also believe, from videos I've seen, that the last 20% the charger slows down (also at the start, if the battery has a very low state of charge) to further protect the battery from the excess heat generated when you fully charge it -- much as most modern smartphones also slow down the charging when the battery gets up to about 80%. From what I've seen, it is most EVs that do this, not only Teslas -- and some even "block" the top 20% from being used; they'll claim the car comes with an 80 KWh battery, and that is all that is usable, but it actually has a 100 KWh battery. Of course, this is not solely to protect the battery life but also helps to prevent "explosions," such as happened with the Note 7 phones.

No charge, I had meant to include that. The update is being covered under the 12M02 FSA. And when the dealerships connection to Ford is reliable again, the service manager is supposed to call and allow me to bring the car back at my convenience, and get the update finished while I wait.

I have to say thanks, it's helped me tonight. To tell the story, I took my C-Max in today to get the 3.10 update. Now, something that people here might be able to better explain (and if it was just an excuse), according to my service manager, they are having issues with their Oasis connection to Ford's servers -- apparently getting random time outs and such which is preventing some car diagnostics to be done, as well as causing the update of my Sync to fail. When I got the car back today, I couldn't figure out the touchscreen -- it seemed almost random what would pop up. As I played with it, I realized the touchscreen was mirrored and inverted, so pressing on the top left, instead of getting the Phone screen, I'd get climate control. I managed to get a phone paired, with a bit of playing around, by just trying to guess where the inverted upside down position would be on the screen. So, tonight using the diagnostic mode that is posted, I managed to get the screen recalibrated fairly close (I should have taken a stylus with me, instead I used a finger). I still have issues -- I think the sound system believes I have the non-touch sync without all the speakers -- it seems the left/right and front/back adjustments aren't working. Additionally, it doesn't realize I have the factory navigation. But at least, other than a few issues like that, it is now much more usable.

What is the best deal Ford has had on the batteries? And is there a good replacement you can buy that isn't from Ford? I know currently Ford is offering a $40 rebate but I seem to recall that they've frequently had a better deal. For those of us who don't have to replace the battery yet, wait for a better deal or just get the $40 rebate?

No, the 12V battery is a traditional lead-acid, like you find in most cars. I do agree it likely means that your battery is no longer holding a charge and needs to be replaced. Also, there are reasons that will cause a lead acid battery to suddenly fail; one I recall happened to me several years ago was a plate in one cell of the battery came loose (from what I recall) and kept shorting out the battery.

1) The 2013 C-Max EPA rating is 40 mpg. Yes, it was initially 47; Ford gamed the system by using the EPA rating for the Fusion Hybrid (which uses the same powertrain, so was allowed per EPA rules) and then, on top of that, they made errors in the calculations. Because of this, the EPA rating was dropped twice; 40 mpg overall seems to be a good number for the C-Max -- though some here argue it should be 42 or 44, particularly on the later model years. 2) Cold weather will lower fuel efficiency, particularly on shorter trips. As a general rule, you will lose 1-2 mpg for every 10 degrees the temperature drops -- though the grill covers help a great deal by limiting the cold air coming into the engine compartment. The biggest issue, with cold weather, is that the engine will want to come up to operating temperature before turning off -- meaning on a 1-2 mile trip the engine may run the entire time. This is made worse if you are running the cabin heater, as the air heated further keeps the engine from coming up to temperature (or even cools it off, such as when sitting at a light). In fact, some here will tell you they don't use the cable heater, only the heated seats, on shorter trips in winter. On a long trip, you typically won't lose as much fuel economy as it is easier to keep the engine warm once it is up to operating temperature, though, again, the grill covers help (and also can aid aerodynamics). 3) As others have stated, there was an issue with the battery -- and those seem to have largely been fixed by a series of recalls and customer satisfaction programs. That appears to have been a manufacturing issue, particularly on a number of SE versions; most SELs did not have the issue. This is an issue you should have been able to get fixed in conjunction with your Ford dealer, and through the various recalls. Additionally, there seems to be no correlation with geographic location (or temperature) with the battery drainage -- it happened just as much (from what I've seen) for people in the South as in the North. 4) Most of us have found that the rear tires aren't a huge issue, so long as you properly rotate your tires. I can't say for sure, but I believe (based on tread on the tires when I bought my C-Max and the wear since) I just replaced the factory tires on mine at 62,000 miles and almost 5 years. 5) I don't think any of us understand the issue you are having with the brakes. Most here still have the original factory brakes on the car -- they've never needed to be replaced. In fact, this seems as if it may be a large part of why you are having fuel economy issues. So long as you brake soft to moderately, then the brakes shouldn't be used; they should only activate when the car gets below about 5 mph. If you do a lot of hard braking, that might explain needing to replace the brakes as often as you do -- though that likely would be the case on most cars. Now, perhaps you have an issue with your brakes that is causing the wear and tear -- but that would seem to be an issue with your car, it is not an issue I've heard of with any other C-Max.

And I'm another person, one who has never worked for and is not associated with Ford, that doesn't find your experience similar at all. Driving on the freeway, I have no issue getting at least 44 mpg at 60 mph, and 40 at 65 mph, and that is just using the cruise control -- not any type of hypermiling. If you can't get at least 40 mpg on the freeway at speeds below 65, then there is an issue with the car. My fuel economy with the 2013 C-Max isn't anything special but I still get 40 MPG over 3 years without really trying.

I suspect Ford views the Escape hybrid as the replacement for the C-Max -- the two cars are very similar in size, just the Escape is more SUV as opposed to wagon. While I know most here won't like the Escape as a replacement (due to higher ground clearance), I suspect it will be more popular. And from the limited things we've seen, I believe the Model E will be similar to the Focus, just engineered to be a EV (including HEV and PHEV), and will likely replace the Focus EV.

Yes, the tire was rotated when they installed the three new tires.I'm mostly looking for the ride to be quieter. I am curious what effect I'll see with ride quality; if the new tires will be stiffer. I'd also expect better grip at times, such as in rain with the new tires.

I ended up having the three Michelins installed today. They seem to be much quieter, I'll be interested to see what kind of differences there are over the next week or so.

To be "fair," VW's sudden interest in Electric cars is largely based on their settlement with the US government over Diesel-gate -- VW is to build EVs in the US and to invest $2 billion dollars in Zero Emissions Vehicle (ZEV) infrastructure, such as building charging stations: https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-11/documents/vw-faqs-app-c-final-11-18-16.pdf

I'm to the point, or close enough, that I need to replace the tires on my C-Max. I've had to replace one of my tires already, about a year ago, due to road damage -- so I have one Energy Saver that is still relatively new (one year old), which means that I'd only need to replace 3 tires if I stay with the Energy Saver. I typically buy tires from Costco, I've been extremely happy with their service, so plan on buying from them again -- with the issue that it limits the selection (since they largely only carry Goodrich, Bridgestone, and Michelin tires). So I'm basically deciding between buying three of the Energy Savers or a full set of Bridgestone Ecopia EP422 Plus -- and with the current sale at Costco, the 4 Ecopias would be about $30-40 cheaper than buying the 3 Michelin Energy Savers. I considered buying 4 Energy Savers, when they were on sale with free installation (roughly $130 off) but it was still almost a full $100 more than buying 3 tires. I'm torn, largely because I'm mostly happy with the Energy Savers; my one complaint would be the noise. Obviously, replacing the Energy Savers should make the car quieter, though from what I've read, after 20,000 miles the noise will start coming back (and I have one tire that will be at 20,000 much sooner than the other 3); whereas the Ecopias may stay quieter longer, from what Plus 3 Golfer has claimed. OTOH, while there isn't a huge amount of comparison data (the Ecopia E422 hasn't had many comparisons done with the Energy Savers, any comparisons I can find were done with the older Ecopia E100). So I'm torn; do I stick with the factory tires and just buy the 3 replacements? Or would I be better saving a bit, having all 4 tires new, and buying the Ecopias. Not sure there is a "wrong" answer here, reviews are similar between the two (maybe a bit better, a many more reviews, for the Energy Savers) but curious what others here would recommend?

I'm not quite sure why the button couldn't be included on every hybrid, I can't see why it wouldn't work equally as well for a lead acid 12V -- it is part of the reason I left out that they included the 12V as part of the LiPo HVB pack. As for longevity, my guess is that the "12V battery" on the Ioniq is maintained (in terms of charge) in a similar manner as the other HVB cells -- not allowed to fully charge or discharge (and likely an additional reason why the button is necessary). I'm guessing Hyundai/Kia testing shows that the "12V battery" cell will last a similar length as the rest of the HVB -- and it appears that LiPo Hybrid batteries are holding up very well in real world use. When you get to the point that you need to replace the HVB, I doubt the extra cell acting as the 12V battery adds much cost. It will be interesting what the cost of replacing that 12V battery is -- if one has to be replaced separately -- and it could easily be that the higher replacement cost is largely offset by replacing it much less often than a traditional lead acid battery. As for not having the posts that would allow you to charge the 12V, or jump start another car, I suspect that was done to protect the battery. I'm guessing the LiPo battery is less tolerant of the mistakes people make using jumper cables -- and a mistake that would cause a 12V lead acid battery to explode would be much worse with a LiPo (particularly when right next to the rest of the HVB). Additionally, with the button to give the 12V a small charge, if the HVB doesn't have enough power to charge the 12V then you have worse issues then just a dead 12V battery and the car will need to be serviced anyway. Last, with portable charges so common now, there is much less need for you to be able to jump start another car.

If the transmission was replaced, that should mean the issue is fixed. It was a manufacturing issue in some of the parts of the 2013, with the issue resolved on later model years -- including the replacement parts.

Disconnecting the HVB while the car is off is a safety feature; it is meant to protect those that are servicing the car -- particularly emergency services if you are in an accident or have another issue. I do think this is something Hyundai/Kia got right in their Ioniq and Niro models, where they have a button that connects the HVB to charge the 12V battery in case the 12V has died.

You should be able to buy those at auction in the next few years; I'm guessing they'll take off the lights and "front bumper thingie" before they put it up for auction. Of course, you likely won't get the same fuel economy with the Fusion Police vehicle as with other hybrid vehicles, since it is more of a "performance hybrid." My guess is that it will tend to keep a higher level of battery charge, so that it can provide extra power (with the ICE and electric motors working together) when needed, as well as being able to keep the engine off when the car is stopped but left turned on.

Also, the main "electrical issue" that was complained about was the 12V battery dying over a few hours, such as someone getting to work, turning off their car, and coming back out to find a dead battery for no apparent reason. There are a series of recalls that seem to have fixed this, and many people "solved" it in the short term by keeping one of the small lithium battery jump starters in the car. I'm not aware of any other real electrical problem with the C-Max, at least not off the top of my head. The small lithium-ion batteries, such as you can buy off Amazon or at Costco, work just fine to start the C-Max, as it doesn't need a lot of power to "start." When you press the start button, all the 12V battery does is start the computers and electronically connect the traction (hybrid) battery -- which is what starts the engine. The battery is electronically disconnected when the car is off 1) for safety reasons, to make it safer to work on the car and for first responders (in case of an accident) and 2) to keep the traction battery from "dying", as there is no easy way to recharge the traction battery (unless you have a plug in hybrid).

The Fusion has a bit of extra width that I think helps with longer trips, and it definitely (at least to me) has better seats (though this may also depend on the trim). Additionally, the upper trims of the Fusion Hybrid has a power passenger seat, which makes it more comfortable when someone else is driving. In particular, the C-Max -- despite its height -- seems a bit too narrow in the shoulders for me. The Fusion, because it is a sedan and has the closed trunk, has less road noise, as well. I also believe the Fusion may have more insulation against noise.

My best guess would be the type of miles driven. I suspect that people see the Fusion as more of a "family car" -- and it definitely seems like it would be more comfortable for trips (more passenger room). By contrast, I believe most see the C-Max as more of a commuter/utility car. Because of this, I suspect that the C-Max tends to see more city miles, and the Fusion is driven more on the highway -- and taking highway trips in either car at 65+ mph is going to lower fuel efficiency. I also suspect that the C-Max, with most people not even knowing about it, tends to be purchased more frequently by people specifically looking for a hybrid that they can hypermile to get great gas mileage; most people looking for a station wagon/SUV are going to be pushed towards an Escape (or now the EcoSport). By contrast, with the Fusion being more of a mainstream offering, I think many buy it because they like the Fusion and are attracted to the Fuel economy numbers, but have no idea (or interest) in learning how to drive it to get the best fuel economy.

That seems overpriced, to me, for a 2014, particularly an SE, despite the low miles. In my area we have a 2016 SEL with just over 22,000 miles being sold as a CPO for just under $17,000. Per the CarFax, it has a single owner and no accidents. If I'm going to pay 17,000 (or half that after trade-in), I'd rather have the newer car at that price; particularly when it has the Sync3 with Sony sound, leather seats, etc.

I'll bite. Why should you have never purchased the car, and why should Ford never have released it. Most of us here are quite happy with our cars, so I'm interested in hearing your experience. I'll also agree that Ford screwed things up with the release of the car -- which is much of the reason for this lawsuit. So, what are the reasons behind your opinion, or are you just attempting to troll?

When the C-Max was new they were actually advertising it. There were two main issues, that I can see, that caused Ford to "give up" on the C-Max. The first was Ford's fault, and that was the EPA ratings. They initially used the same EPA rating as the Ford Fusion Hybrid received, which while legal, the C-Max was never going to have the same gas mileage because of the aerodynamics of the C-Max vs. the Fusion. Worse, they miscalculated the EPA rating, giving the Fusion a higher rating than it should have had. This led to a lot of bad press -- particularly as the lowered the EPA rating on the C-Max twice -- once (as I recall) to give it its own rating, rather than using the Fusion's rating, and a second time when they corrected the "mistake" they made on the rating. While it can be argued they over-corrected, that the C-Max should have a higher EPA rating, the damage was done -- Ford was publicly embarrassed by the lowering of the rating. It also made it so the C-Max no longer directly competed with the Prius on fuel economy ratings. This probably wouldn't have killed the advertising for the C-Max, except that it was just about this time period that gas prices dropped. With gas prices dropping to $2/gallon, most people quit caring about fuel efficiency and started buying larger and less fuel efficient cars. The C-Max, as originally designed, was meant to be a "Prius-killer." I suspect the fuel economy issues made Ford feel the car had failed, and they never figured out how to market the car after, particularly with the various flaws they found with the 2013 (MFT, battery discharging while parked, etc.). I think Ford based on these factors just "gave up" on the car and decided to start over. It will be interesting to see what new hybrids/EVs Ford will be releasing. Unfortunately, I think what Ford considers a replacement will be closer to a "Prius killer," complete with less power and less utility, than the C-Max we know. I think the hope is that Ford decides to make a hybrid version of the EcoSport or Escape.

Obob beat me. Though it seems typically those who have tried premium fuel have found that while it does provide better mpgs, it isn't enough of a difference to justify the higher price (my recollection is typically it is no more than 2 mpg better).