Ford C-Max & Fusion Hybrid Gas Mileage Lawsuits Combined

[ptjones]

Try this on for size. Fueleconomy.gov. Out of 45 vehicles posted, the overall average is 39 MPG. 8 below EPA. 2012 Camry LE Hybrid, out of 13 cars, overall average is 40.4 rated 41. 2011 Fusion Hybrid, 11 car sample, 38 overall, rated 39.

 

If so many people are happy, why are there 45 vehicles listed for the 13 Fusion, but so few for the other ones I listed? Could it be because the other ones are doing exactly as claimed? You guys can defend Ford all you want, Ford gamed the test so they can market the car, and so far the majority of owners listed are 43 and under, Only 3 are hitting near EPA, 8 are above, and they are mostly city drivers in warmer climes. that is not a very good percentage. 27 out of 45 owners are below 40 MPG. That is well over 50%.

 

There are two types of owners who really use this site, those who brag, and those who are not getting what they think they should be getting. Out of those who are not, at least half have a legit beef.

 

Lets go one step further, Cmax, 74 vehicles listed, 38.5 MPG average, Prius V 19 vehicles listed, 42.5 average, EPA 42. Ford will have a tough time defending this, the YMMV can only go so far, and I do believe Ford screwed themselves when they asked the EPA to revise their testing, which tells me Ford Gamed the system on this.

I was hoping FORD would have explanation for your fouled spark plugs, that doesn't seem right.

 

FFH has been around for only 4months at most and winter months too. When summer time comes around your MPG's will go up 4-8mpg my testing has shown. When temps are in the 70's I can get EPA MPG's.

 

Sure would be interesting to test a "poor" MPG car on my test loop to compare to my car. Maybe not all cars are created equal.

 

On the lawsuit the only people that make money are lawyers and I haven't seen anything on both Forums that has done anything illegal. So don't waste any of your money or time.IMO

 

So I guess it is up to us to figure out what is going on with the MPG's

[hermans]

um, its called a tripod, or some duct tape. Obviously you cant drive with one hand then hold a video camera in the other and its clear that your not willing to help the people who "dont know how to drive this car" and are totally BSing about your numbers.

All I did is read up on everything I could about how to drive a hybrid while waiting for my car.

 

Eat it clown.

[acdii]

I have my doubts it will improve in warmer weather, only because I have been in 78* weather with it and didn't see 40. I was down in Florida in December with it for a week and only time I saw it get reasonable miles was when I was in slow traffic. Going to keep hopeful though, as I have been able to get 38 out of it the past 2 days. Still a little less than my other car, but better than it was.

 

I ordered the Husky liners for it today, and will order the hitch next month.

[Fynack]

All I did is read up on everything I could about how to drive a hybrid while waiting for my car.

 

Eat it clown.

 

Wow now were turning to insults like a 12 year old. Grow up and learn to respect yourself and the money you spend. Obviously you like to take it in the a$$ from ford. But I dont judge...keeping taking it

 

 

[elle]

I have my doubts it will improve in warmer weather, only because I have been in 78* weather with it and didn't see 40. I was down in Florida in December with it for a week and only time I saw it get reasonable miles was when I was in slow traffic. Going to keep hopeful though, as I have been able to get 38 out of it the past 2 days. Still a little less than my other car, but better than it was.

 

I ordered the Husky liners for it today, and will order the hitch next month.

I have doubts about the warm weather, too. My experience with the last hybrid I drove was that the A/C was also a real drain on mileage. Since I live in a fairly warm climate, that's a bigger worry for me that the cold. Problem here is the temperatures can vary so much that I might wake up with temps in the 40s and be running the heat in the morning and then have temps so hot in the afternoon that I'm running the A/C. We have very few days here when I wouldn't be running something or other for climate.

[fusionTX]

Wow, this was a mature discussion on all sides. No happy talk here.:)

[hybridbear]

Let's try to bring this discussion back to a more mature level. I think what causes division here is that not all Fusions are having the issues that acdii, Fynack, nmadole and others are having with their gas mileage. I think that most of us truly empathize with you guys who received defective cars. I can't imagine what I would do or how I would feel in your situation, it must be truly frustrating.

 

But what is frustrating for the rest of us here who are getting acceptable gas mileage and don't have defective cars is that you paint all the Fusion hybrids as being evil. Most of us are fine. There's a small group of you with issues, and those issues have be traced to cars that were built one specific week near the end of October/the beginning of November. It is a real shame that Ford won't admit that there is something wrong with cars from that week and compensate you guys accordingly. Maybe the only way for you to get resolution is a lawsuit, since the dealerships and Ford are not helping. But that doesn't mean that every person here is having the same issues that you are, or that we should all join you in suing Ford.

 

I think if everyone realizes that these few cars have a real problem with them, that it isn't just driving style or driver error, and if those of you with problems realize that the rest of us empathize and really feel bad about what's happening, it will help to keep the discussion civilized. We also have to realize that constant complaining about your mileage doesn't solve anything. What acdii has done with testing his car has helped to start to isolate where the defect is. But, to find the defect we need more information from those of you with issues and ideas from all of us of how to spot the issue. Maybe what it will take is for us to find the exact problem so that acdii and others can go to their dealer and show them exactly what the difference is between the poor MPG Fusions and the rest of the Fusions.

 

That would certainly be a more productive discussion than the name calling and constant complaining

[ptjones]

Some of the CMAX members are connecting Laptops to monitor ICE functions. If we compare a High MPG car to a Low MPG car under the same conditions there might be some info that would explain the difference. :)

[acdii]

Some of the CMAX members are connecting Laptops to monitor ICE functions. If we compare a High MPG car to a Low MPG car under the same conditions there might be some info that would explain the difference. :)

Can you link to some of those? I would really like to do that as well. The ScanGauge can only do so much and being able to record information is even better.

[brcd131]

I appreciate all the information I get in this forum. I know it goes off into the weeds at times, and others get tired of hearing us complain about our poor MPGs but I pick up tidbits of info all the time that I can then take to the dealer and try to find a solution. The dealer is amazed a how much info I have, and I think at times he doesn't like it but that's the benefit of this forum - to exchange info.

[Fastronaut]

I appreciate all the information I get in this forum. I know it goes off into the weeds at times, and others get tired of hearing us complain about our poor MPGs but I pick up tidbits of info all the time that I can then take to the dealer and try to find a solution. The dealer is amazed a how much info I have, and I think at times he doesn't like it but that's the benefit of this forum - to exchange info.

That's what the value of Forums like this one provide. My dealer is also amazed at what I know in relation to his limited view of the world.

Edited March 1, 2013 by Fastronaut

[acdii]

Mine just shakes his head and walks away. I was even asked if I could come work for him. I dont know if it was in jest or what though!

[acdii]

I have been thinking about this all morning(I know, get a life right?), and what I came up with is this. It may seem frivolous to sue Ford over false advertisement, however, what if Ford really did game the system by programming the car to meet the EPA test dead on, when in real world driving it is unrealistic, and those numbers just cant be achieve by most drivers, and real world driving shows at least 20% losses to the EPA? When other car companies program their cars to get the highest possible real world driving and then run the EPA test to get their numbers, like Toyota, and most drivers can obtain those numbers, buyers who have had Toyotas and then switch to a Ford and cant even get close to what those ratings are will not be happy. There is a big discrepancy between what their EPA test are and what real world driving is.

 

For example, the Prius V, which is what Ford is targeting with their Cmax, out of a 19 car sample, the Fuel Economy website shows the overall real world average to be 42.5 MPG, while the EPA combined is 42. When you then look at the Cmax, out of the 74 cars sampled, the real world average is 38.5 with EPA of 47. That is a huge difference, and really does make Ford look bad.

 

So my thoughts on this is, if Ford really did program to ace EPA when real world driving cant meet those numbers, then the lawsuit against them will expose how flawed the system is. Ford basically said that is the case when they insisted the EPA change the testing, in my mind they admitted to gaming the system right there. What do we the consumer get out of this? More accurate real world EPA ratings, fewer false claims by car companies on their EPA ratings, and knowing when you buy a car based on its gas mileage, that you can expect to see those numbers within 10%.

 

Even if there is no compensation for the false advertising claims, as long as the testing is changed to be more realistic to real world driving in a Hybrid, without games, then we all benefit from it. That is my hope in how it all plays out.

 

Basically when you drive any of these cars conservatively, without extreme P&G measures like what has to be done in mine, you should be able to get within 10% of the EPA ratings, that is how the YMMV rule should be applied. If you go to any Toyota dealer and test drive any of their hybrids, and drive it conservatively, you will get within 10% if not right there. You can't say the same for the Fords. On a test drive I have not been able to get 42 MPG in either the Cmax or the Fusion, yet on the test drives of both the Camry Hybrid and the Avalon hybrid, I was able to meet EPA on one, and come within 1.2 MPG of the other on the high end of EPA. What I think will hurt Ford the most is lack of variance between their city and highway numbers, there is no gap between them as in other cars. If the sticker read more like 43 highway 47 city, that would seem more realistic in real world. When you look at 10-12 FFH sticker, 36 Highway, can be done, easily, 41 City Hell yes! 39 combined, Spot on. It is best to under promise and over deliver than to over promise and under deliver.

 

Imagine how all you who are getting good MPG in yours would feel if the EPA numbers were closer to 42 MPG instead of 47? You would be :happy feet: :rockon: :headspin: Right? Those of use who are stuck in the 30's wouldnt be complaining as much either, :baby: . But since no one has yet shown consistent 47 MPG in their Fuelly tags, when you look at Prius chat and see most owners tags show them right at or above the numbers, tells you , hmmm something isnt quite right.

 

So in the end, the result is a change in how Hybrids are tested to reflect actual real world driving, then its a good thing, as it will benefit all of us. Peace Out :victory:

Edited March 2, 2013 by acdii

[ptjones]

I know exactly what acdii is talking about, you excelerate then get into ev mode then drain the battery while slowly losing speed then excelerate and ev then drain again. Like driving 55 then drain to 30 then speed back up to 55 then drain again. Its ridiculous if thats what i have to do to get 40mpgs

Actually if you wanted to average 55mph P&G you accelerate to 58-60mph let off gas. EV should kick in at around 55mph depress accelerator to half way up blue arc to keep in EV to 50mph and then P&G again.

[hybridbear]

I have been thinking about this all morning(I know, get a life right?), and what I came up with is this. It may seem frivolous to sue Ford over false advertisement, however, what if Ford really did game the system by programming the car to meet the EPA test dead on, when in real world driving it is unrealistic, and those numbers just cant be achieve by most drivers, and real world driving shows at least 20% losses to the EPA? When other car companies program their cars to get the highest possible real world driving and then run the EPA test to get their numbers, like Toyota, and most drivers can obtain those numbers, buyers who have had Toyotas and then switch to a Ford and cant even get close to what those ratings are will not be happy. There is a big discrepancy between what their EPA test are and what real world driving is.

 

For example, the Prius V, which is what Ford is targeting with their Cmax, out of a 19 car sample, the Fuel Economy website shows the overall real world average to be 42.5 MPG, while the EPA combined is 42. When you then look at the Cmax, out of the 74 cars sampled, the real world average is 38.5 with EPA of 47. That is a huge difference, and really does make Ford look bad.

 

So my thoughts on this is, if Ford really did program to ace EPA when real world driving cant meet those numbers, then the lawsuit against them will expose how flawed the system is. Ford basically said that is the case when they insisted the EPA change the testing, in my mind they admitted to gaming the system right there. What do we the consumer get out of this? More accurate real world EPA ratings, fewer false claims by car companies on their EPA ratings, and knowing when you buy a car based on its gas mileage, that you can expect to see those numbers within 10%.

 

Even if there is no compensation for the false advertising claims, as long as the testing is changed to be more realistic to real world driving in a Hybrid, without games, then we all benefit from it. That is my hope in how it all plays out.

 

Basically when you drive any of these cars conservatively, without extreme P&G measures like what has to be done in mine, you should be able to get within 10% of the EPA ratings, that is how the YMMV rule should be applied. If you go to any Toyota dealer and test drive any of their hybrids, and drive it conservatively, you will get within 10% if not right there. You can't say the same for the Fords. On a test drive I have not been able to get 42 MPG in either the Cmax or the Fusion, yet on the test drives of both the Camry Hybrid and the Avalon hybrid, I was able to meet EPA on one, and come within 1.2 MPG of the other on the high end of EPA. What I think will hurt Ford the most is lack of variance between their city and highway numbers, there is no gap between them as in other cars. If the sticker read more like 43 highway 47 city, that would seem more realistic in real world. When you look at 10-12 FFH sticker, 36 Highway, can be done, easily, 41 City Hell yes! 39 combined, Spot on. It is best to under promise and over deliver than to over promise and under deliver.

 

Imagine how all you who are getting good MPG in yours would feel if the EPA numbers were closer to 42 MPG instead of 47? You would be :happy feet: :rockon: :headspin: Right? Those of use who are stuck in the 30's wouldnt be complaining as much either, :baby: . But since no one has yet shown consistent 47 MPG in their Fuelly tags, when you look at Prius chat and see most owners tags show them right at or above the numbers, tells you , hmmm something isnt quite right.

 

So in the end, the result is a change in how Hybrids are tested to reflect actual real world driving, then its a good thing, as it will benefit all of us. Peace Out :victory:

 

I agree, the point of any lawsuit should be to get the EPA to fix the broken tests, that's what I've been saying for months. If someone wants to make that the focus of their litigation then I will join you in that fight.

 

I want to see hybrids succeed. I buy hybrids because 1) it's good for the environment & 2) because I believe in the long run they are a good investment.

 

I don't know how many of you have read the book The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell, but I recommend it. Hybrids have not yet reached their tipping point yet to become popular with the masses, but I want to see that happen. I hope the same thing happens with PHEVs because I believe those are the future of cars; they're more practical than all electric vehicles or fuel cell cars or CNG cars. I fear, though, that the negativity here and a lack of change of the EPA tests will make hybrids take a step back in the court of public opinion and then we won't see them reach their tipping point. I think all of us here, as hybrid owners and enthusiasts, can agree that it is in our best interests to see hybrids succeed and become more popular. It is also in the best interests of our planet, and thus of all earth's inhabitants.

 

One thought that has crossed my mind is that maybe Ford doesn't want hybrids to succeed, maybe they're getting paid off by big oil, or they make less profit on hybrids, or something. I certainly hope that isn't true, though...

[jeff_h]

So my thoughts on this is, if Ford really did program to ace EPA when real world driving cant meet those numbers, then the lawsuit against them will expose how flawed the system is. Ford basically said that is the case when they insisted the EPA change the testing, in my mind they admitted to gaming the system right there. What do we the consumer get out of this? More accurate real world EPA ratings, fewer false claims by car companies on their EPA ratings, and knowing when you buy a car based on its gas mileage, that you can expect to see those numbers within 10%.

 

You might say that Toyota was more realistic in their estimates and what went onto the stickers, but I don't know if that was always the case. In 2005 I bought a 2005 Prius, sticker said 60 city and 51 highway.... my average was normally around 51 which was good, but nowhere near 60... and then in the next year or two the numbers on their stickers went down to around 50 or even the high 40s.... whether that was reflective of a different engine or other design, or was there grumbling over the 60/51 numbers being unrealistic? I don't know the answer to that one, but Toyota lowered the numbers in those successive years for one or more reasons, I wonder if Ford will as well?

[lolder]

I think when people bought a car that was rated 47/47/47, they thought no matter where the drove, they would get 47. The EPA tests do not reflect many real world situations. The comment that Toyota designed high mileage cars and then tested them is probably correct. Ford had an eagle eye on the tests first. The EPA is now testing the Fords themselves so we shall see. First generation TCHs and FFHs got within a mpg of each other real world when the FFH's EPA was much higher. They were about the same size, weight and power and those are the deciding factors. The Prii are lighter, sleeker and lower powered. The higher power of the C-max over the v is probably the culprit there. Toyota has really aced the wind drag from the gen 2 Prii on. Everybody made fun of their funny looks but more and more cars are starting to resemble them for a reason.

[acdii]

You might say that Toyota was more realistic in their estimates and what went onto the stickers, but I don't know if that was always the case. In 2005 I bought a 2005 Prius, sticker said 60 city and 51 highway.... my average was normally around 51 which was good, but nowhere near 60... and then in the next year or two the numbers on their stickers went down to around 50 or even the high 40s.... whether that was reflective of a different engine or other design, or was there grumbling over the 60/51 numbers being unrealistic? I don't know the answer to that one, but Toyota lowered the numbers in those successive years for one or more reasons, I wonder if Ford will as well?

Actually the EPA tests did not take Hybrids into consideration at that time. It was after 2007 that the EPA drastically changed the way the testing was done which lowered the numbers down to more realistic averages that the Pri were actually seeing. So in a sense, Toyota did what the EPA told them to do at that time, then when the change came from the EPA, thats when the variance went away. The 2007 Pri I had did get between 50 and 60 like the sticker said, however it was just the opposite, 60 highway 50 city is what I was seeing. I ;took a trip to PA for some schooling, and my return trip averaged 65 MPG from PA to IL, and up until I hit Chicago it was hovering around 75 MPG.

[elle]

Again, the car companies report the EPA numbers as required. Companies can't adjust the test results downward (or upward); they are required to report the actual numbers they get on the tests. They're not required to shout them from the rooftops, but they do have to report them.

 

So, I can't speak to whether or not Ford decided to design to the test, as it were. One could argue (as I have) that building to a test that is supposed to represent real-world conditions kind of makes sense, but some might see it as gaming. Personally, I agree with those here who are saying that we need a better, more accurate test for hybrids. If this controversy exposes a flaw in the testing process for these cars, I'm all for it.

Edited March 2, 2013 by elle

[B25Nut]

"One thought that has crossed my mind is that maybe Ford doesn't want hybrids to succeed, maybe they're getting paid off by big oil, or they make less profit on hybrids, or something. I certainly hope that isn't true, though..."

 

HB - I have agreed with everything you've posted so far, but this is way off base. I realize what you said is only a thought, but I'm 100% confident that Ford and Alan Mulally know that the days of making huge profits from turning tucks into SUVs will never return. All the evidence I see indicates that Ford knows that hybrids are a major part of their future.

As has been said before, Ford is required by law to post the MPG numbers that come from EPA tests. They didn't have the option to change them, which is what makes any lawsuit pointless. Just like in any form of racing (this is a race for sales), Ford looked at the EPA rules and determined how they could push the rule's edges to their advantage. I feel I'm close to being as honest as they come, but this is what I've done in the past and is probably what I would have done if I were Ford.

As Acdii, you and others have said, the most likely outcome of all this is a change in the way the EPA tests hybrids. I think you'll agree with me when I say that from this point on, whatever we say here on this subject will have zero impact on the final results. The wheels have been set in motion on this issue, so let's get back to concentrating on subjects that enhance all our experiences with the FFH.

[ptjones]

Can you link to some of those? I would really like to do that as well. The ScanGauge can only do so much and being able to record information is even better.

I found this in CMAX forum in fuel mileage forum and the below thread. What do you think? Coolant Temperature, Speed, ICE rpm Graphs of 30 Mile Trip - 45.8 MPG

I used VC-Scope along with VCDS (Ross-Tech product) to record the ambient air temperature (yellow), the coolant temperature (red), my speed (white), and ICE rpm (green) for the initial trip to the shop. There are four graphs below that show these variables for the 30 mile trip. Each major horizontal division on the X axis should be one minute.

[GrySql]

All the evidence I see indicates that Ford knows that hybrids are a major part of their future.

My general feeling about where the majority of basic commuter vehicle production is headed is displayed on my FFH's rear window.

[hybridbear]

"One thought that has crossed my mind is that maybe Ford doesn't want hybrids to succeed, maybe they're getting paid off by big oil, or they make less profit on hybrids, or something. I certainly hope that isn't true, though..."

 

HB - I have agreed with everything you've posted so far, but this is way off base. I realize what you said is only a thought, but I'm 100% confident that Ford and Alan Mulally know that the days of making huge profits from turning tucks into SUVs will never return. All the evidence I see indicates that Ford knows that hybrids are a major part of their future.

As has been said before, Ford is required by law to post the MPG numbers that come from EPA tests. They didn't have the option to change them, which is what makes any lawsuit pointless. Just like in any form of racing (this is a race for sales), Ford looked at the EPA rules and determined how they could push the rule's edges to their advantage. I feel I'm close to being as honest as they come, but this is what I've done in the past and is probably what I would have done if I were Ford.

As Acdii, you and others have said, the most likely outcome of all this is a change in the way the EPA tests hybrids. I think you'll agree with me when I say that from this point on, whatever we say here on this subject will have zero impact on the final results. The wheels have been set in motion on this issue, so let's get back to concentrating on subjects that enhance all our experiences with the FFH.

 

I hope it isn't true. But right now the future of motoring is not hybrids, if it were we would be seeing more than a 3% take rate. At the moment the big thing is turbocharging, direct injection, variable valve timing and other tricks to make the ICE more efficient. Mass electrification has not yet caught on. It hasn't reached its tipping point. And hybrid vehicles may never tip if Ford pushes things backward with these cars and the negativity toward hybrids that they are causing. I don't see how the "experts" at Ford could have not forseen this backlash to the 47 MPG claims. We all know that if they did in fact build the car to exceed in the EPA tests then they also knew that the car would not yield that mileage in the real world driving of most people. We can all be sure that Ford knows how quickly the MPGs drop at speeds above 60 MPH.

 

For example, we know that Ford charges a price premium for the EcoBoost engines. These engines are supposed to increase fuel economy and performance to the point where it will be worth it. Ford has said they expect the 1.6 L EcoBoost to be the volume engine in the Fusion. They don't expect the hybrid to be the volume engine, even though all of us here would agree that the hybrid is the best of the Ford powertrains, otherwise we wouldn't have bought a hybrid. So then why would Ford be so concerned about making the hybrid successful when they know that, right now in 2013, it isn't the choice of the masses? Until hybrids reach their tipping point I don't think we'll see as much innovation as we could. Until hybrids become the focus of all the major manufacturers there will always be low-hanging fruit out there. I wonder if in this case, Ford took the posture of making the hybrid ace the EPA tests to get that big 47 MPG sticker number for their advertising, figuring that the hybrid sales would be low enough that there wouldn't be too much backlash. With my background in Risk Management I wonder if Ford figured that the risk of offending the hybrid enthusiast community was a small enough risk to be worth the addition attention and sales they get from the 47 MPG campaign. Because, no doubt, the 47 MPG campaign has driven traffic to the gas-powered Fusions too. Because people will see that number and be intrigued, even if they don't end up buying the hybrid, I'm sure it drives foot traffic. And those are key metrics for auto manufacturers.

 

I hope it isn't true. I almost hope that the people at Ford are stupid and that's why we have this controversy about mileage rather than the cause being that they did it on purpose. But, with the way society is these days, who knows? :confused: :headscratch:

 

I agree with B25Nut that we can't fault Ford for building a car that excells at the EPA tests. Like the illustration I gave earlier on another thread about standardized tests and school kids, this is much the same debate. The EPA cycles are a standardized test, I think we all can agree that standardized tests have their flaws. I hope that the EPA does change their test cycles for hybrids.

 

I also agree that it is a better use of our energy to focus on sharing things that improve our experience of owning these cars. Thanks B25Nut for the great post.

 

I found this in CMAX forum in fuel mileage forum and the below thread. What do you think? Coolant Temperature, Speed, ICE rpm Graphs of 30 Mile Trip - 45.8 MPG

I used VC-Scope along with VCDS (Ross-Tech product) to record the ambient air temperature (yellow), the coolant temperature (red), my speed (white), and ICE rpm (green) for the initial trip to the shop. There are four graphs below that show these variables for the 30 mile trip. Each major horizontal division on the X axis should be one minute.

 

Ptjones, can you please post a link to that info? Sounds very interesting

[hermans]

Wow now were turning to insults like a 12 year old. Grow up and learn to respect yourself and the money you spend. Obviously you like to take it in the a$$ from ford. But I dont judge...keeping taking it

 

Tell me I wasn't right.

Edited March 3, 2013 by hermans

[acdii]

I hope it isn't true. But right now the future of motoring is not hybrids, if it were we would be seeing more than a 3% take rate. At the moment the big thing is turbocharging, direct injection, variable valve timing and other tricks to make the ICE more efficient. Mass electrification has not yet caught on. It hasn't reached its tipping point. And hybrid vehicles may never tip if Ford pushes things backward with these cars and the negativity toward hybrids that they are causing. I don't see how the "experts" at Ford could have not forseen this backlash to the 47 MPG claims. We all know that if they did in fact build the car to exceed in the EPA tests then they also knew that the car would not yield that mileage in the real world driving of most people. We can all be sure that Ford knows how quickly the MPGs drop at speeds above 60 MPH.

 

For example, we know that Ford charges a price premium for the EcoBoost engines. These engines are supposed to increase fuel economy and performance to the point where it will be worth it. Ford has said they expect the 1.6 L EcoBoost to be the volume engine in the Fusion. They don't expect the hybrid to be the volume engine, even though all of us here would agree that the hybrid is the best of the Ford powertrains, otherwise we wouldn't have bought a hybrid. So then why would Ford be so concerned about making the hybrid successful when they know that, right now in 2013, it isn't the choice of the masses? Until hybrids reach their tipping point I don't think we'll see as much innovation as we could. Until hybrids become the focus of all the major manufacturers there will always be low-hanging fruit out there. I wonder if in this case, Ford took the posture of making the hybrid ace the EPA tests to get that big 47 MPG sticker number for their advertising, figuring that the hybrid sales would be low enough that there wouldn't be too much backlash. With my background in Risk Management I wonder if Ford figured that the risk of offending the hybrid enthusiast community was a small enough risk to be worth the addition attention and sales they get from the 47 MPG campaign. Because, no doubt, the 47 MPG campaign has driven traffic to the gas-powered Fusions too. Because people will see that number and be intrigued, even if they don't end up buying the hybrid, I'm sure it drives foot traffic. And those are key metrics for auto manufacturers.

 

I hope it isn't true. I almost hope that the people at Ford are stupid and that's why we have this controversy about mileage rather than the cause being that they did it on purpose. But, with the way society is these days, who knows? :confused: :headscratch:

 

I agree with B25Nut that we can't fault Ford for building a car that excells at the EPA tests. Like the illustration I gave earlier on another thread about standardized tests and school kids, this is much the same debate. The EPA cycles are a standardized test, I think we all can agree that standardized tests have their flaws. I hope that the EPA does change their test cycles for hybrids.

 

I also agree that it is a better use of our energy to focus on sharing things that improve our experience of owning these cars. Thanks B25Nut for the great post.

 

 

Ptjones, can you please post a link to that info? Sounds very interesting

Great post!

 

When you look at Hybrids, there really are only two car companies today that make hybrids worth anything, Toyota and Ford. GM hybrids have gone no where, Honda has had too many problems, and Hyundai and Nissan well you dont hear much about them. I do believe Ford went backwards with this new Hybrid though.