2013 Hybrid MPG Results

[Fynack]

Dude, he has only 365 miles on the car. You do realize that an average is only as good as the amount of information it contains, right? Are you really suggesting that an average over 365 miles during the break in period is going to be representative of anything that's *more* accurate than the EPA test?

Break-in period is total BS...Ford official statement is you'll receive a total of 1 to 2 percent gain after the break-in period

Edited February 21, 2013 by Fynack

[Fynack]

 

No, it was a challenge because you are too lazy to do the legwork. If you dispute it, please provide an actual argument for this. Some of

 

I dont now why you take so offense to my questions or feel the need to defend Ford so much but to all their own. I am 39 by the way

[acdii]

Your probably right but why would a company knowing this still advertise the 47/47/47 number. Ford talking to the EPA about changing the test proves they knew it was flawed. They should have never reported those numbers and instead gave it something like 40/40/40. 40/40/40 is more reasonable since as an estimate some will get more and some will get less based on driving habit and conditions. But NO ONE is get 47 period. They took that risk to try to be the "prius slayer" and youll see the value of the model nose dive.

If Ford had rated the car with those numbers, then the mileage I was getting would have fallen right where I expected it to be, however, I would not have purchased the car then. Why would I spend the extra on the car when I can get a 2012 that does the same thing and costs several thousand less? Good points here in all respects.

 

In City driving, mine did hit the 47 mark, but I dont do much city driving, mainly rural highways, where the 2010-12 model excels, the 2013 does not, and they overshot the mark there, and really should have been much more realistic even if the car can do that on the EPA tests. I saw how they do it, you have to drive the car to mimic the EPA test, but who really drives like that? Who wants to take that chance driving like that and have Bubba in his 4X4 running you off the road? A more realistic rating would have been what they rated the Gen I at, maybe 41/47/43? That is what we are seeing now.

[hybridbear]

Last night i drove the Lexus es300h, cold start ,drove about 15 miles, 10 on the highway , 5 on the city. My average was 38.5. Their EPA Estimates were 39 hw 40 City 40 Combined. Yes your "mileage may vary" and it didnt meet EPA estimates but it was with in reasonable distance from it. If you think 47/47/47 and getting 37 is reasonable then you are fool and i have a bridge i want to sell you. I dont know how many of you are Ford Employees or just real people but you dont have to hear the grip about MPG yet you still come on these threads and defend Ford...why is that??? Coming with the same things the dealership and Ford constantly states...Mileage will vary, it hasnt broken in, its too cold, its because you dont know how to drive it yet. The gripping will end soon as Ford buys back my vehicle and I get my new es300h.

 

So, what have you done to request that Ford by your car back?

 

It isn't "advertisement." They are required by law to run the EPA test and they are required by law to post the results. And even if they weren't, they are on the same playing field as all the others in the market. It would not make sense to come out and say "we don't have any confidence in this car so we're not going to tell you what the numbers were." All that would happen then is that the same people complaining now would be saying "Ford is HIDING something from us! The numbers must be so LOW that they don't want to publish them!"

 

Good point

 

Oh, dear. So let's explain the difference between legal requirements and marketing.

 

1) Legal requirements: The law says they have to post the numbers, whatever they are.

 

2) Marketing: The marketing department sees the numbers and says "Wow! We should make a big deal out of this!"

 

Some marketing strategies are more ill-advised than others. In this case, I think Ford's enthusiasm for the numbers is backfiring as a strategy. A more savvy marketing tactic would have been to advertise all the great features of the car and then cutely downplay the EPA ratings with an asterisk or something like *oh, and the mileage isn't bad, either. Then wait to see what it does in the real world and adjust the strategy accordingly.

 

But I don't run Ford's marketing department so I wasn't there to give them advice before they rolled this all out. What I can tell you is this. No company takes something that looks good and buries it completely. That is marketing insanity.

 

I agree that their marketing may be ill-advised in the end.

 

Break-in period is total BS...Ford official statement is you'll receive a total of 1 to 2 percent gain after the break-in period

 

I remember reading that Raj Nair said that the break-in period is worth closer to a 10% increase in fuel economy

[hybridbear]

I dont now why you take so offense to my questions or feel the need to defend Ford so much but to all their own. I am 39 by the way

 

I don't understand why you have to be so negative. I still don't see what Ford has done wrong. They built an excellent hybrid, they tested it on the EPA cycle and got 47/47/47, they have published those numbers on the window sticker and in their advertising complete with the "your mileage will vary" disclaimer. What did Ford do wrong? Just because you can't get 47 MPG right now doesn't mean Ford did something wrong. Think about the differences between your driving and the EPA cycles. You are using winter blend gasoline, which also is likely 10% ethanol. That right there explains about 2 MPG in difference. You're also driving in colder temperatures. The EPA tests are done at 60 degrees or above. Every 10 degree temperature drop explains another 2 MPG in your difference. You are also using the heat, radio, lights, carrying extra weight in the car of cargo or passengers and doing a lot of other things that make you circumstances different from the EPA tests.

 

For all those reasons it is unrealistic to expect any car to mirror the EPA numbers in the real world. Some cars do better than their EPA numbers, some cars do worse. It all depends on the design of the car and the driver. The EPA test cycle is like a standardized test. All the cars take the same test, which means we can compare the results. It doesn't mean that the test isn't flawed. If you don't believe that the Fusion/C-Max deserve to be rated at 47/47/47 then go after the EPA, not Ford.

 

If your child scored a 2100 on their SATs but you believed that they should have only scored 1800 would you make them artificially lower their scores on college applications? Of course not!! The SATs are no doubt a flawed system, but since all students take the same test they can be used for comparison. Are the SAT scores an accurate measure of intelligence? No! Of how much a student has learned? No! But they are the test that's used. There are books upon books teaching kids how to "ace" their SATs, not by teaching them more knowledge, but by teaching them how to take the test.

 

Ford did the same thing. They taught their cars how to take the EPA tests and excel.

[elle]

I don't understand why you have to be so negative. I still don't see what Ford has done wrong. They built an excellent hybrid, they tested it on the EPA cycle and got 47/47/47, they have published those numbers on the window sticker and in their advertising complete with the "your mileage will vary" disclaimer. What did Ford do wrong? Just because you can't get 47 MPG right now doesn't mean Ford did something wrong. Think about the differences between your driving and the EPA cycles. You are using winter blend gasoline, which also is likely 10% ethanol. That right there explains about 2 MPG in difference. You're also driving in colder temperatures. The EPA tests are done at 60 degrees or above. Every 10 degree temperature drop explains another 2 MPG in your difference. You are also using the heat, radio, lights, carrying extra weight in the car of cargo or passengers and doing a lot of other things that make you circumstances different from the EPA tests.

 

For all those reasons it is unrealistic to expect any car to mirror the EPA numbers in the real world. Some cars do better than their EPA numbers, some cars do worse. It all depends on the design of the car and the driver. The EPA test cycle is like a standardized test. All the cars take the same test, which means we can compare the results. It doesn't mean that the test isn't flawed. If you don't believe that the Fusion/C-Max deserve to be rated at 47/47/47 then go after the EPA, not Ford.

 

If your child scored a 2100 on their SATs but you believed that they should have only scored 1800 would you make them artificially lower their scores on college applications? Of course not!! The SATs are no doubt a flawed system, but since all students take the same test they can be used for comparison. Are the SAT scores an accurate measure of intelligence? No! Of how much a student has learned? No! But they are the test that's used. There are books upon books teaching kids how to "ace" their SATs, not by teaching them more knowledge, but by teaching them how to take the test.

 

Ford did the same thing. They taught their cars how to take the EPA tests and excel.

 

Yup, what he said. I'm not defending Ford. I'm defending my own realistic attitude and plain old common sense. I'm happy with my car and what it offers. I want to enjoy it. I choose not to hyperfocus on one issue. This will be the last you hear from me in this thread for those reasons.

[Fynack]

This is what i get for buying an american car. Done with this and Ford as well.

[acdii]

I don't understand why you have to be so negative. I still don't see what Ford has done wrong. They built an excellent hybrid, they tested it on the EPA cycle and got 47/47/47, they have published those numbers on the window sticker and in their advertising complete with the "your mileage will vary" disclaimer. What did Ford do wrong? Just because you can't get 47 MPG right now doesn't mean Ford did something wrong. Think about the differences between your driving and the EPA cycles. You are using winter blend gasoline, which also is likely 10% ethanol. That right there explains about 2 MPG in difference. You're also driving in colder temperatures. The EPA tests are done at 60 degrees or above. Every 10 degree temperature drop explains another 2 MPG in your difference. You are also using the heat, radio, lights, carrying extra weight in the car of cargo or passengers and doing a lot of other things that make you circumstances different from the EPA tests.

By this reasoning, my 2010 would be getting 28 MPG instead of 37 in this cold weather with winter blend gas, am I right? In summer it gets 43, in winter roughly 34 on average, but this morning, 37, in 24* temps. The other day 39 in the same temps, yesterday 34, but it was also 9*. So why is it the Gen I Ford hybrid is doing so much better than the Gen II? Then again, those who are getting over 40, how many miles at 55 are you doing vs 35-40? That right there makes a huge difference. The new FFH does not do well at all at highway speeds, and that is where the biggest beef is. It has been noted quite a bit how quickly MPG drops off over 62 MPH in these cars. In fact the non hybrids aren't fairing so well in this department either, very few owners are seeing highway EPA, or even close to it.

 

In city driving mine did very well, never had a complaint about the city driving, but I do very little city, at least 80% is at 55 MPH, and that is why the MPG is so dang low, it sucks at highway speeds.

[Fynack]

Sorry i though i was gone but theres that number again... ""Every 10 degree temperature drop explains another 2 MPG in your difference"" where does that come from and where can i see it officially stated??? I find that hard to believe consider your supposedly from "Minneapolis, MN", one of the colder parts of the country yet your average is fine??? This forum just plain fishy

Edited February 21, 2013 by Fynack

[Fynack]

Anyways if you want to get rid of me and have a happy MPG forum then please sign my petition

 

https://www.change.org/petitions/ford-motor-company-buy-back-my-2013-ford-fusion-hybrid#

 

Ive already contacted the dealer and ford to see what they can do as buy back or just have the dealer sell it.

Edited February 21, 2013 by Fynack

[fusionTX]

I actually enjoy a good discussion and welcome divergent poits of view. Anytime you get personal in a discussion, you are losing the argument.

My understanding of the EPA tests is that there is a level of latitude where conditions are concerned. In other words,

Some things are not well defined. I saw this on another forum, maybe I'll search for it.

That leaves some room for abuse and manipulation.

 

I cannot believe that people are arguing that Ford was obligated to go the 47/47/47 route and had no choice. i simply find that hard to swallow.

 

Regardless, I think I know what I'm getting into, and will be happy if I get 40 or over on my daily commute.

 

serious highway driving, I know I will be nowhere near 47, probably not even 40.

[coach81]

By the way...... I got 53 MPG in my first tank :)

 

 

 

Have a great weekend everyone!

[elle]

I actually enjoy a good discussion and welcome divergent poits of view. Anytime you get personal in a discussion, you are losing the argument.

My understanding of the EPA tests is that there is a level of latitude where conditions are concerned. In other words,

Some things are not well defined. I saw this on another forum, maybe I'll search for it.

That leaves some room for abuse and manipulation.

 

I cannot believe that people are arguing that Ford was obligated to go the 47/47/47 route and had no choice. i simply find that hard to swallow.

 

Regardless, I think I know what I'm getting into, and will be happy if I get 40 or over on my daily commute.

 

serious highway driving, I know I will be nowhere near 47, probably not even 40.

 

Sorry, but it starts to feel personal when the message is, over and over again, "you made a crappy buying decision with your $30+ grand." That's how being on this forum is making me feel. Maybe I should stay off the forum and let the negative posts set the tone.

[fusionTX]

Sorry, but it starts to feel personal when the message is, over and over again, "you made a crappy buying decision with your $30+ grand." That's how being on this forum is making me feel. Maybe I should stay off the forum and let the negative posts set the tone.

I am buying the Fusion because it seems like an awesome combination of features, it's great looking, and should get some great gas mileage. It seems like the right car for me at this time in my life. it was the gas mileage that first caught my attention. That's probably true of most people.

 

I really do not take it personally if some one critiques the car. I agree acdii went overboard in his angst, and that probably turned off a few people, myself included. But Even though I am buying A Fusion, I refuse to give Ford a free pass on the 47/47/47. I have noticed that Idon't seem to see any commercials touting the 47/47/47 anymore.

[expresspotato]

Just finished my first tank and got a measly 32 MPG or 7.2 L /100 KM.

[coach81]

Just finished my first tank and got a measly 32 MPG or 7.2 L /100 KM.

 

Just to put in perspective... for the last 12 years or so I've been averaging about say.. 11-12 MPG with my Nissan Frontier...with this car.. if I would have gotten anything close to 35-40 MPG I would have been thrilled... despite what the sticker says.. the fact that this size car with all of its features and weight can still get me close to 40 MPG or better is amazing in my opinion. I love the vehicle, and I can't wait to drive it again in a few mins...

Edited February 22, 2013 by coach81

[Ric]

I agree acdii went overboard in his angst, and that probably turned off a few people, myself included.

 

The truth will come out: ACDII works for Toyota. :hysterical3:

[hybridbear]

Yup, what he said. I'm not defending Ford. I'm defending my own realistic attitude and plain old common sense. I'm happy with my car and what it offers. I want to enjoy it. I choose not to hyperfocus on one issue. This will be the last you hear from me in this thread for those reasons.

 

 

By the way...... I got 53 MPG in my first tank :)

 

 

 

Have a great weekend everyone!

 

 

Sorry, but it starts to feel personal when the message is, over and over again, "you made a crappy buying decision with your $30+ grand." That's how being on this forum is making me feel. Maybe I should stay off the forum and let the negative posts set the tone.

 

I'm annoyed with the negativity in some of these threads too...so I'm going to start a thread that will be for positive comments only. It will be a place to share our MPG accomplishments, tips on how to maximize out MPG and what we like best about the Fusion. This way we can keep the negative comments separated from the positive ones (hopefully!).

 

This was an interesting discussion, and the most important thing is that the Motor Trend video and ensuing discussion has made all of us think about the car and about Ford and the MPG. The thought process is the most important thing.

 

So, anyone who wishes to have a positive discussion about the Fusion and how to achieve maximum mileage, like Coach and his 53 MPG, is welcome to join me on the new thread I'm creating

[acdii]

The truth will come out: ACDII works for Toyota. :hysterical3:

Ha Ha Ha vewy funny!!!!!

 

 

Just for that I should go Achmed on your ass! :)

 

[hybridbear]

I started a positive thread under the "General Powertrain Discussion" section for anyone who wishes to have a positive discussion about what they like about the Fusion, rather than their complaints. Thanks

[acdii]

My gripe isn't with the Fusion, its with Ford. The new Fusion is a really nice car, one of the best they have made in quite some time. One of the best FWD cars I have ever driven in snow. The way Ford has been treating me over my issue with the car is what has me all upset and why I no longer want to drive the car. The sooner its gone the sooner I can move on. I do miss driving it, but I dont miss obsessing on trying to get better then 35 MPG, nor having cold feet by the time I get to work.

 

 

 

We love our 2010 Fusion Hybrid, great car, very good gas mileage, and have I ever griped about it? Nope. I griped at myself for busting it that one time though.

[Da0ne]

my daily commute is 14 miles each way, in the morning i get about 34 mpg and in the evening i get 39 mpg granted the temps have been between 20 - 30 here daily, but next week its suppose to be in mid 30 - mid 40 so i should see a better mpg, either way its better than what i used to get on my 07 corolla which would only get me 30 mpg in the city and my 00 jeep which that one is 11-13 mpg

[jeff_h]

my daily commute is 14 miles each way, in the morning i get about 34 mpg and in the evening i get 39 mpg granted the temps have been between 20 - 30 here daily, but next week its suppose to be in mid 30 - mid 40 so i should see a better mpg, either way its better than what i used to get on my 07 corolla which would only get me 30 mpg in the city and my 00 jeep which that one is 11-13 mpg

 

If you are in NYC then the first 5 (approx based on temp, of course) miles will have poor MPG while the cabin is being heated and engine warms up... when you have days where the mornings are in the mid 60s or 70 it will not take nearly as long for the warmup(s) and hopefully your MPG will increase nicely, commensurate with the better outside temps!

Edited February 22, 2013 by jeff_h

[Da0ne]

yea i am and i believe it should be but either way its already getting better than my old corolla so no complaints from me, i even took a ride from nyc to upstate ny about a 50 mile drive and it got 49.8 mpg and it was 20 degrees out that day

[ptjones]

I have 14k mi on my CMAX and have done extensive testing to come up with "every 10deg.F drop in temp you get a 2mpg drop in mileage." You go to fordcmaxhybridforum.com and then to fuel mileage forum where there are several threads on this subject.

If you get in the Atlanta area I would be happy to show you there is nothing wrong with your FFH. Good Luck

Sorry i though i was gone but there's that number again... ""Every 10 degree temperature drop explains another 2 MPG in your difference"" where does that come from and where can i see it officially stated??? I find that hard to believe consider your supposedly from "Minneapolis, MN", one of the colder parts of the country yet your average is fine??? This forum just plain fishy