Ford fuel efficiency update guinea pig testers

[Nmadole]

Is the

 

What needs to be done is some driver and car testing. You need to drive a FFH known to get good gas mileage to see what you get. Then someone who tends to get really good gas mileage needs to drive your FFH to see what they get driving it. This would help isolate how much of the issue is car related and how much is driver related.

 

I would love to try this; I live in Northern Michigan (Traverse City), and I visit Grand Rapids/ Muskegon often. If anyone would like to help me with this I would be interested in the results. The Ford dealership has done two fuel economy test on my car and they only got 37MPG and 41MPG...

[corncobs]

 

I would love to try this; I live in Northern Michigan (Traverse City), and I visit Grand Rapids/ Muskegon often. If anyone would like to help me with this I would be interested in the results. The Ford dealership has done two fuel economy test on my car and they only got 37MPG and 41MPG...

And that's not prove enough that something isn't quite right?!?

[acdii]

And that's not prove enough that something isn't quite right?!?

It is an acceptable number according to Ford.

 

Been there, done that, still bear the scars.

 

Anyhow, I haven't noticed yet if the update is an improvement. The trip in this morning was a route I haven't taken yet in the morning in this car, so cant compare, other than to say, 47.4. That's only 12 MPG higher than I ever got in that "other" car on this trip when it was 60* out. I need to check the tire pressures, they rotated them yesterday, but I don't know if they had "adjusted" the air pressure. I had them set at 44 PSI, and it felt a little low this morning, and had a feel of drag. I also haven't driven it since Monday, and 3 days in the Flex can really make this car feel SLOW!

 

If I had time I would shoot over and check his car out, but my weekends are booked solid for quite some time. School starts soon, daughters birthday coming up, and still trying to get crap done around the house. A few years ago I drove to Michigan in a snow storm to get my Collies, so I know its only a few hour drive, just don't have the time though.

[corncobs]

It is an acceptable number according to Ford.

 

Been there, done that, still bear the scars.

 

If someone personally would claim that yes > YMWV but if the dealer or in your case a Ford field engineer does the test and they can get close something is wrong. The way he was drove your ca he should have gotten 55 MPG with ease. Edited August 8, 2013 by corncobs

[Nmadole]

If someone personally would claim that yes > YMWW but if the dealer or in your case a Ford field engineer does the test and they can get close something is wrong. The way he was drove your ca he should have gotten 55 MPG with ease.

I drove 55 mph for two hours straight (adaptive eco cruise on) and only returned 42 MPG. I can confirm Ford claims that 37/41 MPG is "normal" (I have a letter from ford stating it). My best tank of gas was 38 MPG

Edited August 8, 2013 by Nmadole

[Nmadole]

One thing I have noticed is the rev meter on the left side no longer turns yellow if you floor it. Also the MPG instantaneous doesn't turn yellow when your mpg drops low

[hybridbear]

I drove 55 mph for two hours straight (adaptive eco cruise on) and only returned 42 MPG. I can confirm Ford claims that 37/41 MPG is "normal" (I have a letter from ford stating it). My best tank of gas was 38 MPG

Can you share what they said in the letter? Maybe we can somehow help you.

 

Have you tried going to another dealership and test driving a new FFH?

[corncobs]

Also the MPG instantaneous doesn't turn yellow when your mpg drops low

Really too bad that you actually know that it turned yellow before I had no idea probably like so many others.

[Nmadole]

Can you share what they said in the letter? Maybe we can somehow help you.

 

Have you tried going to another dealership and test driving a new FFH?

this is a screen shot of the letter; they never responded to my email about the second MPG test

 

I have not tried going to another dealership and test driving another car... seems like a waste of time to confirm what I already know

[acdii]

Did they retest it now that the weather has warmed up? From that letter, if they get the same results, then you can slam it back in their face.

[Nmadole]

Did they retest it now that the weather has warmed up? From that letter, if they get the same results, then you can slam it back in their face.

They did back in June and got 41 MPG ... which they say is normal ...

[acdii]

They did back in June and got 41 MPG ... which they say is normal ...

Them @$$h0l3$ 41 is not normal under our standards. One of the reasons I created post your fuelly badges is to get a quick run down to see what we are getting, and for the most part we are at 43 and above. Man I really wish I could get time to meet up and go over to the dealer with you. Side by Side comparison, then lets see them say its normal. I know it wasnt my driving on that last car, and the dealer also knows, otherwise they would not have given me such a fair deal on trading it in. Once I got a few good results and showed them I felt vindicated.

 

In any case, I am hoping your LL for the damages they did gets you a good replacement. I know you do a lot of short drives, those do hurt mileage, but you should still have been able to do better doing 55 with the Ecocruise. I do that every day 44 miles each way, up and down hills and get 47.

[Riggo]

So far I don't see any great increases in my fuel economy with the update. I was getting pretty good numbers to begin with though. I actually got lower than my normal commute to work today but it wasn't too far off the norm.

[MaineFusion]

They did back in June and got 41 MPG ... which they say is normal ...

Doesn't sound normal to me. I wonder if there is a bad sensor somewhere that is causing your FFH to not shift back and forth from EV mode efficiently. The dealer should do a full systems diagnostic that tests all the sensors.

 

This won't help you, but something a learned from my previous new cars is that during the break-in period it is important to drive lightly. I don't understand the full mechanics behind the break-in period, but I made sure to absolutely drive my FFH very lightly for the first 6,000 miles and totally avoided any hard accelerations and stops. I was especially careful during the first 2,000 miles.

[acdii]

Well, I am pretty much convinced the update is doing as advertised.

 

Best trip home ever!!!

 

[jeff_h]

Data from a couple more days - 60 miles for each morning/afternoon commute.

 

Yesterday morning, 53.4 with cruise set at 65, afternoon 53.8 with cruise set at 65 -- same route with which I got 60 just the other day and traffic was about the same, but those headwinds sure made quite a difference.

 

This morning, 53.1 with cruise set at 65, afternoon 53.4 (didn't get to use cruise much at all) with enjoyable wait of an additional hour to to 3 miles while one of the two HOV lanes were blocked... so always a fun time. But was enough for lifetime on the display to inch up to 49.9.

 

So it appears that the software update results are about the same for highway MPG, but for around-town behavior I think I got a nice boost.

[Nmadole]

You guys make me want to drive my car off a cliff... My average since the update is 29.8 MPG ....

[Geremy13]

Them @$$h0l3$ 41 is not normal under our standards. One of the reasons I created post your fuelly badges is to get a quick run down to see what we are getting, and for the most part we are at 43 and above. Man I really wish I could get time to meet up and go over to the dealer with you. Side by Side comparison, then lets see them say its normal. I know it wasnt my driving on that last car, and the dealer also knows, otherwise they would not have given me such a fair deal on trading it in. Once I got a few good results and showed them I felt vindicated.

 

In any case, I am hoping your LL for the damages they did gets you a good replacement. I know you do a lot of short drives, those do hurt mileage, but you should still have been able to do better doing 55 with the Ecocruise. I do that every day 44 miles each way, up and down hills and get 47.

 

acdii, I am curious as I don't get 43 and above. My tanks thus far is 36. What was your MPG on your first car?... and how come you had to trade in a brand new car instead of them just giving you a new one? (Exchange based on something was obviously wrong.)

[Geremy13]

Well, I am pretty much convinced the update is doing as advertised.

 

Best trip home ever!!!

 

 

Some interesting numbers just for those interested. And the only reason I bring this up is because my last tank reported 36.9 but my actual (based on fuelly) was only 35.0MPG. Anyways: The numbers above are reported as 49.9MPG ... BUT 35.2/ 0.7= 50.3MPG

 

Now just for fun.... 35.2 actual miles traveled minus 20.2 EV and 2.9 Regen equals 12.9 miles actually travelled on gasoline alone. Which equates to 17.3 MPG on gas alone.

 

Just havin' fun.... I have too much time on my hands apparently.... need to go wash the car now......

[Nmadole]

 

Since the update on Tuesday...

[acdii]

 

acdii, I am curious as I don't get 43 and above. My tanks thus far is 36. What was your MPG on your first car?... and how come you had to trade in a brand new car instead of them just giving you a new one? (Exchange based on something was obviously wrong.)

35, while my 2010 FFH was 38, on the same roads, using gas from the same station, driven the same way. I went through the same crap Clummus, MXGOLF, and Nmadole are going through. Being told its my driving, its the gas, its the cold, its getting acceptable MPG, blah blah blah.

 

The big difference between the one I had and theirs, mine fouled all 4 plugs at 4500 miles with no explanation as to why. I had also road tested another FFH and a Cmax and was easily able to get over 40 in each of them in the same weather and winter gas blends.

 

Everything has its way of working out, and it all worked out in the end for me, replaced that thing with a Flex which has been great, and my 2010 FFH I took a chance on getting the HyTi I ordered to replace it and the gamble paid off. I am paying more for them than what I was paying for the other cars, but I dont mind paying for something I really like.

[Geremy13]

35, while my 2010 FFH was 38, on the same roads, using gas from the same station, driven the same way. I went through the same crap Clummus, MXGOLF, and Nmadole are going through. Being told its my driving, its the gas, its the cold, its getting acceptable MPG, blah blah blah.

 

The big difference between the one I had and theirs, mine fouled all 4 plugs at 4500 miles with no explanation as to why. I had also road tested another FFH and a Cmax and was easily able to get over 40 in each of them in the same weather and winter gas blends.

 

Everything has its way of working out, and it all worked out in the end for me, replaced that thing with a Flex which has been great, and my 2010 FFH I took a chance on getting the HyTi I ordered to replace it and the gamble paid off. I am paying more for them than what I was paying for the other cars, but I dont mind paying for something I really like.

 

Thank you acdii, I appreciate this forum very much. I am going to put 5000 miles on the car before I get really concerned.. BUT ... most of all I appreciate that YOU as a moderator provide honest information both for/ against the product without bias.

 

Sometimes you hop into forums where this is not true. I think that this forum is going to provide us with alot of information.... whether it be good or bad..... honest information is all we ask for.

 

Glad that your cars are working out for you..........

[corncobs]

 

Some interesting numbers just for those interested. And the only reason I bring this up is because my last tank reported 36.9 but my actual (based on fuelly) was only 35.0MPG. Anyways: The numbers above are reported as 49.9MPG ... BUT 35.2/ 0.7= 50.3MPG

 

Now just for fun.... 35.2 actual miles traveled minus 20.2 EV and 2.9 Regen equals 12.9 miles actually travelled on gasoline alone. Which equates to 17.3 MPG on gas alone.

 

Just havin' fun.... I have too much time on my hands apparently.... need to go wash the car now......

The trip summary only shows one tenth accuracy and is truncated while the trip meters show two tenth. In order to get the "correct" number you need to calculate the gallons used based on miles and MPG displayed.

 

It's kinda odd why they choose the have the two displays different but the truncated number usually looks better.

Edited August 9, 2013 by corncobs

[Geremy13]

The trip summary only shows one tenth accuracy and is truncated while the trip meters show two tenth. In order to get the "correct" number you need to calculate the gallons used based on miles and MPG displayed.

 

It's kinda odd why they choose the have the two displays different but the truncated number usually looks better.

 

Very well put.....

 

My REAL numbers are my total miles divided by the actual amount of gas I put in the car. Which is NOT what the tripmeter reports... Interesting.... Hmmmmmm... I wonder why? Wish it was the other way around.

[MaineFusion]

Since my daily commute is both pretty long (~47mi each way) and relatively free of traffic impediments that can screw up travel time/fuel economy I can get pretty consistent results for given weather conditions from day to day.

 

Now that I can drive faster than 63mph with my FFH being willing to go into EV mode, one thing I'm trying to figure out is how much of a difference it makes to set my cruise control at 65mph vs 63mph. Yesterday for the 65mph speed limit sections of my commute, I set my cruise control to 65mph going both ways. Today I set my cruise control to 63mph as I did prior to the PCM update. Yesterday, I morning I got just over 48mpg and in the evening I got 49mpg. This morning I got 51.7mpg and this evening I got 51.9mpg. Timing wise the four trips were so close to each other that stoplights had a bigger impact on my trip than did the 2mph difference in speed as this evening's commute where I set the CC to 63 was about a minute or two shorter than yesterday's commute where I had set the CC to 65. The timing of this morning's commute is useless for comparison because I got stuck at a railroad crossing for several minutes.

 

Here are two Ski Tracks of my commute. The first is yesterday and the second is for today.