Poll: Should EPA be 47city & 44hwy?

[Jmonty]

Vienna, when you bought the car, what were your expectations for mpg knowing you got a hybrid when it was not your best choice for doing mostly NON city driving where a hybrid excels (as most already know). the cmax is not the only hybrid that would get lower mpgs on highway/freeway driving so why think otherwise? Did you do any research on hybrid technology?is this the first hybrid.? a gas or diesel car might have been a better choice but you still would be getting 35+ mpg constantly.

Why defend Ford?

[bigalpha]

Vienna, when you bought the car, what were your expectations for mpg knowing you got a hybrid when it was not your best choice for doing mostly NON city driving where a hybrid excels (as most already know). the cmax is not the only hybrid that would get lower mpgs on highway/freeway driving so why think otherwise? Did you do any research on hybrid technology?is this the first hybrid.? a gas or diesel car might have been a better choice but you still would be getting 35+ mpg constantly.

 

Because we are not all as wise as Yogi salsaguy.  Unfortunately, some of us think that you should get what's advertised.

[salsaguy]

you get what is advertised including (your mileage may vary) if you drive it exactly like the epa tests which many dont. but you might also get ALOT more than the EPA, if you know your car, route and have good temps, like JusACMax and recumpence and many others here in this forum.

[spyburn]

As I understand it, EPA testing is not intended to gather real-world data.  It is intended to create a consistent measure that can be compared to other vehicles.  Personally I'd like to see several EPA ratings - mostly city driving, mostly highway driving, and hills.

 

I recognize my driving patterns will rarely, if ever, get me to that 47 mpg for an entire tank of gas.  But when I run the numbers based on my limited experience with my C-Max (not even halfway through my second tank) I am getting slightly higher mileage than I expected.

 

Personally I am averaging around 35 mpg highway (70+ mph, lots of hills - and I SWEAR it's mostly uphill both ways!) and 55 mpg city.  When I weight these based on my driving percentages (about 25% city), I should be getting about 40 mpg....and for this tank I'm at 42.  If I weight these based on what I remember the EPA uses (60% city), it's right at the 47 mpg the C-MAX was rated.  

 

I'm not saying that anyone else is right or wrong, I'm just saying that I bought my C-Max for multiple reasons - not just the magic number of 47.  I am happy with my results and I believe they are in line with the EPA tests, modified for my driving style.  If I used these calculations and figured I should be getting 40 mpg and was getting 33 mpg as some people are experiencing, I would not be a happy camper. 

 

As a side note, My current average is 89% of the EPA rating.  My last two cars were both getting 75% of the EPA rating.  So for me at least, the C-Max is performing better than previous vehicles as compared to EPA combined mileage rating (and yes, I'm still driving essentially the same routes).

 

So far I love my C-Max.  I'm learning to drive it more efficiently and I'm loving driving past the gas station I used to visit every 4 days!

[viennacoup]

Vienna, when you bought the car, what were your expectations for mpg knowing you got a hybrid when it was not your best choice for doing mostly NON city driving where a hybrid excels (as most already know). the cmax is not the only hybrid that would get lower mpgs on highway/freeway driving so why think otherwise? Did you do any research on hybrid technology?is this the first hybrid.? a gas or diesel car might have been a better choice but you still would be getting 35+ mpg constantly.

I had never heard of the car when I bought it.  I did some research before I pulled the trigger.  Most of the customers at Edmunds liked the car (as I did) and I saw the 37 mpg figure from Consumer Reports as well as the class action lawsuit.  My wife really liked the car so I bought with the hope that I would get 40 mpg.  My first trip was 40.5 mpg home for 30 miles home from the dealer.  I was pleased.  Now I find my mpg going up and I am disappointed when a trip is below 50 mpg.  I think a diesel would be a good choice if I were constantly on a 70+ mph freeway, but I am not.  I love my C Max and have no complaints whatsoever.

[bigalpha]

As I understand it, EPA testing is not intended to gather real-world data.  It is intended to create a consistent measure that can be compared to other vehicles.  Personally I'd like to see several EPA ratings - mostly city driving, mostly highway driving, and hills.

 

I recognize my driving patterns will rarely, if ever, get me to that 47 mpg for an entire tank of gas.  But when I run the numbers based on my limited experience with my C-Max (not even halfway through my second tank) I am getting slightly higher mileage than I expected.

 

Personally I am averaging around 35 mpg highway (70+ mph, lots of hills - and I SWEAR it's mostly uphill both ways!) and 55 mpg city.  When I weight these based on my driving percentages (about 25% city), I should be getting about 40 mpg....and for this tank I'm at 42.  If I weight these based on what I remember the EPA uses (60% city), it's right at the 47 mpg the C-MAX was rated.  

 

I'm not saying that anyone else is right or wrong, I'm just saying that I bought my C-Max for multiple reasons - not just the magic number of 47.  I am happy with my results and I believe they are in line with the EPA tests, modified for my driving style.  If I used these calculations and figured I should be getting 40 mpg and was getting 33 mpg as some people are experiencing, I would not be a happy camper. 

 

As a side note, My current average is 89% of the EPA rating.  My last two cars were both getting 75% of the EPA rating.  So for me at least, the C-Max is performing better than previous vehicles as compared to EPA combined mileage rating (and yes, I'm still driving essentially the same routes).

 

So far I love my C-Max.  I'm learning to drive it more efficiently and I'm loving driving past the gas station I used to visit every 4 days!

 

Both of my previous two cars hit the EPA mileage pretty much on the money. 

[Jus-A-CMax]

Diesel is a choice, or the Mazda 3 with the SkyActiv which they are advertising as 40MPG highway - we get that and a tad more with ICE High MPG..dancing baby :headspin:

[salsaguy]

but those were not new advanced technology hybrids that the EPA test (now 20+ years old) was never designed to represent. the EPA needs to add a separate section of the test parameters if these hybrids are the subject car under test.

Both of my previous two cars hit the EPA mileage pretty much on the money. 

Edited July 14, 2013 by salsaguy

[Jmonty]

but those were not new advanced technology hybrids that the EPA test (now 20+ years old) was never designed to represent. the EPA needs to add a separate section of the test parameters if these hybrids are the subject car under test.

Do you work for FOMOCO?

[Noah Harbinger]

but those were not new advanced technology hybrids that the EPA test (now 20+ years old) was never designed to represent. the EPA needs to add a separate section of the test parameters if these hybrids are the subject car under test.

 

The EPA test is a derived calculation that was updated in 2008 to include 3 new test cycles - it's hardly a "pre-hybrid" test, though it is certainly not designed to counteract the hybrids' unique advantages on the test. 

[GaryM]

I was in a tough decision spot when I started looking for a car. My 9 year old manual trans Camry was still getting a solid 30+ mpg if I had any open highway driving, and would still net better than 28 on almost every tank, even when I got stuck in bad Los Angeles traffic. So I knew it was not going to be easy to do much better and still have a roomy car. I almost bought the new Camry hybrid, but the handling stunk. The new Camry SE handles great, but only has the insane 7 or 8 speed auto trans that shifted so many times per mile, I thought I was having a seizure. The Prius was too small, and the Prius V corners like a dump truck. Then I saw the ads for the Fusion hybrid at 47 MPG and I had to check it out. Equipped how I wanted it, it was well over $30,000 and when I checked, it would be nearly 50% more to insure, OUCH!! I also drove a Dodge Dart and a Cruze eco. Both 1.4 litre turbo non hybrids with manuals trans. I almost got the Cruze, but again, just a tick too small. I am sure I would have no problem getting 40+ highway, but I get stuck in traffic a ot, and the hybrid just kept calling me back. I then had to try a Chevy Volt. Wow, that is one amazing car. One of my co-workers got one, and he plugs it in ech night, and his drive to work is just 20 miles. He can sometimes make it home without firing the engine, but usually has to for a mile or 2. Not counting the electricity, he is getting a silly 95 mpg on the little gas he does use. I was very tempted, but I just could not justify the $42,000 price tag. Then I saw the C-Max. How can it be so much cheaper than the Fusion? And when I checked, it turned out to also be far cheaper to insure, only a tiny bump up from my current 9 year old Camry. The cargo carrying is different, but more than capable for my needs. But I did get delayed when I started seeing all the bad reports. I talked the dealer into letting me take a longer test drive, and I actually got over 40 mpg without being a slug on the road. I drove it a bit harder, and WOW, it handles and brakes, and the big one, it can accelerate too. This thing makes my wife's Prius C feel like a slug. Doing some quick math... even if I just get 40 average, I will be happy with it.

 

I have now had it for 3 weeks. I did not reset the lifetime average MPG which was at just 22 when I got it, but I did reset the main display average. The car had 125 miles when I got it. My first tank wasabout 40 mpg as I had a bit of fun around town. My second and 3rd tanks were a round trip from Los Angeles to Phoenix and back at 75 mph with the A/C on. That pulled my average since I bought it down to 39 mpg, but the lifetime was still climbing to 36. 4th tank was local driving again, in some traffic, and another shorter trip, 300 miles at speeds from 55 to 75. That tank was at 42 mpg when I decided to fill it up again, I had just under 1/4 tank left. The 5th tank is now just at 65.4 miles and still showing just above the full mark. Those miles were a little in town here, down to my office, out to lunch, back from my office, and 3 short in town trips. This is a very good even mix. I hit 70+ on the freeway, was in stop and go a bit, and in local traffic as well. This tank is currently at 47.5 mpg. To me that shows the EPA test to be right on the money. 

 

There is a huge difference between the C-Max and the Prius. In a Prius hatch, you do not have a choice on how to drive the car. You must drive it like the slug it is. It does not corner or brake hard enough to carry any speed and the acceleration is so slow, it just never burns the fuel at any rate. The C-Max has a completely different personality. It CAN accelerate, it CAN corner, and it CAN brake very hard. This makes it feel like you should drive it harder, and you can and have a lot of fun doing it, but, if you do drive it harder, it WILL use more gas to do it. As others on the many MPG threads have said, your right foot has the choice on how much you want to trade of MPG for fun driving. 

 

When I have gotten the battery up to 85% or more charge, it will easilly cruise on level ground at 70 mph with the MPG bar floating at near 50 mpg. If I slow to 64, I do see it go into full EV mode for over a mile before it must fire up the engine. The only bad part being that it ends up dropping to 23 mpg while it is pushing the car AND charging the HV pack. It is annoying to see that, but on the flip side, this short time of crap MPG is offset when you get that energy back and run EV or even in blended cruise getting 55 MPG on the I5 here in Los Angeles.

 

As my car breaks in, I am seeing the MPG climb for each tank. I am also getting a bit better at making it drop into EV mode at will. I hope to get better at managing the ICE/EV blended mode as that does seem to be the trick to good freeway mileage. So far, I am getting pretty good at the eco Cruise and using the double down tap to make it go into EV or go from rev and charge to coast and maintain. My normal drives have a few big hills and I am really working at making it use the battery on the way up so I have a near dead pack to suck up KWH on the long coast down. I keep seeing it charging the main pack on the climb, so I keep forcing it to EV mode just to make room as the drop from the top of the pass into town is more than enough to top up the batteries. Once they are topped off, any further braking has to go into the friction brakes and go right to heat.

 

I will have to drive it a bit more to be sure, but it is starting to look like I just may do 47 MPG in my combined city/freeway.

[salsaguy]

nope not even close.

 

Do you work for FOMOCO?

[Adair]

Hi GaryM, and Welcome!! Thanks for sharing your story. I think many can relate. Hope you continue to enjoy your wonderful new ride!!!

[salsaguy]

what i meant about the 20yr old reference is that the"highway" mph is more in mind with the speeds of 20 yrs ago (55-65 mpg) when we all know current freeway/highway speeds are more on line with 65-85 mph (whether it's legal or not) but the EPA tests do not replicate this fact as it gives false expectations.

 

The EPA test is a derived calculation that was updated in 2008 to include 3 new test cycles - it's hardly a "pre-hybrid" test, though it is certainly not designed to counteract the hybrids' unique advantages on the test. 

[fotomoto]

I was in a tough decision spot when I started looking for a car.

 

 I then had to try a Chevy Volt. Wow, that is one amazing car. One of my co-workers got one, and he plugs it in ech night, and his drive to work is just 20 miles. He can sometimes make it home without firing the engine, but usually has to for a mile or 2. Not counting the electricity, he is getting a silly 95 mpg on the little gas he does use. I was very tempted, but I just could not justify the $42,000 price tag. 

 

 

Gary, copy/paste your post into the welcome forum so many, many more folks will see it.  Not everybody wants to read yet another mileage thread so they will miss your nice intro.

 

I come from a Volt so I know what an amazing car it is.  Only the lack of rear passenger room/utility made me trade it in on the CMax.  I was at 162mpg lifetime.  Too bad you didn't further check into the financial side of the equation as the car is no where near $42k with all the discounts and financial incentives, particularly in California (HOV access too), since most folks are getting them for $25-29K.  Add in the huge gas savings and the car becomes incredibly affordable to drive.  Plus it handles like a sports car (to me).  We'll be getting another one when it's time to get the wife a new ride.

 

Anyway, sounds like you will do fine with the CMax as hybrid owners who live in the SoCal climate typically have the best stats.  

Edited July 16, 2013 by fotomoto

[fotomoto]

what i meant about the 20yr old reference is that the"highway" mph is more in mind with the speeds of 20 yrs ago (55-65 mpg) when we all know current freeway/highway speeds are more on line with 65-85 mph (whether it's legal or not) but the EPA tests do not replicate this fact as it gives false expectations.

 

Yes the pre-2008 ratings were even further off.  For instance, the second generation Prius was rated at 60mpg city by those older standards.  Basically no one could get those numbers as real world is more like 45mpg.  HUGE difference.  

[Jmonty]

Interesting quote: "EPA has followed Consumer Reports' testing with interest and are evaluating their claims. As with any of our engineering evaluations, if the results indicate an alternate approach would be more accurate we will update our procedures and processes to ensure that the fuel economy label is as accurate as possible."

[obob]

Interesting quote: "EPA has followed Consumer Reports' testing with interest and are evaluating their claims. As with any of our engineering evaluations, if the results indicate an alternate approach would be more accurate we will update our procedures and processes to ensure that the fuel economy label is as accurate as possible."

FYI, http://www.komonews.com/news/consumer/Report-Hybrids-coming-up-short-in-delivering-promised-gas-mileage-215761301.html

[salsaguy]

good find the obob. let's hope they do update their test method accordingly.as we know some here are killing the epa numbers by far ( 55+mpg )

[Jmonty]

FYI, http://www.komonews.com/news/consumer/Report-Hybrids-coming-up-short-in-delivering-promised-gas-mileage-215761301.html

Ya, I should have posted that link. Google alerts for c-max brought that to my attention :)

[SnowStorm]

I voted NO since you can't change the EPA results as many have pointed out.

 

I just don't understand why we keep fussing at Ford for publishing the results of highly standardized tests when they have no choice.  Ford designed a "strong" hybrid that can use EV mode through much of the testing.  That's what you want in a hybrid.  But the result is that the EPA test gives a higher number than you get at "typical" Interstate speeds.  Instead of fussing at Ford, we should be fussing about all the "weak" hybrids that don't get an EPA highway rating that's higher than typical driving!  (And no, I have no association with Ford.)  Everyone keeps referring to "real world" driving like it's been defined.  My "real world highway" is not 70 to 80 mph but yours may be just that.  Point is, the EPA test is very standardized - though, of course, not perfect.

 

I'll take any EPA test over all the unverifiable reports, email quotes and mass user results put together.  Detailed user results (like some on this forum) are indeed helpful but we must always have the standardized tests.

[bigalpha]

Everyone keeps referring to "real world" driving like it's been defined. My "real world highway" is not 70 to 80 mph but yours may be just that. Point is, the EPA test is very standardized - though, of course, not perfect.

.

Because the test has standard components doesn't mean that the test can't be gamed.

[zhackwyatt]

Because the test has standard components doesn't mean that the test can't be gamed.

No reason to game.  The tests suck.  http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

[bigalpha]

No reason to game.  The tests suck.  http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

 

All the more reason to game.  What are the chances that Ford spent millions on developing this car only to just throw it in the test and call it good?  None.  Ford definitely knew what they were doing when putting this car in the test.  

[plus 3 golfer]

I agree that the EPA tests suck but it's the "game" to be played when comparing hybrids against hybrids and hybrids against non-hybrid vehicles. Big $$$$ ride on the outcome.

 

And, I have to agree with bigalpha, one doesn't spend millions (likely 100s of millions) to develop a product to have it fall short of market expectations and the competition. $$$$ will likely trump ethics especially when ones future is highly dependent on winning the game by any "legal" means. How the product actually performs in use vs the game is secondary to winning the game especially when there is a scapegoat - the designer of the game.