1966 Fastback Mustang C Code Red Solid Wow Show Car 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.

Recharge Wrap-up: Atieva making EV with former Tesla talent, Holland lowers PHEV incentives

A reduction of tax incentives on company cars in Holland is expected to put the brakes on plug-in hybrid sales. Cars are taxed at an average of 25 percent, with plug-in hybrids taxed at just seven or 14 percent, depending on emissions. Taxes on PHEV company cars will increase to 14 and 21 percent. With company car leases making up a third of vehicle sales in 2014, the uptake on PHEVs "will likely go back to regular volumes," according to Volvo's Christiaan Krouwel. It could be a boon for battery electric cars, as their tax rate will remain at four percent for company cars. Read more at Automotive News Europe. Ford is testing cylinder deactivation in its 1.0-liter EcoBoost engine. On-road prototype testing has shown improvements in fuel economy of as much as six percent. Ford engineers developed a system using a new dual mass flywheel, pendulum absorber, and tuned clutch disc to allow cylinder deactivation under a wider range of speed and engine loads with less NVH. "The highest priority in the development of new combustion engines for automotive applications is the ongoing reduction of fuel consumption," says Ford's Andreas Schamel, presenting Ford's findings to the Vienna Motor Symposium. Read more at Green Car Congress or in the press release from Ford. Atieva is building an EV with the help of numerous former Tesla employees. The Silicon Valley-based startup was founded in 2007 by a former Tesla vice president, and its roster includes 12 other former Tesla employees. Already well funded, Atieva is now looking to fill its ranks with more talent, with 32 engineering positions, two recruiter positions and other job openings posted at its website. As for the EV it is working on, Atieva says it is "redefining what a car can be, by building an iconic new vehicle from the ground up." Read more at Charged EVs. Testing shows that Joule ethanol, made from recycled CO2, meets standards for use in the US and Europe. In partnership with Audi, Joule has been working toward making its recycled CO2 fuels ready for commercialization. "We are pleased to achieve another critical step towards our planned near-term delivery of fuel-grade ethanol from recycled CO2," says Joule President and CEO Serge Tchuruk. "Using waste CO2 as a feedstock, our technology has the two-fold advantage of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and producing cost-competitive, drop-in fuels." Joule will use these test results to get government approval for the use of its ethanol in highway fuel.

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.