2002 Ford E150 9 Passenger Van With 6 Captain Chairs! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA says fuel economy test for hybrids is accurate

The EPA says it stands behind its fuel economy test for hybrid vehicles following controversy about the testing process after Ford C-Max Hybrid customers and automotive journalists alike struggled to achieve 47 miles per gallon, the advertised mpg number, Automotive News reports. Ford responded to the issue almost two weeks ago by claiming that a 1970s-era EPA general label rule was responsible for the inaccurate mileage numbers, rerating the C-Max Hybrid's mpg numbers and offering customers rebates. Ford later said it didn't overstate the C-Max Hybrid's fuel economy and that it was surprised by the low numbers.
Ford technically didn't do anything wrong because it was following the general label rule, but agency regulator Christopher Grundler says the automaker was exploiting a loophole when it came up with the hybrid C-Max numbers, and that the testing process remains accurate. The general label rule allows vehicles that use the same engine and transmission and are in the same weight class to share fuel economy numbers, but it doesn't take into account other factors such as aerodynamic efficiency, which affects hybrids more drastically than non-hybrid vehicles. Ford originally used the Fusion Hybrid economy figures for the C-Max Hybrid and claimed the engineers didn't realize that its aerodynamic efficiency would affect fuel economy as much as it did.

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.

2017 Ford Super Duty trucks recalled because the fuel tank could fall off

Bad news from Dearborn. Ford just announced a pair of recalls, including a particularly worrying flaw in the new F-Series Super Duty. According to Ford's official announcement, there are roughly 8,000 of its big trucks on the roads with a missing reinforcement bracket – if it's not there, the fuel tank could separate from the frame. Yes, Ford is basically saying the fuel tank could fall out. We don't need to explain why this would be a very bad thing. Fortunately, no owners have experienced said bad things – Ford claims it's unaware of any fires, injuries, or accidents resulting from the flaws. The Kentucky Truck Plant built the affected pickups between August 10 and September 17. The bulk of the vehicles are in the US – 7,103, to be precise. Another 964 are cruising around the frozen Canadian tundra, while two more are in "federalized territories." The other recall is smaller, but reaches across a broad swath of the Blue Oval's family vehicles. Ford says there are 1,352 Taurus sedans, Flex crossovers, Explorer SUVs – including the Police Interceptor Utility variant – and Lincoln MKTs equipped with the company's 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 that could catch fire. In this case, the danger isn't a detached fuel tank, but an "improperly brazed turbocharger oil supply tube" that could leak and spill engine oil on the turbocharger. Again, Ford isn't aware of any fires, accidents, or injuries due to the flaw. Here's the breakdown of manufacturer dates and location: 2016 Ford Taurus vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 2, 2016 2016-17 Ford Flex vehicles built at Oakville Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 10, 2016 2017 Ford Explorer vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant, Oct. 15, 2016 to Nov. 12, 2016 2017 Ford Police Interceptor Utility vehicles built at Chicago Assembly Plant on Nov. 2, 2016 2016-17 Lincoln MKT vehicles built at Oakville Assembly Plant, Oct. 18, 2016 to Nov. 10, 2016 As with the Super Duty recall, most of the affected cars, crossovers, and SUVs are in the US market. There are 126 units in Canada and six in the same "federalized territories" mentioned above. In the case of both recalls, dealers will inspect the affected parts and replace or add them as necessary. Related Video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.