Ted Swing

The upcoming Mazda 6 diesel is apparently clean enough to not require it - something about the unusual compression burning up more of the emissions. However, it has been repeatedly delayed (apparently the power was not considered good enough for the American market). I was originally considering it against the FFH, which I ordered in August. Back then it was to be released any month. I'm glad I chose the FFH, because the Mazda 6 diesel still doesn't have a release date. I believe the rest of diesels sold in the US require the urea system, though.

A lot of what he says is true (except for claiming that the Passat is a better car than a FFH). He does come across as biased in favor of diesels, though. Diesels are better for high speed highway driving. Hybrids are better for city driving and stop-and-go, moderate speed highway driving. You also don't have to pay as much for gas as diesel in the US. The problem with getting a diesel in the US, IMO, is that there aren't many options in the midsize class. In the luxury segment there are more diesel options (BMW, Audi, etc.) and the cost of diesel compares more favorably to premium gas. However, for a normal midsize, I think Passat's the only option in the US until the Mazda 6 diesel arrives (am I missing any?). I don't consider the Passat to be equal to the FFH. If they made the Ford Mondeo Diesel available in the US, I bet Ford would win some converts, but it's probably not worth the investment given the size of the diesel market in the US.

Sounds like you're a pretty experienced hypermiler. I'll be curious to see what you can do with a FFH in the long run. You may want to track your MPG through fuelly if you don't already. I think you'll appreciate the comfort of the car on those long commutes, too. I know I do, and I only drive ~15,000 miles a year.

Welcome to the forums. What did you get in terms of color/options?

Supposedly the Tesla won't lose MPGe in the upcoming AWD Model S, but definitely a hybrid would lose a little.

That's a rare one! I think I've only seen one Ginger Ale. Yesterday morning, I saw a Tuxedo Black FFH and a Dark Side FFH (both SE) on my way to work.

Sorry we're losing you, Aquineas. I can see how needs change over time, though.

Saw this Tuxedo Black HyTi (could be Dark Side - can't really tell) tonight.

This is my first Ford (and my parents never owned one in my lifetime) so I don't have any history of brand loyalty to them. I picked the FFH after several months of research and so far my experience has borne out that research. It sounds like some Ford models (like your Focus) have had issues lately and that's fair game for Consumer Reports to criticize that. I don't know if I speak for others, but I think the objection that some of us have to Consumer Reports' criticism is that both our own experiences with the FFH and their own numbers (reported by tr7driver in the original post) seem to suggest that the FFH is a good car, yet they come out with an overall conclusion that seems to suggest it is not. If this is the result of combining reliable vehicles (FFH) with unreliable vehicles (FF Ecoboost), then I just wonder how useful such combined data are. Nobody buys or owns a brand of car - they buy a specific model. If it's based on MFT, that's probably unfairly punitive. This type of feedback probably works for motivating Ford to step up their game on those cars and features that are bringing their brand/model reliability down, but I don't think it's the right way to present the data for an individual consumer making a car buying decision. I would hope that we could be helpful to people coming here, even frustrated owners, and we generally are. Some of what you're seeing may be a reaction with what we see as exaggerated or misleading criticisms. So much of the press surrounding cars seems to based on perceptions only loosely related to reality.

Looks very nice! I hope you're enjoying it. Also, it seems like we're in the same neck of the woods.

Also, here's another article from the Consumer Reports website I came across. http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/02/infotainment-car-reliability/index.htm They mention Cadillac, Ford, Honda, and Lincoln as getting the most complaints about the infotainment system and Audi, BMW, Chrysler, and Lexus as getting the fewest. Not sure how much good that information really does us in the hybrid midsize sedan market - none of those "fewest complaints" brands have competitors in our segment. I guess Toyota must be in the middle. I can see what CR is saying - it would hurt to suddenly lose access to navigation or climate control - but I agree with others that they're overstating the importance of it. I don't even have MFT in my car, but for those who do it has already been improved and Ford is switching systems anyway so in a year or so, it will soon be a moot point. I'd care a lot more about safety, comfort, fuel economy, etc. Not only are those bigger issues, but they can't really be improved much once the car has been made - the infotainment system can.

According to the article below, Ford got marked down by Consumer Reports for three things: "the MyFord Touch infotainment system, automatic transmissions in the Focus and Fiesta models and its 1.6- and 2-liter EcoBoost turbocharged 4-cylinder engines." www.nytimes.com/2014/03/02/automobiles/consumer-reports-lexus-is-no-1.html Other than MFT, those probably don't affect us much. I wonder if anyone here has experience with the other two?

Will you buy another Flex?

Suppose, hypothetically: Car A gets 40 MPG with an average driver and 42 MPG with an efficient driver. Car B gets 40 MPG with an average driver and 47 MPG with an efficient driver. In this hypothetical, clearly there's nothing wrong with Car B - in fact, based on this information it is better. However, if both cars are advertised with their EPA test cycle MPG - which matches the behavior of an efficient driver - then average drivers, who get 40 MPG in either car, are going to feel ripped off in Car B (advertised as 47 MPG) but not Car A (advertised as 42 MPG). In practice, the FFH is much more like Car B and others (e.g., Camry Hybrid) are more like Car A. Arguably the EPA test cycle should be changed to better reflect the average driver, but it would be a mistake to drop the information about the upper potential of each car (which is the more relevant number for many drivers). Also, keep in mind that as optimistic as the EPA test cycle is, the ones used in Canada and the European Union are even more inflated. Likewise, I believe other cars inflate the MPG through the onboard gauge, too. Six MPG below sounds high, though. For me it's more like 2.1 or 2.2 MPG. Edit: All of that said, it's always possible you got a lemon. It's just best to definitively rule out the driving style/driving conditions explanations before going there.

Road trips to Vostok Station is my guess.

Welcome and thanks for your service, Kcouture. I ordered mine ~6 months ago after researching it for a few months and I feel like I definitely made the right choice. Hopefully you'll feel the same way when you get yours. If you can keep your speed at or below the speed limit, you should be able to get pretty good MPG on your long commute.

Yeah, I had thought ruby red at the time but when I looked at the picture I realized that.

I was next to a ruby red FFH SE for a little while in traffic this morning. Edit: Or is that sunset?

Wow. I'm sorry to hear about the crash. I hope you and your wife are okay. It's unfortunate about the Flex but at least it did it's job. I don't miss the winter driving up north.

Some businesses already exist that do that. I heard about them when I was looking into getting my car. They charge a flat fee (usally a few hundred, I think). It doesn't speak very highly of the car dealing profession that they are middlemen who are so unpleasant to deal with that people would hire another middleman to deal with them.

That was brave of him to take it on a road trip down to Panama, between the rough country roads, variable charging arrangements, and the need to constantly bribe border officials. I doubt that I'd be willing to take those chances if it were my car. It was funny that the border officials couldn't figure out what to put down for the motor/engine number.

There's usually some discrepancy between the two. My car's computer lists my lifetime MPG as 47.7 last time I checked but as you can see in my sig, Fuelly rates it lower by around 2.2 MPG. I believe it's due to the car undercounting the fuel being used or lost. Using the gas station meter for fuel and the car's odometer for miles travelled (as with Fuelly) is considered more accurate than the MPG calculated by the car's computer.

Thanks for the review. I think I would also stick with the FFH if I had it to over again, but agree that it would be nice if the FFH could adopt a few of features that HAH has an advantage in. In particular, I think LED DRLs you mention look nice on the cars (typically BMWs, etc.) that I see them on regularly. Clearly they don't require a luxury car if the HAH can have them in the same price range. That seems like a pretty simple missed opportunity for Ford, like replacing the standard antenna with a shark fin as many of us have done.

I liked the review. HAH certainly seems like a good car, with many of the same strengths of the FFH. I'm still a little skeptical that the difference in real world driving will be 7 MPG between the FFH and HAH when all is said and done, but I guess we'll see. Edit: Just for example, the limited data fueleconomy.gov has right now shows the 2014 FFH at 40.6 MPG and 2014 HAH at 40.7 MPG. The HAH was released a little bit later, but still that doesn't seem to reflect a difference as big as some are suggesting.

The early reviewers probably drove the car in October, so they would have missed most of the cold. Perhaps not coincidentally, the more recent reviews (NY Times review, Edmunds' comparison) are less glowing about the MPG. I think cold probably explains some of those differences (MPG in the high 40s vs. low 40s).