Ford C Max, Prius killer?

oh

Snap!

 

Yeah, but you intentionally only present a fraction of the data to misrepresent the data.

Consumer Reports also found the Toyota Prius was off by 7 MPG on the Prius C and 6 MPG on the regular Prius.

I know a lot of people on here that testify they meet or exceed the Prius EPA mileage despite Consumer Reports calling the Prius fraudulent.

You have to reasonably ask:
1. How are they testing these cars?
2. Are people driving them the same?

As anecdotal evidence, I know when I drive the Prius, I drive far less spirited than when I drive the Fusion.


Did Consumer Reports carry an accelerometer to ensure they accelerated with each vehicle similarly?

There's tons of relevant information missing about their tests.

 

Fuelly data is what it is. I posted the data that was available at the time (which is why I took a screenshot instead of linking... It would give a time stamp to see if there is value to this 10k breakin claim by Ford). CR doesn't say if they make them all accelerate at the same rate. Why wouldn't they? I doubt they are out to stick it to ford and would intentionally thrash on the Cmax while hypermiling the Prius.

I said I wanted to see a full year of data on the Cmax, too, to account for the seasonal fuel economy changes. I think I'm being pretty unbiased.

 

The Ford Fusion with it's Euro-Ford DNA is more of a drivers car than a Prius. I suspect that Fusion owners drive a bit more vigorously on average the Prius owners.

 

Drivers for the EPA test have to follow an acceleration map on a monitor. Deviate from it, and the test has to be redone. While the method means you might not see a difference between eco and power modes on the test, it does control several variables that allow fair comparisons between models.

The only instrumentation CR appears to use on the car is a fuel flow meter. This means acceleration rates and braking is pretty much being measured by the seat of the pants. I'm sure their test drivers try to be consistent in how they drive the cars, and an average of at least two drivers is reported, but there is no measurement being taken or feed back to the driver to ensure the same acceleration profile is met. An extra cup of coffee could shift a testers perception of acceleration for the day.

 

My complaint, as mentioned before, about the EPA tests is that the distance is so short that battery charge level can impact the mileage rating over that short distance. If I run the EPA tests right after going down a long mountain, the vehicle will have more electric charge to run off than if I was going up a series of hills or running in EV mode prior to running the test. Now apply that principle to a bigger non-plug-in battery and a higher electric only speed and you could have the same advantage. Over long enough if a test, the gas engine would eventually have to recharge the battery if you delivered the car with a full battery and that would normalize the mpg values. Adjusting the battery discharge high and low levels can additionally trick the test. One could probably get away with these methods on an 11 mile test, like the EPA ones. My personal opinion is that the EPA test needs to be done differently. Do a 100 mile highway and 50 mile city cycles with a lot more variance than what is currently done, and a lot of the mileage gaming (shift points, gear ratios that are only used in the Great Plains and downhill, etc) tricks would go away. I'd love to see a mountain cycle thrown in there because that has a big impact on cars that really have to rev to make power, my Prius for example. A "short drive" cycle would be nice, too. Many people on my 4Runner forum are mad about the gas mileage in their 4Runner, but they only drive 5 miles round trip and the big V6 doesn't get warmed up until you arrive to your destination. Another good cycle would be "bat out of hell". If you drive 75 everywhere, you might be no worse off in a V6 Camry than an I4 Camry, for example. Basically, the two cycles we're given by the EPA are inadequate for many consumers, IMO.

/off topic

 

100%

Yep

Agreed

Former Prius Owner here, and yes I do drive the Fusion more aggressively than I did the Prius. The new one handles even better then my 2010, so I am having more fun with it, although not the reason it is not getting close to EPA. Then again, since it did take nearly 5000 miles on my 2010 before MPG improved, maybe same thing with my new one.

 

I'll bet if they put the Mythbusters behind the wheel, they could get a more true basis on what the car gets. I really liked the episode with the tailgate up, vs down, and proved what I had been saying for years. If CR isn't using test equipment to measure statistics during the test, then it is an illegitimate test.

 

A more involved test would be great, but it has to be balanced with time and cost. Without expansion of testing facilities and personal, the EPA's current test facilities might be able to audit only 1% to 3% of cars with a longer test.

 

Agree absolutely here, I don't trust the methodology. The 150 mile loop is really prone to differences in whether and drivers. CR is testing two things that the EPA is not, and it is information that people want to know

- Steady State highway milage - Motor trend does 75 mph which seems like a more appropriate than EPA or CR's 65 mph. That is the test where the c-max really falls down because of its higher drag. It also is what pushes the prius-c down.
- City driving with cold engines. This is where hybrids do much worse than EPA. Short distance cold engine is what pushes down my and other fuel economy.

The current city test really seems to love hybrids and maybe needs to be rewritten. According to the recent EPA comments its been a problem since the prius first came out. I agree that the cruise control highway portion is not something we can have the EPA do. We should leave that one up to the magazines, but the highspeed test may need some help.

 

2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid: Prius Killer? | CNET TV | Video Product Reviews, CNET Podcasts, Tech Shows, Live CNET Video

 

I hope this isn't a repost, but it is a very detailed and recent 16 minute C-Max hybrid video review by Truth About Cars. Reviewer really likes the C-Max hybrid and claims about 41 to 42 MPG over 600 miles. Based on this review, C-Max seems to be a good alternative to Prius liftback or maybe Prius v.

 

I'm doing 50.6 MPG in my 2011 Prius over its 9,000 mile life, but it doesn't see many 1 mile trips to the store. I take the other car or bicycle for that. Much of the time I drive it solo and we have mild weather, 50 in Winter, 70 Summer. Gassed up yesterday and did only 1 mile trips to the store. Result - at about 5 miles on tripmeter, consumption gage is reading about 30 MPG :-0

 

Makes me feel pretty good that I got 53 lifetime on the 2007 Prius over the 22K miles that we had it.

 

Its pretty easy to get over 50 mpg when its warm and dry, and you
have no passengers in the vehicle.

The real test for true MPG's is winter in northwest Oregon, when its 40 degrees, raining heavy, and
you have your headlights, defroster, windshield wipers on and you plowing through an inch
of water on the highway. You will never see 50 mpg in those conditions....

 

I was pretty close to those conditions yesterday. Three in the car, high 40's, rainy, was seeing in the high 30's in heavier rain on way to SFO to pick up bro in law, car managed to claw its way up to 47 in lighter rain after 200 mostly highway miles, but that's more like 44 or 45 actual MPGs. And I despise the single cash lane leading up to toll plaza of Westbound San Mateo bridge! Half hour wait and you have to cut in line. 3 Fastrak lanes, one cash lane and most needed the cash lane which stretched back for a mile. Argh.

 

eh, the fast trak lanes usually have cameras and record your plate and have a website you can log into the pay the tolls. At least the TW in Il, the Ipass has that.

 

If the C-Max hybrid can average 40 MPG without too much trouble, I think it can sell alright. 40mpg is a lot better than 26 for a CR-V, but you lose some cargo space in C-Max.

I think it's a little funky how C-Max uses a key ignition in the SE version, but people coming from a regular car will never know the difference. The SEL has push button start although I didn't see it when sitting in driver's seat. It is a very comfortable driver's seat and the steering wheel feels good. There's more of a left foot rest than the one in liftback Prius. The whole knee box area in C-Max doesn't strike me as being all that roomy, but it would be good enough for me.

Loads of headroom in the C-Max. Decent rear seat room behind driver's seat when set for me at 6'2" tall. However, the rear seat height is a little lower than my Prius liftback, so it's not quite as comfortable. Rear seat headroom is very good. It looks as though you could squeeze three adults across the back in C-Max as it's a little wider than my liftback, but it would be a pretty tight fit for three 200 pounders back there. I would say C-Max cargo area with seats up is about the same as regular Prius, although C-Max area is a little taller. There's a bit of underfloor cargo area, but pretty small compared to my car. Shame there's no donut spare tire. Mine came in really handy when I got a puncture. I put the donut on at home and took the wheel only to Toyota.

Speaking of wheels, C-Max wheels (and tires) look great. 17" wheels and 225 width tires are going to make it more surefooted on a bumpy highway than mine.

I think it is a well laid out and decent looking car; the interior and exterior are much more mainstream than the Prius. Hopefully it ends up being very reliable. If the EPA revises the combined fuel economy to, say, 41 MPG, that would still be quite good. The car supposedly has 188 hp total and it must feel more substantial on the highway than mine.


So, what am I saying? I hope C-Max sells pretty well and makes Toyota work hard to one-up it in its 4th generation Prius.

 

I don't think a C Max can last as long as a Prius. Reliability as well.
No panic.

 

Dont discount Ford's reliability, I have had a lot of Ford cars and they have all been reliable. The Fusion has been a very reliable line for Ford, the only problem I ever had with the Fusion was a bad door handle, but it was a cheap easy 15 minute fix I did myself for $35. My 2010 FFH had a clogged MAP sensor, but that was due to it sitting in a garage for half a year before it was purchased by me, it had a spider nest in it. Other than that, no problems.

OTOH I did had plenty of issues with the Camry I had, poor door seals, wind noise, sticking sunroof, etc. I had the Prius in twice for the MDF failing.

For me, seems like Toyota had more problems than my Fords did.