EPA, MPG's and Forum activity

[GrySql]

I have been a member here since January 2013 and was an early adopter of the new 2013 FFH (12/12/2012).

The recent announcement by Ford that it has lowered the EPA mileage numbers has caused me to have a couple of informal thoughts about this Forum and it's activities.

 

First, I wonder how many of us would have purchased a FFH knowing the new EPA numbers?

I probably would have, it is beautiful and 44/41 is still amazing for a car with this much to offer.

 

The second question relates to the amount of Topic's and Posts on this Forum that concern improving our mpg's to match the old EPA numbers.

How different do you think this FFH Forum would have been if we had known in the Fall of 2012 that the real EPA mpg's were 44/41mpg's instead of 47/47?

Do you think this Forum would have been as busy?

 

Just askin'...

 

[machoman1337]

I would have - even if it was only 30 mpg because the car just looks so good. Seriously. Plus, I came from a car that was getting 13 L/100km mixed (about 18 mpg) so 30 mpg would be a massive upgrade.

 

I think this forum would've been as busy because lots of people still can't hit 40 mpg due to driving habits, and they'll appreciate tips from those who manage to exceed 50 mpg. Other hybrid cars' forums have such activity (I've seen people bragging online about 60 mpg figures in Priuses).

[corncobs]

Interesting thought GrySql.

 

Maybe you can add a little survey to your post which would enable us to see a percentage of people who would or not have bought the FFH.

 

To answer Q1: no doubt at all even a split second I would have bought the FFH. Besides the exterior it's the beauty of the internal styling, comfort and technology.

For all the

For Q2: I agree with machoman I will find both side of EPA number no matter what. I think it would have been less dramatic in some cases because the the difference between EPA and "real" MPG would have been only half.

 

Just like the goal only scoring again

 

Maybe HB and Larry would have never gone out an beyond trying to understand to technology and share their thoughts. All the resulting posts are tailored towards making the most out of driving.

 

Overall is a fun plan to also have all these it would half the nice.

Edited June 20, 2014 by corncobs

[DeeCee]

I would have still made the purchase. I went in anticipating 40 mpg and am elated with bettering that mark by more than 5 mpg. Also the styling and technology features available were just as a big factor in my purchase decision. Have been very satisfied with the car to date.

 

I think this forum would not have changed much based on the sincerity of most posters. Very dedicated and helpful members on the whole.

[acdii]

I have been a member since I got my 2010 FFH, and upgrading to the new one was just right, it was what I have been wanting in a car for a long time. With that being said, if the EPA ratings were 44/41, then the BD would not have been such an issue for me, at least not until summer came around. :)

[jeff_h]

Yes I still would have bought mine, replaced the 2010 FFH and just brought up the window sticker to refresh my memory - that was rated at 41/36.

 

So the 2013 still is rated higher and I think looks better and has more features too.

 

Like acdii, I think I have been here since I ordered my 2010 FFH back in 2009, and things don't change that much -- get lots of newbies come in all excited about getting their new car, some stick around after their purchase but most fade away. As for attitudes, this forum is better that some others I've been on - still get some with attitudes now and then, and thankfully many of them move on when they don't find a lot of trolling success.

Edited June 20, 2014 by jeff_h

[Texasota]

GrySql, interesting and thought provoking thread. I had been lurking and then became active on this forum a little over a year ago so I have been following the threads for most of the 2013 and 2014 model years.

 

I was struck early on how much effort and dedication (maybe obsession?) there is in trying to meet or exceed the 47/47 EPA numbers. It also seems like the posts that advertised, boasted, and demonstrated that 47+ was achievable only heightened the anxiety and disappointment for those that were not achieving anywhere near those numbers. I suspect that some of those not achieving the 47 EPA numbers wondered if their FFHs were either defective or they were not driving their cars correctly no matter how hard they tried.

 

I do not own a FFH (have a 2015 order) so I can't say how the 47/47 challenge would have affected me. But I think if I average 39-41 I will be very happy as that will be better than my 2012 Focus and the FFH is a larger, quieter, and more comfortable car. More importantly, the fuel economy far exceeds the gas Fusions.

 

In my mind, the ultimate test will be if I can resist the urge to purchase a Scan Gauge and pipe insulation. ;)

[Hybrider]

From all of the posts I've seen here in this forum, especially lately that I have been perusing the older posts, I believe the large amount of posts were not only attributable to the frustrations of not achieving the illusive 47 MPG goal, but also due to the massive amount of recalls and TSBs that were present on the Job1 2013 FFH cars.

 

I am so very grateful to all of you 2013 FFH owners, and to Ford, for having blazed the trails via those early 2013 FFH builds so that I could have a much more enjoyable experience as a 2014 FFH owner, where my main concern is only the achievement of that illusive 47 MPG goal. I salute you all, 2013 FFH owners. :salute:

 

But still with the new MPG ratings, compared to the other hybrid sedan choices in roughly this same price range, the FFH is still very competitive just on the stat alone. And once you factor in the attactiveness of the 2013-2015 FFH design, there really is no competition. :headspin:

Edited June 20, 2014 by Hybrider

[Ram]

My very first motivator for getting a '14 FFH SE was the 47/47/47. I am disappointed in the decision that Ford has taken to lower the numbers as well as the crap the EPA puts forth on the mfg to put these numbers on the car in the first place.

 

I feel that the EPA has as much a hand in the numbers going down as Ford and they need to pay as much or MORE than FORD.

 

When is government going to be held accountable?

 

My second motivator for getting this car was the beautiful ruby red paint job. My third and final was lack of all the fancy, luxury add on's to this one. Its so to speak bare bones for an SE. Maybe not exactly the bottom tier of the SE but very close to it.

 

I am not very happy over any of this. Period.

 

Rant off.

[Sleddog]

I would purchased mine anyway. We all know the folks that are not happy will voice that fact. I was on the forum well before my FFH was delivered. The tips and experiences, both good and bad, were very informative.

 

I have a been able to get better mileage than the EPA stated numbers in all my fords. Although the f150 does take much effort to get good numbers. Going back to my 2001 Focus it had a lifetime average of 37.9. The stated EPA number was 36. Same for The 2009 Focus. EPA number is 35. It's getting between 35 and 37.

 

I tend to research a new vehicle based on how it will be driven. If I was still doing a long daily highway commute, I would not have a FFH. It does not fit that driving profile. But for the drive it does every workday. For me it's perfect. And my mpg numbers prove that out.

 

Getting good mileage with a/c is tuff. But I manage to do it. Driving, for me, is now centered on getting the best mileage and getting my lifetime to 52. But, it looks like I could make it to 53 if I'm able to maintain the numbers I'm getting.

Edited June 20, 2014 by Sleddog

[Easy Rider]

 

First, I wonder how many of us would have purchased a FFH knowing the new EPA numbers?

 

I knew the numbers weren't applicable in the real world, even more so than most other similar models, and it wasn't a factor in my decision.

 

Having said that.......things happen in your sub-conscious that you have no control over......and just knowing that 47 number was there might have swayed my decision just a bit.

 

As for forum activity......who knows. I think the void would have been filled with something else. :)

Edited June 20, 2014 by Easy Rider

[Easy Rider]

 

I am not very happy over any of this. Period.

 

Rant off.

 

This post shows a complete misunderstanding of what the "EPA estimated fuel mileage" is supposed to do and how it works.

 

First it is an "estimate" that is not necessarily supposed to be achievable in actual operation.

 

It is intended ONLY to be a gauge to compare one model to another.

If one says 40 and another says 45, the second one should do a little better in the real world but might never make 45.....or even 40 maybe.

 

You can be mad at whomever you please but the EPA has nothing to do with this fiasco........except maybe they aren't policing the manufacturers close enough to catch "errors" sooner.

[hybridbear]

When we compared the FFH with the Camry Hybrid we determined that the real world fuel economy would be equal between the two cars. We chose the FFH because we could get it for less money and better customize what options we wanted than with the Camry. We took a risk on a first year car and our first FFH spent 30 days at the dealer within the first 11 months we had it. It could have spent much more time there but I always wanted my car back instead of letting the dealer keep it for 3 or 4 days while waiting for parts to arrive. I think we had somewhere in the range of 15-17 trips to the dealer with that car for all the problems it had.

 

However, with the new EPA ratings being barely better than the last gen FFH I think we might have bought a close-out loaded 2012 FFH because we could have bought a loaded 2012 with lots more features for less money than we paid for our 2013. In fact, my wife asked me about doing that, and my answer as to why not was because the new one is rated at 47/47/47, the old one is 41/36. That means that they must have made major powertrain improvements to have such a big jump in efficiency. In fact, the more I think about it as I type this, the more I am convinced that we would be driving a loaded 2012 FFH right now had the 2013 FFH had the correct MPG numbers from the start.

 

I also think that Forum traffic picks up anytime the FFH is in the news.

[GrySql]

However, with the new EPA ratings being barely better than the last gen FFH I think we might have bought a close-out loaded 2012 FFH because we could have bought a loaded 2012 with lots more features for less money than we paid for our 2013.

I looked at those close-out 2012's too, it was tempting. That would have been a good choice, those cars had all the problems worked out of them.

But the '13's design, size and the 47/47 swayed my decision - the design mostly.

 

As for the Forum, I know we sure were delving into every aspect of the 2013's issues and a lot of new ground was covered in that first year.

[acdii]

Considering I had a perfectly good 2010 FFH, Even if the 13 only got 41 MPG, I would still have gone for it. IT was a step up in so many ways to the 2010. Nothing at all wrong with getting a loaded 2012, but look at what the 13 has that the 12 doesn't besides looks! It was the added features that sold me on the car.

[jsolan]

I'd probably be a 2.0 ecoboost fusion owner if the EPA was at 42 from the start. I assumed I'd get 20% lower than EPA before purchasing and ~33 MPG wouldn't be enough of an uplift to make up the price/power difference for me. I'm certainly glad I did though as I now know my commute/driving style is excellent for hybrids and know what to expect next time.

[Texasota]

I'd probably be a 2.0 ecoboost fusion owner if the EPA was at 42 from the start. I assumed I'd get 20% lower than EPA before purchasing and ~33 MPG wouldn't be enough of an uplift to make up the price/power difference for me. I'm certainly glad I did though as I now know my commute/driving style is excellent for hybrids and know what to expect next time.

The best gas Fusion has an EPA combined of 29 and the FFH's new EPA combined is 42. That is a 44.8% advantage over the gas Fusion for the FFH. Lots of different ways to play the math for the gas savings vs the greater initial cost of the FFH but the payback is probably not an unreasonably long time.

[jsolan]

The best gas Fusion has an EPA combined of 29 and the FFH's new EPA combined is 42. That is a 44.8% advantage over the gas Fusion for the FFH. Lots of different ways to play the math for the gas savings vs the greater initial cost of the FFH but the payback is probably not an unreasonably long time.

 

You're absolutely right, but you have to realize I'd never driven a hybrid before so I had to make some assumptions. I know from experience that my gas vehicles do 10-15% under EPA and I "knew" that hybrids get their best mileage from city driving, which I don't do much of. So I assumed a 20% reduction from EPA for the hybrid to make sure I wasn't shortchanged.

At the new EPA, you're saving about $39.50 each 1000 miles if gas is $3.70/gallon. At the base $1800 upcharge for a hybrid that would take less than 46k miles to pay off.

At my anti-hybrid calculations (26 vs 33), I would be saving just over $30 each 1000 miles at the same price. That would be slightly under 60k miles to pay off.

 

My cutoff was 55k miles (half the 110k I put on my previous car) in order to convince my brain to give up the power I've been used to.

 

Again, I'm super glad I made the decision I did as my payoff period is going to be less than 30k miles based on the mileage I'm getting vs the mileage a coworker is getting in the ecoboost as well as higher gas prices. But 18 months ago, I was going in blind and based a lot of my decision off of 80% EPA.

[GrySql]

But 18 months ago, I was going in blind and based a lot of my decision off of 80% EPA.

Sounds very similar to the way things were for me. I'd never driven a hybrid and knew even less.

It seemed impossible for the FFH to get such high mpg's, but a big, good looking car that could get even 40mpg was hard to resist.

I special ordered the '13 FFH in October 2012 without ever seeing one in person, nor having driven one - there were none available at any Dealer near me.

It was a shot in the dark purchase with a lot of unknown's.

 

If this Forum's extensive body of knowledge had existed back then it sure would have helped my decision making.

The ideas and questions that are still being added continue to help me as an owner.

 

The new members (or lurkers) that are researching a purchase of a FFH have a lot of good material to sift through on this site, all posted here in the last year and a half.

The recent addition of Ashley and Kim, our Ford Rep's, has increased the Forum's ability to help too.

Edited June 23, 2014 by GrySql

[acdii]

This forum has also been a good sounding board for improvements. Pretty sure some of them are trickling back to Ford for later updates.

[darrelld]

I have been a member here since January 2013 and was an early adopter of the new 2013 FFH (12/12/2012).

The recent announcement by Ford that it has lowered the EPA mileage numbers has caused me to have a couple of informal thoughts about this Forum and it's activities.

 

First, I wonder how many of us would have purchased a FFH knowing the new EPA numbers?

I probably would have, it is beautiful and 44/41 is still amazing for a car with this much to offer.

 

The second question relates to the amount of Topic's and Posts on this Forum that concern improving our mpg's to match the old EPA numbers.

How different do you think this FFH Forum would have been if we had known in the Fall of 2012 that the real EPA mpg's were 44/41mpg's instead of 47/47?

Do you think this Forum would have been as busy?

 

Just askin'...

 

I just did purchased with new ratings posted on the window sticker.

[RLMeadors]

I bought a new 2014 Ford Fusion Titanium Hybrid (Dark Side Metallic with charcoal interior) a couple of weeks ago. Love the car! Figuring out how to drive it to get the best mpg has been a learning process. I've been lurking on this site off and on for the past week and picked up some really good tips... one of the best being the use of the "Empower" display. Right now I'm getting almost 40 mpg driving a mix of about 70% city and 30% highway in the metro Atlanta area where nothing is flat (i.e. lots of hills).

 

Anyway, I haven't seen anything posted about the following yet. Maybe I missed it here? Did you folks know about this? If I read this correctly, it looks like I'm going to be getting a check from Ford and so are most of you! Ford Goodwill Payment

 

BTW, whether I get 40 mpg or 47 mpg, I really like this car a lot and am very glad I bought it! Thanks to all here who have provided such great driving tips! :)

[acdii]

I bought a new 2014 Ford Fusion Titanium Hybrid (Dark Side Metallic with charcoal interior) a couple of weeks ago. Love the car! Figuring out how to drive it to get the best mpg has been a learning process. I've been lurking on this site off and on for the past week and picked up some really good tips... one of the best being the use of the "Empower" display. Right now I'm getting almost 40 mpg driving a mix of about 70% city and 30% highway in the metro Atlanta area where nothing is flat (i.e. lots of hills).

 

Anyway, I haven't seen anything posted about the following yet. Maybe I missed it here? Did you folks know about this? If I read this correctly, it looks like I'm going to be getting a check from Ford and so are most of you! Ford Goodwill Payment

 

BTW, whether I get 40 mpg or 47 mpg, I really like this car a lot and am very glad I bought it! Thanks to all here who have provided such great driving tips! :)

http://fordfusionhybridforum.com/topic/8860-ford-motor-company-lowers-fuel-economy-ratings-for-six-vehicles/?p=82159

[RLMeadors]

http://fordfusionhybridforum.com/topic/8860-ford-motor-company-lowers-fuel-economy-ratings-for-six-vehicles/?p=82159

Thanks! Obviously, I haven't been through that many sections of this forum. I figured it was being discussed here.

[keybman]

I have been a member here since January 2013 and was an early adopter of the new 2013 FFH (12/12/2012).

The recent announcement by Ford that it has lowered the EPA mileage numbers has caused me to have a couple of informal thoughts about this Forum and it's activities.

 

First, I wonder how many of us would have purchased a FFH knowing the new EPA numbers?

I probably would have, it is beautiful and 44/41 is still amazing for a car with this much to offer.

 

The second question relates to the amount of Topic's and Posts on this Forum that concern improving our mpg's to match the old EPA numbers.

How different do you think this FFH Forum would have been if we had known in the Fall of 2012 that the real EPA mpg's were 44/41mpg's instead of 47/47?

Do you think this Forum would have been as busy?

 

Just askin'...

 

 

1) I would not have been as attracted to 41 MPG in the City, which is the only number I was concerned with. My calculations on Value/Total Car Cost/etc were based on 47 MPG/City and I was comparing it with other hybrids on the market. On the positive side, if the numbers were not published as 47/47/47, then Ford may have priced the FFH lower. Plus, there is no doubt that this car’s styling far outclassed its competitors. Add in the extras (ACC, BLIS, B/U camera, lane keeping, cross traffic, etc) and I just may have still made the FFH my choice.

 

2) No. I can’t imagine there being the kind of buzz and user growth that occurred during that time period. So, my experience (if I would have even found the forum) would have been limited and it would have become a passing thought on my life’s internet pathway.