600+Mile CMax Club

[Jus-A-CMax]

Brother Jus ~ Can you PM me a summary of stats for each 600, 700 & 800 Clubs? I would like to add it to my Proposal to Organize a C-Max Club. Thank you, Bro! ~~ Moms/Eve

 

You have PM.

 

Reason there are 2 columns: TotalMiles vs Total Miles with EV is that some drivers did not provide the full info.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Jus-A-CMax

[ChuckJr]

Too me a little more than 16k miles and driving mostly without the air conditioning to get it. My range said I had 20 more miles to go but am not as comfortable as some in pushing it that far! 

 

http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/c-max/2013/ChuckJr/224414

Edited October 13, 2014 by ChuckJr

[C-MaxSea]

:congrats: ChuckJr !  Never to late to join the 600 mile tank party !   ................& many more.

[ptjones]

Too me a little more than 16k miles and driving mostly without the air conditioning to get it. My range said I had 20 more miles to go but am not as comfortable as some in pushing it that far! 

 

http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/c-max/2013/ChuckJr/224414

GEE! you had atleast another gallon, 50 miles! LOL Good Job :happy feet:

 

Paul

[ChuckJr]

Thinking about how 'accurate' the MPG calculation is in the Max I figure the range is probably just as 'accurate'. If I have a gas can or someone with me that could push me into the gas station then I wouldn't worry.

[Jus-A-CMax]

Post #1 updated, :congrats:  Welcome to the Club, ChuckJr :)

[kostby]

Brother Jus, you need your own icon for the 900 Club!

And your C-MAX is White Platinum, not silver, so here's a quick photochop...

 

 

 

[Jus-A-CMax]

Thank you Kostby, your act is most appreciated  :thumbsup:   As you can see, I did use it in my art work but declined the 900 for the reason, we're all in the same club...no matter if you do 600, 601, 700, 800 or even a 1,000 in the future.

 

 

@ChuckJr - glad to see your new badge. Now, you do realize that you will NEVER, EVER get a job as a Toaster Reviewer in Consumer Reports. Remember, their drivers, who possess great driving skills, with a set route and the FACT that they BOUGHT their own CMax managed 38MPGs and you totally shattered that MPG record. Shame, shame, shame.... ;)

 

...oh, you also got 48 MPG, more than the ORIGINAL Ford EPA rating of 47 that many, even here....CONDEMNED as fraud, deceitful and what-have-you...you better return your Ford checks too, that is more SHAME money.

 

 

ps well done :) ...now go for the 700 Bar.

Edited October 14, 2014 by Jus-A-CMax

[Marc Smith]

Chuck,

 

while the MPGs are overeported,  the range, I have found is always cautious.  my range has always gone to zero while there is more than a gallon or so left in the tank.

[ptjones]

Thinking about how 'accurate' the MPG calculation is in the Max I figure the range is probably just as 'accurate'. If I have a gas can or someone with me that could push me into the gas station then I wouldn't worry.

Remember the car doesn't stop when you run out of gas, it just goes into EV Mode. I have run out three times and EVed into a Gas Station. If you are running low on gas keep the HVB charged. LOL :)

 

Paul

[Marc Smith]

back to back tanks

 

640.8 miles

411 ev

51.2 indicated mpg

12.49 indicated gallons

23 mph average

 

13.07 pumped

49.02 mpg calc

[stevedebi]

back to back tanks

 

640.8 miles

411 ev

51.2 indicated mpg

12.49 indicated gallons

23 mph average

 

13.07 pumped

49.02 mpg calc

If I understand your first numbers right, that means that when running the gas engine, the C-Max got 18.4 MPG (640.8 - 411 ev = 229.8 miles on the ICE, divided by 12.49 gallons used). But, while interesting, that is not really a valid number, and is not too shabby considering that when the ICE does kick in, it is also usually charging the battery at the same time it is propelling the vehicle. So naturally it would post low mpg in pure gallons vs. miles.

 

Probably a useless number, since the electric kicks in whenever it can. But interesting when compared to conventional 2.0L cars (which of course weigh a lot less than a C-Max, and don't have to charge a large battery).

Edited October 17, 2014 by stevedebi

[C-MaxSea]

Way to go Marc, you are cruising now, 640 is great, and nothing like breaking into the 50+mpgs on the tank gauge - other than 60, of course  ;).   Nick

Edited October 17, 2014 by C-MaxSea

[Marc Smith]

If I understand your first numbers right, that means that when running the gas engine, the C-Max got 18.4 MPG (640.8 - 411 ev = 229.8 miles on the ICE, divided by 12.49 gallons used). But, while interesting, that is not really a valid number, and is not too shabby considering that when the ICE does kick in, it is also usually charging the battery at the same time it is propelling the vehicle. So naturally it would post low mpg in pure gallons vs. miles.

 

Probably a useless number, since the electric kicks in whenever it can. But interesting when compared to conventional 2.0L cars (which of course weigh a lot less than a C-Max, and don't have to charge a large battery).

So...whats your point?   the purpose of a hybrid drive train  is to mix two technologies, in this case gas and electric to create a synergy and make for much better mileage and range than either by themselves  could do.

 

So I don't really see any "useless" numbers...

 

some folks get more EV miles based on terrain, weather, and driving style...

 

Since  CR has the Cmax at mid to upper 30's MPG and ford has the cmax barely cracking 40...  getting 49 in real word driving.  Pretty f#$*ing good...  While not as good as my prius I had,  its much better than my wifes Saturn Vue green line and much better than my HHR I had...

[stevedebi]

So...whats your point?   the purpose of a hybrid drive train  is to mix two technologies, in this case gas and electric to create a synergy and make for much better mileage and range than either by themselves  could do.

 

So I don't really see any "useless" numbers...

 

some folks get more EV miles based on terrain, weather, and driving style...

 

Since  CR has the Cmax at mid to upper 30's MPG and ford has the cmax barely cracking 40...  getting 49 in real word driving.  Pretty f#$*ing good...  While not as good as my prius I had,  its much better than my wifes Saturn Vue green line and much better than my HHR I had...

Just an observation; if it is not interesting to you I hope you'll just ignore the posts. I've noticed the same thing in my C-Max Energi - at highway speeds the two vehicles operate similarly (because I turn off my EV battery reserve for later off-highway driving, leaving it in the exact same mode as the Hybrid C-Max). Whenever I'm using the ICE, the MPG guage is most often at or below 20 if there is any engine load on the vehicle at all. It was interesting to see it in your numbers, as a confirmation.

 

I actually think that the 2.0L may a bit small for a 3500 lb vehicle, IMHO. That is similar weight to the previoius generation Escape Hybrid, which had a 2.5L engine. GaryG, and exceptional hypermiiler who can be found on these forums, owned a 2009 FEH, and he got better hybrid mileage than with the C-Max. I suspect Ford used the smaller engine for some reason other than maximum design, perhaps because it was a common engine overseas, or maybe for size of the engine compartment, or something.

 

BTW, I admire yours and everyone elses great numbers on the Hybrid C-Max, don't think I don't appreciate the great job of driving you show! I glance into this forum to get tips for my own driving, and because most of the features are identical between the Energi and Hybrid models - I'm not "trolling".

Edited October 17, 2014 by stevedebi

[Marc Smith]

I've seen the ICE engine MPG  like you saw  in the 20's  but I have also seen it register in the 30's and 40's from time to time...  and some say ther eis a sweet spot around 67mph 

 

http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/4272-best-highway-cruising-speed-for-mpgs/?hl=%2Bsweet+%2Bspot chekc post number 13 for a pic  

 

I think the downfall of the ICE engine and the low MPG numbers is the CVT.  on the highway  in my wife vue and my HHR (2.4L)  with a heavier car.  I'm able to get low 30's mpg.  but thats with the engine running low RPM's in overdrive.

 

I don't think the CVT is that fuel efficient...  when compared with a 5 speed with a tall OD gear  so the engine  can cruise in a nice sweet spot..

[fbov]

...I actually think that the 2.0L may a bit small ...

If it weren't for that electric motor, I might agree.  

ICE: 141 HP, 129 lb. ft torque

EV/Gen: 118HP, 177 lb.-ft. torque

188 HP sustain (mode) (you don't get all of both at the same time)

... for a 3500 lb vehicle, IMHO. ...

It's not obvious that vehicle wieght has no affect on fuel economy in vehicles with regenerative braking. If we were talking acceleration and power requriements, mass matters relative to power, but it's not a factor in energy consumption when a vehicle can recover kinetic energy.

 

I've seen the ICE engine MPG  like you saw  in the 20's  but I have also seen it register in the 30's and 40's from time to time...  I don't think the CVT is that fuel efficient...  when compared with a 5 speed with a tall OD gear  so the engine  can cruise in a nice sweet spot..

That's an instantaneous, ICE-only readout you're quoting; some of that energy is stored in the battery. Find High ICE mode and you'll see readings in the 60's, because the battery's helping the engine under low load conditions. I'd also like to see any fixed gear transmission slow the engine down at high speed, like a hybrid does in high ICE.

 

Then there's the inherent efficiency of a tranny with only gear mesh and bearing losses, common to manual and automatics alike. The only time tall, fixed gearing gives better efficiency than a CVT is when you can reduce fuel delivered regardless of engine speed, as in a diesel. That's why the VW TDI Sportwagen can get better highway mileage than a gas hybrid of similar aerodynamic load.

 

Have fun,

Frank

Edited October 17, 2014 by fbov

[ptjones]

Just an observation; if it is not interesting to you I hope you'll just ignore the posts. I've noticed the same thing in my C-Max Energi - at highway speeds the two vehicles operate similarly (because I turn off my EV battery reserve for later off-highway driving, leaving it in the exact same mode as the Hybrid C-Max). Whenever I'm using the ICE, the MPG guage is most often at or below 20 if there is any engine load on the vehicle at all. It was interesting to see it in your numbers, as a confirmation.

 

I actually think that the 2.0L may a bit small for a 3500 lb vehicle, IMHO. That is similar weight to the previoius generation Escape Hybrid, which had a 2.5L engine. GaryG, and exceptional hypermiiler who can be found on these forums, owned a 2009 FEH, and he got better hybrid mileage than with the C-Max. I suspect Ford used the smaller engine for some reason other than maximum design, perhaps because it was a common engine overseas, or maybe for size of the engine compartment, or something.

 

BTW, I admire yours and everyone elses great numbers on the Hybrid C-Max, don't think I don't appreciate the great job of driving you show! I glance into this forum to get tips for my own driving, and because most of the features are identical between the Energi and Hybrid models - I'm not "trolling".

I had a 08 and 10 FEH's and I got up to 42mpg City/HWY and up to 35mpg HWY vs 34/31mpg EPA estimated. I'm getting about 60mpg City/47mpg HWY in the CMAX Hybrid. FEH has 177hp vs CMAX 188hp and will slip the tires if you get on it hard from a stop. It's all about the torque when it comes to accelerating off the line. CMAX gets 8.1sec for 0-60mph, 2sec. shorter than Prius V. :shift: :superhero: :arrive_alive: :)

 

Paul

Edited October 17, 2014 by ptjones

[stevedebi]

If it weren't for that electric motor, I might agree.  

ICE: 141 HP, 129 lb. ft torque

EV/Gen: 118HP, 177 lb.-ft. torque

188 HP sustain (mode) (you don't get all of both at the same time)

It's not obvious that vehicle wieght has no affect on fuel economy in vehicles with regenerative braking. If we were talking acceleration and power requriements, mass matters relative to power, but it's not a factor in energy consumption when a vehicle can recover kinetic energy.

 

That's an instantaneous, ICE-only readout you're quoting; some of that energy is stored in the battery. Find High ICE mode and you'll see readings in the 60's, because the battery's helping the engine under low load conditions. I'd also like to see any fixed gear transmission slow the engine down at high speed, like a hybrid does in high ICE.

 

Then there's the inherent efficiency of a tranny with only gear mesh and bearing losses, common to manual and automatics alike. The only time tall, fixed gearing gives better efficiency than a CVT is when you can reduce fuel delivered regardless of engine speed, as in a diesel. That's why the VW TDI Sportwagen can get better highway mileage than a gas hybrid of similar aerodynamic load.

 

Have fun,

Frank

All I'm saying is that the 2008 Escape Hybrid vs the 2009 Escape Hybrid saw an engine size increase from 2.3L to 2.5L - and better mileage in the 2009 model. I believe the battery tech was still the same on those two models, and the weights were similar to the C-Max.

 

I think weight is still pertinent to the MPG equation; they constantly tell us (even as hybrid users) to not carry around any unnecessary weight in the vehicle. It takes more energy to propel a heavier car. It is true that you can recover energy via regen when slowing down, but never enough to recoup the energy used to get up to speed - and one uses more energy to get a heavier car up to speed.

[ptjones]

And 2010 FEH was an improvement over 2009, ICE didn't start when you started it. Weight is more important for City, Aerodynamics for HWY.

 

Paul

[stevedebi]

And 2010 FEH was an improvement over 2009, ICE didn't start when you started it. Weight is more important for City, Aerodynamics for HWY.

 

Paul

Yeah, it didn't help that the FEH had the cD of a brick. I didn't use the 2010 model for comparison becuase I think they went to a LiIon battery.

[ptjones]

Yeah, it didn't help that the FEH had the cD of a brick. I didn't use the 2010 model for comparison becuase I think they went to a LiIon battery.

It still used same HVB, CMAX & FFH 2013 used 1st Li Ion Battery which has twice the range of FEH.

 

Paul

[BoomerGer]

I'm gonna laugh like heck at you guys when you run your gas tank down to E and go those "extra" miles to get to the "magic mileage club" and then think you can get gas at some station just as Mother Nature does a number on you:  Earthquake, lightning strike, tornado, or some disaster comes along and you cannot fill up at a station because the power is out to fill up your empty baby, and you don't have enough to get home or ANYWHERE because it affects pumping over a wide area, AND/OR an earthquake hits and destroys bridges between you and wherever you need to go, so you have to take ALTERNATE routes to get to where you need to go, which will take longer.  So, fellow Hybrid babies, just WHAT is your alternate plan?

[Marc Smith]

on my last 600+ tank  I still had 1 gallon in the tank..  good for 50 miles....

 

Boomer,  do you fish much?  Trolling in So CA  is supposed to be pretty good...

[Jus-A-CMax]

I'm gonna laugh like heck at you guys when you run your gas tank down to E and go those "extra" miles to get to the "magic mileage club" and then think you can get gas at some station just as Mother Nature does a number on you:  Earthquake, lightning strike, tornado, or some disaster comes along and you cannot fill up at a station because the power is out to fill up your empty baby, and you don't have enough to get home or ANYWHERE because it affects pumping over a wide area, AND/OR an earthquake hits and destroys bridges between you and wherever you need to go, so you have to take ALTERNATE routes to get to where you need to go, which will take longer.  So, fellow Hybrid babies, just WHAT is your alternate plan?

 

Drop the attitude ger, there is no need for it. You'll find members here answering your questions if they were nicer otherwise you'll make their IGNORE list and get nowhere with your questions.

 

Now...to answer your question, I carry a spare and at my rate I can run 60 miles on this gallon and I have NOT run out of gas for sometime now, even at my 901 mile one. I also carry supplies in the car lest the ground shake, this is LA. Plus in reality, no one will be going fast especially after the big one hits, not with the potentially collapsed bridges, cracked roads etc.

Edited October 23, 2014 by Jus-A-CMax