Topic: Comparison Test: 2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid vs 2013 Volkswagen Golf Wagon TDI

[ArticSteve]

We even tried to match them up against the original hybrid, the Prius V, but one was not available

The ORIGINAL hybrid is the PRIUS .... not the V, just to keep things factual.      Toyota needs to re-examine the V.  We avoid stocking the V.  If Toyota decided to stretch a Prius then they should have stretched the power to match the load.    But it's Ford that has been pounding away at the comparison between the C-Max and the V, and for good reason.  On it's own merits, for the MPG, the C-Max is a massive fail.

[jyarkony]

The C-Max barely beats our Corolla for fuel economy.   

I can fix that for you...

[pcsp]

I personally don't have any issue with the Trans. Can. fuel ratings. They are to be looked at as a comparative tool. If a truck, for example, rates 14 l/100km. in the city and a small car rates 7 l/100km., then we know that the truck owner will use twice as much fuel (and so on). What Ford has done here with the C-Max, however, should be considered FRAUD! No comparison whatsoever to Hyundai's recent problems with their estimates - much worse. The extensive testing done by the writer resulted in the C-Max using 80% more fuel than its official rating!!! The VW used about 10% more.

This was a great test in that many km. were driven and the C-Max's official rating is about the same for city/highway. Therefore no issues with stop and go and percentage of city/highway involved. Once again, I say that this constitutes fraud by Ford. Games (or purposeful "errors") such as this by manufacturers such as Ford render the Trans. Can. ratings useless, not only for estimates of annual fuel usage, but as a comparative tool (its most important function).

[mixmanmash]

I'd really love to know the ownership cost of new diesels.
I've been told by more than one person the new emission requirements have added very expensive and complex systems to diesels.

I'll be replacing my current vehicle soon and will be looking for a very specific list of needs that are hard to fill.  (decent fuel economy, comfy travel car, towing capacity - a blend of daily driver and travel vehicle)   On paper the diesels seem perfect.

Urea injection for the most part.  The urea tank needs to be filled up every 15000-20000 kms and if you do it yourself, it will run you well under $80.

Again, it depends on the manufacturer & model.  For example, VW doesn't need it on the 2.0 TDI, but they need it on the bigger V6 TDI.  Mazda doesn't need it with their Skyactiv-D because they dropped the compression ratio significantly so the NOx and soot production is greatly reduced.

[Vanstar]

No cost per km comparison? That is the most important. Fail.

Not a figure you going to see from a buff-book. The really important cost is TCO: total cost of operation. Never once seen it on a buff-book.

[JohnM]

Ford is stuck in a marketing blind alley here.  They've gone out of their way in their advertizing to knock the Prius V saying the C-Max is much faster and gets much better mileage.

Driven as illustrated in the ads, the C-Max will probably deliver dismal fuel numbers.  Even driven comparably, it appears the C-Max falls short of the Prius V.

So there is the credibility gap for anyone watching this unfold.

The bind for Ford is their traditional customer list does not include a lot of hybrid aspirers.  They seem to be saying hybrids are boring and you can drive our C-Max like a sports car and get better mileage than a Prius. 

I don't see where they can go with this.  Potential Ford buyers have their negative image of hybrids reinforced and non-Ford gear heads who do pay attention to fuel economy claims vs real world results will be climbing all over Fords back.

Maybe Ford put a really big tank in the C-Max so their buyers will think they are getting good mileage but they really seem to have dug themselves an expectation hole that will be difficult to climb out of.

Cheers,
John M.

[sailor723]

Ford is stuck in a marketing blind alley here.  They've gone out of their way in their advertizing to knock the Prius V saying the C-Max is much faster and gets much better mileage.

Driven as illustrated in the ads, the C-Max will probably deliver dismal fuel numbers.  Even driven comparably, it appears the C-Max falls short of the Prius V.

So there is the credibility gap for anyone watching this unfold.

The bind for Ford is their traditional customer list does not include a lot of hybrid aspirers.  They seem to be saying hybrids are boring and you can drive our C-Max like a sports car and get better mileage than a Prius. 

I don't see where they can go with this.  Potential Ford buyers have their negative image of hybrids reinforced and non-Ford gear heads who do pay attention to fuel economy claims vs real world results will be climbing all over Fords back.

Maybe Ford put a really big tank in the C-Max so their buyers will think they are getting good mileage but they really seem to have dug themselves an expectation hole that will be difficult to climb out of.

Cheers,
John M.

Isn't there an old adage about how to satisfy customers?  Something like  "deliver more than you promise".  Ford seems to have got it backwards this time

[dragonfly]

 I gathered from the article that they both got about the game MPGs..Is diesel more expensive in Canada , as it is (unfairly) here in the states?
  If so, I daresay the Ford wins on economy...I don't care what the vehicles were rated for..only what each got as far as MPG goes...The Ford may have been the winner here in economy...Good point about the same vehicle with the 1.6 (6 spd std?)...Could actually be faster and better on fuel.
   Bugger that    jack

[mixmanmash]

I gathered from the article that they both got about the game MPGs..Is diesel more expensive in Canada , as it is (unfairly) here in the states?
  If so, I daresay the Ford wins on economy...I don't care what the vehicles were rated for..only what each got as far as MPG goes...The Ford may have been the winner here in economy...Good point about the same vehicle with the 1.6 (6 spd std?)...Could actually be faster and better on fuel.
   Bugger that    jack

It depends on location & time of year.  Sometimes it's a little cheaper, sometimes it's a little more.  By little, I mean 10 cents a litre.  Really, the fuel economy difference more than makes up for the difference in price.

[sailor723]

I gathered from the article that they both got about the game MPGs..Is diesel more expensive in Canada , as it is (unfairly) here in the states?
  If so, I daresay the Ford wins on economy...I don't care what the vehicles were rated for..only what each got as far as MPG goes...The Ford may have been the winner here in economy...Good point about the same vehicle with the 1.6 (6 spd std?)...Could actually be faster and better on fuel.
   Bugger that    jack

It depends on location & time of year.  Sometimes it's a little cheaper, sometimes it's a little more.  By little, I mean 10 cents a litre.  Really, the fuel economy difference more than makes up for the difference in price.

Diesel here in NB runs 12-15 cents more than regular gas for a good part of the year. In the height of summer it get's down to par or a small (2-3 cent) premium.

http://www.cbc.ca/nb/interactives/gasprices/chart.html

[dragonfly]

 That seems fair enough.....But it costs less to make diesel, ergo one would think it would cost less...Not in the imperfect world of get as much as you can for your product...Demand equals price increase....But here the difference is 50 cents or better per gallon.. About 15 percent more..(about 3.50 gal at present)...I've never seen the explanation for this disparity...I suspect there isn't one..Just greed....Thanks bud  Jack

[sailor723]

That seems fair enough.....But it costs less to make diesel, ergo one would think it would cost less...Not in the imperfect world of get as much as you can for your product...Demand equals price increase....But here the difference is 50 cents or better per gallon.. About 15 percent more..(about 3.50 gal at present)...I've never seen the explanation for this disparity...I suspect there isn't one..Just greed....Thanks bud  Jack

15 cents per litre more is like 56-57 cents more per US Gallon

[PJungnitsch]

I'd really love to know the ownership cost of new diesels.
I've been told by more than one person the new emission requirements have added very expensive and complex systems to diesels.

I'll be replacing my current vehicle soon and will be looking for a very specific list of needs that are hard to fill.  (decent fuel economy, comfy travel car, towing capacity - a blend of daily driver and travel vehicle)   On paper the diesels seem perfect.

Urea injection for the most part.  The urea tank needs to be filled up every 15000-20000 kms and if you do it yourself, it will run you well under $80.

Again, it depends on the manufacturer & model.  For example, VW doesn't need it on the 2.0 TDI, but they need it on the bigger V6 TDI.  Mazda doesn't need it with their Skyactiv-D because they dropped the compression ratio significantly so the NOx and soot production is greatly reduced.

A friend of mine is running Ford diesels in the bush and finding the urea fluid is frozen solid at -20, kind of annoying.

[sailor723]

I'd really love to know the ownership cost of new diesels.
I've been told by more than one person the new emission requirements have added very expensive and complex systems to diesels.

I'll be replacing my current vehicle soon and will be looking for a very specific list of needs that are hard to fill.  (decent fuel economy, comfy travel car, towing capacity - a blend of daily driver and travel vehicle)   On paper the diesels seem perfect.

Urea injection for the most part.  The urea tank needs to be filled up every 15000-20000 kms and if you do it yourself, it will run you well under $80.

Again, it depends on the manufacturer & model.  For example, VW doesn't need it on the 2.0 TDI, but they need it on the bigger V6 TDI.  Mazda doesn't need it with their Skyactiv-D because they dropped the compression ratio significantly so the NOx and soot production is greatly reduced.

A friend of mine is running Ford diesels in the bush and finding the urea fluid is frozen solid at -20, kind of annoying.

Sounds like Ford forgot the heating system  (or it's on the fritz)  It's been -20 or-22 the last few days and the urea in the ML has been fine

[johngenx]

Can you just top it off with a little of your own warm urea fluid...   

[tpl]

That seems fair enough.....But it costs less to make diesel, ergo one would think it would cost less...Not in the imperfect world of get as much as you can for your product...Demand equals price increase....But here the difference is 50 cents or better per gallon.. About 15 percent more..(about 3.50 gal at present)...I've never seen the explanation for this disparity...I suspect there isn't one..Just greed....Thanks bud  Jack

Diesel has more energy per litre than gasoline and arguably should cost more...or perhaps it should be taxed more.

[mixmanmash]

I'd really love to know the ownership cost of new diesels.
I've been told by more than one person the new emission requirements have added very expensive and complex systems to diesels.

I'll be replacing my current vehicle soon and will be looking for a very specific list of needs that are hard to fill.  (decent fuel economy, comfy travel car, towing capacity - a blend of daily driver and travel vehicle)   On paper the diesels seem perfect.

Urea injection for the most part.  The urea tank needs to be filled up every 15000-20000 kms and if you do it yourself, it will run you well under $80.

Again, it depends on the manufacturer & model.  For example, VW doesn't need it on the 2.0 TDI, but they need it on the bigger V6 TDI.  Mazda doesn't need it with their Skyactiv-D because they dropped the compression ratio significantly so the NOx and soot production is greatly reduced.

A friend of mine is running Ford diesels in the bush and finding the urea fluid is frozen solid at -20, kind of annoying.

Sounds like Ford forgot the heating system  (or it's on the fritz)  It's been -20 or-22 the last few days and the urea in the ML has been fine

Yup.  I know guys with GM Duramax diesels without issue on the urea systems running in the bush at temps around -40C.

[Spec5]

The C-Max barely beats our Corolla for fuel economy.   

That's amazing...many hybrids are a scam and a sham. Or more generously, a novelty.

I think you hit it on the head, its hip to be green and these things fall under that umbrella. You cant show up at a movie premiere in a hemi 'Cuda, the hippies will crucify you, show up in a Prius, or whatever equivalent, and everyone think you are a hero.

Except us

[jyarkony]

I gathered from the article that they both got about the game MPGs..Is diesel more expensive in Canada , as it is (unfairly) here in the states?
  If so, I daresay the Ford wins on economy...I don't care what the vehicles were rated for..only what each got as far as MPG goes...The Ford may have been the winner here in economy...Good point about the same vehicle with the 1.6 (6 spd std?)...Could actually be faster and better on fuel.
   Bugger that    jack

It depends on location & time of year.  Sometimes it's a little cheaper, sometimes it's a little more.  By little, I mean 10 cents a litre.  Really, the fuel economy difference more than makes up for the difference in price.

Diesel here in NB runs 12-15 cents more than regular gas for a good part of the year. In the height of summer it get's down to par or a small (2-3 cent) premium.

http://www.cbc.ca/nb/interactives/gasprices/chart.html

I got pretty lucky, then, because the whole time I was running the long-term golf wagon TDI, diesel was cheaper than even regular gas here in the GTA...

[X-Traction]

That seems fair enough.....But it costs less to make diesel, ergo one would think it would cost less...Not in the imperfect world of get as much as you can for your product...Demand equals price increase....But here the difference is 50 cents or better per gallon.. About 15 percent more..(about 3.50 gal at present)...I've never seen the explanation for this disparity...I suspect there isn't one..Just greed....Thanks bud  Jack

Diesel has more energy per litre than gasoline and arguably should cost more...or perhaps it should be taxed more.

Finally.  I had to read through every post to see if anyone mentioned that diesel has more energy per litre than gas.  Price is one matter, but you should factor out the energy difference before directly comparing mileage.  In this, the mileage comparison falls short.

And since this is, after all, 2013, fuel/efficiency comparisons should include GHG and particulate levels.  Surely it's not that hard to have this checked for cars tested.