PSA: Bought a Fiesta 2014 or Ford / Lincoln Hybrid 2013/2014 model? Check this

[Tweak155]

I posted this in the Garage section but realized it may be more useful here, or both:

Ford has owned up to their EPA estimate gaps and has offered payments to those who bought the vehicles under the misleading label.

Check here for the payment you will receive:

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

Overall, I find it a good move on Ford's part to own up to their mistake.

 

[ElFenix]

i'd heard they'd botched the c-max by just copying the fusion's figures (which apparently is legal, usually), didn't know they'd botched the fusion to begin with.

 

[Pulsar]

I suspect this is a result of a lot of the complaining done by owners when the cars didn't meet the gas mileage rankings.

That said, I haven't seen a lot of companies go on social media and be this frank. "We fucked up and we're giving people money because of it."

If it only Ford and all the rest ALWAYS responded this way to customer complaints:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cz19ugjFZG0&feature=youtu.be

 

[JulesMaximus]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-06-12/ford-lowers-hybrid-mileage-ratings-for-a-second-time

Ford Motor Co. (F:US) lowered fuel-economy estimates on some of its cars for the second time in less than a year, citing a computer-modeling error, and promised to compensate more than 200,000 customers.

Six models are affected, including the C-Max Hybrid, which is now rated at 40 miles per gallon overall, the Dearborn, Michigan-based company said in a statement today. That’s down from an estimate revised lower last year to 43 mpg from 47 mpg.

Payments to customers will be as high as $1,050 to owners of the Lincoln MKZ Hybrid and as low as $200 to owners of the Fiesta with a 1-liter engine, the company said. Other models include the Fusion Hybrid, the C-Max Energi and the Fusion Energi.

Video: TV Adjusts Ratings to Reflect Digital Media Reality

“This is our error,” Raj Nair, Ford’s group vice president for global product development, said in a conference call. “When we see an issue, we address it.”

 

[Aikouka]

My Ford Fusion doesn't count under this (I have a normal ICE model), but I'm annoyed by the rather awful performance. I get just as much gas mileage or worse than my '07 Altima 3.5SL, which had one of those dastardly, gas-guzzling V6s! According to Fuelly, my average is 23.1 MPG. My highest MPG (25.8) is still less than the highest that I got my Altima (26.7), and it's not like the latter was on a long trip -- it was just my normal work commute on cool days (i.e. no air conditioning sapping power).

I think it was Jules who made the "EcoBoast" joke in The Garage, and he's definitely right about that.

 

[michal1980]

my cmax energi now lines up way better with the estimate. disappointing that it was still so far off (I got mine in october)

But I'll be getting about 1.5 months of lease payments back, which is cool. Its like getting an extra 6% off my lease.

 

[vi edit]

Yeah, they knocked my C-Max hybrid down to 37/42 which is probably even a touch on the conservative side. In town I can do much better than that.

 

[allisolm]

Missed it by THAT much. Have the 2012 MKZ Hybrid, so I get - nothing . The 2013 owners get $1050.

 

[Topweasel]

My Ford Fusion doesn't count under this (I have a normal ICE model), but I'm annoyed by the rather awful performance. I get just as much gas mileage or worse than my '07 Altima 3.5SL, which had one of those dastardly, gas-guzzling V6s! According to Fuelly, my average is 23.1 MPG. My highest MPG (25.8) is still less than the highest that I got my Altima (26.7), and it's not like the latter was on a long trip -- it was just my normal work commute on cool days (i.e. no air conditioning sapping power).

I think it was Jules who made the "EcoBoast" joke in The Garage, and he's definitely right about that.

I don't know. My Highway numbers are fantastic and my city driving is actually above EPA. It's all in how you drive it. My average after a reset is 24.4 but that's only because I am 70-30 City due to some construction this year. I just think of it less as Eco+boost and more of eco or boost.

 

[Imported]

My Prius never met EPA numbers. Never ever.

 

[BassBomb]

My fiance's Elantra Coupe same deal

 

[ThatsABigOne]

Heh, my Honda Accord passes EPA everytime. Last fuel tank was 43.3mpg average with about 20% city. Last 200 mile drive on that fuel tank, the car averaged 51mpg.

I wish Ford were true to their numbers as I was interested in their 1L fiesta but not any more.

 

[someone16]

I posted this in the Garage section but realized it may be more useful here, or both:

Ford has owned up to their EPA estimate gaps and has offered payments to those who bought the vehicles under the misleading label.

Check here for the payment you will receive:

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

Overall, I find it a good move on Ford's part to own up to their mistake.

It's funny how Hyundai/Kia did the same thing and everyone was bashing them.

 

[tortillasoup]

I posted this in the Garage section but realized it may be more useful here, or both:

Ford has owned up to their EPA estimate gaps and has offered payments to those who bought the vehicles under the misleading label.

Check here for the payment you will receive:

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

Overall, I find it a good move on Ford's part to own up to their mistake.

HOLY SHIT! FINALLY they owned up to the lies about their fuel economy. I wrote several e-mails to the EPA in regards to Fusion Hybrid fuel economy issue several months ago to no response. Whether my complaints and the complaints of others were a factor I do not know but regardless I'm happy to see them finally owning up to their misleading statements. NO company should be allowed to outright lie on their market materials about their fuel economy or any other aspect of their vehicle.


As for why they gave payments for the 2014 Fiesta but not the 2011-2013 Fiesta, that's curious. I think/hope that those vehicles should be investigated as well considering they're of the same generation/engine design etc.

 

[sk560]

I'm getting 38 combined on my 2013 MKZ hybrid. I get ~50 in the morning commute (20 minute all surface streets).

 

[SearchMaster]

There does seem to be a lot of variance in the EB engines. I've been happy with mine (30.6 overall on a 23/32 rating), but others on the ST forums report conservative driving still yielding 25ish HWY and 16ish CTY.

 

[Topweasel]

There does seem to be a lot of variance in the EB engines. I've been happy with mine (30.6 overall on a 23/32 rating), but others on the ST forums report conservative driving still yielding 25ish HWY and 16ish CTY.

I feel bad for all of the car manufacturers for this one. They have to tune these cars for EPA tests because of the CAFE requirements. But on the reverse end even with the new EPA tests they still don't simulate true usage and when you tune the car to those tests you are probably farther of in real world usage.

Take the EB for example. Nice engine. It keeps weight down and in my Fusion gives me the performance of a decent to good V6 with lots of lowend torque. But all of the EPA tests where pretty much done without the car actually using the turbo. Why? Because with the turbo spooled up fuel efficiency is worse than the V6 it replaces (for my 2.0), from what I hear the 1.6 isn't as bad about that.

Basically if you want the fuel efficiency you have to treat it like its a 2.0 I4 and not a 3.7 V6. Taking it one step farther because at least on the 2.0 I4 you could floor it.

On my car I have tried to drive it for full tanks in different manners to get a feel for it. I just had a 140 mile trip where half was cruise controlled at 65 and on the way back 60. For that I averaged 36.5 MPG. If I cruise at 70 it's ~30mg. 80 27MPG. If I am having fun highway 23 MPG If I am careful on the city 24MPG. If I am having fun city 17MPG. If I am not paying any attention at all 20MPG city and 26 Highway. It's all sorts of scatter shot. With such a peaky an easily excited motor as the EB that what normal usage is going to look like.

As CAFE requirements keep rising I think you will see cars fall farther and farther away from EPA ratings when compared to their "real world" usage. These manufacturers are going to have to pull out every trick in the book to keep up.

 

[thomsbrain]

"Sooooo guys... you know that time we said we lied about our MPG numbers?... and then we gave you the real ones?... yeeeeeah... we lied then, too."

 

[Pulsar]

HOLY SHIT! FINALLY they owned up to the lies about their fuel economy. I wrote several e-mails to the EPA in regards to Fusion Hybrid fuel economy issue several months ago to no response. Whether my complaints and the complaints of others were a factor I do not know but regardless I'm happy to see them finally owning up to their misleading statements. NO company should be allowed to outright lie on their market materials about their fuel economy or any other aspect of their vehicle.


As for why they gave payments for the 2014 Fiesta but not the 2011-2013 Fiesta, that's curious. I think/hope that those vehicles should be investigated as well considering they're of the same generation/engine design etc.

Sigh. Can you pretend to be unbiased and realistic even for a moment? They even went so far as to explain some of the technical side of what happened.

Do you understand the penalties involved if they were found 'lieing'? I work in the auto industry. Do you realize how careful EVERYONE is when it comes to government regulation? NO one would lie to make mileage look better when the result if caught would be hundreds of millions in fines. No one.

I know you hate domestics and all, but for gods sake let's keep the discussion intelligent at least.

 

[tortillasoup]

Sigh. Can you pretend to be unbiased and realistic even for a moment? They even went so far as to explain some of the technical side of what happened.

Do you understand the penalties involved if they were found 'lieing'? I work in the auto industry. Do you realize how careful EVERYONE is when it comes to government regulation? NO one would lie to make mileage look better when the result if caught would be hundreds of millions in fines. No one.

I know you hate domestics and all, but for gods sake let's keep the discussion intelligent at least.

I don't hate domestics, I hate liars. If ANY automaker lies like this, I don't care who it is, I'll be just as pissed about it as anybody else. The EPA isn't concerned with getting people arrested over this, at least I don't think so which is why nobody is being called a liar and being arrested. Let's face it, there have been far more egregious and expensive things done to the consumer and the offending companies got a slap on the wrist much like Ford and Hyundai got because in our country, we're not here to vilify companies and throw people under the bus. Just think about the whole Ford vs. Firestone deal where each company blamed each other when at the end of the day, it was obviously Ford's damn fault for under-inflating the tires and having excessively long u-bolts. The extra long u-bolts was an issue for the Ford Exploder AND for the Pinto (u-bolt on the axle when rear ended would puncture the gas tank causing a spark and explosion).

 

[thecoolnessrune]

Like was already said, please at least try to have an intelligent discussion. Your bias in your posting history here is very readily apparent. Your myth on the exploding fuel tank has been debunked many times for well over 20 years, and was even debunked on MythBusters. A simply knowledge of basic chemistry and physics dispels this silliness.

http://wardsauto.com/blog/my-somewhat-begrudging-apology-ford-pinto

 

[tortillasoup]

Like was already said, please at least try to have an intelligent discussion. Your bias in your posting history here is very readily apparent. Your myth on the exploding fuel tank has been debunked many times for well over 20 years, and was even debunked on MythBusters. A simply knowledge of basic chemistry and physics dispels this silliness.

http://wardsauto.com/blog/my-somewhat-begrudging-apology-ford-pinto

It's true that it was a low number of people that died from that pinto problem but that article completely glosses over the issue at hand.

Here is a rebuttal article:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/car...ve-engineering-failures-ford-pinto-fuel-tanks


You can continue to believe it's not a problem just like GM's saddle side fuel tanks aren't a problem either.