CNCGeek

It's too bad the C-max was not rated for 42mpg, then the it could be reviewed on it's real merits.  The mpg is a real issue, and has been beaten to death, but the reasons you had for buying it over the other choices are similar to mine - except that I was shopping for the Prius as well as the Crosstrek and Escape before deciding on the C-max.

I gotta say that Ford should have thought of a better design for the antenna, it looks very much like some aftermarket add-on when it should be invisible.  They could have even built it into the rearview mirror.

Yeah they could have put more of a lip on the box to keep stuff from falling out.  It's a minor problem (or seems to be), unless the box gets stuffed with junk, then I'd suggest never opening it ;)

I keep some of the loose stuff in a small bag so if it falls out, it is just one bag and not 20 small things which I would need to find/pick up

Good review, and it summarizes the reasons to buy the c-max despite the unrealistic mpg claims.

I noticed most of the major pubs including Consumer Reports referenced each other to support their view resulting in a circular reference. They picked data from this site, fuelly, and fueleconomy.gov and ignored data that contradicted the foregone conclusions.

Thats how they make headlines. :)

But what is the data that contradicted the articles (serious question)?  I don't give much credibility to the CR testing until they have more miles on it and have it in different conditions, but I have not seen any other tests showing mpg close to the advertised 47mpg (aside from the EPA test itself).

It does look like the EPA will be double checking Ford's numbers however.

If this is the case (and it applied to car owners in general) then the Fuelly data would still be relevant, even if it were skewed to higher mpg drivers.

You threw in the "and it applied to car owners in general" while we clearly were discussing differences between CMAX and Prius owners...

I was referring to Fuelly users (car owners who use Fuelly). I'm not sure how that would change anything though.

ding!

 

Also, may be more inclined to use a site like fuelly.

 

I bet a lot of c-max customers don't even ever look at anything about cars online...  After all, it's "just another Ford"... ;)

If this is the case (and it applied to car owners in general) then the Fuelly data would still be relevant, even if it were skewed to higher mpg drivers.

I believe those people will buy a  C-Max but probably lean more toward the Energi. Ford data reveals that most C-Max buyer traded in competitors vehicles, but they don't break that out to hybrid, TDI, etc. I see several, including my self, TDI owners who traded mentioned on this forum.

I agree, the Prius has a strong reputation for reliability and efficiency which will be hard for Ford to beat. I would bet that if not already, their customers will figure this out, and Ford will probably be bringing in many more new hybrid owners rather than stealing away Prius owners/buyers. Prius owners whom I have spoken with, tend to have a good feel for why they get good fuel economy, and they may get their antenna up with the C-max since it is both heavier and has more HP than the Prius V. I also suspect that the Prius crowd will do their homework before buying. OTOH, somebody who has not considered the C-max or any hybrid will find that it drives just like any other car, has a reasonable price, and it gets pretty decent fuel economy (and I am referring to the more likely 41mpg rather than the 47mpg EPA rating). It's too bad that they marketed the heck out of the 47mpg number since rightly or wrongly it is going to dog them. The C-max is not a Prius which is why I bought it.

Real world, South Florida, 1700 total miles, 270 trip miles, 47.4 mpg.  Maybe Consumer Reports should get some instruction on how to drive a hybrid before they do their test.  My first couple of fill ups were a little low on the mpg, then I picked up some tips on this forum and others and on many 6 - 10 mile trips I consistently see 50+ mpg.  As long as my wife doesn't  drive it the mileage stays up there.

If CR drove the C-max or any other car in a particular way to increase fuel economy, then they would not be getting good comparison data. 

Hopefully when the weather warms up (which should be pretty soon with temps way above average) - and there are more c-max's on the road, more people will get better data and enter it in Fuelly.

This happened to me again yesterday after work. I started the car and waited for the go message to appear and disappear, then put the car in reverse and nothing happened. I tapped the gas pedal and still no movement. I then waited while still in reverse gear and about two seconds later the car abruptly reversed. It seemed like it was waiting for something to complete like a diagnostic some check or some reserve power to get charged up or so. I sent an email to my sales person and he wants to discuss it with me. I hope to get some time this weekend to call him.

I have not recently observed the problem I initially had with it not moving at all, at least not in the past week or two.  But I have had the hesitation followed by a surge going in reverse - which can be dangerous in a busy parking lot.  I've observed this happen on a mostly level surface, and I suspect it may be due to the hill climb assist incorrectly thinking the vehicle is parked on a hill.  When I had the no-go problem, I think it may have been that the battery was too low, and the car decided it needed more charge before it would attempt to start moving (possibly also thinking incorrectly that it was on an incline) so it just ignored the accelerator input until it was ready, or I powercycled it - reverse is all electric, even though the engine may run to charge the battery IIRC.

Whats even more interesting is the Consumer Reports test that show the Prius and Prius C not hitting their combined EPA average. The Prius was 6 miles below EPA and the Prius C was 7 miles below EPA? That completely contradicts the Fuelly data, if you believe CR.

I don't really trust CR when it comes to FE testing - I trust the fuelly numbers much more.  Fuelly has a bigger sample of vehicles in different locations and climates, so their data is probably a better gauge of real world FE.  Right now the c-max does not have enough users tracking their FE on Fuelly though.  However, fuelly data is possibly subject to manipulation or user error, things I'd hope CR would not have problems with.  There is also the possibility that the people who really care about FE, and therefore try to get better mileage, are more likely to use fuelly - but thats just me talking out of my tailpipe.

It would be easy for Ford to remap the throttle and add an ECO setting to the left display like they do with TC. Turn it on if you want to max out your FE.

This seems like a very good option, and may help get the C-max's FE monkey off Ford's back - if it worked to get the real world FE closer to 47mpg.

A couple things to consider with the sunroof - if you plan on getting a roof rack, it would be wise to verify the load capacity with the sunroof option.  I have a co-worker who did not order the roof on his Escape because it dramatically cut the load capacity of the roof.  The other consideration I'd have is if the sunroof will change the crashworthyness of the vehicle - I hope they crash test it with and without the sunroof, but I kind'a doubt that will happen.  The only test I've seen so far was the EU version and it did pretty good, but they used a stock C-max.

I can't say whats causing the 25% of all reported Prius V drivers to get below the EPA combined mpg and it wouldn't be fair for me to speculate why. Possibly some other defect with those models? I know when my Lexus IS stated getting poor fuel economy I had a fuel leak and later Toyota issued 2 recalls for defective fuel pumps.

I think the most likely possibilty is that there is nothing wrong with them, when you remove the drivers getting EPA mph -3 (39mpg) the numbers drop off considerably.  The Prius V chart looks like a normal bell curve for the most part, and the folks getting a greatly reduced mpg (EPA -4 or less) may have some other driving habits or requirements (such as running a business with gear in the car all the time) which cause the hit to mpg.  On the flip side, the drivers getting EPA + 3 may be hypermiling or rarely haul any passengers or cargo.  Hopefully the C-max data  will fill up similar to the Prius V chart when more people put their data up there (I am going to do that on my next fuel up).  What seems most interesting about the Prius V chart (and what makes it a formidable challenge for the C-max) is that it is centered right on the EPA estimated mpg which is where it should be in a perfect world - which this is not.  We will see if the C-max can live in the same perfect world as the Prius :)

Hmmm. Not sure whether upper/lower kit is worth it. It may be. I'm more concerned about the level of difficulty of installing it. If done wrong -poof, $300 down the drain. There are some thin parts around the grill which will require careful alignment. Seems like you need a second set of hands to get the job done properly.

 

I think I'll wait a bit more to see if other vendors offer kits.

I plan to wait as well, the seller says they take offers, but don't expect much.  There are tons of videos on installing these kits and they make it look easy, which it is not.  The main point seems to be, keep it wet until you are sure on placement. 

I am going to buy and install a kit when they come down about $50 at least.  In the mean time I will be getting some small pieces of the 3m film to protect the pad areas on a roof rack I am buying, hopefully that will give me some practice with this stuff.

That avatar is awesome! I may have to borrow that one :-)

Thanks, somebody here said it looked like a screaming potato and the next time I drove my C-max thats all I could think of.

You could use this one :)

Cool post, I had totally forgotten about the shutters.  I need to go look with a flashlight to see if I can find them even.  I hope the most likely failure mode would be open since it would really suck to have them stuck closed in the summer.

If you do go with a ESP, the cheapest I found for 7/100k was around $1135 (just as a point of reference).

I think what your observations of your own and your wife's driving habits are in relation to mpg is exactly the reason why the real world numbers are so important, and also explain why some of the Prius V owners are not seeing the advertised mpg.  In your case, you may be at the right side of the mpg curve and your wife on the left.  IMHO, what seems most important about the fuelly charts is that the average for the Prius V does settle in at the EPA rated mpg, which tells me it is much less of a stretch to get the EPA rated mpg with the V.  The C-max on the other hand has too little data on Fuelly to draw a conclusion on the average, but the initial data does not suggest it will be very close to the 47mpg EPA rating (right now nobody is getting 47mpg average according to the fuelly data). 

I think that the title of this post would have more fairly been "Some Prius V's getting below EPA".

Was that a body panel which dislodged?

It looks like the c-max upper/lower kit is the most expensive (upper/lower) kit from the ebay seller - even more than their truck and SUV kits. Maybe worth waiting for other sellers to begin getting these out to save some bucks.

EDIT - never mind that, I was not searching all their kits, they have some over $400 even. The price is probably reasonable compared to other sellers.

Nothing personally. I site Prius examples as an established hybrid reference point for comparison of data.

People keep claiming that the Prius beats EPA numbers and the C-Max does not.

 

 

I'm neither a Prius or C-max promoter - until a car washes itself and drives me to work everyday, I probably wont be a "fan" of any car.  I did buy a C-max which may tell you something though :)  

I agree the comprison to the V is fair (Ford has used it in their ads even). 

When I look at the fuelly data curve for the Prius V, it is somewhat bell shaped with the most vehicles right on 42mpg (also the EPA rating), which is how I would expect it to be.  The C-max curve is still developing, but the claimed 47 is far over to the right, with the most (by a very small margin) at 39mpg now. From the fuelly data and my own experience owning the C-max, this seems reasonable.  I think there would be no concern if the C-max fuelly chart (as a reflection of real world mpg) was beginning to look similar to the Prius V chart, except shifted to center on 47mpg - but it will be a while before the fuelly chart gets filled out enough, and there is a larger sample with vehicles past their 1500 mile break in period to draw better conclusions, maybe later this spring.

Prius V Fuelly Chart (212 vehicles tracked)

C-Max Fuelly Chart ( 31 vehicles tracked)

The GCR mpg has been discussed in another thread and their testing seems suspect (at least as far as any vaild conclusions can be drawn from it).  The CR testing is probably going to be closer to a valid test, in time - right now they are just breaking them in (not that I really buy into that whole thing, but gotta give Ford the benefit of the doubt).  I would bet CR ends up in the very low 40's after several thousand miles of real world driving.  If they are running a valid test they would not user hypermiling techniques and would drive it "normally".

If I really cared, it would interesting to look up CR's initial long term report when they tested the Prius to see if they had similar poor fuel economy.

Are you currently or formerly a Prius owner?

Not sure what that has to do with anything, do you have something against the Prius? ;)

The Ford C-MAX 2013 3M Scotchgard Paint Protection Film Clear Bra Upper Kit is now being listed on Ebay.   

 

 

 

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ford-C-MAX-2013-3M-Scotchgard-Paint-Protection-Film-Clear-Bra-Upper-Kit-/321036223986?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item4abf4005f2&vxp=mtr

Thanks, I was just looking for one of these last night. This is a good sign, hopefully they will get a kit which does the whole front soon too.

EDIT: wow that was fast!  ;)

29% or almost 1/3 of all the reported Prius V get below the 42 combined EPA, thats not a small percentage.

Ah, nm, you are seeing all the vehicles getting below 42, I was going by what the OP said (30 vehicles). I think the spread is what is important though.

IMHO, getting one or two MPG less than EPA is not a big deal for most people, but if it were 5mpg less that may be.

There are only 17 of 212 Prius V's on Fuelly getting 38mpg or less.