Consumer Reports covers the PCM software update

[MaineFusion]

Consumer Reports discusses the PCM software update in this article: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2013/07/ford-to-improve-fuel-economy-of-existing-hybrids/index.htm

 

[hybridbear]

Thanks for sharing. Here's one item I thought of that would hurt the CR numbers and they don't identify in their testing. How many miles did they drive on the freeway at 65+ MPH to get their MPG results? Knowing how ICE High works in the cars now unless they drove at least 30 miles they're going to get poor highway fuel economy because of how long the car takes to charge and get into ICE High. Also, what SOC did they start and end with. If they are doing short runs and spend lots of time idling gathering data they're going to really hurt their results by lowering the SOC. Perhaps in a gas car they exclude the fuel burned while idling from their end results but with the hybrid they don't factor in the electricity used while idling which lowers their MPGs while driving.

[rjent]

CR got it wrong the first time, and they didn't do this one well either. When they opened with:

 

 

Ford is launching a "customer satisfaction campaign" to address shortfalls in fuel economy that CR reported since we tested the company's current hybrids.

 

 

I almost didn't read the article.....

 

Almost like they don't want an American company to look good ..... just a thought .... :)

Edited July 31, 2013 by rjent

[MaineFusion]

I think Consumer Reports "real world" tests may be too aggressive of a driving style. Maybe there should be two driving style tests, one for aggressive driving and one for economical driving. Also CR's test results don't say how much of a break-in period they gave the FFH before starting tests. It takes 6,000 miles for the FFH to be fully broken in. If CR began testing at say 2,000 miles, that isn't a fair test of the FFH's capabilities.

 

Personally, I think a lot of the fuel economy problems people have with cars in general, not just hybrids comes from over aggressive driving, being too fast off the stop and too late in braking. I'm not saying everyone needs to drive like a grandpa, but even being a little easier off starts and sooner to let off the gas before stops would result in marked improvement in fuel economy and less mechanical wear. What really kills me is when people race off the start to get to the next stoplight; it makes no sense at all.

[jeapa]

My car has less then 500 miles and has not had the update, but yet my lifetime avg is 47.2mpg. Right on the number and all I have done to achieve this is drive the posted speed limits, brake correctly, and accelerate smoothly.

Edited August 1, 2013 by jeapa

[acdii]

Maybe CR needs to see real world numbers from those of us who know how to drive these cars instead of the ones they got by not knowing the car. There are a ton of variables that affect MPG in these cars, Terrain, temps, traffic. My car only shows 42.6 actual, but I get EPA more often then not, just depends on where I go.

 

Besides, takes a special kind of stupid to race to a red light.

[MaineFusion]

One way Ford could address the MPG issue with FFH is to offer clinics at dealerships on how to maximize fuel economy. In addition to Ford/dealership personnel trained in how to maximize fuel economy, they could invite FFH owners who do routinely meet/exceed EPA rated MPG to provide tips of their own.

 

Honestly, a lot of the tricks to improve fuel economy aren't that radical -- they just take practice.

 

One thing that would help everyone's fuel economy, not just hybrid owners, would be longer yellow lights at intersections. I've observed that very often the length of yellow lights requires excessive braking to stop in time and if you don't stop, you will run a red light. The length of the yellow light could also be indicated by the length of the solid white/yellow line before the intersection. The idea being that if you are doing the speed limit and within the solid line area when the light turns yellow, you have time to continue through the intersection. If you are before the solid line, you would need to stop. Where the painted lines are already solid, they could be made thicker to indicate the safe to continue zone.

[storksb]

 

One thing that would help everyone's fuel economy, not just hybrid owners, would be longer yellow lights at intersections.

 

I agree longer yellow lights would be better for a smoother traffic flow experience, unfortunately though many lights (especially where red light camera are installed) have a unrealistic yellow light time.

 

The cynical part of me says that this is again just another way for our local governments to collect more traffic fines by catching more drivers running red lights.

[MaineFusion]

 

I agree longer yellow lights would be better for a smoother traffic flow experience, unfortunately though many lights (especially where red light camera are installed) have a unrealistic yellow light time.

 

The cynical part of me says that this is again just another way for our local governments to collect more traffic fines by catching more drivers running red lights.

That's exactly what it is. What needs to be done is the length of time for yellow lights to be written as a standard into Federal highway safety regulations. The length of time for yellow lights needs to be dictated by the speed limit of the road in question and this length needs to be standarized across the nation, no exceptions.

 

A long time ago, towns used to set speed traps on U.S. highways that ran through their towns by reducing the speed limit from say 55mph to 25mph and then position a cop on the other side of the 25mph sign and ticket truckers for speeding. This practice was finally outlawed and now there is a requirement that speeds can't drop by more than so much without giving prior warning and the new speed limit can't be enforced within a certain distance of the speed limit sign indicating the new speed. Just with the unfair speed traps of yesteryear, unfairly short yellow lights need to be outlawed.

Edited August 4, 2013 by MaineFusion

[corncobs]

That's exactly what it is. What needs to be done is the length of time for yellow lights to be written as a standard into Federal highway safety regulations. The length of time for yellow lights needs to be dictated by the speed limit of the road in question and this length needs to be standarized across the nation, no exceptions.

 

There actually is standardize yellow light timing base on a "complicated" formula that takes speed limits, lanes of traffic and other things into consideration. All lights across the States should apply to this standard but a lot of local authorities go below this calculated limit in order to create more revenue.

 

There is news report on this and there might even be a link on this forum.

[anguyen]

Just got my 13'FFH software update last Friday, I was at the dealer to get my second pair of key sync with my car and asked the service manager if they had the updated software. Well dealer can't get the key sync to my FFH Not even with the Ford Hot Line. I got tired of waiting after 3 hours at the dealer since my car got an software updated. I take my car back and will be back on Monday to get my second key sync.

 

With my new updated I took my car for a trip 270 miles round trip. I start out in Houston only 630 miles on my FFH with 91 deg driving 65mpg to 78mpg moving along with the traffic. Coming back from L'Auberge Lake Charles casino with win, it was 96 deg also driving 65-78mph all on ECO Cruise Control at the end of the trip I got perfect 40.0mpg.

 

What do guys and gals think about 40.0 mpg with the sofware updated on the Interstate bellows are more informations regard to the car and the trip.

Stock 18" rim with 235/45/18 Good Year LS2

84 Regular Gas

1 person on the trip

Climate control on all time with 65deg fan on one par

Entertainment on all the time playing musics from USB

 

Btw This is my first interstate with my FFH, so no base line to compare to see if the software update help my mpg or not.

[MaineFusion]

There actually is standardize yellow light timing base on a "complicated" formula that takes speed limits, lanes of traffic and other things into consideration. All lights across the States should apply to this standard but a lot of local authorities go below this calculated limit in order to create more revenue.

 

There is news report on this and there might even be a link on this forum.

Right and state/federal laws should make this local behavior illegal. Unpredictable yellow light timing makes roads less safe because people don't know whether it is safe to continue or to slam on the brakes and potentially cause an accident.

[hybridbear]

New update from CR

 

Ford has a conundrum on its hands. The fuel economy we measured when we first tested its C-Max and Fusion hybrids last year was very good, placing them among the most fuel-efficient cars in their classes. The Fusion sedan got a stellar 39 mpg overall, and the C-Max wagon netted 37. But the results were far below the 47 mpg EPA estimates printed on the cars’ window stickers. We found the same situation with the Lincoln MKZ, which is an upscale sibling of the Fusion.

We weren’t the only ones to notice the gap; owners have reported lower-than-expected gas mileage online, and Ford said that it has seen a relatively high level of customer dissatisfaction with fuel economy for the C-Max.

A few months ago, it came to light that the company had never actually tested the C-Max’s fuel economy for the EPA. It used a legal loophole in the EPA’s regu­lations to simply use the Fusion’s mpg results for both cars because they share the same powertrains.

Ford then lowered the C-Max’s EPA combined estimate to 43 mpg, promised to update its hybrids to improve their real-world fuel economy, and offered software updates to existing owners for their cars. Ford also gave C-Max owners money for the difference in fuel consumption.

Because we still own our tested C-Max, Fusion, and MKZ hybrids, we had the software updates applied to our cars and retested them to see whether they improved. We conducted our tests, which use a different criteria than the EPA’s, immediately before and after the cars’ software was updated. We saw only minor differences for all three cars.

Someone who is a subscriber can get the full article, but that's all that's publicly available. Perhaps a subscriber could post the full article here. This is the link.

[B25Nut]

Just got my 13'FFH software update last Friday, I was at the dealer to get my second pair of key sync with my car and asked the service manager if they had the updated software. Well dealer can't get the key sync to my FFH Not even with the Ford Hot Line. I got tired of waiting after 3 hours at the dealer since my car got an software updated. I take my car back and will be back on Monday to get my second key sync.

 

With my new updated I took my car for a trip 270 miles round trip. I start out in Houston only 630 miles on my FFH with 91 deg driving 65mpg to 78mpg moving along with the traffic. Coming back from L'Auberge Lake Charles casino with win, it was 96 deg also driving 65-78mph all on ECO Cruise Control at the end of the trip I got perfect 40.0mpg.

 

What do guys and gals think about 40.0 mpg with the sofware updated on the Interstate bellows are more informations regard to the car and the trip.

Stock 18" rim with 235/45/18 Good Year LS2

84 Regular Gas

1 person on the trip

Climate control on all time with 65deg fan on one par

 

40.0 mpg is a very good number at these speeds and outside temperatures, especially since in sounds like you don't have many miles on your FFH. If the temps had been around 75, I think you would have seen 42-43 mpg.

[B25Nut]

Consumer Reports discusses the PCM software update in this article: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2013/07/ford-to-improve-fuel-economy-of-existing-hybrids/index.htm

 

 

This report is from July and just announces that the updates will be made. I don't think CR had driven an updated FFH when this was written.

[acdii]

I STILL have no faith in their reporting. Chances are they test drive them like they drive any other non hybrid car. If so, yeah, they will see what they see. A good majority of us now know what the Fusion is capable of and we know its tricks to get them too.

[Texasota]

I STILL have no faith in their reporting. Chances are they test drive them like they drive any other non hybrid car. If so, yeah, they will see what they see. A good majority of us now know what the Fusion is capable of and we know its tricks to get them too.

 

This forum is active with very smart and knowledgeable folks who strive to understand all the technical details and capabilities of their FFHs. I don't think it would be a stretch to say that for several members their FFH has become somewhat of a hobby and personal challenge to understand every nuance of their car. It is a daily personal challenge and contest to improve their MPG. There is nothing wrong with that. The rest of us are learning a lot from these forum members.

 

However, the vast majority of motorists will never pursue the MPG challenge to the degree that true hybrid enthusiasts do. How many motorists would purchase a scan gauge for their car? I think very few. I think the vast majority of motorists that purchase a FFH tend to drive it the same way as a conventional car but probably improve their driving techniques (to varying degrees) as a result of the FFHs coaching software. Consumer Reports understands this and they drive/test the cars as they believe the majority of motorists will drive them and they document their results as such.

 

If Consumer Reports tested hybrids using all the tricks, then they would be able to report much higher MPG results. They could also apply those same tricks when they tested a conventional Ford Focus and also report higher MPG results for the Focus or for any other car for that matter. But this would not represent how the vast majority of motorists drive their cars. Consumer Reports tests the cars in a way that represents typical/average real world driving by the majority of motorists and I believe they have it exactly correct.

[corncobs]

I agree with you completely but why isn't the EPA testing in a similar way? Since their numbers are the once presented on the sticker they should also test or specify their test how the majority of motorists drive and not just some fudged numbers from the seventies. Anyway we had this discussion many times not sure if the EPA will even realize or even change this.

[Texasota]

In the February 2014 consumer reports article (the subject of this thread) CR states that they conduct their highway MPG testing at 65 MPH and the EPA conducts their highway MPG testing with an average speed of 48 MPH. That by itself probably goes a long way to explaining why EPA numbers frequently do not reflect real world MPG results seen by motorists.

 

The EPA tests are far from perfect but it also very unlikely that they could ever come up with a test that everyone would agree is an accurate reflection of real world driving by motorists. I try to view the EPA numbers as a relative comparison between the different cars and trucks instead of expecting it to be an accurate reflection of the actual MPG I will achieve. Having said that, I have found that the EPA numbers on my 2012 Focus are very close to what I achieve with my driving style but I am sure there are Focus owners that get better results and some that get worse results than me.

[acdii]

If thats the case, then they should perform two test drives, one the average gas waster drives, and one that an average Hybrid driver drives. Then post both results, would be a more fair comparison.

 

Drive like normal get 39 MPG, drive it like it was intended to be driven, get 46. Imagine what they would see with the Prius if they did that. Although I dont like the Prius, hated driving it, it does an exceptional job at using as little fuel as possible. I have a respectful hate of that car. :)

[hybridbear]

In the February 2014 consumer reports article (the subject of this thread) CR states that they conduct their highway MPG testing at 65 MPH and the EPA conducts their highway MPG testing with an average speed of 48 MPH. That by itself probably goes a long way to explaining why EPA numbers frequently do not reflect real world MPG results seen by motorists.

 

The EPA tests are far from perfect but it also very unlikely that they could ever come up with a test that everyone would agree is an accurate reflection of real world driving by motorists. I try to view the EPA numbers as a relative comparison between the different cars and trucks instead of expecting it to be an accurate reflection of the actual MPG I will achieve. Having said that, I have found that the EPA numbers on my 2012 Focus are very close to what I achieve with my driving style but I am sure there are Focus owners that get better results and some that get worse results than me.

You're dead on! I agree completely.

Although I dont like the Prius, hated driving it, it does an exceptional job at using as little fuel as possible. I have a respectful hate of that car. :)

Haha :hysterical: me too and we own one ;)

[Texasota]

Not disputing your suggestion, acdii, - but what is an average "gas waster" test and what is an average "Hybrid" test and how do you document those EPA results in an understandable form on a new car window sticker? And do you peform those same tests for a non hybrid vehicle such as a conventional Ford Focus? This is where things start to get very complicated and you can begin to see the "no win" situation that the EPA is confronted with.

Edited January 1, 2014 by Texasota

[acdii]

Drive it like you stole it(DILYSI), which is how I see most people drive, and pulse and glide like we here do. If you perform both tests on both types you will get two different results on each. I P&G my Flex and see well above EPA, and I DILYSI the Fusion and see what CR does. When I just cruise in both, I get right in the middle. I mostly just cruise now. No jack rabbits, no hard braking, just get up to the speed limit and relax, and in both I see right in the middle of what I expect both to get.

 

When you drive the same route 5 days a week for 13 years, you kind of get an idea of what your car will get under various conditions. When I got the first 13 FFH, I expected between 38 and 43 MPG based on my drive and the 2010 FFH. Thats what I got in the 10, so it seemed reasonable to see the same in the 13, and when I didn't I got rowdy. Now that I have a normally functioning one, I am getting exactly what I expect, 38-43. My Flex however has surprised me, I expected 18-19 based on my 2010 Flex, and this one is getting me 19 winter, and 21 summer.

 

It is all in how you drive it, and if you drive it to perform, and not drive it to conserve, then you get results like CR and other magazine testers get.

[Ted Swing]

Both the EPA and CR type estimates have their pros and cons. A lot of people dismiss EPA ratings because they're higher than most people get, particularly for hybrids, which is a fair criticism. However, the problem with CR type estimates is that even if it matches what people DO get for MPG, it probably doesn't reflect what they COULD or SHOULD get for MPG.

 

Before I got my FFH, I had a standard gasoline car which I drove like most people (75-80 on highways, accelerated fast, and braked fast). When I got the FFH, I made a deliberate effort to change those behaviors based on things I read on these forums (now driving 60-65 on the highways, etc.) and it has paid off. The FFH simply seems to reward careful driving more than most cars (even most hybrids). I think all of the critical reports about the FFH falling short of it's EPA mileage miss this fact and are unfair to the FFH.

 

It's hard to provide something really useful on a window sticker. One alternative would be to create an online calculator that estimates, based on your MPG in your current car, what you would get in a FFH (or any other car, for that matter). It could also indicate what you would get with driving habits that put you at the 50th, 75th and 90th percentile, for example.

[acdii]

 

 

The FFH simply seems to reward careful driving more than most cars (even most hybrids). I think all of the critical reports about the FFH falling short of it's EPA mileage miss this fact and are unfair to the FFH.

Exactly! All the hybrids reward you with careful driving, the Fusion just happens to slap you down if you don't! The Fusion is also a new breed of hybrid, no other Hybrid works like it does, and we here on this forum have it figured out, but CR drivers most likely would not even bother to even attempt to figure it out. Maybe they need to hire a Hybrid driver for their tests now that there are more models out.