Consumer Reports MPG Result For 2013 Fusion & C-Max Hybrids!

Only hybrid that uses lions really well is Prius+/Alpha... rest is just proof how little investment these companies have in hybrids.

 

I apologize if I came off that way. I was just put off by the way the toyota PR machine handles lithium batteries.

Shouldn't that read that Toyota is not just a PR machine. Didn't they spend almost $2B on advertising last year.

They used to put out FUD that lithium was not reliable. Now that they sell 3 different vehicles - alpha, prius phv, rav4 bev - they can't do that anymore. The latest was the interview with Motor Trend where they implied that Lithium was worse with high currents by saying it was harder to manage. It does require a different BMS, but the chemistry in the alpha can provide for higher currents. Since they already are "managing" it in one of their cars, I consider the line an excuse.

Yep, they are doing something different than what they are saying. That is why I said do not believe the rumor mill. They put out the line on leaks, but we can see what they are realy doing. The handwriting is on the wall, nimh isn't going to be put in cars in 10 years,. That is why the FUD is offensive. It isn't as if toyota's PR machine is much different than the other auto companies. They all like to portray weakness as strength.

 

I really didn't want to get into a lithium pissing match, but ...

Camry xle gains 280 lbs to become a hybrid
Fusion SE gains 190 lbs to become a hybrid

The camry packaged most of the nimh battery outside the trunk. The fusion will have a more noticeable decrease of trunk space despite its smaller battery.

Not all of the difference in the battery, but it contributes less to the weight gain. The camry battery also has higher capacity though 1.6 kwh versus 1.4 kwh. Ford might have done a little better using a 1.6 kwh battery to add more power to mg2 for acceleration.

2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid Road Test - Review - Car and Driver

In other words lithium saved 44 lbs, allowed for a fold flat seat and more trunk room, and provided more power to get to 62 mph in ev mode (likely the key spec that artificially pushes epa highway miles higher, but a real world advantage too). Still a 1.6 kwh pack, the energy of the camry hybrid would have weighed only 15 lbs more and would have allowed for 193hp and acceleration closer to the camry hybrid and perhaps better cruise control electronic pulse and glide on the highway.

The difference in mpg is likely not much to talk about. If you go by epa you get the fusion about 6 mpg better, if you go by CR its about 1 mpg better. Car and Driver got 2 mpg more in the fusion than the camry. YMMV.

These are not big differences, but think about it this way in technological terms. When the dvr (tevo) and dvd came out they were not a huge amount better than betamax They did ride the technology curve downward, and now I have huge capacity in my dvr, and the blue ray player gives me vastly superior picture and sound to recorded beta tapes (I think though I have not watched a betamax). Similarly Lithium has great promise for improvement, nimh is pretty played out.

 

I agree with the lithium promise but am still bothered that the chemistry may include some conversion of the reactants to inert compounds during the charge/discharge cycles. In contrast, there is no evidence of that with the NiMH with the exception of 'gas leakage.' The leakage can be solved by re-hydration.

Still, my ignorance about lithium battery chemistry should not be read as anything but something I'm curious about. If I were younger, I'd probably point my career in that direction.

Bob Wilson

 

There are many different chemistries with different trade offs. Ford claims to have tested theirs - panasonic cells in the hybrids - to 200,000 miles. Hyundai to 300,000. What is difficult to do quickly in the lab is actually age them to see what time will do. Key here as it is in the nimh is bms. Lithium should be able to provide a larger SOC without deterioration, but above a certain level charge must be slowed down.

A theoretical example non knowing what the absolute fusion hybrid or toyota alpha software does follow. SOC is mostly kept in 25%-70%, from 70%-80% the battery is charged slower, from 80%-90% even slower. If the software can guess driving behavior then it can manage the SOC for acceleration and regen. If it guesses wrong it may not have room for regen or extra juice for acceleration.

The key here is we are at the early days of lithium traction batteries. Price should continue to decrease, power to volume and energy to volume should continue to increase.

To bring it back to topic -
According to the EPA spokesman, the ability to run with the engine off, gives hybrids an advantage on the test. The extra power from the lithium cells is one factor in higher EV speed (62mph in ford hybrids, 43 mph in prius). That will give it better test numbers. Whether you can use it in the real world depends on your route and speed. YMMV

 

Well, all I can say is, no matter WHAT i tried, my 2013 FFH does no better than 38 on the highway, no matter what speed I drove it. The one thing I noticed, if I am on cruise, on level road, and hit the cancel, it feels as though the brakes are applied. Makes me wonder if something is dragging, and I also noticed, no matter what I do, turn off, or what, when it is on, but not in gear, everything off, there is still a draw on the batter.

 

Something is broke. If you were in the Huntsville AL area, I'd be interested in taking a look.

Bob Wilson

 

Wish I had the time Bob, because I am very PO right now! I got to get this into the dealer now, and P1$$3d that the dealer in Fl blew me off so now there are 1200 more miles added to it before I can get it documented in case I file for a Lemon.

Doubly PO that Ford reps are ignoring me on FB. When I had an issue with the F150 and posted, I had a response right away, and you would think that something as new and hot as the Fusion they would be on top of it, but Nope!

 

no they did not... however your imagination is running wild.

I cant understand why would you, an internet user, think to know better than some top engineers in the field... but hey, obviously you do.

why dont you get one of these new Ford hybrids so you can help these poor people get EPA mpg?

 

it is same thing that EVERYONE is reporting. So if it is broke, it is broke by design.

 

Latent defects are not uncommon and sometimes there are undocumented, operational modes that need to be avoided. This is why I plotted MPG vs mph for every Prius from the first trip from the dealer. So I don't call the steep performance drop above 65 mph as 'broke by design' but just the characteristics of the NHW11 Prius.

Now I am curious about the diagnosis of this CMAX problem. But not owning one, I don't have a test model and I don't knowingly buy something that I know is broken . . . with one exception:

I knew the engine was rotten but swapping engines is not uncommon in experimental aviation.

Bob Wilson

 

That is quite an attitude. Hey if you haven't read the FUD by toyota against Lithium that is fine, but it does exist. Maybe you just don't think its FUD, I don't know.

I was trained as an electrical engineer, and in the past specified batteries in industrial equipment. I also have consulted to automotive. I am not an naive internet user. I have never, ever heard a top engineer say that lithium is inferior to nimh. Its the PR people putting out the words.
- Engineer, we have not had time to age test the batteries. PR the new batteries are less reliable

- Engineer, we need a different BMS for Lithium, but they have a greater power and energy density. PR engineers say Nimh is easier to manage at high power settings.
Its not too suprising as there is a big investment by toyota in nimh technology, but we can try to push them to embrace the better current technology. I would expect even out of things from toyota's own pr, that lithium will be less expensive over the life time of a new car design. Try to buy a new phone or lap top with nimh.

I can't even get close to epa in my prius unless I am doing a long trip, how would I be able to help people get higher mileage. I can understand YMMV and the test does not test how these folks are using their cars. CR also does not drive like people drive. What you can't do is compare CR to EPA.

There needs to be more time to find out what people are getting, and wait until we at least change seasons. We do know that the ford design will inflate highway mileage on the test. Also don't get 18" wheel upgrade?

Ford would do well to not advertise EPA ratings while CR is doing its budgening. CR seemed to hate the prius c, civic, and c-max - but that does not mean these are not good cars.

 

I would rather say the nhw11 just didn't consider that speeds over 60 mph were important. It wasn't designed to be for fuel economy there, its not a broken design.

The c-max and fusion were designed for these higher speeds, but... expectations may have been set too high from the epa test. The engine is powerful enough to be efficient at higher speeds. cdA - drag for the c-max though does say that mileage will drop off fairly quickly as you get much faster than 60mph, it will be much better than other cross overs though. I am concerned with a real defect in acdii's fusion here, when mileage does not improve when going slower.

We can't blame the engineers for a design defect when compared to a government test. If the fusion beats the camry hybrid then its not a defect, its not as if an engineer is ever tasked with beating epa in regular driving. That's a failure in the government test, although the epa is much better than the Japanese or European test. If it is user perception its the fault of sales and marketing. Other than packaging the c-max and fusion hybrid systems appear to be very good.

What kind of engine did it have? Being a private pilot, I wouldn't really want to go up in a plane with a bad engine.

 

First off, I don't fault the early designer, Rex Taylor, who used the best information he had in the late 1970s to build his engines. Hindsight is 20/20 but often due to seeing what happened to others.

N19WT had a 60 hp, HAPI, 1800 cc, converted VW engine:

Bye-bye HAPI . . . parts for someone else.

These engines had known problems:

• Propeller hub attached to accessory drive end of crank shaft by woodruff key and 'Jesus nut.'
  • A slip-joint, the power pulses were concentrated on the woodruff key leading to a stress fracture to the threads of the Jesus nut. The crack would follow the thread around and the prop hub separate from the engine. Since the mass of the engine remained with the plane, it became a glider.
  • Light-duty bearings in the accessory end led to resonance stress on the crank shaft.
  • Two in-flight prop separations, another on the ground, and one known crank shaft failure in flight.
• Updraft throttle body with unheated manifold requires both carb heat and mixture. The N19WT engine log shows a lot of problems with the original carb including evidence there may have been a manifold leak leading to an early, 100 hour, rebuild of the head on one side.
• Magneto and fixed advance, electronic ignition. It could only start on the magneto but once running, the electronic ignition could be turned on. It is an unrebuildable magneto. As for the electronic ignition, dual-coil, fixed advance, can not start engine.

Now I do not consider the 3,200 rpm peak power speed to be a design problem given the aircraft speed range, 60-140 mph. It came with two, 52", fixed pitch props. It turns out that aircraft with a higher minimum-maximum speed range have less prop unloading with a faster rpm. A slower turning, fixed pitch prop unloads at a lower speed which limits the top speed:


Engineering is the science and art of making the best decision from a number of choices and combinations. So I'm going with a 60 hp, Hirth 3502 with an electrically adjustable Ivop prop:

• water cooled
  • prevents cold-shock on descent
  • safe cabin heat as no exhaust heat shroud is needed
  • lower cooling drag at high-speed (aka., P-51)
  • reduced engine noise
• fuel injected
  • no fuel cooled, throttle plate for carb ice
  • very short manifold attached to engine case that is too warm for carb ice
  • automatic altitude mixture adjustment, no mixture control
• oil injected
  • lubrication is engine rpm based
  • no mixing of gas and oil
  • no oil changes as like gas, consumed in flight
• dual, electronic ignition
  • starts on electronic ignition
  • advance based upon optimum rpm
• 128 lbs vs 172.6 lbs
  • saves 45 lbs of empty weight
  • requires new, forward, engine mount and cowling

There are other changes planned but we can discuss this in another forum. <grins>

Bob Wilson

 

Just some notes on my return trip to share.

Using the ecocruise, temps upper 40's low 50's, 100 mile legs at each speed, based off the dash display, which I reset at each MPH change. I started the notes after I drove for 30 minutes so the car was fully warmed up and I was past traffic that could affect the speeds. These were done from Tampa north on I 75 through lower Georgia.

55 MPH, 38 MPG

60 MPH, 38 MPG

65 MPH, 38 MPG

70 MPH, 33 MPG

75 MPH, 32 MPG

It seems the EV up to 62 MPH makes little difference in MPG. I returned 98 miles EV over a 300 mile trip when driving between 55 and 62, yet still only returned 38 MPG.

One other factor that is skewing things, apparently if I wait 45 seconds after the pump clicks off, I can add another half gallon of gas to the tank, which explains the wild variations between fills. One tank returned 29 MPG while another returned 45.

Pretty consistent though, it gets 38 MPG, 9 under EPA.

 

THANK YOU!

We don't see any aerodynamic effects until +65 mph! This suggests something is dreadfully wrong . . . stuck or sticky brake pad? Can you feel any heat coming from the rear wheels?

It is almost as if the parking brake is partially applied or the wheel alignment is dreadfully off. Do the tires feel unevenly warm between front and rear?

I am using the slowest possible fill rate to minimize foaming and let it click off. I never use more than two clicks to finish the fill-up with a 2-5 second pause to let the foam settle.

Something is broke and whatever it is probably is running hotter than normal. The characteristics point to a rolling drag problem.

GOOD LUCK!
Bob Wilson

 

It seems like other people on the Fusion site are also getting mpg in the high 30s as well.

 

Yeah but getting high 30s for a tank is not the same as getting 38 at steady speed at 55 mph.

My HCHII gets about 45 a tank but I'll be at 60-70 mpg at steady state 55 mph with a warm engine.

 

In the owner's manual for these Prius+ (european) it states something like this: Battery life is limited.
Also you can find that in Prius PHV manual.

FUD? Does not apply when related to customers.