Print 42 comment(s) - last by virginiakiana2.. on Aug 18 at 6:18 PM

Ford will also give cash payments of $550 to buyers of the C-Max

The writing has been on the wall for months, but it looks as though Ford is finally listening to its countless critics. After a few lawsuits, blowback from publications like Consumer Reports, and even findings from actual drivers, Ford has lowered the fuel economy ratings for its C-Max hybrid.
The C-Max was previously rated at 47/47/47 (city/highway/combined), but the company announced today that it would lower those numbers to 45/40/43 (city/highway/combined). The biggest hit came on the highway, where the C-Max saw its rating drop by seven miles per gallon. The new combined rating puts the C-Max just one mile per gallon higher than its chief rival: the Toyota Prius v.
In addition, customer that bought a C-Max will receive a $550 cash rebate from Ford; lessees will receive $325.

2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid
“Ford is absolutely committed to being a leader in the hybrid market and to top fuel efficiency across our lineup,” said Raj Nair, group vice president, global product development. “We are taking actions with our popular C-MAX Hybrid so that customers are even more satisfied with the vehicle’s on-road fuel efficiency performance.”

In its testing, Consumer Reports indicated that the C-Max was only good for 35/38/37 (city/highway/combined). In response to Consumer Reports' story, Ford spokesman Wes Sherwood said in April, "Early C-Max Hybrid and Fusion Hybrid customers praise the vehicles and report a range of fuel economy figures, including some reports above 47 mpg. This reinforces the fact that driving styles, driving conditions and other factors can cause mileage to vary."
For their part, C-Max drivers over at Fuelly reported an average of 40.2 mpg combined -- still nearly three miles per gallon below Ford's new combined rating.

C-Max drivers on showed just how optimistic the original ratings were
"This is an industrywide issue with hybrid vehicles," explained Nair. "We've learned along with EPA that the regulations create some anomalies for hybrid vehicles under the general label rule."
Ford isn't the only automaker that recently had to revise its inflated fuel economy ratings; Hyundai/Kia was taken to task when it overstated the fuel economy on a number of 2012 and 2013 models. It too instituted a cash repayment program for affected drivers.

Updated 8/15/2013 @ 8:39pm
The EPA has explained [PDF] the reason why the C-Max was previously rated for 47 mpg across the board, and why the new numbers are lower. It appears that Ford used a provision in the EPA testing to allow it to use the fuel economy numbers from the Fusion Hybrid on the C-Max because they used the same powertrain and weighed the same. However, the Fusion is a more aerodynamic vehicle, hence the huge discrepancy in the real world on the C-Max:
Ford based the 2013 Ford C-Max label on testing of the related Ford Fusion hybrid, which has the same engine, transmission and test weight as allowed under EPA regulations. For the vast majority of vehicles this approach would have yielded an appropriate label value for the car, but these new vehicles are more sensitive to small design differences than conventional vehicles because advanced highly efficient vehicles use so little fuel. 
In this case, EPA’s evaluation found that the C-Max’s aerodynamic characteristics resulted in a significant difference in fuel economy from the Fusion hybrid.

Sources: Automotive News, Ford

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

By alpha754293 on 8/16/2013 9:07:56 AM , Rating: 2
See also Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 86, SS.86.129-80 "Road load power, test weight, and inertia weight class determination.", (c)(2)(i).

"The dynamometer road load setting
is determined from the equivalent
test weight, the reference frontal area,
the body shape, the vehicle protuberances,
and the tire type by the following
(i) For light-duty vehicles to be tested
on a twin roll dynamometer.
Hp = aA + P + tW
Hp = the dynamometer power absorber setting
at 50 mph (horsepower).
A = the vehicle reference frontal area (ft2).
The vehicle reference frontal area is defined
as the area of the orthogonal projection
of the vehicle; including tires and suspension
components, but excluding vehicle
protuberances, onto a plane perpendicular
to both the longitudinal plane of the vehicle
and the surface upon which the vehicle
is positioned. Measurements of this area
shall be computed to the nearest tenth of
a square foot using a method approved in
advance by the Administrator.
P = the protuberance power correction factor
from table 1 of this paragraph (horsepower).
W = vehicle equivalent test weight (lbs) from
the table in paragraph (a).
a = 0.43 for fastback-shaped vehicles; = 0.50
for all other light duty vehicles.
t = 0.0 for vehicles equipped with radial ply
tires; = 3 × 10¥ 4 for all other vehicles.
A vehicle is considered to have a fastback
shape if the rearward projection
of that portion of the rear surface (Ab)
which slopes at an angle of less than 20
degrees from the horizontal is at least
25 percent as large as the vehicle reference
frontal area. In addition, this
surface must be smooth, continuous,
and free from any local transitions
greater than four degrees. An example
of a fastback shape is presented in Figure

"I f***ing cannot play Halo 2 multiplayer. I cannot do it." -- Bungie Technical Lead Chris Butcher

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki