Ford to lower fuel economy rating to 43 MPG

[greycrx87]

Hitting the wire just now.

 

DETROIT -- Ford Motor Co. will reduce the stated fuel-economy rating of its C-Max Hybrid car -- a rare and potentially costly move that Ford spent months feverishly working to avoid, according to a Ford source with knowledge of the plan.

Ford planned an announcement about the move later today. A company spokesman had no comment.

Ford has faced heavy criticism and lawsuits about worse-than-expected fuel economy for several new models, including the C-Max, whose window stickers have advertised 47 mpg for city, highway and combined driving. The ratings are based on tests Ford conducted and data it submitted to the EPA.

The Detroit News, citing people familiar with the matter, reported the fuel economy rating on the C-Max would be lowered to 43 mpg, or about 10 percent.

Ford is the second automaker to back down on lofty fuel-economy claims in the past year under pressure from the EPA. Hyundai and its Kia affiliate in November agreed to change the labels on most of their models after the agency discovered that the brands had submitted flawed results for one of the tests used to calculate fuel economy numbers.

All four Hyundai and Kia nameplates that had been advertised as getting 40 mpg in highway driving received new labels showing 36 to 38 mpg.

Hyundai and Kia offered customers of 900,000 vehicles prepaid fuel cards for compensation. In January, Bloomberg reported that Hyundai set aside about $225 million and Kia about $187 million to cover the reimbursements.

The EPA did not respond to e-mail and phone messages requesting comment on Ford's plans.

The News, citing three industry officials, reported the EPA is expected to announce Friday that it will revise test procedures for how hybrid vehicles are assigned fuel economy ratings and labels.

Ford's move shows the high stakes surrounding fuel economy in today's car market, where buyers are more sensitive to high gasoline prices and the Obama administration is requiring automakers to meet stricter mileage standards.

Blow to Ford's image

Cutting the C-Max Hybrid mileage ratings is a blow to Ford's carefully cultivated image as a fuel economy leader, a core tenet that CEO Alan Mulally has emphasized since joining the company in 2006.

Ford used the 47-mpg number as the centerpiece of its C-Max advertising. Beginning in October, it aired a series of playful animated ads that pitted the C-Max against the rival Toyota Prius V. In addition to better fuel economy, Ford boasted the C-Max was more fun to drive than the Prius, as well.

But Ford's mileage claims soon ran up against the real-world experiences of customers. At least two class-action lawsuits were filed against the company on behalf of consumers who alleged that Ford misled them with fuel economy claims.

One of the suits, filed in California, was dropped in February. Another suit, filed in Massachusetts, is awaiting a hearing.

The Ford Fusion and C-Max hybrids fell 17 percent to 21 percent short of Ford's promise of combined 47 mpg in testing last year by Consumer Reports magazine, which uses a different testing cycle than the EPA. The Fusion achieved 39 mpg and the C-Max averaged 37 mpg in tests of city and highway driving, the magazine found.

Other hybrids also fell short of their manufacturers' claims, Consumer Reports said, but none more so than the C-Max and Fusion.

The Toyota Prius, with a combined rating of 50 mpg, is the only non-plug-in nameplate with higher EPA fuel-economy than the C-Max and the Fusion, which is also rated at 47 mpg, according to FuelEconomy.gov, a Department of Energy Web site. The Prius is smaller and lighter than the C-Max and Fusion.

Read more: http://www.autonews.com/article/20130815/OEM05/130819953/ford-to-lower-fuel-economy-rating-on-c-max-hybrid#ixzz2c4SF3Os0
Follow us: @Automotive_News on Twitter | AutoNews on Facebook

 

[jeff_h]

Below is the media release from Ford -- the part near the end about taking the Fusion numbers and also assigning them to the CMax since they are in the same family... well to me that's like the AT&T commercial about the turtle where the red-haired boy smacks his head with his hand. They may have the same drive train but the bodies are quite different.

 

https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2013/08/15/c-max-fuel-economy.html

[GrySql]

A goodwill payment to current C-MAX owners in the form of a $550 check?

 

HybridBear, your folks are going to get a nice surprise!

[corncobs]

A goodwill payment to current C-MAX owners in the form of a $550 check?

 

HybridBear, your folks are going to get a nice surprise!

That would be nice but I think it doesn't apply to the plug-in version.

[anguyen]

We pay premium for the hybrid, Ford should make rembursement the value of the vehicle vs how much gas it would use, if Ford advertise 43mpg we would have not pay that much for our FFH.

[djminfll]

We pay premium for the hybrid, Ford should make rembursement the value of the vehicle vs how much gas it would use, if Ford advertise 43mpg we would have not pay that much for our FFH.

As of now, there is no reimbursement for the Fusion - this currently only applies to the C-Max.

[corncobs]

I would donate my refund since I'm getting more than EPA.

[aaronj1159]

I would donate my refund since I'm getting more than EPA.

Yeah in my opinion they have nothing to apologize for (aside from the obvious problem vehicles). Not all FFH owners, myself included, should be entitled to any compensation for false advertising. I average 48 MPG these days on my predominately hwy commute and can easily average in the 50's-60's around town.

[fusionTX]

How embarrasing for Ford. Hope the stock price holds up.

Why no word on the Fusion?

[fusionTX]

Yeah in my opinion they have nothing to apologize for (aside from the obvious problem vehicles).

 

Ford just lowered the EPA estimates on one of their vehicles by more than 10% and you think they have nothing to apologize for?

My understanding is the EPA would have lowered the CMax to 41 MPG had it not been for the latest PCM update.

[aaronj1159]

Ford just lowered the EPA estimates on one of their vehicles by more than 10% and you think they have nothing to apologize for?

My understanding is the EPA would have lowered the CMax to 41 MPG had it not been for the latest PCM update.

In terms of the FFH, I stand by my point. I have no idea what's going on with the C-Max.

 

I'm not driving like a hardcore hypermiler. I set the cruise and go, and I exceed EPA estimates. And I'm not alone. I realize there are issues with other vehicles, but I also realize some people aren't driving as well as they could to get their best fuel economy. If my driving was mostly over 70 MPH, I wouldn't expect to get EPA in ANY car, aside from maybe a TDi. I don't know why the FFH is different.

[Da0ne]

Well thats bs we all know the ones not performing are lemons.....mine during the winter months was getting only 35-40 mpg thats because I bought the car in Feb and we up north had a bad winter... the car had to break in but once the warmer weather rolled in that average went up I was seeing 45-47 mpg on my daily commute and I dont try to hypermile, dont use eco cruise unless im on a road trip, accelerate slow or brake slow I just drive the car that what I love to do is drive and found a car that can fulfill that passion and it was a bonus to get good mpg so I back ford and commend them on making an awesome car and would recommend it to anyone looking to pay less at the pump and get 500 miles on a full tank

 

I bet if everyone would use fuelly and keep it up to date it would be a different story

 

There is a local cabbie that parks at the garage I do and he has one that was ice storm now its lime green (nyc new program for boro-cabs) and I spoke to him and he is avg 44 mpg and these guys dont try nor care about mpg but he is happy that he can get 500 miles on a full tank for just $40 which means he sees nothing but profit after an hour of driving around or just one airport trip I told him to take it in to get the update...I will follow up with him to see what he is avg after the update for me im at 44 avg and im happy and not complaining and will also donate my money if they do this to the fusion also

[Da0ne]

In terms of the FFH, I stand by my point. I have no idea what's going on with the C-Max.

 

I'm not driving like a hardcore hypermiler. I set the cruise and go, and I exceed EPA estimates. And I'm not alone. I realize there are issues with other vehicles, but I also realize some people aren't driving as well as they could to get their best fuel economy. If my driving was mostly over 70 MPH, I wouldn't expect to get EPA in ANY car, aside from maybe a TDi. I don't know why the FFH is different.

I agree when my Lilly was in the shop for the recall I had 3 rentals and none got anywhere near the epa

 

Impala lowest trim 18 mpg

Altima s 22 mpg

Escape sel eb awd 18 mpg pretty close and on a long trip to CT I got up to 23 mpg a/c at 72 auto going 70-75 mph

[corncobs]

Ford just lowered the EPA estimates on one of their vehicles by more than 10% and you think they have nothing to apologize for?

My understanding is the EPA would have lowered the CMax to 41 MPG had it not been for the latest PCM update.

No not really since the EPA makes these stupid rules that allows to apply the fuel rating of Fusion to the C-Max by using a fudge factor. Every car should be tested separately regardless of the same drivetrain or what not.

 

Should they have tested the C-Max as its own model absolutely the took the gamble and lost. Since the C-Max concept was more for city driving the maybe thought they are going to fine but it bit them pretty good.

 

Should the EPA finally wake up to make changes to the test procedures they should also add another test for sustained interstate travel @ 70 MPH for 2h or so.

[jeff_h]

Why no word on the Fusion?

 

Because this has nothing to do with the Fusion, they did the testing on the Fusion and then used the same numbers on the CMax since it was in the same family (see quote from the Ford media release) instead of doing the actual testing on the CMax (which is within the EPA rules).

 

"Previously – and consistent with EPA’s General Label rules – testing of the Fusion Hybrid was used to generate fuel economy labels for a family of vehicles, including both Fusion Hybrid and C-MAX Hybrid. The result was the same fuel economy label values for both vehicles."

Edited August 16, 2013 by jeff_h

[hybridbear]

Ford just lowered the EPA estimates on one of their vehicles by more than 10% and you think they have nothing to apologize for?

My understanding is the EPA would have lowered the CMax to 41 MPG had it not been for the latest PCM update.

Where did you get this information from? Please provide a reputable source and not just random speculation.

[Waldo]

The EPA consider's any vehicle that has the identical powertrain (including calibration) and falls in the same weight class to be the same vehicle. This is the rule and everyone takes advantage of it. If you want to break down the testing into individual models, it becomes a tricky discussion. I don't think anyone would argue that a Fusion and a C-max are different and should have different ratings, but what about a Fusion SE vs a Fusion Titanium? What about a SE vs a SE Appearance pack (with the spoiler). Creating a clear definition that's fair to everyone without requiring the OEMs to run dozens of tests for every new model is very difficult.

[hybridbear]

Both this thread and this one contain the actual news, rather than fill these up with discussion and debate there's a thread here for that.