Ford Motor Company Lowers Fuel Economy Ratings For Six Vehicles

[greycrx87]

wow it only took them 2 years to figure it out, it's a nice cover-up, the EPA estimates were deliberately elevated as a marketing trick - Ford's reputation in my eyes just went down the drain, I'll take the check and drive happy, but will never think about Ford the same again.

Edited June 13, 2014 by greycrx87

[djminfll]

I have a few thoughts on this:

 

1. Most of us are, and have been, achieving or close to achieving 47mpg over the past 2 years. So why did Ford change their numbers now?

 

2. I'd never complain about the mpg I am achieving, but I'll sure accept $775, just in case the fuel economy drops!

 

3. It seems that many of the hybrid vehicles numbers are overstated - first it was Hyundai Sonata, then it was the C-Max, now the Fusion and Fusion Energi, and I just read that the same thing is coming for numbers to be adjusted down for the Honda Accord Hybrid.

 

My biggest concern is that public perception may turn against Ford and the Fusion.

[PoohBaby]

I'm in the market of buying a FFH. If I buy one next week, will they reduce the sticker price by $775 because of the lower fuel economy rating. Am I crazy, maybe I should buy a different car. Any suggestions??

[alpha754293]

wow it only took them 2 years to figure it out, it's a nice cover-up, the EPA estimates were deliberately elevated as a marketing trick - Ford's reputation in my eyes just went down the drain, I'll take the check and drive happy, but will never think about Ford the same again.

 

I have a few thoughts on this:

 

1. Most of us are, and have been, achieving or close to achieving 47mpg over the past 2 years. So why did Ford change their numbers now?

 

2. I'd never complain about the mpg I am achieving, but I'll sure accept $775, just in case the fuel economy drops!

 

3. It seems that many of the hybrid vehicles numbers are overstated - first it was Hyundai Sonata, then it was the C-Max, now the Fusion and Fusion Energi, and I just read that the same thing is coming for numbers to be adjusted down for the Honda Accord Hybrid.

 

My biggest concern is that public perception may turn against Ford and the Fusion.

 

 

So, I'm going to answer both of these posts, to the best of my ability at the same time because they're related.

 

So, first off, I'm going to let you in on a little secret about how you develop/engineer a vehicle.

 

Remember that you're looking at this from the perspective of June 2014, so like about 20 months I think (or so) after the 2013MY Fusions launched. Now I'm going to try and put things in a little different perspective for you and hopefully you can follow along and then at the end you might come away with understanding how things like this happen.

 

Rewind back to about 18 months BEFORE the launch. So, now, you're in about the April, 2011-ish timeframe. (DISCLAIMER: The timelines given here are used as an example of how cars are developed in general, and pretty much ALL automakers are like this. The specific details vary a little bit, but having worked in the supply base before joining Ford, they're all very similar, so the timing here is just a number I'm pulling out of thin air, and does NOT represent the ACTUAL vehicle timing (cuz I wasn't working for Ford back then, so I have no clue what the timing was).) But anyways, think about it this way, 18 months before launch, EVER single component on that car is still being developed at the same time. The engine, the hybrid powertrain, the body, EVERYTHING.

 

So, you ovbiously can't wait until you start your main production to submit your paperwork for certification, so how can you tell what your fuel economy is going to be when you don't even have a car that runs?

 

And as the vehicle development and engineering matures, you start putting in the "real" parts instead of using your prototype parts.

 

Now, hypothetically speaking, what if someone told you that it's going to take 18 months for you to get your certification approval? Now your homework is due, and you've never even seen a car. (And pretty much ALL automakers go through this.) What do you do?

 

My point is that it isn't about what you know now. My point is what did you know back then, almost like three YEARS AGO, when you might not have had a car?

 

And I see this a fair bit on internet car forums. Lots of people can talk about parts and engines that EXIST for example. But if I were to ask those same guys "make me an engine that gets 500 HP and gets 99 g CO2/100 km, I'd be willing to bet that the VAST majority of them wouldn't know where or how to begin.

[jsolan]

I have to say I'm pretty shocked by the amount of the drop for the FFH. 44 seems pretty conservative for the city and 41 is what most of us are seeing at 65-70 highway, but I thought the EPA testing was done at 55 for highway?

Based on what I read though, it almost sounds like the EPA numbers are all theoretical based on numbers plugged into an equation.

I suppose this is an attempt at good PR by Ford, but they're going to need to advertise it correctly. I'm sure that most people are going to hear they lowered the EPA estimates and assume it was because they got caught cheating the system, not something they did voluntarily.

 

I guess I shouldn't complain about free money. This is the first car I've ever beat the EPA estimates in then as my lifetime average just ticked back up to 43 mpg this week.

[alpha754293]

I have to say I'm pretty shocked by the amount of the drop for the FFH. 44 seems pretty conservative for the city and 41 is what most of us are seeing at 65-70 highway, but I thought the EPA testing was done at 55 for highway?

Based on what I read though, it almost sounds like the EPA numbers are all theoretical based on numbers plugged into an equation.

I suppose this is an attempt at good PR by Ford, but they're going to need to advertise it correctly. I'm sure that most people are going to hear they lowered the EPA estimates and assume it was because they got caught cheating the system, not something they did voluntarily.

 

I guess I shouldn't complain about free money. This is the first car I've ever beat the EPA estimates in then as my lifetime average just ticked back up to 43 mpg this week.

 

Well....so....thisi s how I usually explain the fuel economy tests to people.

 

These are tests that were originally developed in I think it was the 70s and it was to try and encapsulate people driving in like I think it's Fort Lauderdale (or something) all the way up to the high mountains in Colorado, from New York City to Iowa, from Alaska to Arizona. So...when you think about the immensely diverse range of experiences that people (customers) go/drive through, now if I were to ask you - "okay...make two test that can tell me how your vehicle is going to perform EMISSION-wise" (since fuel economy tests don't actually measure fuel economy, they measure emissions, and then fuel economy is back-calculated through analytical chemistry (it's an oversimplification, but that's the jist of how fuel economy tests work) - anybody that spends more than two sconds thinking about what a daunting task THAT is, will very quickly realize the size of the elephant-of-a-problem they've got in their room.

 

Now, the one thing that the US does differently (compared to - for example the EU), is that they actually DO try to make it so that the numbers are representative of real world. It might not be real world for EVERYBODY, but if you figure "okay....x percent of the population live in a major urban center, and they tend to drive like this" and then you plot that on a normal distribution bell curve, and then you say, "ok, I'm going to devise a tests that will work for 67% of the people", and then another test for the other 33% - I mean that's kinda how you're doing it. (Sort of. It isn't quite exactly like that, but to get the point across, I'm grossly oversimplifying it.)

 

And as several people have mentioned, interestingly enough, it's not that far off. I mean, you look at the averages on sites like Fuelly for example, and it's pretty close. So....interesting how it all works out in the end, eh? Go science/math!

[corncobs]

I have to say I'm pretty shocked by the amount of the drop for the FFH. 44 seems pretty conservative for the city and 41 is what most of us are seeing at 65-70 highway, but I thought the EPA testing was done at 55 for highway?

Based on what I read though, it almost sounds like the EPA numbers are all theoretical based on numbers plugged into an equation.

I suppose this is an attempt at good PR by Ford, but they're going to need to advertise it correctly. I'm sure that most people are going to hear they lowered the EPA estimates and assume it was because they got caught cheating the system, not something they did voluntarily.

 

I guess I shouldn't complain about free money. This is the first car I've ever beat the EPA estimates in then as my lifetime average just ticked back up to 43 mpg this week.

If I could I would triple like this post!

[alpha754293]

 

I have to say I'm pretty shocked by the amount of the drop for the FFH. 44 seems pretty conservative for the city and 41 is what most of us are seeing at 65-70 highway, but I thought the EPA testing was done at 55 for highway?

Based on what I read though, it almost sounds like the EPA numbers are all theoretical based on numbers plugged into an equation.

I suppose this is an attempt at good PR by Ford, but they're going to need to advertise it correctly. I'm sure that most people are going to hear they lowered the EPA estimates and assume it was because they got caught cheating the system, not something they did voluntarily.

 

I guess I shouldn't complain about free money. This is the first car I've ever beat the EPA estimates in then as my lifetime average just ticked back up to 43 mpg this week.

If I could I would triple like this post!

Well, people are going to think what they're going to think pretty much regardless. There's nothing I or we can do about that.

 

"You get to say the world is flat because we live in a country that guarantees your free speech, but it's not a country that guarantees that everything you say is correct." - Neil deGrasse Tyson

 

And for those that had written that an apology from the CEO would have sufficed, he did:

 

“Ford is absolutely committed to delivering top fuel economy and accurate information,” said Alan Mulally, Ford president and CEO. “We apologize to our customers and will provide goodwill payments to affected owners. We also are taking steps to improve our processes and prevent issues like this from happening again.”

From The Detroit News: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140612/AUTO0102/306120104#ixzz34WO3B6zI

[hybridbear]

My biggest concern is that public perception may turn against Ford and the Fusion.

This is a concern I share. I really like the FFH. I want Ford to sell 10,000 FFHs a month instead of 3,000 and 10,000 FFEs a month instead of 800-900. And forget the gas Fusion. Sadly, these issues will no doubt hurt public perception. Because no matter what Ford says, ppl are going to hear what they want to hear. And all the people who are not Ford fans (which is a lot larger portion of the population than those who are Ford fans) will propagate information that they like, regardless of the truthfulness of that information.

[hybridbear]

Here's my question: why do Fusion Energi owners get more money than C-Max Energi owners? The two vehicles had identical EPA ratings before and have identical EPA ratings after, yet they have different payments. That doesn't make sense to me.

 

And another one that perhaps alpha can answer: how did Ford determine the amount of the payments? Is the payment designed to cover the difference in fuel costs for a certain number of miles?

 

And, alpha, it's nice to hear from you again :)

Edited June 13, 2014 by hybridbear

[corncobs]

Me and my LiR will continue to proudly wear this...

 

 

:shift:

[dalesky]

Don't leave out us 13-14 MKZh owners! :)

The largest rebates go for MKZh owners

[acdii]

What I see with the numbers Ford has posted now is more along the real world numbers the car will get. I always look at the EPA numbers as a pipe dream mainly due to the fact that in the real world, you can't drive like the EPA tests. I also have over 7 years experience driving Hybrids daily, and know what to expect and where to expect it. I knew going into the new Fusion what to expect, and I was right on the money too, and couldn't be more pleased with what I get in mine.

 

My take on this is Ford is Stepping up, and saying, hey we found a flaw in the way the numbers work and adjusted the ratings based on that, and what they show is pretty much what you can expect out of the FFH. Those who are doing better have the best driving conditions to suit Hybrids, and no matter what Hybrid they drive will always do better than EPA.

 

Those members here who have been here since the new FFH came out know my plight with the first one, and can also agree I have never complained about my replacement's MPG, in fact when I get above 43 I am very impressed with it. Just yesterday I took a highway trip of 70 MPH and got 50 MPG. I am currently sitting on my first 47 MPG tank ever, and just this week hit the 500 mile per tank club.

 

What it all boils down to, is even though I am still pissed at Ford Customer Service for the way they treated me on the first one, I will still defend them on the car when others try to bad mouth them.

[Howie411]

Always thought my 2014 FFH wasnt gett much better MPG then my 2010 FFH. Now to recompare the #s 41 City and 36 HWY (2010) to 44 City and 41 HWY (2014). So its a 2nd generation hybrid with weaker horsepower and the increase in efficency is only 3 mpg in the city and 5 mpg on the highway.

[hybridbear]

Always thought my 2014 FFH wasnt gett much better MPG then my 2010 FFH. Now to recompare the #s 41 City and 36 HWY (2010) to 44 City and 41 HWY (2014). So its a 2nd generation hybrid with weaker horsepower and the increase in efficency is only 3 mpg in the city and 5 mpg on the highway.

Toyota has historically improved MPG by 10% with each new generation of HSD. Ford improved by slightly more than 10% from gen 1 FFH to gen 2 FFH. That's an excellent improvement.

 

The overall maximum HP might be down slightly, but how often do you use that much power? Never? The power delivery in the FFH is more than sufficient for us.

[tr7driver]

I'm glad to see they are going to pay out cash instead of vouchers for "discounts on future new car purchases." My 2014 is the first new car I have purchased since 1987. Due to the rapid depreciation of new cars and our high annual mileage totals, I like to buy a 3 year old car and drive it until it hits 200K miles or becomes unreliable. Kudos to you Ford.

[Eddie Sessum]

I think the formula thing is just an excuse really. They know they had a problem and we're hoping for a software fix. They probably could have done a prius style throttle programming and fixed it but I've driven those and if my car would have had that I would have said hell no to purchasing. It just makes it feel dead and underpowered. There's no real form of calculation that can base the full stop and go brake regen unless they had stuff in the car running the brake manually. I believe they would set cruise and load up the dyno massively to simulate everything.

 

Wouldn't be surprised if they didn't put so many of them into service with employees and watch every little thing about them to get those numbers. In the case of the mkzh they nailed it dead on where I believe the numbers should be based on my car and the little bit we have experienced in the new mkzh. People locally with the ffh I still think it's a little high. 70mph Highway driving weight doesn't matter. I believe the 2 cars would be the same aerodynamics if the mkz doesn't have a slight advantage. Why the ffh would get better on the highway makes me wonder what there thinking.

[Fusion Hybrid Forum]

Please note that all four (4) topics on this issue have been merged into this one topic. No content has been lost or deleted.

[Eddie Sessum]

Also I have no complaints or bad will towards Ford for this. I believe the Lincoln was the better choice because Ford seems more willing to work with me on build quality issues than Ford models have been in the past. Ford admitted they f***ed up which is a good thing in my eyes. You will have the gm and Mopar guys going crazy bashing Ford on this tho. Hope they take a hint from the new vw diesel hybrid tho. Or maybe secretly doing it. If they get a fusion sized car out with one of those setups that can even get 100mpg (based on the Vw I believe 150-175 is acheveable) they could kill the market and cause a total redesign for everyone else.

[GrySql]

One wonders how much pushback all those companies and government agencies that bought FFH's for corporate/municipal use gave Ford, like New York City.

I'd imagine a purchase of 100's of FFH's that don't get the EPA 47 was heard in Ford Marketing and Engineering.

That may have had more of an impact than all the single buyers that complained, Ford just had the Dealers handle those one at a time.

 

Of course the public lawsuits were there almost from the beginning.

 

Either way, I am happy to be getting EPA on mine, it's a very nice car.

Edited June 13, 2014 by GrySql

[lolder]

It's all about weight, HP and Drag Cd. That argued for 4 mpg improvement over Gen 1, not 8. Software re-programing doesn't change that and it might have made it worse for some drivers.

Edited June 13, 2014 by lolder

[Ted Swing]

I'm happy to get a $775 check, but to be honest I wasn't upset by the controversy in the first place.

 

I bought my FFH back in August after researching the vehicles I was looking at. The real world vs. EPA mileage discrepancy was already known then. I've actually gotten better MPG than I was expecting.

[Eddie Sessum]

It's all about weight, HP and Drag Cd. That argued for 4 mpg improvement over Gen 1, not 8. Software re-programing doesn't change that and it might have made it worse for some drivers.

The top speed ev change hurt flat land cars. There should be a setting with 3 choices.. In the hills high speed ev when going down helps. The fact with the prius unless you put it in sport mode it wont give you the same power is what helps it. A prius in sport mode should be compared to the ffh. And even than it doesn't have as much power. I still agree with Ford that we don't want that option, just makes the car feel like a slug.

 

 

Still don't see why the fusion should get better than the mkz on the highway at a steady speed tho.

[Sleddog]

I'm glad Ford is doing what they are. It will give some relief to those that are under the 47 mark. And on a happy note, my FFH just turned 51.7 lifetime this morning.

 

Come on 775.00 I just purchase a new FNH SLP shotgun for my 3 gun shoots. That will put most of the money back in the bank.

Edited June 13, 2014 by Sleddog

[Waldo]

Still don't see why the fusion should get better than the mkz on the highway at a steady speed tho.

 

Because EPA highway rating isn't based on steady speed. The MKZ is tested in a higher weight class and it has tires with more rolling resistance. That can easily account for the differences, even if the aero is the same.