Ford Motor Company Lowers Fuel Economy Ratings For Six Vehicles

[Ford Super News Ticker]

Ford Motor Company announced today it is lowering the fuel economy ratings for its 2013- and 2014-model year hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles, as well as most 2014-model year Fiestas.

 

View the full article

[greycrx87]

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

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz19ugjFZG0

 

The original post continues below. . .

 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

$450 coming my way :yahoo:

 

Fusion Hybrid lowered to 44 / 41 / 42 from 47 / 47 / 47

 

 

http://www.streetinsider.com/Press+Releases/Ford+Motor+Company+Lowers+Fuel+Economy+Ratings+For+Six+Vehicles/9578559.html

 

- Ford identified an error with fuel economy ratings for certain vehicles through its internal testing and notified the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

 

- Ford worked with EPA as the agency retested the vehicles, which resulted in lower fuel economy ratings for Ford’s 2013- and 2014-model year hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles, as well as most 2014-model year Fiestas

 

- The company apologizes to its customers, and will make goodwill payments to owners of the approximately 200,000 affected U.S. vehicles for the difference between the previous and revised ratings

 

- Ford reviewed its entire line up to determine the vehicles that required further testing and revised the fuel economy ratings for the affected vehicles. No other fuel economy ratings adjustments are planned

 

DEARBORN, Mich.--(BUSINESS WIRE)-- Ford Motor Company announced today it is lowering the fuel economy ratings for its 2013- and 2014-model year hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles, as well as most 2014-model year Fiestas.

Ford identified an error with fuel economy ratings on certain vehicles through its internal testing and notified EPA. The company worked with EPA as the agency retested the vehicles to determine the correct fuel economy ratings.

“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.”

Ford reviewed its entire line up to determine the vehicles that required further testing and revised the fuel economy ratings for the affected vehicles. No other label adjustments are planned.

“This is our error. When we see an issue, we address it,” said Raj Nair, Ford group vice president, Global Product Development. “That is why we notified EPA and lowered the fuel economy ratings for these vehicles.”

Fuel Economy Testing

Fuel economy testing involves many factors. Ford’s error was specific to a factor called "Total Road Load Horsepower", or TRLHP. TRLHP is a vehicle-specific resistance level used in vehicle dynamometer testing that determines fuel economy ratings. TRLHP is established through engineering models that are validated through vehicle testing, including physical track tests referred to as coastdown testing.

Use of these engineering models is a common industry practice, consistent with EPA regulations. These models normally are more reliable and consistent than physical vehicle tests, which can exhibit variability.

As an ongoing practice, Ford conducts tests on production vehicles to validate its engineering models. Based on coastdown testing of the Fusion Hybrid, the company found the TRLHP did not match the values used for the dynamometer testing.

Upon further testing, Ford also discovered an error specific to how we correlate wind tunnel results into the TRLHP model. Ford’s error was the result of a recent process change, which the company has since corrected.

Ford has now validated through physical vehicle testing the TRLHP for the vehicles affected by this error and also has instituted enhanced validation tests for future vehicles to prevent reoccurrence of this error.

New Fuel Economy Ratings and Customer Information

Ford has communicated to its dealers that new fuel economy labels will be available in approximately six days and that dealers may continue selling the vehicles until the new labels are received.

Ford estimates that approximately 200,000 of these vehicles have been sold or leased to customers in the United States. Affected Ford and Lincoln owners and lessees in the United States will receive a goodwill payment for the estimated average fuel cost of the difference between the two fuel economy labels, as shown in the table below.

Affected U.S. fleet owners and affected owners outside of the United States will be contacted by their local Ford representatives.

Customers with questions can contact the Ford Customer Relationship Center at 1-866-436-7332 or visit: www.ford.com/mpglabel and www.lincoln.com/mpglabel.

U.S. EPA-Estimated Fuel Economy Label Ratings and Goodwill Payments* Model Year Vehicle Powertrain Revised

(City, Highway, Combined)

Previous

(City, Highway, Combined)

Lease Customers Purchase

Customers

2014 Fiesta 1.0L GTDI M/T 31 / 43 / 36 32 / 45 / 37 $125 $200 1.6L A/T 27 / 37 / 31 29 / 39 / 32 $150 $250 1.6L SFE A/T 28 / 38 / 32 30 / 41 / 34 $275 $450 1.6L M/T 28 / 36 / 31 27 / 38 / 31 Combined MPG not affected Combined MPG not affected 2013-14 C-MAX Hybrid 42 / 37 / 40 45 / 40 / 43 $300 $475 Fusion Hybrid 44 / 41 / 42 47 / 47 / 47 $450 $775 MKZ Hybrid 38 / 37 / 38 45 / 45 / 45 $625 $1,050 Model Year Vehicle Powertrain Revised**

(Charge Sustaining, Charge Depleting, EV Range)

Previous**

(Charge Sustaining, Charge Depleting, EV Range)

Lease Customers Purchase

Customers

2013-14 C-MAX Energi Plug-in Hybrid 38 mpg / 88 MPGe+ /

19 mi EV range

43 mpg / 100 MPGe+ /

21 mi EV range

$475 $775 Fusion Energi Plug-in Hybrid 38 mpg / 88 MPGe+ /

19 mi EV range

43 mpg / 100 MPGe+ /

21 mi EV range

$525 $850

*Bolded figures in the above chart represent the values used to determine the customer goodwill payment.

** Combined numbers only. Revised EPA-estimated ratings: 40 city, 36 highway MPG; 95 city, 81 highway MPGe. Charge depleting range is 20 mi.Previous EPA-estimated ratings: 44 city, 41 highway MPG; 108 city, 92 hwy MPGe. Previous charge depleting range was 21.

+MPGe is the EPA equivalent measure of gasoline fuel efficiency for electric mode operation.

Edited June 13, 2014 by robertlane

[SteveB_TX]

$1050.00 !!! Woohoo! Wait... AND another $775.00 for the FFH!!! Time to party! :)

[Fastronaut]

Just heard that Ford is restating MPG for the Fusion Hybrids and Energi products for 2013-2014.

 

Fusion Hybrid was 47/47/47 and is now revised to 44/41/42 (Highway/City/Combined).

 

Ford is rebating $775 per car as an apology. $850 for Energis.

 

See http://www.ford.com/mpglabel

 

[GrySql]

Most interesting....

[IraF]

Also if you check Ford Etis after entering your Vin#, you should find,

 

14B03 Fuel Economy Customer Satisfaction

[corncobs]

Cool now I can claim that I'm exceeding EPA rating by up to 10 MPG and I don't have to feel bad if I'm only getting 43 MPG.

 

This is crazy after almost 2 years of advertising 47/47/47 and knowing it can be done and achieved but don't get me wrong I'll take $775.

Edited June 12, 2014 by corncobs

[smr2112]

Will we all be getting checks? The 2013-2014 models have always had the same mileage rating, hasn't it?

 

[swingdj]

For 13-14 FFHs

[SteveB_TX]

For 13-14 FFHs

 

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

[TheMgnt]

http://online.wsj.com/articles/ford-cuts-fuel-economy-on-some-vehicles-after-tests-1402598815

 

 

Ford Motor Co. lowered the mileage ratings on six 2013 and 2014 models, mostly hybrids and plug-in electric hybrids, and said it would pay owners as much as $1,050 to compensate for underestimating fuel costs.

 

[...]

 

Ford said the error occurred in the calculation used to determine something called the "total road load horsepower," a resistance measure on a machine called a dynamometer that is used to test vehicle performance in a static, lab setting.

Mr. Nair said the correlation of wind-tunnel data to the computer model was incorrect, creating too little resistance. That led to a big disparity in results, particularly for the heavier hybrid vehicles, such as the Lincoln MKZ hybrid, which had its fuel economy reduced to a combined 38 mpg from a combined 45 mpg.

(edited to include US graphic)

Edited June 12, 2014 by TheMgnt

[TheMgnt]

Interesting. I've only had the car a few weeks (2000 miles) and have been regularly getting 42ish on my morning commute (30 miles heavy congestion) and 47 on my evening commute (mostly surface due to far less congestion). Short trips in the 'burbs are usally in the upper 40s for mpg. I've hit the low 50s more than one My last fill up gave a calculated total of 45mpg. I'm completely happy with the car. However, if I'd seen these posted figures while shopping I might have gone with a different car altogether.

[kuzzi]

$775, wow!

 

I budgeted anything over 37mpg when buying the car was going to save me money in the long run. And now I get fuel for a year.

 

I love being able to drive like a regular Houstonian and get 42mpg.

[Toz]

Well, I'll be happy to take the money but I have been nothing but happy with the MPG of my HyTi

[GrySql]

What if you bought one and sold it, or traded it in on another? Do you get double credit for buying the first one???

[Sleddog]

I'm over the 47 mpg. So, I get 775.00 and have a FFH that exceeds the orginal mpg and slams the revised mpg.

[MaineFusion]

W00t! To me this seems like a very nice good will gesture. It sure makes my day! :yahoo:

[B25Nut]

My lifetime mileage after 19 months reads out as 42.0 mpg, so mine is right at average, although I've been getting 43.5 mpg for the past two months.

I hope that there were people at Ford that got demoted over this. When the Energi figures were released, they hit the magic number of 100 MPGe+ exactly. That was the goal, so now it's obvious some group manipulated the figures to reach it. This seems to be an example of the state of ethics in our modern world. I read a book about the making of the P-51 Mustang and it told the story of how North American Aviation made several different lighter versions with the goal of reaching 500 mph. The best they could do was 497 mph. The engineers involved knew that they could easily just fudge a few figures in their reports to say they achieved that milestone, but they didn't. How often do we find those ethics today?

[corncobs]

What if you bought one and sold it, or traded it in on another? Do you get double credit for buying the first one???

I like the way you think.

It would be interesting to know if in this case our old well known friend (fy..) would be getting the same check.

 

I guess it's current owners only which would be fair IMO.

[jeff_h]

$1050.00 !!! Woohoo! Wait... AND another $775.00 for the FFH!!! Time to party! :)

 

$775 for the SE Hybrid and $850 x 2 for the Energis... make room at your party for me!

 

Added - and this means Fynack will at long-last get money back...but will still be unhappy.

Edited June 12, 2014 by jeff_h

[corncobs]

But fudging number doesn't always and everywhere work at some point the truth will surface. Question is a severe the consequences are in this case a few drops of gasoline.

 

Look at GM and their big mess! IMO people should go to jail for there actions that cost peoples lives.

[corncobs]

 

$775 for the SE Hybrid and $850 x 2 for the Energis... make room at your party for me!

 

Added - and this means Fynack will at long-last get money back...but will still be unhappy.

I just asked the same question on the other thread. Do we really think Ford is paying for cars that you don't own any longer? Edited June 12, 2014 by corncobs

[Eddie Sessum]

Only current owners, just called them because we bought a 2nd used one yesterday (mkzh).

 

Debating if im going to just mail the money right back to ford to get the 100k bumper to bumper warranty now.

[acdii]

Holy Sh*t, What was I saying from the start? 38-43 MPG. Look what they rate it at now, 44/41/42! I should get 2 back to cover the aggravation on the first one, because I was right all along about that car! Well Here is further proof that Ford now has it correct, my lifetime on the dash is sitting right at 42 MPG! It just changed this afternoon to 42.

 

Thanks for the headsup email HB. Wow, I am surprised at this for sure.

[acdii]

I just asked the same question on the other thread. Do we really think Ford is paying for cars that you don't own any longer?

For all the aggravation I received on that first one, I should! Probably wont happen, but I can at least put up a fight for it.