Test Drove a C-Max hybrid today

Honda and it's Civic Hybrid problems were well known and it allowed Toyota to become the global Hybrid leader. To this day Honda never recovered. How many Honda Hybrid Civics you see on the road? Not many. Prius in the top 10 American car sold and #1 in California. That may have been Honda if they didn't mess up.

 

Honda's problems weren't the reason for Toyota's domination in the hybrid market. From the first generation of hybrids, the Prius was a more practical car for the majority of potential buyers. The first gen was small, but had four doors. The original Insight, while still the mpg king for now, only sat 2. Being a conversion, the Civic hybrid gave up trunk space and the fold down rear seat.

The Civic was comparable to the gen1 Prius in nearly every way. However, it came out as a 2003 model. The 2004 Prius was the gen 2 that went from a compact sedan to a midsize hatchback. For a year Honda was equal to Toyota in a hybrid that was of equal usefulness beyond a single person's commute. Now the Prius could serve as a family of four's vehicle. The Civic is still a compact sedan.

Then there is Honda's pricing. Despite being a smaller car, the base Civic hybrid is listed at the same price as the base Prius. Even now, I believe, when the Prius has a larger mpg advantage. Perhaps it isn't because of their greed or arrogance. Perhaps their prices are fixed and can't take lower margins like Toyota. They are a smaller company without pockets as deep.

Whatever the reason, the Honda Civic hybrid costs around the same as a Toyota Prius. Buyers could get a compact sedan or a larger car with better fuel economy. Technical differences in the hybrid system and problems with battery management don't have to come up to see who will do better in the market.

 

I sat in a SEL last night, very impressed with the room. I owned a 07 Prius, and on 09 Camry. I hated the Prius, too small, crosswinds knocked it around and the traction control was too sensitive, but 65 MPG on the highway from PA to IL, cant touch dat! I did not care for the materials in the car either, however I did get a Camry Hybrid after that, and my initial impressions were not bad, then after 2 weeks, it started making noises, found little things in it that were not good, so my impression fell flat after that, and over all MPG was not much better than a 4 banger model, only saw about 35 MPG on avg, and the thin seat material, poor handling, sticking sunroof, and that horrible brightly lit dashboard had me hate that car too. Then Ford came out with the Hybrid model, and I was intrigued, and eventually got a 2010 model. So far my lifetime average has been right around 38 MPG, and I have seen long highway drives getting me up to 50 MPG. After 33K miles and no issues other than a squeaky blower motor, the fit finish and material quality just blows Toyota out of the water. The car is still quiet, has no squeaks, nothing loose, and no sync issues, iphone issues, yes, but no sync issue. I do hate the nav unit, but thats just the way it works, I use a back up TomTom for more precise street navigation, the dash unit is a touch to slow for me. Since I rarely use the Nav it is really a non issue. Since I didnt have Nav in the Toyota, I cant compare them. The handling of the Fusion is also much better compared to the lolling of the Camry, traction is also better, as well as performance.

In between the two Hybrids, I got a Fusion Sport, I just couldnt swing the cost of the FFH at the time, and we just LOVED the Sport, never had a problem with the car, but the cost of the gas was killing us, so we reluctantly got rid of it for a used Fusion Hybrid.

Winter driving I see 37, summer 41, highway varies on the traffic and if I feel like driving the speed limit when its 70, or keeping it under 65, but in either case, is always more than 40 MPG. The trunk is also much better than the Camry, there are no hinges that can break things, or get in the way. First time I put something in the Camry, some cat litter, and close the trunk, the hinge went right into the back and spewed cat litter all over the trunk, took me an hour to clean it all out.

With that being said and after owning several Fords, and several Toyota's, the Fords to me are better vehicles and I have not had reliability issues with either brand. The Cmax from first appearances and a few minutes of sitting in one in the dark, it was comfy and roomy, and did stink pretty much from new plastic, and considering the new Feusion and Cmax get the same MPG ratings, and the interior room is nearly the same, it will be a hard choice to pick one over the other if cost is not a factor. The back seat room surpringly enough was large, even with the drivers seat where I normally put it.

The 2013 Fusion Hybrid, while lacking a good Sony stereo, has options in it that most luxury cars dont. I test drove the FFH, it was nice, oh man was it nice, but it was short, and I didnt get a chance to play with the gauges to see what kind of FE it could achieve, I just didn't have the time to spend last night, but first impressions on both, Very nice cars, Toyota has some catching up to do to meet what Ford is offering.

After having both the Prius and Camry Hybrid, they left a sour taste in my mouth for Toyota. The new styling of the Fusion, also knocks the Camry out of the box.

 

Yeah, the Prius was first to market, and had a pretty ingenious drive-train technology. Now the entire market is buying from them -- Ford, Hyundai, Nissan, Subaru (sans GM, with a more complex and potentially repair-prone design).


When it comes down to it, the C-Max vs Prius debate amounts to whether you're willing to sacrifice comfort + performance for 3-5 mpg.

Or, vice versa, sacrifice 5-8% mileage for extra comfort/handling.

 

Is this correct? I would love a source to substantiate. My understanding is they also own the hybrid drivetrain technology through their previous ownership of Volvo. I'm not trying to argue. I would just like more detail.

 

After further research it seems there is some media confusion (several outlets reported as such). Ford's HSD is not designed by Toyota.


Ford did develop theirs independently.

However, the design was so similar it did cause Ford to license Toyota's HSD patents. However, I believe they did so at reduced cost since Toyota was offending some of their pollution-reduction patents (these contracts tend to be private so who knows if money exchanged -- but smart of Ford to do it now before they gain market and threaten Toyota).

Is Ford Innovative? Part Two. - BusinessWeek


Half the market uses the same essential design, planetary gearset with 2 MGs. GM introduces 4 clutches to achieve EV-only mode and skirt around Toyota patents. Toyota does have 1 clutch to decouple the engine flywheel.

 

The Volt uses 3 clutches within its hybrid transmission. I think the Toyota clutch you are referring to is the "damper" between the engine and the hybrid transmission and while that is a type of clutch it is purely passive and not controlled by any of the Prius hybrid computers.

I'm not aware of GM going out of their way to "skirt around" Toyota's hybrid patents any more than Toyota skirts around GM's hybrid patents. Do you a source for that specific claim?

It's a little known fact that GM patented the essential aspects of the Prius hybrid transmission design back in 1995 before the Prius was first sold in Japan in 1997. GM has been building and selling full hybrid planetary gear transmissions since 2003 although they were an extended 2-mode variant aimed at the needs of large trucks and buses and then later downsized for use in RWD SUVs.

The Volt transmission uses a new design variation but is 75% based on parts from a FWD hybrid transmission GM developed for a small Saturn-brand SUV.

GM's early hybrid patents start with:
US5558595 One-mode, input-split, parallel, hybrid transmission

Patent US5558595 - One-mode, input-split, parallel, hybrid transmission - Google Patents

See column 11 on page 19 with the sub-header "Description of a third alternative embodiment" for a description of the design used by Toyota/Ford.

 

And Briggs & Stratton had a concept hybrid car in 1980.
Most of what current hybrids is based on was developed around that time. Battery technology wasn't up to the the task. The aforementioned B&S hybrid had 2 rear axles to support the lead acid battery. Plus, there was political/bureaurocratic resistance to the concept.

 

I just read that the Prius is the Third most popular car sold in the world behind the Corolla and the Ford Focus.

 

Then why can't/doesn't GM build a car to compete w/ the Prius?

Honestly, I can't make hide nor hare of those drawings. It looks like 2 motors in series to me but, I'm not here to doubt what you say. I just can't understand why GM would sit back and watch the Prius become so popular, knowing they have these patents, and not provide a viable alternative. The Volt is not an alternative b/c it is way more expensive and is more of an electric car than a hybrid.

If what you say is true (and I believe it is), I'm even more pissed at GM for having these patents and letting their competitors leave them in the dust and then beg for tax dollars to bail them out. This seems to be a blatant example of mismanagement on their part. It reminds me of the story of the Grasshopper and the Ants with GM being the Grasshopper.

Let's face it, the hybrids they've produced do not compete with the Prius. And... their current "eAssist" hybrid is a mild hybrid system that doesn't take full advantage of the economies available. Is it just me or does GM always seem 2-5 yrs behind in innovation?

 

It's clear that GM management didn't think there was a market for hybrid passenger cars. They chose to stand back and watch Toyota try to find a customer base for highly efficient but somewhat more expensive cars. Instead, GM's hybrid development was located in their Allison Transmission subsidiary that supplied the truck and transit bus industry. GM created the first full hybrid bus powertrain around 2003. So, they did develop and commercialize hybrid technology but just not in the retail consumer space.

In a way, it's good that they covered that part of the market because Toyota wasn't. Later, that 2-mode hybrid design was down scaled for GM monstrosity-class SUVs and full-size pickups around 2007 (I think). That was poor marketing because few of those drivers cared about fuel economy and sales were very slow. I'm not an expert on the car industry, but my impression is that for many years GM wasn't serious about the compact and midsize passenger car market generally (at least in North America). So, GM wasn't going to spend serious effort on passenger car hybrid tech is they weren't investing there in general.

They also attempted to license their SUV hybrid tech to Mercedes-Benz, Chrysler, and others but that flopped also. Once again, they and their partners, were trying to sell fuel economy to buyers of big cars that didn't care.

More recently, they've gotten more serious about "normal" cars and have been redesigning the Malibu, Cruze etc. and gaining new market share. As part of that push into the smaller car space, they got aggressive about doing the Volt PHEV.

The Volt is targeted at the beginning phase of a new lithium battery price/performance curve but it leaves a large gap in GM's product mix between the Volt and their conventional cars. The eAssist mild hybrid is aimed at gaining some improvement at lower cost. That's nice, but where are the GM cars that get 45-50 combined city/highway mpg that can compete with Ford and Toyota full hybrids?

A GM exec recently said they were going to focus on plugins instead of developing full hybrid non-plug cars. Maybe that's true, but I tend to think that's a cover story for their failure to design a small car hybrid transmission and that they are ultimately going to compete but just may not be ready to talk about it yet. In any case, it's not because they don't know how or don't have the patents.

 

two words: bob klutz.

 

... and I filed a consumer protection complaint with the Missouri Attorney General requesting the C-Max be recalled and banned until the lack of a spare tire/donut is rectified. What if a woman gets stranded on the road in the middle of nowhere with a shredded tire, damaged sidewall, or broken valve? The Ford-supplied can of Fix-A-Flat won't do her a bit of good... Will she have a cell signal to summon help (many places in MO have no signal or a very weak signal)? If she can make a pone call, will her help arrive before an accident or foul play occur?

And if you are short, like me, you won't be able to reach the pedals or floor on the C-Max, anyway.

 

They're just always couple of years behind and tend to squander every competitive advantage they get.

 

I drive a Prius and it has a spare tire and a tire jack. My wife purchased a Acura ILX Hybrid. Not much trunk space. Get this no spare. She said it has some cannister that can inflate the tire and allow you to drive to the Tire store or Dealer at a slow rate of speed if the tire has minor damage, otherwise you have to call the Tow Truck. Go figure.

 

Be ready to file one for the Prius PHV when it becomes available in your state then. You can also file for the Leaf, 500, Sonic, several Hyundais, etc. There's a good chance any compact or smaller car today doesn't come with a spare, and those where it is an option charge $300 for it(GM might only charge $100).

When was the last you or anybody you knew had an actual blow out?
Tires have improved over the years. They are more durable, and the majority of flats can be repaired by those fix a flat kits. The last couple of nails and screws that punctured our tires resulted in slow leaks that didn't need emergency repair. With TPMS required by law, run flats are an option for every new car.

As for the pedals, Ford offered power adjustable ones in the Taurus for over a decade. Our 2001 Sable has them. Perhaps they have spread to other models.

 

I had Run Flats and no spare on my 2006 BMW 325i. I never got stranded. I have on 2 occasions had a flat and a message came on in the nav system low tire pressure do not exceed 50 MPH braking may be impared. I know something was up though. I drove the car for a day before I took it to the Tire store. In both cases the tires were close to the end of the useful life. The tires also never needed to be rotated but alignment was important. Those damn tires were expensive above $1,200 for 4, and they were low profile Pirelli P-Zero's. Great grip and quiet on the freeway, but man they were expensive.

 

Did you also fire a complaint against the prius phv? New cars sold without spare tires: Automakers sell more cars without spare tires - Los Angeles Times

Please don't buy a c-max, but don't try to get government to force spare tires on every car. You can easily choose one with a spare tire if you wish.

What if a woman is asaulted in her home? DO you think she should be forced to hook up cameras everywhere inside and down the blovck and hire a security firm?

 

There are no guarantees, but it seems stupid to not take reasonable precautions for a likely occurrance... a spare tire seems pretty reasonable... cameras down the block and in the home or a security firm would be ridiculous. But locking the doors and windows and having a phone to call 911 in case of an emergency seems pretty reasonable.

My parents ended up with a shredded tire last week on their brand new car from something that came flying out of a construction zone.

Less than a year ago, a bunch of us ended up together on the side of the highway with nails in our tires from a truck losing its load (of nails)... those tires ended up shredded/seriously damaged because we had to drive over a mile on the flats because we were in a one lane Interstate construction zone with no shoulder. Some years back, I had a seriously bent rim, damaged valve, and subsequent flat tire from a pot hole.

Fix-A-Flat would have been useless for each of the above.

Fix-A-Flat is a great product for the times that it can fulfill its intended purpose. But it cannot take the place of a donut or spare tire.

Green