Ford Says It’s Talking to EPA About Hybrid Mileage Tests

[darrelld]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-14/ford-says-it-s-talking-to-epa-about-hybrid-mileage-tests.html

 

Sales of Ford’s hybrids haven’t been hurt by the controversy surrounding the real world mileage reviewers are getting in those models, Hinrichs said.

“We’re seeing great sales,” Hinrichs said. “We follow the EPA test guidelines and we’re proud of the fuel economy and technology in our vehicles.”

Ford sold 4,848 C-Max hybrids last month, a 52 percent gain compared with October, its first full month of sales. The company sold 1,834 Fusion hybrids in November, up from 993 a year earlier, according to researcher Autodata Corp.

 

 

[AgentCMAX]

From the article...

 

Ford isn’t asking the EPA to make any specific modifications to its mileage testing procedures, Hinrichs said.

 

 

That's too bad (but expected from Ford's perspective)!!!  The EPA really needs another HWY test that includes HWY speed of 65 mph (minimum) for uncongested freeway driving simulation.

Edited December 14, 2012 by AgentCMAX

[C-MaxJaxon]

I'd like to see mileage at several speeds like 55, 65 and 75, or even a line graph showing mileage up to whatever the highest legal state speed limit is.

[AgentCMAX]

I'd like to see mileage at several speeds like 55, 65 and 75, or even a line graph showing mileage up to whatever the highest legal state speed limit is.

 

Good point.  Instead of display a couple of MPG numbers, simply display an MPG graph at various speeds (say in 10 mph increments).

[mtberman]

Not a bad idea; it would be helpful for some people. I've seen great variations in fuel mileage in certain cars depending on how I drive and general driving conditions.

 

The most variation I experienced was in my 2004 Prius. In city driving in very cold weather the engine ran constantly and the battery motors more-or-less stopped working. It could do maybe 30 MPG. But in ideal conditions it could do 50 MPG or higher.

 

The biggest steady-state highway cruise variation I've experienced was in a 2010 VW Jetta TDI. With cruise set at 65 MPH on the interstate, it got over 40 MPG. Bump the cruise up to 75 and the mileage instantly dropped to about 35 MPG. At 85 it hovered near 30 MPG.

 

YMMV. I wonder why people make such a big deal out of it. I recall there was some scandal about unmet MPG expectations when I got the Prius back in late 2003, but it sort of blew over after a while.

[erwhitham]

I could have posted the same. My 2007 Prius showed 30mpg ( or less) in very cold weather with heater blasting. Increasing speeds to above 65 showed a marked drop in mpg too. And even driving into the wind reduced mileage. Whatever I get in my C Max won't disappoint.

[darrelld]

Not a bad idea; it would be helpful for some people. I've seen great variations in fuel mileage in certain cars depending on how I drive and general driving conditions.

 

The most variation I experienced was in my 2004 Prius. In city driving in very cold weather the engine ran constantly and the battery motors more-or-less stopped working. It could do maybe 30 MPG. But in ideal conditions it could do 50 MPG or higher.

 

The biggest steady-state highway cruise variation I've experienced was in a 2010 VW Jetta TDI. With cruise set at 65 MPH on the interstate, it got over 40 MPG. Bump the cruise up to 75 and the mileage instantly dropped to about 35 MPG. At 85 it hovered near 30 MPG.

 

YMMV. I wonder why people make such a big deal out of it. I recall there was some scandal about unmet MPG expectations when I got the Prius back in late 2003, but it sort of blew over after a while.

My Jetta TDI would average about the same at 75 mph. My C-Max gets about 35 at 75 and drops to 32 at 80.

[valkraider]

My truck drops to 5mpg at 80, my van dropped to 12mpg. 32 at 80 will be pretty good. :)

 

I can pile on about the Jetta. My TDI Jetta was about the same as those mentioned here. It loved those super slab miles. It downright moved... ;)

[MikeB]

We've got lots of VW TDI drivers here, but that should probably be expected. I usually set the cruise on my Jetta Sportwagen right at 70, it usually got about 42mpg at that speed, above the 40 EPA number.  I expect my C-Max will be below that, but not using diesel may balance it out. Of course, my big gain will be driving in town entirely in EV mode, which is the reason I'm changing cars.

 

I think the idea of showing an mpg curve for different highways speeds would be great. It would also encourage automakers to focus more attention on aerodynamics, where I think there's room for big improvements coming out of small changes. There's a few modders out there who have seen huge gains by adding a boat tail to the rear of their vehicle, I bet we could see significant improvement in the automakers just put more taper into the tailgate shape.

[darrelld]

We've got lots of VW TDI drivers here, but that should probably be expected. I usually set the cruise on my Jetta Sportwagen right at 70, it usually got about 42mpg at that speed, above the 40 EPA number. I expect my C-Max will be below that, but not using diesel may balance it out. Of course, my big gain will be driving in town entirely in EV mode, which is the reason I'm changing cars.

 

I think the idea of showing an mpg curve for different highways speeds would be great. It would also encourage automakers to focus more attention on aerodynamics, where I think there's room for big improvements coming out of small changes. There's a few modders out there who have seen huge gains by adding a boat tail to the rear of their vehicle, I bet we could see significant improvement in the automakers just put more taper into the tailgate shape.

Buggy IPS code duplicate post Edited December 17, 2012 by darrelld

[darrelld]

We've got lots of VW TDI drivers here, but that should probably be expected. I usually set the cruise on my Jetta Sportwagen right at 70, it usually got about 42mpg at that speed, above the 40 EPA number. I expect my C-Max will be below that, but not using diesel may balance it out. Of course, my big gain will be driving in town entirely in EV mode, which is the reason I'm changing cars.

 

I think the idea of showing an mpg curve for different highways speeds would be great. It would also encourage automakers to focus more attention on aerodynamics, where I think there's room for big improvements coming out of small changes. There's a few modders out there who have seen huge gains by adding a boat tail to the rear of their vehicle, I bet we could see significant improvement in the automakers just put more taper into the tailgate shape.

TDI's equipped with manual transmissions will beat the DSG highway mileage with their lower final drive ratio.

 

Currently there is a 30% price difference in D2 and RUG so my C-Max at 32 mpg costs the same per mile as my Passat TDI at 40 mpg.

[darrelld]

My truck drops to 5mpg at 80, my van dropped to 12mpg. 32 at 80 will be pretty good. :)

 

I can pile on about the Jetta. My TDI Jetta was about the same as those mentioned here. It loved those super slab miles. It downright moved... ;)

The diesel sound at highway speed is addicting, love pulling into truck stops (Loves) for fuel next to the big rigs.

 

Edited December 17, 2012 by darrelld

[valkraider]

We loved our TDI, but found that 95% of all of our driving is stop&go city.  The TDI isn't all that good at stop&go.  Since we can't afford two cars, we decided to go with the better choice for city driving, which is also a decent choice for highways as well.

 

Know thy self... 

 

;)

[dusty]

My truck drops to 5mpg at 80, my van dropped to 12mpg. 32 at 80 will be pretty good. :)!

 

same here. went from my explorer. which was a great truck. and highway was about 11-15mpg.... cmaxxer now at 75, around 32? and easily 45 city driving. my gas bills are 1/4 now.

now about that non opening glass roof, especially in 300 days a year warm L.A........ maybe when my lease expires in 2 years....

[garypark]

First, let me be clear that I do not regret having bought a Ford C-Max. Over-all I am very happy with the car. Fuel economy however it the one area where I am disappointed. I believe the Consumer Reports values far more that I do the EPA (window sticker) numbers. Also, I consider the actual fuel economy numbers that I am getting to be quite good. They are in fact only disappointing as a broken promise from Ford Motor Company. 

 

I have kept spread sheets for my last 3 cars, recording the gas milage for every tank of gas that I bought. For all of those cars I achieved numbers that actually matched the EPA estimates very well.

 

Nissan 350z: Rated 18 city, 26 highway. My average 23.7 (worst 20.8, best 26.5)

 

Honda Civic EX: Rated 28 city, 36 highway. My average 32.5 (worst 26.9, best 42.8)

 

Honda Civic Hybrid: Rated 40 city, 45 highway. My average 42.3 (worst 38.4, best 48.8)

 

As you can see my personal experience does not make me think that the EPA numbers are always bunk. Nor do I accept that these results indicate that I am “lead footed” to any extreme. I believe the numbers on the window sticker should reflect reasonable expectations - not the best one can possibly achieve under ideal conditions or most perfect driving techniques. Clearly, Nissan and Honda both manage to provide very acceptable estimates.

 

So far my C-Max is not coming anywhere near as close to keeping its promises as these three cars did. My average is 37.6. The worst is 36.2, best 39.1.

 

With just over 3000 miles in my current C-max numbers it is still very early to come to any conclusions, but it is not looking good.  Sorry to say, but I think the Ford numbers may be self-serving over estimates. I am not happy to hold this opinion as it tends to sour my impression of what is otherwise an excellent car.

[valkraider]

They can't be self serving over-estimates if they are what the EPA test results are.

 

The tests are the tests.

 

If the EPA certifies the numbers then they are what they are, blame the tests that the EPA designed and that Ford is required by law to use and post on the car.

 

I don't know what to tell you about your spreadsheets. But it is a well known fact that hybrids have far not variation in fuel economy numbers than regular ICE vehicles because the EPA tests don't push the hybrids the way real people will.

 

There are only so many ways to spin this. If Ford messed up the numbers - then complain. But if the EPA certifies Ford numbers then the problem is with the tests and what they are designed to test - not with Ford.

 

The simple fact is a hybrid will do very well on a test which averages 48mph and doesn't go more than 10 miles. But that doesn't reflect how regular people use the car.

 

I and many others have pointed out that if they really wanted to test the hybrids they need to move at sustained real world highway speeds (perhaps 70mph) for at least 30 miles.

 

What I would prefer is the addition of a simple graph showing fuel economy at various sustained speeds. They could add one test which runs 30 miles at a sustained speed, and do it for 4 different speeds. 45mph, 55mph, 65mph, and 75mph. Then show the graph with 4 bars reflecting the sustained fuel economy.

 

Do that in addition to the current tests, and put it in the window sticker too.

 

In the C-Max Hybrid I could easily drive 48mph for 10 Miles and get over 50mpg.

 

Edit: I wish the forum admin would enable TapaTalk. The mobile web entry is flaky...

Edited December 24, 2012 by valkraider

[garypark]

I have seen trip "MGP numbers" of over 70. (Purely down hill and under 60mph.) Driving to work usually over 50 coming home maxes out (C-Maxes out) at 34. But

pump to pump nothing close to 47 yet.