SnowStorm

But you guys are getting this awesome mileage while doing your real-world everyday jobs - not running around some test track under super optimized conditions. Simply amazing!

You can certainly get 100+ mpg for a short trip (but not a whole tank!). I coasted 5+ miles off a mountain (about 1000 foot drop) and managed to get this! It actually went on up to 700+ but I didn't get a picture. The ICE had only run for a few seconds at the top after I reset the trip 2. I doubt your C-Max had a meltdown.

Oh wow! This race sure beats NASCAR! And its a lot better for the environment!

The Enterprise (car's nickname) has arrived! Now at 47.0 mpg lifetime average! So who said its not a "47 MPG Car"? Now at over 4100 miles and still at 47.0. We really love the car - even if I am "obsessed"! Sounds like my wife has just about sold a couple of friends on one.

The best thing about this contest is that everybody wins!

It must be the "hybrid tax"! ;) Seriously, I wish there was a way to safely check a pump now that we are really getting into the finer points of fuel economy calculation. It wouldn't surprise me to find the car computer being more accurate.

I like the range because we can make a frequent 500+ mile round trip without having to buy ethanol (we can get E0 locally). Also, today's fill-up was another 600+ tank at 620 miles with still some 30+ MTE. A lot of this tank was open country 55 mph highways where the car seems to get at least 50 mpg on eco-cruise. Indicated tank average was 50.3 mpg. I just love it. My indicated LTA is at 46.8 mpg - just gotta get it to 47! Pump based LTA is at 45.7 odometer adjusted but, of course, I have no idea how accurate the pump is.

My bet is that it will make no practical difference as long as you get a 100% braking score. Even if your score is less than 100, I don't think it will matter very much so long as you pressed the friction brakes into service below, say, 10 mph. Your car has 20 times as much kinetic energy at 45 mph then at 10. The simple formula would be 1) "coast" when at higher speeds, 2) use regen brakes at moderate speeds, and 3) use friction brakes (if necessary) only at very low speeds. I think we tend to do that naturally.

What bugs me about this EPA thing is that "everyone" keeps fussing at Ford for building a car with an EPA rating greater than certain "real world" scenarios when, in reality, we should be bashing all the other makers for building hybrids that do match! Point being, the reason other hybrids act like "ordinary cars" with this whole rating thing is because they are not as good a hybrid design as the Ford 47s! I call the C-Max (and siblings) "strong" hybrids as opposed to the "weak" ones. Hybrids that can go faster and farther on battery power is what you want! And when that design gives you a higher EPA rating - that is awesome! There is a lot of real world driving that is close to the EPA cycle (and of course a lot that isn't). Ford designed it right and got a higher rating as a result. My car's lifetime average is now at 46.0 with mostly "highway "driving at 55 to 70 mph. I'll say it again - hybrids whose EPA ratings (under the present system) match their 70 mph "real world" cruising mileage are the ones to criticize.

We all have "special cars" :), but maybe some are more special than others? ;) Or maybe it's the E0 gas... ...or maybe it's driving on the East coast instead of the Left Coast :stirpot:... or...oh, I know... it comes from driving in God's Country! If thou wilt obey this command, thou shalt also delight thyself in abundant gas mileage!

Doesn't mean much I know but still too much fun. Trip home from work - started with high SOC and ended very low thanks to EV+. Washed the car and let it sit for several hours. Pulled into the garage (slight uphill) and got this! Should have just let it sit out!

Storing energy in a hill still seems more efficient than storing it in a battery. The battery storage cycle might not exceed 80% efficient (losses in the generator, charging circuit, battery charge/discharge cycle, invertor, motor). whereas the hill is 100% (the only loss I can think of in the hill is the tiny amount of extra distance traveled as compared to flat). Yes, I am thinking about gradual hills where you need a small (or zero) amount of energy out of the battery when going down. I remember reading the surfing post too - oh yeah - "Surfin' U.S.A." "...downhill in both directions" lol, where is Mr Escher when we need him? Tdefny: What speed gave you 75 mpg? What did you get at the same speed on a flat?

How exciting! These cars are sure a lot of fun when you first get them - and it keeps getting better. Have a great trip!

That's easy! Someone is sneaking out there and pumping some juice into your battery during the day. My dad used to tell the story of a guy who bought a little imported car - way back when it was something novel - and then started letting his co-workers know about the great mileage on his trips to work. So his friends started going out and putting in a little gas every day! As time went buy he became increasingly euphoric over the unbelievable mileage he was getting!

The basic idea behind a hybrid is that you can store energy in the battery and then use it when the load is light with the ICE shut down. An ICE becomes increasingly inefficient as the load drops towards zero. Hills also store energy - potential energy. You get it back when you go down. So, in effect, you now have a much bigger "battery" to work with. My test run that gave 72.7 mpg (see the 50+ MPG thread) included a fairly long stretch where the road gently climbed a couple of hundred feet. Going back down it was amazing to see the car just go on and on with the kW meter hardly even registering at all. It seems counterintuitive but I do think you really want to charge the battery and climb hills at the same time. When the ICE is running, it needs to work fairly hard for best efficiency. Has anyone been able to compare flat runs to those with gentle hills where you can have the ICE run only when going up hill?

After a test run done today I'm afraid I don't agree. See my post under the 50+ mpg thread. I did a loop (returned to same point) averaging about 30 mph for 29 miles and got 72.7 mpg. At 13.6 gallons that would be 989 miles! I don't have an Energi! I'm now on the proverbial limb predicting someone is going to hit 1000 miles on one tank (but it will be one long slow drive!). :drool:

Here's a test drive that returned to the same point. As you can see, about 30 mph average speed, temperature around 80F. Relatively flat (for around here) but some small hills and at least 200 ft elevation change. The C-Max is amazing!

Maybe I'm wrangling over words but I feel the "proper" EPA ratings are the results of the actual tests - as published. If the EPA ratings don't agree with the way I drive, then "My mileage may vary". The current tests may not do a good job of predicting mileage at 70+ mph for all cars but I think they are better than anything else in telling the average driver what it will cost to operate one car versus another. Better than all the magazine "reports" and all the self reported mileage sites. As an aside, just suppose the "V" gets 50 mpg at 70 mph and the C-Max gets 40 and you drive 15,000 miles per year - always at 70 mph. That's about 70 cents a day savings. How many of us would be willing to switch to a "V" for 70 cents a day? Not me!

And below all three is MyView - which, too often, is the one we can all do without! Seriously, I so agree with what's been said. Let's all try and keep this forum friendly and helpful - it has certainly added a lot to owning our new C-Max!

This car is awesome! It got me in the 600 mile club. :) Car - SE with panoramic roof Tires - 42 psi "cold" at about 70F Gas - 87 octane E0 (no ethanol) - refilled at same gas station (true loop) Driving Conditions - No rain, no AC, some wind, temperatures from 50 to maybe 75F Elevation - Maximum 1800ft, Minimum sea level Roads - essentially all "highway" about 1/3 Intersate at 55 to 65 mph and most of the rest open country roads at 50 to 55 mph with the occasional town and stops for crossroads, etc. (and Jus, no "train miles"!) Zero miles to empty came at 637 miles on Trip 1 with 12.89 gallons used. Lifetime now at 45.5 mpg (reset when picked up at dealer) with 745 EV miles.