1979 Ford Ranchero Gt - Time Capsule; Daily Driver. Full Shop Manuals! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford director says company has big efficiency plans, but no dedicated EV

The annual autofest known as the North American International Auto Show previews a plethora of exciting new products that we'll see and drive later in the year, from tiny urban commuters to family sedans and crossovers to hard-working big pickups and SUVs. It's also a once-a-year cornucopia of auto executives and leaders from around the world. "There will be some really fun stuff that you'll hear about in the future" - Ford's Kevin Layden So, in-between dozens of cool new-product unveilings on rotating stages during the two press days preceding the public show, we auto scribes grab what planned and impromptu interviews we can. Sessions with top industry leaders can be hard to get, but I was able to score a seat in a group session with then-General Motors North America president (now executive VP of global product development) Mark Reuss, and I also managed brief one-on-ones with a trio of vehicle electrification leaders, one each from Ford, BMW and GM, and what they said then remains relevant now. First up is Kevin Layden, Ford's Director of Electrified Powertrain Engineering. ABG: Where will Ford go beyond its current Focus EV and hybrids, and will there be a Ford EV and/or hybrid on its own energy-optimized platform one day. KL: We don't want to do a dedicated electric vehicle with all the development costs borne by a niche product. At the Michigan Assembly plant right now we're building the Focus electric, PHEV and EcoBoost on the same assembly line. Also the C-Max, with both a hybrid and an Energi plug-in, and we use that same power pack in the Fusion Hybrid and Energi. We want to be, "The power of choice" [a Ford marketing slogan], so having that choice for customers is very important. And if I want to sell the Fusion, Focus and C-Max globally, we can use these power packs wherever it makes sense. So as we go forward, you'll see us proliferating the power packs we have today. Then the question is, what do we do next? There will be some really fun stuff that you'll hear about in the future. ABG: Is the efficiency difference between a dedicated ultra-efficient vehicle platform and a shared multi-use platform getting smaller as all platforms get more efficient? KL: Exactly. Were going through aero studies now on wheels and tires and hood sealers on base vehicles. We have full aerodynamic wind tunnel studies going on with the base Focus and C-Max, so all of that [aerodynamic improvement] will be there for EVs.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.

Ford recalling nearly 24,000 Focus EV and C-Max models over door chime

Ford will be voluntarily recalling 23,830 Focus Electric and C-Max Hybrid and Energi models equipped with push-button ignition, according to The Detroit News. Why? Because the cars don't make a noise when the driver's door is open, and are therefore in violation of federal regulations. It's not as silly as Honda's badging recall that isn't a recall, but it's close.
Actually, that's not exactly fair. The chime is supposed to come on when the driver's door is open, as it reminds drivers not to leave their cars on or leave key fobs in the car, an easy thing to forget when the cars in question make virtually no noise at idle and do not require keys in ignitions.
The recall, which Ford is conducting voluntarily, covers 2012 and 2013 Focus Electric hatchbacks and 2013 C-Max Hybrid and Energi models. The overwhelming majority, around 22,900 units, were sold in the US, while the remaining 900 units are in Canada. How many of each model are covered in the recall is not immediately clear.