GM Inside News Forum banner

Ford Hybrids' Fuel Economy Failing To Live Up To EPA Ratings?

5K views 48 replies 31 participants last post by  HermPerez 
#1 ·
Ford Hybrids' Fuel Economy Failing To Live Up To EPA Ratings?
BY JOHN VOELCKER
Green Car Reports


This is starting to look not so good.

It appears that two new hybrid cars from Ford--the 2013 C-Max Hybrid hatchback and the 2013 Fusion Hybrid sedan--may not deliver real-world gas mileage that's anywhere near their 47-mpg EPA ratings.

Automotive journalists have been quietly discussing this for a few weeks, since Ford began releasing C-Max and 2013 Fusion vehicles into media test fleets.

C-Max Hybrid: stretching to hit 40 mpg?

It's still early yet, and it's possible that gas mileage may improve slightly in the cars once several thousand miles have accumulated on each one.

But Green Car Reports has tested the C-Max twice, once at Ford's media drive and once over a quick weekend route.

In the first case, the C-Max delivered 37 mpg over 50 miles of mixed freeway and urban driving. Over our weekend route, we got 40 mpg over 240 miles, mostly at freeway speeds.

And other outlets had similar results.

Most awkwardly for Ford, Larry Vellequette of Automotive News has documented his struggles to achieve anything close to 47 mpg in the C-Max Hybrid he bought for family use.

His average gas mileage was 37 mpg.


More at link.
 
See less See more
#2 ·
This is definitely a "not good". Being off by 20% is just bad, especially after the Hyundai fiasco. The EPA rating should be reachable by normal driving. You shouldn't have to granny the car, just drive it in a normal way -- neither too aggressive nor too pedantic -- and achieve around what the EPA ratings are.

This quote just made me laugh:
Pressed further, one engineer noted that because the newest hybrids have a great deal more power than comparable Prius models--54 hp more, as Ford touts in its marketing--it may be that drivers are tempted to use that power.
I drive my car like an utter idiot at times and get 181mpg, well above the EPA rating. It's not like everyone who's bought or tested a Ford hybrid turns into Mario Andretti once behind the wheel of one. Sheesh.
 
#5 ·
This is definitely a "not good". Being off by 20% is just bad, especially after the Hyundai fiasco. The EPA rating should be reachable by normal driving. You shouldn't have to granny the car, just drive it in a normal way -- neither too aggressive nor too pedantic -- and achieve around what the EPA ratings are.

This quote just made me laugh:


I drive my car like an utter idiot at times and get 181mpg, well above the EPA rating. It's not like everyone who's bought or tested a Ford hybrid turns into Mario Andretti once behind the wheel of one. Sheesh.
Not to mention the fact that the EPA ratings have been 'adjusted' several times since their inception to reflect the expanded standard equipment like power accessories and air conditioning. I think it was in 2005 that the EPA rating was last given a 'reality check' to reflect the real world driving.
 
#3 · (Edited)
This is just another case of Ford's bragging like they've done with Eco-Boast. Only, this time they may not get away with over exaggerating on their gas mileage. I use EcoBoost to relate to Ford's bragging, because Ecoboost is an engine that's turbocharged with direct injection which Ford was late in the game with such an engine. VW and GM had this long before Ford, but never gave it a name. Ford though sure has brainwashed the consumers making them think Ecoboost is a greatly advanced engine that nobody else has.
 
#13 ·
[offTopic]

ONE FORD

One Big Blue Oval​


Just in case anyone's interested, my EPA-certified IQ is 388 net HP.
prove it by converting that to kW without googling


[/offTopic]
 
#4 ·
Ok, it may be a little early to make this statement but here goes:

Maybe GM's cars don't get THAT much worse mileage than all the other manufaturers, its just that they are not overstimating mileage as much as every one else.

And this is coming from someone like me has (and still continues to do so) put down some of GM's recent powertrains because of how far behind they are in EPA mileage numbers.
 
#6 ·
Sour grapes.

How is it that I can get over 50 mpgs in the real world on the highway with a 1997 Ford that is only rated for 32 mpgs?

I drive intelligently.

If you are thinking you will get EPA mileage figures while you drive with your head up your keister, you are more than an idiot. You are a pet rock.
 
#14 ·
Unfortunately, that's why so much emphasis is placed on HIGHWAY estimate with complete disregard for COMBINED.


I like to see multiple tank-fulls, to eliminate the variance in fills, but it does seem like its too easy to not hit (or get close) to the EPA numbers.
Sadly, most reviewers don't take the time to actually do that. Each new vehicle falls victim to on-the-spot observations.
 
#8 ·
Just in case anyone's interested, my EPA-certified IQ is 388 net HP.
 
#9 ·
the eight C-Max Hybrid owners who have submitted their real-world mileages to FuelEconomy.gov averaged just 40.7 mpg.
A sample where n=8? Mr. Voelcker ought to know better than to make inferences from that!
 
#12 · (Edited)
Sounds like a big pot of 'not good' for the folks in Dearborn and the blue oval.

Chasing the mpg zephyr is an exercise in near lunacy. Here's a couple recommendations for all the buyers considering getting into the hybrid rat race. Either go all in a get yourself a Volt. Or dial down your expectations and get a Cruze Eco. Both are excellent vehicles.
 
#16 ·
Fully expected in the land of ford advertising ...ll.
Same for Hyundai Kia.l.l..l

If the cars look good and are fun to drive and get somewhat good gas mileage then it's a own for these segments
 
#19 ·
Oh, I can play this game as well..... Malibu e-assist only get 23.5 MPG combined as per fueleconomy.gov.....
Wait for the cars to break-in..... get a large enough sample size and not from journalists who, usually, drive for more fun factor, than economy factor.....and 8 people who registered at the website to make an inference.....
 
#21 ·
I recently read C & D and they had tests of both the Fusion Hybrid and C-Max.... they didn't get the EPA #'s but admitted they drove them pretty hard. Both cars managed 32MPG. So at first glance it's like 'wow, what's wrong here' but the qualified it with their resulst from a Sonata Hybrid 27MPG, and a Camry Hybrid 30 MPG, which were way below their EPA, but the Fusion beat them @ 32. On the other hand they got 32 in the cmax, compared to the Prius-V that got 35
 
#23 ·
The 1980's called, and said you still need to trim yer fat a$$es still to get mileage of those days. Escorts, Mazda's, 4 cyl cars easy acheived 35-40Mpg back then because they where 2500-3000lbs. :p:
 
#25 ·
Is there perhaps a reason that GM decided to not battle on the hybrid technology front?
 
#26 ·
I got a C-Max a month ago and my average is currently at 45 mpg. It was up to 49 briefly at first before falling to 48 and stayed at 47 for quite a while before slowly dropping to 46 and now 45. My only long distance interstate drive at 65-70 mph was on a windy day and averaged 39 going out and 41 back. Short trips (2.3 miles to work for me when I don't bike in) when the weather is cold hurts the average because the engine stays on until it's warmed up. I've had multiple trips with averages over 50 mpg, some over 60 and one over 70. It's pretty easy to exceed the EPA number in city driving. The car stays in EV mode about half the time at speeds between 30-45.
 
#27 ·
I would guess it does pretty well in the city and not so well in real world highway driving. They put a bigger electric motor in their hybrids so they can keep it in full electric mode for more of the highway cycle test. I think this gives a difficult to attain number in the real world. Unless you are getting a lot of regen you will eventually not be driving in elec. mode at all once the battery drains down. Strictly highway driving will almost surely result in a lower number. If you hypermile it in a mix of driving you will be better off I'd guess.

I know they made some significant adjustments to the EPA cycles to make the hybrid numbers become more realistic, maybe Ford has just found a way to optimize the vehicle to excel at the test and not real life? Works on the EPA cycle but doesn't often work in real life? Is the battery's state of charge at the beginning versus the end of the test taken into consideration in the test? Or are they just using an adjustment factor to bring the numbers down? The Prius was highly over rated when first launched as well, eventually they adjusted the numbers down but I'm not sure they ever actually fixed the test, I'm not sure. A fudge factor is not nearly as accurate as a good test.
 
#33 ·
I would guess it does pretty well in the city and not so well in real world highway driving. They put a bigger electric motor in their hybrids so they can keep it in full electric mode for more of the highway cycle test.
As we saw from the Hyundai fiasco, just breaking-in the tires improperly is enough to throw off the EPA cycles results. Over at the www.cleanmpg.com forum the hypermiler kings have been testing it and so far it does not look too good. The combination of higher power, higher weight and (most importantly) higher drag and frontal area means it will never reach the economy levels of a Prius.

Ford should have provided a P mode switch (for Prius), that would reduce engine power by 50hp, remapped the throttle to numb and faked the speedometer to make you think you are speeding :)
 
#28 ·
The way that new vehicles are tuned for economy, it takes very little for them to not hit their mileage. Windy day, cold, mountains, not driving to the strengths of the particular drivetrain, E10/15, etc. These all play into fuel economy.

Anyone using the mileage that journalists who are testing vehicles, as reflective of real life, needs to rethink things.
 
#31 ·
For some of us including Zete, and I these real world accounts accurately reflect how we drive. Of course anyone can change their driving habits, and use hypermiling techniques to achieve notable fuel economy but is that really indicative of real world fuel economy?
 
#30 ·
One other new issue with the Ford hybrids is the new EV+ features that learns where you drive and uses the info to stay in ev mode more. This will boost fuel economy on your everyday commute, but will offer no help on a longer trip that isn't in its learning. I suspect the rating is for the daily trip. fuel economy.

 
#35 ·
The EPA test is now nigh on a farce, and the system can be too easily gamed it seems at this point.
 
#42 ·
Because the MPG's numbers were higher?

The higher the MPG's, the more movement you are going to see.

For generic example 10% on a car getting 50 MPG's is 5 MPG's, on a truck getting 10 MPG's its only 1 MPG, however both are equally "off".


For detailed examples: (below from fueleconomy.gov)

2002 Prius . OLD -> 52/45/48
(1.5L Auto) NEW -> 42/41/41 ~ (48 - 41 = 7 / 48 = 14.6%

1987 Sprint . OLD -> 44/49/46
(1.0L 5/Spd) NEW -> 36/43/39 ~ (46 - 39 = 7 / 46 = 15.2%

1990 C1500 . OLD -> 10/11/10
(7.4L Auto) NEW -> 9/10/9 ~ (10 - 9 = 1 / 10 = 10.0%

1985 Escort . OLD -> 34/44/38
(1.6L 4/Spd) NEW -> 29/39/33 ~ (38 - 33 = 5 / 38 = 13.2%
 
#47 · (Edited)
I think the problem supermoto is having is with "Lab test proceedures and result" versus the Monroney sticker values over time versus USER EXPERIENCE.

It must be understood that the test method has remained basically UNCHANGED since inception in the 1970s up until 2010. There may have been minor modifications at one point in the 1980s, iirc.

Yes there have been refinements in measurement methods and accuracy ... however, the only major change in test method was 2010 with the addition of tests steps for things like AC and higher speeds, and I think thermal environment.

The results of these test proceedures is the "raw lab test data" and the basis for CAFE for the specific vehicle configuration in question.

What you see on the Monroney sticker is the result of applying an algorithm to the specific vehicle's raw lab results to establish the city, highway, and combined sticker values. That algorithm definitely changed in 2008 and probably the 1980s. To the best of my knowledge ... that is it.

Until a system is developed to "personalize" sticker values for the INDIVIDUAL driver's style and operating environment ... there can be NO "real world expectation" by the consumer ... only standardized comparative values.

Unfortunately, even that will probably not adequately account for technology operational differences like those between diesel, gasoline, and plugins.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top