Ford has to explain itself

Posted on Friday, 7 December 2012 , 14:12:51 byVeronica

Filed under fordamericanmpgtestingc-maxfusion-hybridhybridFordAmericanHybridTechnology

Ford has to explain itself

Recently a lot of news appeared involving Ford and their mpg claims for the 2013 C-MAX Hybrid minivan and the 2013 Fusion Hybrid. Just as a reminder, Ford claimed the models deliver 47 mpg in the city, 47 mpg on the highway and 47 mpg on a combined cycle. Recently there were some problems with Hyundai and Kia and their gas mileage was tested. It turned out they the two have overstated the numbers of some 900.000 cars sold in the US in the last two years.

Consumer Reports have decided to also test Ford and this is when the true numbers came to the surface. The results were in fact a lot below the 47 mpg mark. After the tests, the Ford Fusion indicated 39 mpg overall, 35 mpg in the city and 41 mpg on the highway. The other one, the C-MAX Hybrid got 37 mpg overall, 35 mpg in the city and 38 mpg on highway conditions. According to Consumer Reports, these two cars have the largest discrepancy between the overall results obtained and the estimates published by the EPA offered on their official website for everyone to see. Of course, some discrepancies can always exist depending on the driving style and conditions of the road, but in this case these are way too big to be ignored. These actually go to up to 20 % or 10 and 8 mpg with the overall mpg consumption.

In the end the Ford Fusion Hybrid is still capable of beating the Toyota Camry Hybrid by 1 mpg on the combine cycle, but the C-MAX gets bitten by the Japanese Toyota Prius V minivan with 41 mpg in comparison with the 37 mpg of the Ford. Just for information, the EPA fuel economy ratings are certified by carmakers themselves. Different drivers have reported a range of fuel economy figures that sometimes went over 47 mpg. This is the best proof, driving conditions and driving styles and other can create these discrepancies. There might be some disappointed customers because of the big differences despite the fact that the model is quite efficient.