Bad news for Ford on the Fusion and C-Max.

[GRA]

I have no evidence which if any of the above issues is causing the problems with the Fords; assuming the company did the tests and isn't just lying (dumb and expensive), I lean towards the
"EPA test results for these particular vehicles give them a greater advantage over the real world than is the case with most cars."

I see no reason why EPA tests are somehow no-represenattive for C-Max, but are represenatative for Prius v. Occan's razor dictates, the problem is at Ford's end (eith deliberate, by design or a genuine mistake).

Possible, but as I mentioned above, various car mag tests show that just because one ICE is rated better by the EPA than another car, doesn't mean it will prove to be so in the real world. Read a comparo this month in one of the auto mags where that was the case, but I don't remember which cars.

 

[GRA]

Dan Neil, in yesterday's WSJ, gives his usual amusing and informative take on the C-Max Hybrid (he likes it), as well as commenting on the mpg controversy and what he thinks causes it - summarizing, a testing effect. A short quote:

"So we have a very complex, specialized, high-stakes test, often self-administered, being laid siege to by auto makers' legion of code writers, even as the standards themselves are soaring [referring to the new 2025 standard] . . .

"Where does all this leave the C-Max? I think it's likely that Ford's hybrid powertrain programming is, let's say, overly familiar with the EPA's testing regime. For example: key to the Ford hybrid's system is its all-electric speed range of up to 62 mph. If you are really gentle with the accelerator, you can reach highway speeds without ever switching on the gas engine. That's a huge win during the testing cycle, although hard to replicate in the real world. I wouldn't even call it an attempt to game the system. It's the result of human nature, to the extent that automotive engineers are human."

Full article here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324001104578161401552249678.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[GRA]

The expected shoe drops:

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1080992_epa-to-dig-into-ford-fusion-hybrid-c-max-hybrid-mileage" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[Herm]

The expected shoe drops:

Old news.. the important event is when the EPA releases that they tested the vehicles and agreed with Ford's results.. unless Ford pissed off someone in the administration lately?

 

[GRA]

The expected shoe drops:

Old news.. the important event is when the EPA releases that they tested the vehicles and agreed with Ford's results.. unless Ford pissed off someone in the administration lately?

In the latter case, the EPA would first have to show that Ford had made mistakes (accidental or deliberate) in running the tests and calculating the results. I doubt they'd be that dumb, but we'll see. What I think will most likely happen is that the EPA will admit that Ford did the tests correctly, and that they need to re-design the tests to more accurately reflect real-world hybrid MPG. In the meantime that might require using a modifier of .75 or .8 to the test results (Dan Neil was indicating a real-world 35.8 mpg at a steady 76 mph cruise, mild temps, flat freeway, and got 33.9 mpg for the whole tank, driven hard).

 

[Herm]

What I think will most likely happen is that the EPA will admit that Ford did the tests correctly, and that they need to re-design the tests to more accurately reflect real-world hybrid MPG.

Those tests are set by law and are very hard to change since it would invalidate 40 years of data.. the numbers that are displayed in the Monroney sticker are adjusted to better match actual results.. the famous "fudge" factor, it has been adjusted twice but I'm not sure they can apply a different adjustment to the C-Max than to other cars.. Ford would probably sue and win. What the EPA could do is CR type tests and use those for the Monroney sticker, but that makes too much sense.

I think Ford should provide a very aggressive Eco mode switch in the C-Max.. one that triples throttle pressure once you exceed 55mph (it pushes against your foot) while reducing engine power about 30%, plus screeches and shudders when you brake too hard, and also deaden the steering while you are at it .. label it P for Prius Mode

 

[evnow]

http://news.consumerreports.org/cars/2012/12/why-do-fords-new-c-max-fusion-hybrids-ace-the-epa-government-fuel-economy-tests.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

New article by CR seem to suggest, Ford hybrids cracked the EPA test by making sure they can run in EV mode till 62 mph (the highest in the old 2 cycle test).

Apparently all other hybrids get better than EPA highway rating @ constant 65 mph, whereas Ford hybrids get way less.

 

[DaveEV]

New article by CR seem to suggest, Ford hybrids cracked the EPA test by making sure they can run in EV mode till 62 mph (the highest in the old 2 cycle test).

Possibly - but still in the end all the energy used to drive the car has to come from gasoline one way or another. The only way they can really game it is by designing the car so it ends the test with a lower HV battery SOC than it starts with - but then running through the test at least twice would eliminate that benefit. How many cycles do they typically run through during a test cycle? Just one?

It'd be interesting to see constant-speed fuel economy for each of the cars at various constant speeds - say 25, 35, 45, 55, 65, 75 mph. It'd be really nice if the EPA also mandated a few constant speed fuel economy numbers - say 55 mph, 65 mph and 75 mph to show the effect of driving at different speeds and better be able to compare fuel efficiency on long trips.

The Prius V absolutely kills the C-MAX at a constant 65 mph - it's using about 20% less fuel at that speed.

 

[WetEV]

I also question the rating on the Focus Electric. Not sure how a car that is heavier and has a smaller battery with both supposedly having a .29 cd aero rating could have greater efficiency and range than the Leaf. I've not heard any real world results from owners driving.

I own a Leaf, and have driven a Focus Electric. From my experience, and mostly based on the miles/kWh meters of the cars, I would say that the Focus has a better range at higher speeds.

 

[Herm]

Ford stands behind fuel efficiency numbers for C-Max Hybrid

http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20121214/AUTO0102/212140426#ixzz2F3Yev2TQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"The C-Max can travel at a top speed of 62 mph in electric-only mode. Above 62 mph, the car's four-cylinder gasoline engine starts and helps to recharge the battery.

That top electric-only speed means that for the portion of the EPA's highway fuel-efficiency test, which maxes out at 60 mph, the car can travel in electric-only mode without the gasoline engine kicking on; essentially the C-Max Hybrid is optimized for the EPA test."

 

[GRA]

Looks like Dan Neil nailed it. The only question is what kind of fudge factor the EPA will decide to use for such cars. I am all for drees' suggestion of constant speed fuel economy numbers, for those of us who drive on real-world freeways instead of the EPA's mythical ones.

 

[Herm]

New article by CR seem to suggest, Ford hybrids cracked the EPA test by making sure they can run in EV mode till 62 mph (the highest in the old 2 cycle test).

Possibly - but still in the end all the energy used to drive the car has to come from gasoline one way or another. The only way they can really game it is by designing the car so it ends the test with a lower HV battery SOC than it starts with

The EPA tests account for the SOC of the battery.

Ultimately all the energy comes from gasoline, so how is Ford gaming the system?.. each test cycle is usually 10-11 miles long, Ford designed the C-Max so the engine could run hard (at a higher efficiency point) for 2 minutes while charging up the battery and then complete the other 8 minutes in the EV mode (these numbers are just examples). By making the C-Max able to run up to 80mph on the electric motors you are able to do this, and its not noticeable to the driver.. Hypermilers use a similar technique called pulse&glide with very good results, the reason it works is because ICE have a unique point in their operation that provides max economy.

Unfortunately the C-Max has a blunt nose, poor aerodynamics and lots of frontal area, it will suffer at higher hwy speeds.

 

[evnow]

I am all for drees' suggestion of constant speed fuel economy numbers, for those of us who drive on real-world freeways instead of the EPA's mythical ones.

I can hardly ever travel on freeways at a constant speed.

BTW, the way EPA originally designed the 2 cycle system was by actually running the car (in LA I think) on actual roads and capturing the speed and acceleration profile.

 

[GRA]

I am all for drees' suggestion of constant speed fuel economy numbers, for those of us who drive on real-world freeways instead of the EPA's mythical ones.

I can hardly ever travel on freeways at a constant speed.

BTW, the way EPA originally designed the 2 cycle system was by actually running the car (in LA I think) on actual roads and capturing the speed and acceleration profile.

The LA4 cycle dates from what, 40 years ago?

As to constant speeds on freeways, depends how heavy the traffic is. In rural areas or in very light urban traffic, no problemo. In light to moderate urban traffic, yeah, you'll probably need to change speed every minute or two, as people dart from lane to lane, momentary backups occur for no obvious reason etc.

See this article from the January 2013 C&D:

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/2013-10best-automotive-sins-and-virtues-feature" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I agree with them all, especially those involving UI.

 

[GRA]

Found the following year-old article on Green Car Reports re the inaccuracy of the EPA test cycles for hybrids, diesels etc.:

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1064925_outdated-tests-skew-cafe-gas-mileage-ratings-48-mph-freeways" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[cwerdna]

Found the following year-old article on Green Car Reports re the inaccuracy of the EPA test cycles for hybrids, diesels etc.:

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1064925_outdated-tests-skew-cafe-gas-mileage-ratings-48-mph-freeways" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

While the article is right about the ~48 mph average speed on highway test and is right about the top speed 60 mph top speed on the highway test, a higher speed test got added in computing the results, which goes up to 80 mph. The average is still only 48.4 mph though.

Plenty of info via links at http://priuschat.com/forums/other-cars/67235-car-driver-truth-about-epa-city-highway-mpg-estimates.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.

 

[evnow]

Ironically, Ford may have tipped off EPA about the Hyundai rating problems ... :lol: