Not a c-maxer yet

[Winston]

Hi Folks, need to know the good, the bad and the ugly about owning a cmax. Anything would help

[plus 3 golfer]

All you need to do is look at the various forum topics, thread titles of interest, and read.

 

Good = FE, performance, comfort

Bad = FE, no start dead battery issue

Ugly = MFT and Sync

[markd]

Buy an SEL then you'll have no battery problems and on the issue of mft, I have yet to have a single problem with it. I love my c-max the only things that I dislike are fairly trivial, the buttons on the steering wheel where I like to lay my hands, the pocket in the door that is virtually worthless and poor mpg's in the winter. Other than that life's a gas!

Edited April 30, 2015 by markd

[brbevil]

Love mine - I have a 13 SEL live in the SE US where the temperatures don't swing that much.  I looked at a prius and others but really liked the CMAX.  Great interior room, its quick, super fuel efficient, quiet and its a blast to drive considering its a hybrid.  I haven't had any issues in 36K miles and it makes me smile every time I drive it.

[scottwood2]

Buy an SEL then you'll have no battery problems and on the issue of mft, I have yet to have a single problem with it. I love my c-max the only things that I dislike are fairly trivial, the buttons on the steering wheel where I like to lay my hands, the pocket in the door that is virtually worthless and poor mpg's in the winter. Other than that life's a gas!

 

Based on the poll here on this site SEL models do/did have these issues too.  I think the newer the car is the less likely to have the issue.  Also note that SE models with 202A or higher packages have a very low issue count as well. 

 

I am very happy with mine.  We have 3 of them at work and everyone I talked to are happy with the car. 

 

 

 

http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/1294-for-those-who-have-had-12v-battery-problems/?mode=show

[raadsel]

From what I've found, realizing I have not bought a C-Max but am still considering it. The positives, it is a fun car to drive that has a good owner loyalty score -- most C-Max owners seem to love their C-Max. It has good acceleration and power, particularly for a hybrid. It drives well, is quiet and well behaved on the road, especially for its size. It also gets good gas mileage, and seems capable of beating its current EPA numbers -- though this depends on how you drive it and the temperature (hybrids lose maybe 1 mpg in fuel economy for every 10 degree temperature drop, at least below 70 or so).

 

The height of the C-Max allows for easy entry/exit, particularly for tall drivers and putting car seats in the back. It also gives the C-Max good cargo space, particularly with the back seats folded down.

 

The C-Max can be a bargain. Sales were hurt after Ford was forced to lower the EPA figures, admitting they'd used the Fusion numbers for the C-Max (which isn't as aerodynamic). They were hurt further when Ford lowered the EPA numbers a second time. Worse, since that time, Ford has not done a lot of marketing for the C-Max -- most car buyers don't seem to be aware it even exists. Additionally, with gas prices so low, hybrids in general are not being looked at. All of this has lead to it being a buyers market for the C-Max.

 

The negatives from what I can find, and from my experience from a weekend with a C-Max. First, the battery issue. Though this is largely on the SE without MyFordTouch displays, all models have had complaints of the battery dying in only a few hours without a known cause. This also seems to lead to many people needing to replace batteries sooner than should be required, though most seem like they are being replaced under warranty. Having said that, I'm not sure if this should be a concern if buying a 2014 or 2015 SEL or even SE with MyFordTouch. If you want to be safe, it might be worth carrying a lithium battery that can jump start your car, typically available for around $100, that are relatively small and easily stored in the car. Since the 12V battery does not start the engine (the EV battery starts the engine), even smaller lithium jump starters should work fine since they only need to provide enough power to start the cars computers.

 

I'm starting to wonder if some C-Max's may have transmission issues, particularly where the transmission runs hotter than it should. There have only been a few reports here, indicating that it may effect only a small number of cars. OTOH, since most people are still under 50,000 miles on their C-Max's (since the model is less than 3 years old), it could be that it could be a wider issue as the cars age. This is especially true since transmission temperature is not something normally seen, merely alerts if they become dangerously hot. Again, though, it appears that those with problems are having them fixed under warranty.

 

Routine maintenance items are somewhat more difficult than on many other cars because of how cramped the engine compartment is;. One example would be the thread on changing the cabin air filter. This may or may not be an issue for you, depending on how much of your own maintenance you like to do. 

 

Last, the front seats seem to have issues with thigh support on longer drives (2 hours or more), but seem to be good otherwise. Back seats definitely seem to be uncomfortable for adults but the back seat does have good room due to the high roofline.

[kostby]

The GOOD:  An absolute blast to drive. Feels like a much larger vehicle inside, almost minivan proportions. Especially light and airy if you opt for the panoramic sunroof.

 

The BAD:  In the beginning it's hard to not treat the car like a videogame, always trying to "beat" your high mpg score and miles-per-tank. Some available dashboard stats and displays can promote 'distracted driving' if you let them.

 

The UGLY:  Resale value, if you're buying or leasing and are planning to trade it within ~2 to 5 years. There are thousands of used 2013 C-MAX and C-MAX Energi vehicles from rental and corporate fleets that now have 80,000 to 100,000 miles on them, and are selling at 30% to 50% of original sticker prices.

 

We've had our 2013 SE without My Ford Touch for 13 months and put about 5,500 miles on it. Yes, it is an early 2013 SE model and the 'battery' issue has occurred 4 times. Every single time, it occurred in our home garage, at least 8 hours after being parked. 3 of the 4 times, it was likely water intrusion. After the first occurrence, I purchased a $50 300-amp jump-start battery. No, it doesn't fix the problem, but for $50, it was worth the peace of mind of never being left 'stranded'.

 

If you have the time to shop around, check out cargurus.com. They display how long a given vehicle has been listed, so it's possible to easily locate the vehicles dealers are most likely wanting to move from inventory.

[fbov]

I'm one of the lucky owners who's only nonfuel expense has been oil changes and a blown tire I can't blame on Ford. The car's been in the shop many times under warranty, about half for recalls (October 2012 purchase, by my late father-in-law from whom we inherited). In fact, I'm driving a loaner today due to reverse camera, intelligent access and liftgate issues. But it's never failed to take me where I needed to go (save for the flat).

 

What I didn't expect was that the car has changed my personality... I'm less anxious, more patient, more willing to wait. And my wife doesn't recognize the new nut behind the wheel. I was an autocrosser for decades, and it showed in my driving style. Now I drive a hybrid, and it shows in my driving style, regardless my speed in the turns (never used brakes before, why start now?).

 

Internalizing Kostby's "BAD" is one of my goods. You'll be amazed how much stuff you can fit in one of these things - dressers, dining tables, and a stair lift in my case. Water heaters and laundry dryers in others'.

 

That said, I'd like to correct a couple things.

 

My data on temperature sensitivity shows more like 3MPG per 10F. It's a little less on the highway, a little more in rural driving (35MPH speed limits). I tell folks my mileage is between 30 and 60MPG depending on speed and season.

 

The C-Max is not "less aerodynamic" than the Fusion, it's BIGGER. About 5.7" taller, and only 1" narrower. Aerodynamic drag depends on two vehicle parameters, drag coefficient and cross-sectional area. The Fusion only pokes 92%as big of a hole in the air as the C-Max. That was obvious to Ford's engineers, even as their marketing dept. was screaming for an EPA rating better than the Prius.

 

Have fun, and enjoy your new car regardless the choice!

Frank

Edited April 30, 2015 by fbov

[stevedebi]

I'm one of the lucky owners who's only nonfuel expense has been oil changes and a blown tire I can't blame on Ford. The car's been in the shop many times under warranty, about half for recalls (October 2012 purchase, by my late father-in-law from whom we inherited). In fact, I'm driving a loaner today due to reverse camera, intelligent access and liftgate issues. But it's never failed to take me where I needed to go (save for the flat).

 

What I didn't expect was that the car has changed my personality... I'm less anxious, more patient, more willing to wait. And my wife doesn't recognize the new nut behind the wheel. I was an autocrosser for decades, and it showed in my driving style. Now I drive a hybrid, and it shows in my driving style, regardless my speed in the turns (never used brakes before, why start now?).

 

Internalizing Kostby's "BAD" is one of my goods. You'll be amazed how much stuff you can fit in one of these things - dressers, dining tables, and a stair lift in my case. Water heaters and laundry dryers in others'.

 

That said, I'd like to correct a couple things.

 

My data on temperature sensitivity shows more like 3MPG per 10F. It's a little less on the highway, a little more in rural driving (35MPH speed limits). I tell folks my mileage is between 30 and 60MPG depending on speed and season.

 

The C-Max is not "less aerodynamic" than the Fusion, it's BIGGER. About 5.7" taller, and only 1" narrower. Aerodynamic drag depends on two vehicle parameters, drag coefficient and cross-sectional area. The Fusion only pokes 92%as big of a hole in the air as the C-Max. That was obvious to Ford's engineers, even as their marketing dept. was screaming for an EPA rating better than the Prius.

 

Have fun, and enjoy your new car regardless the choice!

Frank

I believe that the FFH is rated at .27 cD, while the C-Max is .30. Plus, it is a bigger front section as well (as you noted).

Edited April 30, 2015 by stevedebi

[Automate]

You can't always trust Wikipedia but the table here say C-max 0.29, Fusion 0.275 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient

[ScubaDadMiami]

Most of us are pretty happy with the car. There are some noted issues, just like with many other cars on the market. My worst complaint is that I HATE the dead pedal/foot rest for the driver, which really starts to get to me on long drives. On the other hand, I have taken my C-MAX on trips that were as long as 5,400+ miles, and it's been pretty solid, handles well, and holds a lot inside.

[fbov]

I believe that the FFH is rated at .27 cD, while the C-Max is .30. Plus, it is a bigger front section as well (as you noted).

I didn't want to get into Cd, as there are so many tricks you can play to get the numbers you want ... but that's not the case with dimensions. This one should have been obvious. At least Ford came clean... twice.

 

 

... In fact, I'm driving a loaner today due to reverse camera, intelligent access and liftgate issues.

 

Update from the dealer; two of these are all related, and the third covered under a techincal service bulletin, I'm told, and I do see a new TSB 14-0070 (2/15) on the forum that looks right. Gotta love vendors that address customer problems! (And forums that allow you to research them independently!!)

 

HAve fun,

Frank

[stevedebi]

You can't always trust Wikipedia but the table here say C-max 0.29, Fusion 0.275 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automobile_drag_coefficient

I don't trust them - hold on a minute while I go change that number to .40!

 

I did a check when I bought the car, but I don't recall if it was .29 or .30. But in any case it is more efficient that the FFH.

 

EDIT: I did a check, and according to some posts on the hybrid forum, Ford itself changed the estimated cD between 2013 and 2014. Do a search for "drag" on this page:

 

http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/4654-cmax-testing-from-argonne-national-laboratory/

Edited May 1, 2015 by stevedebi

[raadsel]

I don't trust them - hold on a minute while I go change that number to .40!

 

I did a check when I bought the car, but I don't recall if it was .29 or .30. But in any case it is more efficient that the FFH.

 

EDIT: I did a check, and according to some posts on the hybrid forum, Ford itself changed the estimated cD between 2013 and 2014. Do a search for "drag" on this page:

 

http://fordcmaxhybridforum.com/topic/4654-cmax-testing-from-argonne-national-laboratory/

 

Yes, that is one of the things I have seen in my research of the C-Max. One thing I have noticed, looking at a used 2013 and 2014 side by side, both SELs, is that the 2014 has some plastic pieces running down each side of the back window, they stick out about an inch -- I'm guessing to help air flow around the back of the car better.

[plus 3 golfer]

Don't confuse Cd with Road Load HP coefficients and how RLHP coefficients are derived for use in EPA emissions testing on a dyno.  We don't know what errors Ford made that resulted in lowering the EPA FE but it applied to several models (see below),  What we know is that the RLHP coefficients changed such that the RLHP increased resulting in lower FE.  Generally, the coefficients are determined by coast down data. I doubt it is the published Cd that changed as the Cd, AFAIK, for 2013-2015 Fusion line (conventional, HEV, and PHEV) and the C-Max remain the same.

 

"Ford identified an error with fuel economy ratings for certain vehicles through its internal testing and notified the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Ford worked with the EPA as the agency retested the vehicles, which resulted in lower fuel economy ratings for Ford's 2013- and 2014-model year hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles, as well as most 2014-model year Fiestas."  - Ford

 

"Ford discovered that it underestimated some of the real world factors, including aerodynamics and tire friction that are important inputs into fuel economy testing." - EPA 

[raadsel]

Don't confuse Cd with Road Load HP coefficients and how RLHP coefficients are derived for use in EPA emissions testing on a dyno.  We don't know what errors Ford made that resulted in lowering the EPA FE but it applied to several models (see below),  What we know is that the RLHP coefficients changed such that the RLHP increased resulting in lower FE.  Generally, the coefficients are determined by coast down data. I doubt it is the published Cd that changed as the Cd, AFAIK, for 2013-2015 Fusion line (conventional, HEV, and PHEV) and the C-Max remain the same.

 

"Ford identified an error with fuel economy ratings for certain vehicles through its internal testing and notified the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Ford worked with the EPA as the agency retested the vehicles, which resulted in lower fuel economy ratings for Ford's 2013- and 2014-model year hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles, as well as most 2014-model year Fiestas."  - Ford

 

"Ford discovered that it underestimated some of the real world factors, including aerodynamics and tire friction that are important inputs into fuel economy testing." - EPA 

 

What I was talking about in my previous post, the first time the C-Max fuel economy was dropped (from 47 overall to 43), Ford stated they had used the EPA numbers they created for the Fusion for the C-Max, that they didn't even test the C-Max -- it was a loophole the EPA allowed, due to the two vehicles having identical powertrains.

 

So the 43 was the first number they had when they performed the EPA testing, and then they lowered it a second time when they audited their testing protocols, which you mention in your post; which lowered the C-Max to 40 overall, and the Fusion to 42. This article, from Consumer Reports, talks about Ford lowering fuel economy ratings on several models, but also mentions the first lowering of fuel economy ratings on the C-Max.

[plus 3 golfer]

Yes, Ford used the Fusion as a proxy for the C-Max for EPA data (the first time) which was corrected about 2 years ago. The use of the Fusion as a proxy with a lower Cd than the C-Max has been discussed many times.

 

My post is in response to stevedebi's referenced link of the C-Max testing by Argonne which used C-Max RLHP coefficients which were incorrect and the statement "Ford itself changed the estimated cD between 2013 and 2014."  We seem to be mixing Cd (and possible changes to the Cd of the C-Max over time) with dyno testing of the C-Max using the "correct" RLHP coefficients in arriving at the latest EPA FE numbers.  

[Winston]

Than you everyone that replied, your imput was most helpful. :)

Edited May 4, 2015 by Winston

[stevedebi]

Yes, Ford used the Fusion as a proxy for the C-Max for EPA data (the first time) which was corrected about 2 years ago. The use of the Fusion as a proxy with a lower Cd than the C-Max has been discussed many times.

 

My post is in response to stevedebi's referenced link of the C-Max testing by Argonne which used C-Max RLHP coefficients which were incorrect and the statement "Ford itself changed the estimated cD between 2013 and 2014."  We seem to be mixing Cd (and possible changes to the Cd of the C-Max over time) with dyno testing of the C-Max using the "correct" RLHP coefficients in arriving at the latest EPA FE numbers.  

Thanks for the clarification! I still don't know if it is .30 or just slightly less. Still higher than the Fusion, and with a larger cross section as well.

[nsteblay]

I have no complaints.  Been averaging over 50 MPG since it warmed up.  I only get upper 30's in cold weather (live in Minnesota).  I find it super comfortable and the headroom is great for a small car - it has a small SUV feel.  The kids named it the Cardis after Dr. Who's Tardis because its bigger on the inside than it is on the outside. I find the acceleration more than adequate - much better than the Prius.  Considering buying a used one for the girls who just got their licenses - lots of steals on the used car market.

[plus 3 golfer]

Thanks for the clarification! I still don't know if it is .30 or just slightly less. Still higher than the Fusion, and with a larger cross section as well.

It's not going to matter whether the C-Max Cd is 0.30 or 0.295 or 0.29 in the scheme of things.  It's not a material change  ;)  

 

A 10% reduction from 0.30 to 0.27 might reduce the RLHP by around 5% in highway driving.   And a quick calculation of frontal area shows that the C-Max frontal area is likely nearly 10% more than the Fusion.  Hence, the Fusion with a 10% lower Cd and 10% lower FA is rated 41 mpg Highway or over 10% higher than the C-Max which is 37 mpg highway.

Edited May 6, 2015 by Plus 3 Golfer