MaxHeadroom

SnowStorm, towing is banned for all years. Still, Ford has never gotten off their lazy rear ends and edited out the mistaken mention of towing, in each model year's manual in about 3 places! How hard is it to edit out mention of towing? Towing isn't available since they would need a better transmission cooling system to handle the extra heat. Maybe power electronics cooling too. Engine of course too. I actually think a 1,000 lb trailer wouldn't be a problem, mounted properly back there of course. Maybe not towing in the mountains in the summer though. I really wonder what high-torque driving is on the C-Max, especially without towing. At the full 188 hp, pedal mashed to the floor, is a max torque condition. Otherwise the engine and motors adjust RPM to be around 75% load, always avoiding knock to some extent just by trying to keep the torque load near that spot. I drive mine at WOT quite often actually. Maybe I could gain 1 or 2 MPG from using premium, at a cost of about 10% more of course. Owner's Manuals for all model years: http://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/catalog/owner_guides/13cmhom3e.pdfhttp://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owner_information/2014-CMAX-Owner-Manual-version-1_OM_EN_11_2013.pdfhttp://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owner_information/2015-C-Max-Hybrid-Energi-Owners-Manual-version-1_om_EN-US_08_2014.pdfhttp://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owner_information/2016-C-Max-Hybrid-Energi-Owners-Manual-version-1_om_EN-US_08_2015.pdfhttp://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owner_information/2017-Ford-C-Max-Hybrid-C-Max-Energi-Owners-Manual-version-1_om_EN-US_EN-CA_10_2016.pdfhttp://www.fordservicecontent.com/Ford_Content/Catalog/owner_information/2018-Ford-C-MAX-Hybrid-Owners-Manual-version-1_om_EN-US_08_2017.pdf

With only a 5-mile commute, I would definitely change the oil every 4 months regardless of mileage. A C-Max has a lot of trouble warming up on short trips. When oil doesn't warm up completely, water tends to build up in there and form acids, etc. Congrats to Swamp45755 and drjohnnyray on your smart car buying. A C-Max out handles and out acclerates a Prius any day of the week since it uses the excellent Focus control-blade rear suspension and sports car like steering system. A Prius is fine, but C-Max is the smarter buy I think. There were some problems and recalls in the first couple of model years, but Ford has mostly ironed it all out, although the C-Max's reputation suffered and persists to this day. Very under appreciated vehicle. 2018 is the last C-Max year, sadly. The plant in Wayne MI where its made (alongside Focus) will end production in a month or two from now. They will re-tool to make gas-hog Ford Ranger pickup trucks. Cool new truck anyway.

Some additional research: https://www.cobbtuning.com/ford-ecoboost-and-the-octane-adjust-ratio-monitor/ discusses how Ford dynamically adjusts timing in their Ecoboost engines. Maybe applicable to our non-boosted C-Max, not sure. It does say timing can be advanced AND retarded, both, not just retarded, compared to the baseline engine map tune. If that's the case in our C-Max, then it is possible to benefit from premium fuel, especially if we accelerate hard or tow. Owner's manual mentions towing specifically. It may be noted that our engine is most efficient at around 2,000 RPM and about 75% full torque load there. Using the electric motors to augment the engine means the control system tries to keep the engine running at that specific part-load condition when it can. Then it comes down to seeing if the engine can advance the timing at most conditions we drivie at. We know it freely retards timing when excessivley low-octane gasoline is used, but I'm not sure how much it will actually advance timing when at typical driving RPM & loads.

2015 C-Max Owner's Manual states: "Octane Recommendations: We (Ford) recommend regular unleaded gasoline with a pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87. Some stations offer fuels posted as regular with an octane rating below 87, particularly in high altitude areas. We do not recommend fuels with an octane rating below 87. Premium fuel will provide improved performance and is recommended for severe duty usage such as trailer tow." Assuming this is the same wording that Swamp45755 (see a couple of posts above) has in his 2018 C-Max (congrats on your purchase BTW) Owner's Manual, I interpret the statement as you only get an MPG benefit from premium fuel octane only if you drive hard, meaning the engine does sense potential knock and will retard the timing if necessary (when piezo knock sensors detect knock). Thing is, it won't knock if you aren't driving hard and your engine then doesn't have to retard timing. It is possible it will keep gradually advancing timing (for better MPG) until it senses knock, constantly "hunting" for that optimal timing adjustment as you drive. Premium gas would allow more advance of timing, giving us slightly better MPG. I'm not sure if timing advance is there, or if there is much of it, from the baseline engine map though. Maybe I can figure out if I start seeing advance of timing using the FORScan (Ford-specific smartphone ELM327 OBDII) app. It could be the Ford engineers actually run the engine on the baseline engine map, and only provide the freedom to retard engine timing (knock sensed), not potentially advance it gradually. Anybody know if the engine control software algorithms actually do advance timing beyond the stored look-up table engine map value? Biggest fuel problem is ethanol usage. Ethanol is less energy dense than pure gasoline. Our C-Max's, like most Fords, can use up to 15% ethanol fuels, E15. (Can't use E85, the high-ethanol 85% extreme fuel out there.) Typical gasoline sold has about 10% ethanol (E10), so we lose about 3% or so MPG (-1.5 MPG) just from the energy density problem with those blends. Pure gasoline is better for MPG, if you can find it !!

It is true the interior hip room and shoulder room favors the Fusion (54.3/55.9 to 55/57.8), putting the separation between the C-Max interior width to the Fusions as the diff between a "Compact" to a "Mid-Size" car. (Interestingly, the Fusion is only 1 inch wider on the outside though.) Here is a way to knock the Fusion MPG down quite a bit. Hang on mass and aero-destroying add-ons as in the new Police Fusion Hybrid car Ford is offering currently. I'd like a Fusion Hyb with the heavy duty suspension and electrical, minus the lights and front bumper thingie. Looks like the kind of car you could pick up Jake at Joliet in. "Cop motor,... cop tires, cop suspension..."

Toyota's basic patent on the power-split planetary gearset was in 1996. https://patents.google.com/patent/US5907191/en "Ford also began developing a hybrid design based on the TRW ideas and brought out a hybrid version of its Escape small SUV in 2005. Because of the close similarities in the design of the Toyota and Ford hybrids the companies agreed to swap certain hybrid patents." -- http://www.hybridcars.com/revenge-of-the-two-mode-hybrid/ and we saw a flurry of almost simultaneous filings and final patents in the 90's. I guess one has to analyze in detail the similarities between the different patents and what got implemented in the 90's and 2000's to really see what the patent lawyers could have been arguing about with the famous Toyota-Ford patent swap deal.

I totally missed this Automotive News report which lists out all the C-Max replacements: Electrified futureFord plans to introduce 13 electrified models by 2021, 7 of which it has identified. • Police Responder Hybrid Sedan, 2018*• Ford Escape plug-in hybrid, 2019• Lincoln MKC plug-in hybrid, 2019• Ford Expedition hybrid, 2019• Lincoln Navigator hybrid, 2019• Transit Custom plug-in hybrid, 
 2019* (Europe)• Electric small SUV with 300-mile range (expected to be called
 Model E), 2020*• Ford Mustang Hybrid, 2020*• Ford F-150 Hybrid, 2020*• Autonomous hybrid for commercial mobility services, 2021*• Another hybrid police vehicle, timing unknown*• 2 more electrified vehicles, timing unknown*Announced by Fordhttp://www.autonews.com/article/20170828/OEM04/170829799/ford-evs

Interesting to compare and contrast the planetary gearset type CVT in the Chevy Volt (First generation model) that GM chose. I watched the Weber video (below) on the Volt, and I've got to say the C-Max/Fusion/Prius/Pacifica layout and the current Honda Accord design is better than Volt's. I guess the Volt's clutches are useful to get better energy efficiency from light power demands, so they did have a decent design, yet I feel like they have too much mass. GM must have not wanted to infringe on Toyota patents or something since the planetary gearset is hooked up a little differently. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqM3YXEf1js

The fact that the C-Max lasted 6 model years is actually pretty good. Sure it boosted EPA CAFE fleet averages for Ford, and they made it profitable enough given it shared so many parts with the Focus (platform; made at the same plant and in Europe too) and the powertrain was shared with the Fusion Hybrid for sufficient volume scale. They made it work in this market. Now with all this experience with the C-Max's powertain, I wish they would scale it all up and put it in a clever configuration in a pickup truck, maybe with the new Ranger (smaller than an F150) first. Then add RAV4-like rear AWD electric motors and a standard C-Max Energi (but scaled up engine&motors) setup up front. ... Or put it all in the city delivery vans (Transit Connect). Just dreaming.

Ford is ending C-Max production, and will never end production of trucks, and target their advertising to the high-profit truck lines. https://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intelligence/2013/01/29/fords-margins-its-all-about-the-trucks/ explains a lot. What if Ford ended production of all vehicles in the lower half of the profitability range? --- Then they would lose overall market share in the global market, and they want to hedge their bets for the future. So they keep trying to come up with new, different, more exciting Hybrids and Electrics that will at least sell a lot at first, and might catch on like Teslas have if they resonate with consumers more than our C-Max did. After the C-Max is gone, Ranger pickup trucks (no surprise) will be made on the same concrete floor at Wayne. I think thats a good evaluation of why the C-Max is dead and not advertised much. I'm not a Business-Brainiac like the marketing whiz-kids at Ford, just a lowly engineer here, so if I'm wrong someone can let me know.

I think it's because pickup trucks and SUVs are immensely profitable per unit, and the C-Max isn't. Therefore, they put their advertising budgets into where the profits are, and leave the rest of the models of vehicles like the C-Max to fend for themselves.

SnowStorm, good points about it should be a Titanium. What if Ford pulled out all the stops and put every available option on it? I checked every possible box on TrueCar.com just now for fun and MSRP = $33,200 (market actually $29,500). The only expensive $600 paint option is the White Platinum Metallic Tri-Coat, so I'm picking that color !!! Titanium Driver Assist Package, Active Park Assist w/Forward Sensing System, Blind Spot Information System (BLIS), cross-traffic alert, Power Liftgate, hands-free liftgate, Panoramic Glass Roof, Voice Activated Touch Screen Display With all those options, it should wear a Lincoln badge. My 2015 C-Max is bottom of the line, cheapest possible (sad, yes). I'm not sure how the employees at Wayne feel about the C-Max, and sister Focus, all made there. The C-Max has been selling so poorly. (The Fusion in Mexico has been selling so well there must be some jealousy.) The Focus sells OK, but with bad transmission reputation there its taken some sales hits.

Will there be a going-away party at the Wayne plant for the last C-Max produced there? It'd be cool to buy the last C-Max. Most people would yawn at that, but not C-Max fans.

Nice Weber videos! I picked the C-Max because of the Aisin-Ford experience with the earlier 2005+ Ford Escape in New York City taxi service. Lots of durability testing there. http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/4718-how-does-the-cmax-transmission-work/ is a good discussion of how the planetary gearset scheme on our C-Max works, and the modes it can operate in. The HF35 C-Max/Fusion system is good, but I think Honda gets the design elegance award: https://www.caranddriver.com/features/explaining-the-honda-accords-shrewdly-designed-new-hybrid-system-tech-dept Honda's latest Accord hybrid system cuts complexity down to the bare minimum. Only downside is that darn pesky one clutch Honda has. Only one though, not bad. https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1087518_2014-honda-accord-hybrid-has-no-transmission-how-it-works

So funny, I typed my stuff in while raadsel (see above) did, and we both surmised about the demographics-usage styles. Agreeing there.

Fusion Hybrids come with the same tires as C-Max's. Michelin Energy Saver A/S 225/50-17. .....UNLESS significant numbers of Fusion Hybrid owners have the optional 18" wheels which take non-LRR Goodyear LS2 tires (235 width instead of the 17" tire's 225 width). Assuming half of all Fusion Hybrid owners have the fatter, non-LRR tires, then I'm not sure it would overcome the ~5% MPG advantage the Fusion "should" have due to lower aero drag. Anybody know if half of all Fusion Hybrids are the Platinum or Titanium luxury trims with the non-LRR fat tires? I'd think only 35% would be those expensive trim levels, guessing. Interestingly, the EPA MPG estimates are the same for 225 tires vs. 235 tires on the Fusion Hybrid!!! The 225 tires are very LRR, and the 235 aren't at all, so I'd think there would be a 1 or 2 MPG loss using the fatter tires, not reflected in EPA MPG numbers, kind of misleading to consumers right there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The only other factor that I can think of is buyer demographics. ...This just occured to me. It could be more C-Max owners are city dwellers, where the extra stop-n-go type driving gets them better MPG than more suburban or rural highway travel. This has to be the answer, since the aero advantage of the Fusion isn't enough to overcome driving environment. So, can we conclude the Fusion owner tends to be more suburban or rural while the C-Max owner is more city-urban? {As a group, on average of course.} The C-Max has the hipster urban Euro look to it, while the Fusion is a more conservative old-fashioned sedan style which would appeal to suburban or rural buyers more.

I'm wondering why Fuelly.com shows the C-Max averaging about 41 MPG while Fusion Hybrids get 40 MPG average. (That is over many, many owners and thousands of miles of statistical validity. Measurement errors and driving styles/cycles average out over that many.) The EPA combined MPG estimates for the C-max is 40 MPG, and the Fusion gets 42 MPG, about the opposite of what is happening out there. I just include 2015,16, & 17 model years of each since they likely have the same powertrain control optimization algorithms. The Fusion should be doing better since it has an aerodynamic advantage which should translate into about a 5% MPG advantage, or about 2 MPG. The Fusion Hybrid is slipperier with a CD=.27 vs. our C-Max's 0.30, which is due to C-Max's boxier shape. For total drag, which is CDxFrontalAreaxDynamicPressure, the Area is important, and the C-Max has 8% more frontal area. Why isn't the Fusion getting better Fuelly.com averages? EPA says it should. Aerodynamics say it should. Anybody know what's going on here? As many here know, our C-Max has the same powertrain as the Fusion Hybrid. Also, the weight of the two are about the same (within 25 lbs of each other!). Wheels and tires are the same size, unless a Fusion owner has the optional slightly wider tires, still not much difference there though. I assume most Fusion Hybrid owners have the same size tires as C-Max drivers have, 225/50-17. 5 years ago, the C-Max had some controversy and had to downgrade its EPA MPG estimates because Ford had used Fusion's CD to compute road loads on the MPG test procedure, which is obviously wrong since the CD's are different by 10% and frontal area by another 8%. Even more strange is that I consistently get 44 MPG, checked by fuel tank fillups and also the dashboard display (both agree). I guess I do more stop and go driving than average C-Max drivers, which would raise mine over the Fuelly.com average of 41 MPG, yet I think my driving profile actually has a lot of highway-style stuff in there, and I am not easy on the gas pedal either.

Page 161 of http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/6753-c-max-inside-info-from-ford-tech-operations/

http://www.fordservicecontent.com/ford_content/catalog/motorcraft/OBDSM1700_HEV.pdf I was searching for how spark plug misfires are detected in engines these days, and came across this inside information from Ford. It starts out with an Overview, showing the driving modes, and continues into discussions of how internal algorithms work inside.

Simple. ((You keep harping and whining about "installation instructions", very strange behavior. Who cares.)) The 4548-12 statements are on those web pages. Sorry if you can't find it. Try the footnotes maybe. Heard of that? Is it that you don't believe multipass performance statements? Tin-foil hat for you then, since those claims are checked by competitors quite easily and very often, by engineers I've met.

"There are approximately 17 vehicles located in the United States and one in Canada. " That is the smallest recall I've ever seen. I have a '16 Focus Electric built there (Wayne). Not affected of course. '15 CMax not at all. I met an engineer from the Wayne plant at the local auto show in town. I would not want to be the dude who was responsible for a recall, thats for sure, either an engineer, assembly worker, tech who set up the welding robot, etc. who caused any recall. Compare how small that one is to the latest Hyundai-Kia fiasco where they are recalling over a million vehicles who might need new engine blocks!! They must have fired a bunch of people over that one.

That lower price would make the Ioniq attractive finally. Our CMax (and/or a Fusion Hyb) reigns as the best deal right now. Ford is nailing it!!! May have to get a CMax t-shirt or something to show off our superiority..... :happy feet: Here is what TrueCar.com is saying the market value is for bottom base-models in each hybrid: Ioniq Hybrid and CMax: $22k Kia Niro, Fusion Hybrid, Kia Optima Hybrid, all at: $23k Accord Hybrid, RAV4 Hybrid, Camry Hybrid, PriusV: Pluck down about ~$6k over what a CMax costs. With a big enough incentive, an Optima Hyb (or Ioniq Hyb looks OK, but a Fusion Hyb is still better in my view. Want to feel even better about your CMax purchase??? Note the newest Chevy Volt sells around here for $32k market value!! Expensive, even for a plug-in. With federal and state subsidies, that figure may go down a bit though, not sure how much.

Awesome choice getting the MKZ (Fusion really)! Same CMax powertrain in there, so it performs well. I sometimes think I should have gotten a Fusion/MKZ hybrid. It does look better and with current market prices, is only about $1k more (Fusion version) than CMax right now.

I visited the Denver Auto Show yesterday and sat in an Ioniq. Its like an Elantra, which isn't bad. Looks like the lowest base Ioniq price is about the same market price of a CMax SE currently! ($22K) A Kia Niro goes for a thousand more around here. Comparing the Ioniq to other hybrids at the show was interesting. Some hybrids are as good as the CMax, but invariably cost more. I liked the Accord Hybrid, and of course Ford had a Fusion Hybrid there. One glaring fact: Nothing I can find has the value with the performance the CMax has except for the Fusion Hybrid which is selling for a $23k market price currently. Even the PriusV and Accord Hybrids are many thousands more.

Just crossed 30k miles in a 2015. Only a new windshield. Maybe they got all the bugs out, since most problems appear to be with the early 2013 models.