By on November 23, 2015

2015 Ford C-Max Energi

A court ruled Nov. 12 that a lawsuit may continue against Ford for misstating its mileage estimates of its C-MAX and Fusion hyrbid cars.

Ford attempted to dismiss the lawsuit based on its claim that the mileage estimates provided by the Environmental Protection Agency, were in part, an estimate and that “actual results may vary.” Car owners suing the automaker pointed to Ford’s media blitz that included Ryan Seacrest in Times Square with a bunch of billboards and T-shirts with the number 47 on them and “47 Challenges, 47 Days” marketing push and Facebook posts that the cars would achieve a “EPA-certified 47 mpg city and 47 mpg highway ratings for a 47-mpg combined rating” — among many other 47-branded things — when the cars didn’t come anywhere close.*

*Actual mileage did vary.

“Ford implicitly recognized that its advertising campaign was misleading,” U.S. District Judge Kenneth M. Karas wrote in the ruling.

In their claims, car buyers who bought Ford Fusion and C-MAX hybrids wrote that the automaker’s aggressive marketing claim that the cars could achieve 47 mpg combined was intentionally misleading. The fact that they were selling their cars based exclusively on their mileage estimates didn’t help much.

“Ford’s advertisements intentionally used these false and misleading statements to demonstrate that the fuel economy of the Vehicles was superior to other hybrid vehicles in the market, such as the Prius and Camry,” lawyers wrote for the vehicle owners.

In its motion to dismiss, Ford argued that the EPA estimates were presented as estimates (OK, maybe the Facebook post is a little incriminating) and that actual results may vary, so what’s the big deal guys?

“’Your actual mileage will vary’ … is why the fuel economy figures transmitted to consumers are estimates, not guarantees, promises, legally binding offers, or warranties,” lawyers for Ford wrote in their argument.

Judges mostly rejected that claim.

The lawsuit could have reach well beyond the C-MAX and Fusion hybrids that most certainly did not achieve their mileage claims. (In 2014, Ford revised its mileage claims for those cars and mailed checks to owners to account for fuel economy discrepancies. Hyundai did the same thing for their cars.)

Despite the lawsuit, what automakers can and can’t say to sell cars is fairly opaque. According to court documents, automakers aren’t explicitly required to tell car shoppers that their “actual mileage may vary” in certain circumstances.

The EPA requires that automakers present the agency’s fuel economy estimates on window stickers, with a mandated disclosure that actual results could vary depending on how the car is driven.

But the Federal Trade Commission, which has jurisdiction over many advertising practices in the U.S., does not require a disclaimer in advertising (but, of course, outright lying isn’t a good idea), which is what Ford claimed in its motion. By including the disclaimer, the automaker should be absolved of any allegations of lying, lawyers for Ford wrote.

The ruling could reach well into Volkswagen’s pockets in their upcoming barrage of civil lawsuits regarding what constitutes “clean diesel.”

Civil lawsuits against Volkswagen claim, among other things, that Volkswagen’s claim that it was “clean” could massively backfire if courts decide that selling those cars based on their environmental impact could constitute a promise by the automaker.

In Ford’s case — at least initially — despite including a disclaimer in its advertising, the automaker may be liable for a fuel economy promise it never delivered.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

59 Comments on “‘Actual Mileage May Vary’ Could Travel Far For Troubled Automakers...”


  • avatar
    Felix Hoenikker

    As I understand the Cmax controversy, Ford did not actually use the results of the EPA test to produce their twin 47 numbers, but instead used a loophole that allowed the same ratings for the same power train on a different car. The EPA was more than a little slack here, but that isn’t going to get Ford off the hook.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    Many people claim they can beat EPA estimates, while many people never get close.

    TTAC is whether a typical vehicle can meet EPA estimates when driven according to the imperfect EPA test protocol. For example, nobody drives an average of 48 mph on the highway, yet that’s what the EPA highway test calls for.

    http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

  • avatar
    bball40dtw

    Does this mean that Ford owes me more money? Were at $1200 and a 7 year bumper to bumper warranty so far, but I’ll accept more.

    • 0 avatar
      jeoff

      The 7 year thing–for what years? Is it transferable? For energie also?

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        That was a dealership/Ford customer care thing. I had a very early build C-Max and complained vociferously in 2012. That was long before any goodwill payments were ever made. Somebody wanted me to stop calling and sending emails.

        • 0 avatar
          jeoff

          Thanks for the info bb! Sounds like the C-Max is treating you ok. I am still thinking about picking one up cheap and extending the life of our “mini”-van a couple of years–especially since we’ve moved to the city–parking, gas and wear on the already iffy transmission makes the van a little less appealing lately.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The C-Max is an excellent city car. It’s easy to park and it gets very good MPG. It’s probably also way cheaper used than a Prius or Prius V. You should be able to find one used for a good price. The powertrain is very similar to the Escape Hybrid, which has been known to go 400K+ miles on taxi duty without issue.

            My lifetime MPG is 42 MPG. It will probably be down to almost 40 MPG after the winter though.

  • avatar
    wmba

    In Europe where annual road tax/vehicle registration costs depend on CO2, VW is on the hook for the same sort of marketing lying. It reduced tax intake to government coffers. Plus the excessive NOx charges on the EA189, a different matter.

    As for Ford, any sane person knew they were exaggerating on the C-Max. And Hyundai, well corporately they’ve never been known for being lily-white, as a pleasant couple of hours googling will show, and it was more than one model’s mileage overstated (they needed to say 40 mpg in ads and damn the torpedoes) – don’t trust them personally.

  • avatar
    wumpus

    For quite some time, you could only legally advertise EPA numbers. Judging from the Hyundai case, that must have changed. I’d be fairly shocked if they could be prevented from selling based on numbers legally* generated for the EPA test.

    * using a different platform might not go well with the judge.

  • avatar
    fishiftstick

    When you make a claim in boldface and add a fine-print disclaimer, people assume that the boldface claim is true and give less credence to the fine print. Maybe they shouldn’t, and maybe they are stupid to do so, but the fact of the matter is that the human mind works that way.

    Ford knows this, and if they didn’t their ad agency told them as much. That’s why they spent millions on these ads. The purpose of their communication wasn’t to tell people “Gosh, we have no idea what mileage you’ll get.” It was to get people to believe that they would get better mileage than a Prius. They knew that wasn’t true, but they intentionally misled people.

  • avatar
    65corvair

    My 14 Accord with 4 cyl. and 6 speed manual is rated at 34 highway. I rarely get less than that. My wives CR-V is rated at 33 highway, 30 on the highway is a good day. Why are they rated only one mpg apart. The CR’V is taller and much harder to push.

    The EPA need to test the cars themselves on real roads.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      “The EPA need to test the cars themselves on real roads.”

      Yup, that’s exactly it! They don’t, and instead allow the OEMs to do the tests under controlled conditions. No wonder we have these bogus figures, just like with VW’s phony baloney diesel-emissions numbers.

      Who didn’t see this coming?

      Remember when Hyundai/Kia was so badly scrutinized because their cars rarely got the 40mpg advertised?

      • 0 avatar
        krhodes1

        But which real roads? And whose driving style? I guarantee that you and I in identical cars in our local environments will get different results.

        People need to stop taking EPA numbers as gospel. They are ONLY useful as a comparison at best, and even then “YOUR MILEAGE MAY (WILL) VARY”. All of this angst over it is stupid.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Yeah, I know, this can be debated endlessly but…. when CR, JDP, MotorTrend, C&D, R&T, et al go out to test cars, they use a track or course they define as the “standard.”

          It would not be that difficult for the EPA to define a “standard” track or course to be used for standardization in road tests. Let’s start with Daytona, or Pike’s Peak, and let’s see how well these vehicles do there.

          For decades, GM had a track in Michigan and also in Yuma, AZ. In fact, often old airfields were used for slalom testing, and Riverside Raceway in CA was used for testing all sorts of criteria back in the sixties. Remember Wade A. Minit?

          So standardized testing has been done before. It’s not that difficult to do again instead of relying on OEM’s testing results under ideal conditions, or with a little help of VW’s lying and cheating using software routines.

          I agree that people need to stop taking EPA numbers as gospel, but this is a beast of the EPA’s own making.

          As I mentioned before in other threads, I have never gotten the mpgs advertised for any of my new vehicles, and I know the reason is that both my wife and I were born with a lead foot.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            So how do you go about standardizing this in the real world? You end up with something that is essentially exactly what is done – a dyno test. Because if nothing else, you can’t standardize the weather.

            MAYBE it makes sense to have the EPA sample more cars, but is it really worth the taxpayer money to do that? Seems to me you are usually on the “less government is better” side of things.

            I nearly always beat EPA on my cars.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            krhodes1, my recommendadion would be to start with the Daytona raceway and run the vehicle being evaluated through a standardized set of criteria, i.e. one lap at 35mph, next lap at 65mph, third lap at 85mph, fourth lap at WOT.

            I know temperature, wind velocity and humidity also play a part but at least we’ve gotten a reading on a real-world road.

            BTW, the Pike’s Peak road test is grueling and would reveal the real nature of the beast of each vehicle being tested.

            I think dynos are useful for “static” tests, like hp and torque definition, but I’m a fan of rolling stock tests to get fuel consumption.

            When my dad was drag-racing there was nothing worse than running out of nitro short of the quarter-mile mark, so fuel consumption meant the difference between winning and losing.

            I never cared about fuel consumption in MY vehicles, but the EPA created this schit yet never defined a standard criteria for testing, leaving it up to each automaker to use their own standard.

        • 0 avatar
          Pch101

          KRhodes gets this one right. The idea that a single test is supposed to predict what your personal mileage will be is simply daft. Different temperatures, road conditions, traffic conditions, driving styles, etc. will produce different results. That isn’t the point of the test, it was never the point of the test, and it never will be the point of the test.

          People need to learn how to understand the use and limitations of data. “Your mileage may vary” applies to you, too.

          • 0 avatar
            MBella

            For mileage I agree with you. A standard synopsis test is the most consistent. I would be satisfied with the highway number being run at 70mph. I’m tired of cars that scream at 3500+rpm at those speeds.

            For the emmisions test, they would have no problem plugging a 5 gas analyzer in the tailpipe, and running around doing everyday things. Testing doesn’t have to be consistent, because you can never exceed emmisions. That would be perfect for their random emmisions test.

        • 0 avatar
          George B

          krhodes1, the problem is that the EPA window sticker number for “highway” gas mileage is almost useless for predicting even relative gas mileage because it doesn’t account for aerodynamic drag at 2015 speed limits. Just drove from Texas to Florida with 75 mph speed limit on I-20 and I-49 and 70 mph on the rest.

          • 0 avatar
            Pch101

            It’s a highway test, not an interstate freeway test.

          • 0 avatar
            krhodes1

            Both of my BMWs, and my last two Saabs would exceed the EPA number at 75mph with the cruise on. “Your Mileage May Vary” Why is this such a difficult concept to grasp?

            High speed mileage is a function primarily of aerodynamics and gearing. The EPA test speed is not necessarily the most efficient speed, it’s just *a* speed. And the number on the sticker isn’t even the actual result of the test, it is “adjusted” by means of a formula that may or may not reflect what any given car will actually do in the real world.

            What you can get out of the EPA numbers is that chances are a car rated at 40mpg will probably generally do better than one rated at 30mpg. One or two mpg, or even three or four different, who cares once you are up in the 30s somewhere? Buy whichever one you like better.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      “The EPA need to test the cars themselves on real roads.”

      @65corvair:

      The EPA doesn’t have the resources to test every iteration of every model car sold in the United States – not by a long shot. This is why they depend on the mfrs to self-report, with the knowledge that fact-stretching could bring penalties.

      Imagine how hard it would be for the IRS to audit every tax return.

    • 0 avatar
      Pch101

      A road test is a great way to make the test less accurate. Road conditions are inconsistent.

      Think of science: To get accurate results, you need to have a controlled study. A road test does the opposite of this.

  • avatar
    RideHeight

    Ford Lied, Na’vi Died!

  • avatar
    Conslaw

    Six months a year I average around 45-48 indicated (42-45 actual) in my 2013 C-Max. It drops off about 3 in the summer and a variable amount in the winter – up to 15(!) on rare occasions. Ford has already paid me (along with the other owners) $400 on two occasions, for the MPG fudge, so I can’t complain much. It’s still a nice car, fun to drive, peppy but frugal. I’m not going to get a new C-Max next time because they are moving production to Mexico. I’ll likely get a Chevrolet Volt instead.

  • avatar
    DeadWeight

    Ford Motor Company has much bigger problems that Fields needs to aggressively tackle if their reputation is to be spared from serious, long-standing damage; namely, the quality & reliability of many new Ford vehicles is abhorrent, and this is reflected in the most recent Consumer Reports Reliability Index.

    • 0 avatar
      Conslaw

      If all you want is reliability. Toyota will sell you a nice Corolla. Some people want that, but most people want more of a mixture of attributes. Problems with Myfordtouch – and learning to use Myfordtouch- account for a large number of the problems reported by Consumer Reports. Now Myfordtouch basically works as it was intended (and is being replaced by Sync 3), but some people can’t be bothered to RTFM. I like Myfordtouch, though I wish it had a full audio equalizer.

      • 0 avatar
        DeadWeight

        I not only “want” reliability, I expect it to come standard.

        Some of Ford’s new vehicles are nothing short of abysmal (e.g. Escape, Focus, Edge, MKC, Fiesta, etc.) and this is even more irritating given how expensive Ford is pricing their sh!tboxes.

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          DW, we have “freedom of choice” in America, so it is up to the buyer to choose wisely.

          And that could be one reason why the foreigners and transplants have acquired such a loyal following in the US market.

          The way I see it, the foreigners and transplants make fewer sh!tboxes so more of their buyers stay loyal to their brands.

          Buying from Ford or GM to me has always been akin to getting ptomaine poisoning at a restaurant. Why would I want to eat there again?

          And there was a time when I drove the Detroit 3 exclusively. But that was before I knew better.

          Now I know better. Millions of others do too.

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            highdesertcat,
            I believe you have more freedom of choice than other to gauge yourselves against, like us and many other nations.

            I wouldn’t call it freedom of choice, when you don’t have all that is available.

            The comment is sort of like my Uncle’s comment he made to me in France this year. It was a Saturday and I asked him when the shops/stores are open. He stated all the time. So I stated to him I would go to Auchan (hypermarket) on Sunday to do some shopping.

            He looked at me curiously and said the shops are closed on Sundays. I stated you just said the stores are open all the time.

            He said yes, but Sunday no one works in stores. Truck and transport drivers don’t work Sundays as well. All you see on the autoroutes are Spanish, Dutch, etc trucks. So much for job security in France as a truckie.

            I went to a BBQ and wanted to buy bags of ice for my esky (cooler) and they don’t have bagged ice in France! I asked how do they keep their drinks cold, my cousin stated very one brings ice they make themselves!

            Maybe DenverMike should start and ice cube business in France rather than importing F Series pickups into Spain.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            The French often drink things warm, as well. And you don’t get a cold drink unless you ask for ice in it, which not everywhere has.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            There isn’t anything that makes me feel more free than filling my large McDonalds’ cup to the brim with ice. Then fill it with delicious, ‘Merica only, Diet or regular Coke. FREEEEEDOM!!!!!!

            No matter what country I travel to, whenever I get back to Detroit Metro, I hit up the McDonalds by the airport on the way home.

            Other countries need better pop/soda and abundance of ice if they want to get on our level. Coke in Africa, Europe, and South America is trash. It tastes like oppression and tyranny.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            LOL, I’m like that with their sweet tea, though I try and avoid it 90% of the time.

            Also, have you tried Coke Light? When I was in Europe I drank that, and preferred it to Diet Coke.

            FREE REFILLS OF “POP!”

            Get with it, other countries. This is important.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Free refills or having the option of not having to get out of your car. America is a great place.

            I have not tasted Coke Light. Last time I was in Europe, I drank mostly wine and beer. Coke Zero is my drug of choice. I don’t drink pop (yes I am from the upper Midwest) often, but I do love the Coke Zero.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            South Korea is getting with the drive-thru. Selected McDonald’s locations will have them. Some Koreans seem to still feel sheepish about using them, however. Had a coworker tell me she never had went through one.

            Of course I inquired why not, and she couldn’t tell me a specific reason.

            I don’t think they’ll ever be all that common there, as most fast food joints are not free standing buildings, but rather located in office blocks.

          • 0 avatar
            bumpy ii

            If you’re loading your Abyss Boy to the brim with ice, you’re getting maaaaaybe half a serving of actual liquid in there.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            When I came back from Nairobi this summer, I just wanted a lot of ice. Ice was more important than the amount of Coca-Cola. Coca-Cola flavored ice was the goal. I also was eager to drink any beer that wasn’t Tusker beer. Kenya has terrible beer. The Heineken on KLM flights isn’t much better.

          • 0 avatar
            RideHeight

            “I just wanted a lot of ice.”

            Heart surgery will do that to you. You wake up in post-op with the Thirst That Passeth Understanding.

            So they give you a couple of ice slivers and set the cup of them just out of your entubed and sensor festooned reach. Then leave.

            You want to drink Lake Superior and you get two ice slivers. Now I drink around 8 liters daily.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            RideHeight, I know what you mean. I had to have two stents put in years ago, one of them elective, and the two bottles of blood-thinner they gave me left me with a terrible thirst.

            What was worse was that although I was sooooo thirsty, the blood thinners had made their way through my kidneys and into my bladder so I suffered from both thirst and overly-full bladder.

            Oh, the pain! The pain!

          • 0 avatar
            Big Al from Oz

            Freedom is drive throughs and free refills of lolly water (soda)?

            The US isn’t the only country with drive throughs and free refills. Most every trash food outlet in Australia has drive through.

            As for free refills I only know of a few joints that do that here. Hungry Jacks (Burger King).

            One thing I will say about France their McDonalds was quite good. But they have to compete with a better French burger trash food outlet called Quick.

            I really do think American food isn’t that great overall, unless you pay big bucks.

            Every thing has corn in it from corn syrup to corn starch. You can taste it.

            Meat is good in the US and Australia. Europe has poor meat. It’s the breeds of cattle used.

            The US is expensive for a good steak. Most of your steak houses offer good beef, but the quality is what should be sold in a bar.

            With all said and done one of the best steaks I ever had was at the Stratosphere in Vegas………..but it was quite expesnive for the meal, the total me for me alone was over $120USD.

            I’ll bring my own candy to the US….corn syrup. US chocolate is acceptable.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I was being facetious. I do enjoy the taste of a McDonald’s Diet Coke after I’ve been overseas, but I try to stay away from McDonald’s otherwise.

            I’m assuming you went to Top of the World at the Stratosphere. If you want an even better steak in Vegas, I recommend Del Frisco’s or Craftsteak. DeadWeight is a huge fan of Del Frisco’s I believe.

        • 0 avatar
          George B

          Yes. The normal 21st century expectation is that you buy a product and it works without breaking as long as you take care of it. There will be scheduled maintenance, but no unscheduled repairs during the normal service life. Those unscheduled breakdowns can cost the owner hundreds or thousands of dollars in lost time.

  • avatar
    stuki

    Whatever makes lawyers the most money, and transfers the most decision making power from those doing something, to those not. Such are the marching orders in Dystopia.

  • avatar
    oldyak

    first of all I`m not writing this for Fiat bashers!
    I have put 20k on my 500 Sport and have had 1 week
    that it managed 40 mpg on my ride to work loop(80%
    freeway with moderate congestion)and this summer my wife and I
    took a trip from Memphis to Daytona with A/C blasting and 75-80mph
    speeds and the BEST I did was 33.9.
    Basically the car is out of its EPA element if driven over 65mph
    with the A/C on.
    I love the little thing but to drive it in real world conditions
    the EPA rating is a joke.
    I could do it if I drove it very slowly without the A?C on.
    Case closed on EPA ratings for me!

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    Why not use existing technology that is at our finger tips.

    Every vehicle that a manufacturer is testing has it’s fuel usage from the computer and with the use of GPS have the distance it travels over a period of several months relayed back to the EPA and logged.

    This is irrespective of the style of testing. So if a pickup is tow testing, off roading, or whatever the information is collected and used to determine the final FE. This would paint a far more accurate picture of the cost of fuel for a vehicle.

    I do think any manufacturer who is diddling FE numbers should also be fined for exceeding emissions. That is what is occurring as well.

    This way the manufacturer gets a double fine for telling untruths.

    • 0 avatar
      SCE to AUX

      A. See the arguments against the mythical OBD-III standard. People get very worked up about ‘Big Brother’ transmissions of data (although we do it all the time with our cell phones). Nobody will sign up for GPS linkage with the EPA.

      B. The EPA test protocol (see my post above) does not represent real-world conditions: http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/fe_test_schedules.shtml

      It would be hard to ding mfrs for not meeting an unrealistic standard, when the testing is performed by untrained drivers in uncontrolled conditions.

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        SCE to AUX,
        1. The model I’m considering is the manufacturers when they are towards the end of developing their product the EPA has a sealed unit that has a GPS and plugs into the vehicles engine management system.

        This would negate any possibility of the consumer being tracked.

        The EPA downloads the data and determines the final FE for a vehicle, not the manufacturer. It appears the manufacturers will lie, cheat, connive, etc. Look at VW.

        This system would of made it impossible for VW to cheat as well.

  • avatar
    SCE to AUX

    I would like to see more truth in EV range advertising – or a better test standard. My 12 Leaf was ridiculously off from the sticker, and many other Leaf drivers have had the same experience.

    I *believe* Tesla’s gas gauge is fairly accurate. Nissan should just copy Tesla’s design.

  • avatar
    SELECTIVE_KNOWLEDGE_MAN

    “People need to stop taking EPA numbers as gospel. They are ONLY useful as a comparison at best”

    The problem is that Ford fiddled the C-Max numbers so that it appears to be more fuel efficient than the main competitor Prius V. Actual test shows that the Prius V is more fuel efficient at any speed than the C-Max:

    http:// cdn2.hubspot.net/hub/195542/file-22765619-png/images/untitled.png?t=1422633189935&width=675&height=506

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      SELECTIVE_KNOWLEDGE_MAN,
      I agree that the EPA FE figures are not accurate. I also think that using those figures as a comparison is not good either.

      A NA gas engine, a turbo gas engine like an EcoBoost or a turbo diesel are impacted significantly by driver behaviour. These three engines have different characteristics.

      A person with a heavier right foot will have poorer FE with the EcoBoost than the same person with a NA engine. Diesel variation is smaller again.

      I have yet to see many people who drive to gain maximum FE from a vehicle. Most of the FE figures that people quote on these sites appear to be wishful as well. I’m not stating everyone is lacking sincerity.

      I don’t really trust those websites that total fuel usage as there will be inaccurate data entered whether purposely or not.

      • 0 avatar
        SELECTIVE_KNOWLEDGE_MAN

        I’m just pointing out that the C-Max fuel economy numbers should be under scrutiny as we are comparing two cars with identical drive train technologies (Atkinson petrol + electric through a power split device), but where the stats put the C-Max at a disadvantage (weight, drag, power).

        This is supported by the real life data from the graph, but goes against the fuel economy claims by Ford. Ford has already agreed to restate the original 47MPG claim (which Ford correctly claimed was not required), but Ford has too much pride to play fair and revise the figures to anything less than the main competitor. Ford has too much pride in its “Prius beating” marketing campaigns. Honesty. Not so much.

      • 0 avatar
        Chocolatedeath

        Big Al
        I drove a CMax for a week in SF. I have a heavy foot. Even with the way I drive I didnt get under 40mpg. The highest I got was 44 on the way from SF to Oakland for a day visit.
        I agree that everyone doesnt tell the truth with these type of things. Sites like this and others promote it to a point as one upmanship. All thees folks saying they get 65 mpg in their PRius are full of shyt. Yet I have driven one for a week in SF as well and averaged about 51 with light foot driving. The only ones that dont lie appear to be VW TDI drivers. I have several friends with Passats that get 52 MPG hwy on a daily basis without trying. Of course now we know why.

    • 0 avatar
      krhodes1

      Once you get into the 40’s, even 5mpg is largely rounding error. I am well aware of what Ford did. Arguably they did nothing wrong based on what the EPA allows/allowed. They fell on their sword due to the media attention.

      My preference would be that manufacturers not be allowed to advertise fuel economy at all, other than as possibly a broad range. “You may get anywhere between 22 and 35mpg with the new Canyonero”.

      Ultimately, in the real world very few people actually care about the last mpg or two or five. Internet hair-splitting basement dwellers, mostly. I simply expect my cars to be somewhere in the norm for their class, and they are.

  • avatar
    jdmcomp

    I cannot believe you can sue someone for being too stupid to understand “Your results may vary.” Come on people, it is not that hard.

    • 0 avatar
      MBella

      Unfortunately, in our country you can sue anyone for any reason. I can sue you for making that comment. You would then have to appear in court to defend yourself against my stupid lawsuit or a default judgment will be awarded against you. We really need a system where the loser pays the legal fees of the winner. It would stop most of these lawsuits.

  • avatar
    gearhead77

    I have managed to get nearly the rated mileage out of anything I’ve ever owned or driven. Our Odyssey is rated at 19/28 or something like that. Around town, we get 16/17 mpg and 25/27 on long highway trips. Those are not the “big numbers” on the sticker, but they fall into the fine print below those numbers giving you a reasonable expectation on mileage. I accept my numbers because traffic pace on most highways, no matter the limit, will not let you do less than 70. And at home, the hills and general road design of western PA are not friendly to gas mileage. The Odyssey in the flatlands will get window sticker numbers.

    Now, I can’t get the rated miles out of a Prius. I cannot drive that gently, because you are a roadblock. I’ve had two as rentals, including the Prius C. I did all highway and managed only 35 mpg. In a car I hated driving. I had a Chevy Sonic shortly thereafter and it got 31 without all the hybrid monkey motion and as a much better driving car

  • avatar
    jthorner

    ” … mileage estimates provided by the Environmental Protection Agency …”

    The EPA does not do the testing or provide mileage estimates. They write the rules and procedures which manufacturers are to use doing the testing. The exact content of said rules is subject to massive lobbying by the auto makers. The auto makers then attempt to hide behind the EPA.

    Fail.

  • avatar
    jimmyy

    Funny comments. I had two different Camry Hybrids, one a 2012, and the other 2015, and both were very close to the EPA number, which was around 40 combined. Makes me wonder what kind of garbage is Ford trying to pull with their hybrid vehicles.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    The source of these errors/cheats by Ford was well documented several years ago. First of all, Ford actually tested a Fusion Hybrid and then claimed (as legally allowed) that a CMAX would perform the same because it had the same power-train and about the same vehicle weight (aerodynamics are apparently ignored ???). The second mistake was that the number they fed into the rolling road computer to account for real world wind resistance, rolling resistance, etc. was simply wrong.

    All of this was reported on year ago. For example: http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/17/ford-made-three-big-mistakes-mpg-for-2013-c-max-hybrid/

    Now the consumer lawsuits are finally making their way through the courts as attorneys and owners reasonably argue that they were fraudulently sold 47 mpg Prius-V beaters. In the real world, the CMAX never bests the fuel economy of a Prius-V under the same conditions. Ford surely had to know this as I’m sure somebody there did some actual drive around and see how much fuel we used then divide that by the miles checking like normal people do.

    Today Ford advertises the CMAX as getting 42 mpg city and 37 highway. That is a far cry from the 47/47 numbers they initially advertised. Consumer Reports’ independent test yielded 37 mpg overall.

    Ford initially intentionally misled customers and is trying to hide behind their manner of gaming the EPA test regimen. Very VWesque.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • Lou_BC: Alot of truth to that
  • Lou_BC: The new Tundra is sooo ugly that TTAC would face obscenity charges for posting photos of it.
  • C5 is Alive: So, we get a tire ad but nothing whatsoever about the new truck unveiled 24 hours ago? Alrighty, then.
  • bufguy: I’ve oiwned numeros VW’s over the years…an 80 Scirocco, 86 GTI, 88 GTI 16V, 90 Corrado, 93...
  • Inside Looking Out: Those new generations shall not not bother to follow us. All they need is love, all they get is...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber