ElectricFan69

The '16 has an 'eco' mode button to the right of the shifter - kind of matches the parking brake switch, but on the right side. Signals the ECU to maximize FE by being a bit 'lazier' on climate control and throttle response. May do other things - but those are the most noticeable.

Experience. Complexity does not age gracefully, even if it's based on durable components. And with every engineer trying to squeeze the last cent of cost out of a part, long-term durability doesn't necessarily give a positive return for the manufacturer. Had a 90's vintage Crown Vic with air ride. First 4 years / 110K miles, the system was great. After that - random 'sitting on bump stops' experienced, which was ultimately diagnosed as a bad sensor and (occasionally) leaking valve. Had acquaintances with similar vintage Mark VII/VIII with the air ride suspensions. Struts were substantially more $$$ to replace, had similar issues with hard (read expen$$ive) to diagnose faults and spendy to set right. If you do 3 year lease, cool, you won't likely have to worry about it. For the folks that keep their cars for a good long time (or for those with the bad judgement to buy well-used examples), the parts bill will be quite painful.

Actually, it IS an article of clothing/eye covering designed to simulate the body/mind/sense disconnect that comes with mind-altering drugs of various types. The demonstration is for the folks to don the garment, plug it into the simulator, and see firsthand how their senses and body parts malfunction under the influence. Cool technology and pretty cool way of creating empathy and a reality check on those who claim they're 'just fine to drive' after the bottle of wine and/or some pills of unknown provenance...

This sort of system adds most value to vehicles with the heavy,clunky and oversize wheel/ultra-low-profile tire. Sport goes there - and most of the other trim levels aren't as bad. I'm a bit surprised that the Platinum trim, which also has the 40 series tire, doesn't include it. Like other systems of the sort, it's going to result in grip compromise if it's active while cornering - a wheel 'flying over' a pothole won't be providing grip... That sort of system can smooth out the ride - and is likely to age badly and be quite spendy when the components need replacement - look at shock/strut prices for GM magnetic shocks. Sport is also the 'premium' version of the Fusion, and thus more likely to have owners that tolerate the breakage and costs - although I'd suspect that the design life will exceed the warranty/average first owner duration. This is a component that speaks to same sort of priorities that tolerate 20K mile 'high-grip' tires and fragile, expensive-to-replace wheels. It's a technology fix for a 'fashion-originated' problem of low-profile tires and wheels.

The mechanism I'd see is the ECU 'forgetting' its adaptive learning due to low voltage. Doing so would wipe out the 'near home' EV capability, have it use the 'default' settings for timing, etc. Now, I'd also expect to see things like failure to start and random ECU error codes.

Likely, yes, as the corrosion environment changes for the worse. Also, if you drive on the beach - or live on the beach and its frequent salt spray, the corrosion profile is similar.

Did the same evaluation 4 months ago, but from a different place when we added to the family fleet. I've had a TCH since April 2008, and have been quite pleased with the vehicle. The only item of note for the TCH (aside from the several recall campaigns) is the melting of the dash top in the Florida heat - which no longer uses the same materials. If I could have gotten a new one similarly equipped, it would have been my first choice. The issue I ran into was Toyota's packaging decisions - you had to go up to the XLE to get rear seat A/C vents. This ballooned the price point, and bundled stuff I didn't want to pay for. The current TCH gen also seems to have gone into the 'what it lacks in handling precision it makes up for in harsh ride' trap. Seems like they hired the GM engineers from the 90's that conflate a rough ride with sporty handling - resulting in a vehicle lacking in both agility and comfort. Honda's decision to 'take the year off' is also more than a bit concerning, and makes me wonder about the viability of the model. When I got serious about buying, there were only the tarted-up versions with a 35K sticker. Also, the prior Civic and Accord hybrid generations have had considerably worse durability record for the electric parts (traction battery in particular) that either Toyota or Ford. Of course, these were a different battery tech and used a different electric motor integration scheme - but... Some of Ford's design and option bundling decisions are also head-scratches. For example, bundling the sunroof with the home link. The A/C design that forces excessive dis-assembly to change cabin filter - when other Ford models (e.g. Explorer) have a much simpler way. The way the battery is packaged in the Energi model that renders luggage space rather sad. The lack of US availability of an Estate model (like the European Mondeo) - which I suppose I'm one of the relatively few to prefer over the 'butched up' crossovers with ghetto-sized wheels and ultra-low-profile tires (Edge on 21's? 40 series tires on a vehicle with off-road pretensions? Really?). Given that, I was able to get one with (almost) everything I wanted, and very little that I didn't, and some things (e.g. sunroof and its loss of headroom) that I both love and get annoyed at, depending on the weather. My issue with the Titanium was the perforated leather - I feel the treatment destroys the value proposition of leather (for me, it's feel, durability and spill resistance). I find the built-in NAV systems a poor value - map updates are spendy and old when released, with relatively poor POI currency. Doubly so with the MFT, which can't integrate with your phone address book, doesn't allow entry or updates of waypoints by your passengers while the vehicle is moving, has laggy response for address entry, etc. The 'driver assist' stuff feels like it needs a couple of more generations to get 'usable'. I have little patience for paying to be a beta tester. Guess my point is that there is no such thing as a perfect car - certainly not at a price point affordable by 'mere mortals' unwilling to sell out their future. The FFH represented for me a reasonable compromise and the items I've ragged on weren't deal-breakers, and could be avoided by judicious selections on the option sheet. For my example, at least, the quality of paint and assembly was pretty good - really haven't found any glaring faults or mistakes. Time will tell how durable the thing is - I've only 2K miles and change on mine, but so far so good. Interesting trivia is that the '08 TCH developed more rattles by this point in its life than the new Fusion - guess the 8 years have resulted in some progress.

The Panasonic battery in the TCH won't bet any benefit from 'stirring up electrolyte' because it's AGM - and doesn't have liquid electrolyte. Apparently, the FFH has a more conventional 12 volt lead/acid - which typically does have liquid that sloshes around. In both designs - more so in the 'conventional' design, deep discharge accelerates battery death. The Panasonic AGM has been documented to have a harder time handling high loads (e.g. by jumping a ICE-only vehicle with the resulting high-amperage load) and doing so can cause its failure. Ford's apparent accessory strategy would seem to cause deeper discharge cycles than I was used to with an ICE-only car and its limited steady load battery. And hooking up a battery backward would be bad news - with the reverse polarity frying (hopefully, if you're lucky) the fuses in the 12 volt circuit. If not, multiple ECUs in the car, the DC:DC inverter, etc....

Well, not exactly - Marchione was talking about 'future platform strategy', where they'd partner with somebody else to design and build the cars. Personally, I'd consider the strategy short-sighted - he's leaving the company with nothing but fuel hogs, and the next time the gas prices spike, nothing viable to sell. Plus, how is that strategy going to play with CAFE?

The story I got in the fordsyncforum.com was that they had a number of 'invalid address' issues, and this was their way to fix. We got suckered into paying the $$$ for the MFT nav in our Explorer - I specifically looked for my FFH equipped to avoid it as a result. MFT nav isn't much worse than most competitive systems (e.g. Toyota Entune, Honda/Alpine) and like them is a poor consumer value - the map updates @ $150 are particularly galling when I can have more updated maps on my phone for "free". Or I can have a lifetime update dedicated nav for less $$ than the map update. And all of the above allow phone sharing with the addresses...

For much of the South, such technology is irrelevant unless the vehicle is also equipped with an A/C system that can function with the ICE off. Having the car get hot when sitting at a light because the ICE goes off isn't going to fly, and having belt-driven A/C compressors forces the ICE to 'idle' to ensure the cool, de-humidified air keeps blowing. Now, if Ford has figured out a way to run an A/C compressor on a low-voltage system without having to upsize the legacy lead/acid batteries - that would truly be innovative...

The weakness/compromise of the Aisin PSD design is that you can't combine MG1 and MG2 output to drive wheels. The one-way-clutch is a way to work around that. A related issue is the electrical energy consumption of the setup at steady cruise speed - which, if worked around effectively, could improve high-speed cruise by several MPG. Against that, a one-way-clutch brings complication and a failure point. It'll be interesting to see the final FE ratings of the setup. Perhaps unfortunate for Chrysler, they're releasing the vehicle into a period of low fuel prices, which will limit the take rate. If they can manage to have EPA ratings in the high 20's / low 30's it would be a game changer - and a compelling value for a relatively fuelish segment. We also have an Explorer in the family, and the fuel consumption of the vehicle is a decided downside (20 MPG is SO 1980's) - made a bit less so by the current dip in fuel cost. But the next time fuel spikes to $5/gal, this will be a good choice for carpool duty, provided they can get the price point into the affordable zone.

Given their obsequious relationship with NSA, is there truly a practical difference?

Yeah, but Prius looks are driven for a large part by the aero requirements, and the Cx is among the best on the market. Now, if yo're speaking to the central instrument layout, and the dash layout...

This is the sort of thing that can be darn handy - or the realization of "1984" dystopia. As long as it's tied to Personally Identifiable Information, I would opt out whenever, or not purchase the technology. "Big Brother" needs to be stopped.

Guess it's a 'fashion thing', but I really have a hard time seeing the appeal of oversize wheels - they screw up the ride, make the car burn more fuel and slower, brake worse, are more susceptible to pothole damage. Kind of like hiking boots with a suit. Much like landau bars and vinyl roof covering, or Vogue wide whitewall and wire wheels, it's a look that doesn't do anything good for the way the car functions.

Maybe they ought to go with the radioactive materials? Uranium - makes you glow inside when you drivePlutonium - so hot you can hardly stand it.Polonium - a real pill to drive;)

Like everything else in life, it's a trade-off. The advantage (at least for my recent driving cycles) is that starting with a relatively low SOC, the ICE warm-up is quite productive when the temps are relatively cold, and you have several stops/traffic lights near the start of your trip. The ICE will run to get everything up to temp - with a low SOC, the higher load will speed warm-up and reduce overall energy use. A related matter is that the quicker warm-up speeds the effectiveness of the front defroster. Even in more moderate temps, having a load on the ICE speeds warm-up - so that part is all good. One item about this that I consider the 'killer app' for this feature is the fact the ICE doesn't have to start for when we have to re-arrange the cars in the driveway. Small 'Easter Egg' sort of thing - but a delightful contrast with brand 'T'.

There have been a number of articles about stealers ripping people off for maintenance the cars flat don't need. For the FFH, follow the service monitor for the routine stuff like oil changes and even coolant changes - aside from paying for the dealer's boat (if you are into that sort of thing), most owners will see no benefit to the old-school 3K mile OCI and the 'profit grinder' injector services. There was a story in NY Times where a guy buying a eGolf was given a 'hard sell' for an oil change package - which the eGolf cannot use as there is not a regularly scheduled oil change for the electric powertrain. Whether it was simple ignorance of the product, or outright dishonesty I don't know- but it's likely a bit of both.

The stealer is trying to revenue you. Call him out for the large pile of bovine excrement he's spewing. And if they're pushing that kind of BS, I'd question their honesty in any dealings you might have to have with them.

I hope that these will be optional - and not crammed on every floorplan vehicle. Much like 'sync services', these are intrusive, expense-generating features of limited real utility, and create new classes of vulnerability and 'hack-ability' for the vehicle. Here's also hoping that Ford and ATT do a better job securing the system than Chrysler / Sprint did.

That's quite shocking. Electrifying even. Did it bring a spark of inspiration to you? :lol:

Sadly, it's not particularly uncommon, and not confined to a singly color or manufacturer. Being a red, and a tinted clear-coat metallic, this paint is likely to be particularly susceptible to the different-base-material fade, and noticeable difference of paint 'flop' as the cars are painted. The other explanation is that the bumper skins were repainted due to scratches that didn't warrant an accident report. For example, my '08 TCH could stand to have the bumpers re-sprayed due to "love bug" damage on the front (these are nasty little insects that have seasonal swarms, and whose splots dissolve paint), and due to luggage loading carelessness that scratched up the rear bumper skin. Neither type of damage involved a collision of note - but both bumper skins have blemishes that should be fixed. Could be the dealer made a 'it seemed a good idea at the time' decision to do a re-spray in preparation to resell the car.

Ditto - but given GM track record on new car introductions, I wouldn't consider it until it's had a couple of years of 'de-bugging'. Being an automotive 'unpaid beta tester' requires a special kind of patience that I don't have.

Parking near a construction site is a REAL wild card. If they used a sprayed-on waterproofing (likely if the facade is concrete), or various types of paints, the over spray could have been the root cause. A thorough cleaning of the car (including claying the finish) could be in order. Lots of the construction folks are sloppy and ill-trained in use of products - to the detriment of the neighbors.