Disappointed with mileage / range claim

[timbop]

'22 prem rwd sr 3300 miles
Today(65F) my GOM shows 60% and 114 miles (190 miles at 100%)
DFW in TX...mostly city driving
SIGH...

Meanwhile my HI5 SE RWD GOM shows 330 miles at 100%

Which means absolutely nothing. What's the mi/kwh you get when driving the thing?

Ford isn't afraid to do so. Ford is specifically prohibited from saying so. They can only advertise one range figure: the one derived from the EPA tests. As there isn't a winter test, they can't advertise a winter range.

They cannot list 2 EPA ranges, but they are absolutely NOT prohibited from saying that winter temperatures AFFECT range. It's a case of being honest with your customers, and telling them that would be more honest.

Sponsored

 

[devmach-e]

They cannot list 2 EPA ranges, but they are absolutely NOT prohibited from saying that winter temperatures AFFECT range. It's a case of being honest with your customers, and telling them that would be more honest.

They already do state on the web site that:

"Actual driving range varies with conditions such as external environment, vehicle use, vehicle maintenance, lithium-ion battery age and state of health."

They can't state that you will lose X amount of range in the winter, and only Z amount in the spring or fall.

See https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/16/259.4 for further clarification.

 

[timbop]

They already do state on the web site that:

"Actual driving range varies with conditions such as external environment, vehicle use, vehicle maintenance, lithium-ion battery age and state of health."

They can't state that you will lose X amount of range in the winter, and only Z amount in the spring or fall.

See https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/16/259.4 for further clarification.

C'mon, man.

That anemic disclaimer does not even come close to setting expectations, and we both know it. That sounds like the standard "your mileage may vary" and does not even come close to representing the actual delta they can expect. Absolutely they can say it more forcefully than that without running afoul of the EPA, especially since Ford is allowed to (and DID with the route 1) list the range as lower than the test results. "Winter conditions can significantly impact range" does not quantify anything, but does more accurately convey the reality.

Obviously we aren't going to agree on this, but customers need to be given realistic expectations especially when they spend a significant chunk of money on a car. In reality that is the job of the sales rep who sells them the car, but of course I realize how silly I am sounding now.

 

[devmach-e]

C'mon, man.

That anemic disclaimer does not even come close to setting expectations, and we both know it. That sounds like the standard "your mileage may vary" and does not even come close to representing the actual delta they can expect. Absolutely they can say it more forcefully than that without running afoul of the EPA, especially since Ford is allowed to (and DID with the route 1) list the range as lower than the test results. "Winter conditions can significantly impact range" does not quantify anything, but does more accurately convey the reality.

Obviously we aren't going to agree on this, but customers need to be given realistic expectations especially when they spend a significant chunk of money on a car. In reality that is the job of the sales rep who sells them the car, but of course I realize how silly I am sounding now.

The problem with using the phrase "Winter conditions can significantly impact range" is that winter conditions can significantly vary depending upon the region of the country you are in. I don't even think they can get away with replacing "can" with "may" in your proposed statement.

There's a difference between being allowed to state a lower EPA test range number and that of stating a delta that the range can vary by. The link I posted specifically states that advertisers should not use vague statements and should stick to specific EPA numbers.

Customers do need to have realistic expectations about winter range, but until EPA/NHTSA regulations are changed, they're not going to get specifics from a dealer or the manufacturer because of the rules currently in place. Unfortunately it falls to independent journalists, enthusiast sites like this one, and general word of mouth. All of which come with various levels of subjectivity because of a lack of uniform testing methodologies.

 

[mkhuffman]

Customers do need to have realistic expectations about winter range, but until EPA/NHTSA regulations are changed, they're not going to get specifics from a dealer or the manufacturer because of the rules currently in place.

Blaming the EPA is always the right approach.

Edit: I am not joking, in case this is mistaken for sarcasm.

 

[devmach-e]

Blaming the EPA is always the right approach.

Edit: I am not joking, in case this is mistaken for sarcasm.

Blaming them implies they did something wrong. Not like they came up with the rules in a vacuum. Or on a whim. Don't like them? Lobby your congressional representatives to get the EPA to propose new regulations, get input from industry stakeholders, have a public comment period, further refine the regulations, and then publish them. Should only take about 2 years to do.

 

[timbop]

they're not going to get specifics from a dealer or the manufacturer

It doesn't have to be specific. Adjectives are good enough if a specific quantity is prohibited, which I actually doubt. Nonetheless this is going absolutely nowhere and will not change what Ford or the EPA does, which is OK.

 

[devmach-e]

It doesn't have to be specific. Adjectives are good enough if a specific quantity is prohibited, which I actually doubt. Nonetheless this is going absolutely nowhere and will not change what Ford or the EPA does, which is OK.

Until the EPA comes up with a specific test for winter range/mileage, they can't even mention winter specifically because there is no hard winter data for them to reference to backup their claims. Otherwise we're back to deceptive advertising practices from the 70s.

 

[mkhuffman]

Blaming them implies they did something wrong. Not like they came up with the rules in a vacuum. Or on a whim. Don't like them? Lobby your congressional representatives to get the EPA to propose new regulations, get input from industry stakeholders, have a public comment period, further refine the regulations, and then publish them. Should only take about 2 years to do.

Well, the fact it takes two years to make a change is pretty clear they shouldn't be regulating things that don't need regulation. If the EPA would just get out of the way, we could blame or praise car manufacturers for how they behave. Now Ford can just hold up their hands ands and say they are just doing what they are told to do. It is unnecessary and another example of a government that is way too big and trying to control way too much, and doing it poorly in the process.

 

[devmach-e]

Well, the fact it takes two years to make a change is pretty clear they shouldn't be regulating things that don't need regulation. If the EPA would just get out of the way, we could blame or praise car manufacturers for how they behave. Now Ford can just hold up their hands ands and say they are just doing what they are told to do. It is unnecessary and another example of a government that is way too big and trying to control way too much, and doing it poorly in the process.

Blaming or praising auto manufacturers has not always worked so well in the past. Go back 50 and 60 years and there's a lot of misleading statements by well established car manufacturers. Clearly the market failed to rein in the wild claims from bad actors and the government had to step in.

When you need a car/truck, and you are on a budget, you'll take anything you can get and forgo any sort of serious research. In the past, manufacturers and dealers would exploit that and give you the cheapest vehicle they had with the highest profit margin with little regard for safety or reliability. Were it not for some of those "unnecessary" regulations, we'd still be driving around in cars that get crappy gas mileage and are essentially death traps. The invisible hand of the market has limited ability to control bad actors once the market gets beyond a certain size.

There's a reason that regulations take a long time to change. It is because those regulations are in place for decades. You want to take your time to try to get it right and address the concerns of all the stakeholders involved. Do regulatory agencies get it right all the time? Absolutely not. Do they have to balance competing and contradictory input from stakeholders? Yup. It's a messy time consuming process. Manufacturers want stability so they can effectively plan out their products for the next decade to meet those regulations, so they don't want a constantly shifting landscape that changes on a whim depending upon who is in the White House.

We'll eventually get something that makes Ford and other manufacturers publish winter guidance for vehicles. But it will have to be for all vehicles, not just the Electric ones.

 

[Nemy]

The problem with using the phrase "Winter conditions can significantly impact range" is that winter conditions can significantly vary depending upon the region of the country you are in. I don't even think they can get away with replacing "can" with "may" in your proposed statement.

This. If you want Ford (or any manufacturer) to list a disclaimer about winter range the lawyers would have a field day. It'd have to say something like "winter range may vary significantly depending on winter conditions, local temperatures, driving habits, one pedal drive mode, climate controls, garage storage, preconditioning habits.... " First, people don't even read the disclaimers. And if they did, and didn't do their own due diligence, they'd be scared off from ever buying an EV.

It's like any other mpg rating. It changes based on temperature and usage. This isn't a diesel-gate situation where they're making up numbers or misleading the public. It's up to consumers to research their purchases. It's up to car manufacturers to manufacture and sell cars.

 

[hprose]

It’s 75. I have a GT. Estimate 270. That’s just under 3m/KW. I drive city and some interstate. I am getting 2.9 to 3.3 mostly. One around 2.5 and a couple over 4 in the past 2 weeks. My guess-o-meter is 294 at 100%. I don’t floor it and I brake gradually. I use acceleration when needed. If I take a long highway drive I expect 240-260. It will not be the battery or the efficiency of the vehicle. If it get cold - it will be lower. Same for all EVs. My reading tells me that Tesla numbers are well below the estimate. I can’t. Edify that other than a good friend traded his Tesla 3 for a MME premium and is thrilled with it. By the way, ICEs have lower gas mileage in cold weather. At around 0 F to -20 you can count on 20 to 40% lower. You can Google it. I haven’t lived up there in decades. I never once checked the gas mileage on an ICE.

 

[spgordon57]

I am rather disappointed with Mileage claim, below is my charging information, normal driving conditions. Select RWD purchased on 8/11/22

Mileage Claim, following is my data, had several charges at 110 V 15 Amps ,Current ODO 1100 miles
9/24/22 83% 190 mile range
10/13/22 89% 198
10/17/22 84% 184
10/30/22 80% 172
11/7/22 100% 212 (Ford Claims 244 miles at 100%)
11/20/22 81% 161 (Garage Temperature 62 F)

Would highly appreciate your comments.

The G-O-M is overly conservative and of limited use, especially if you drive aggressively, drive in a hilly area or live in a cold climate. Best method is to multiply the actual kWh/mile x the usable battery capacity. That is 91 kWh in an MME ER. So for example if you’re getting 3.3 kwh/ mile, that would get you a range of about 300 miles in a full charge.

 

[mkhuffman]

Blaming or praising auto manufacturers has not always worked so well in the past. Go back 50 and 60 years and there's a lot of misleading statements by well established car manufacturers. Clearly the market failed to rein in the wild claims from bad actors and the government had to step in.

When you need a car/truck, and you are on a budget, you'll take anything you can get and forgo any sort of serious research. In the past, manufacturers and dealers would exploit that and give you the cheapest vehicle they had with the highest profit margin with little regard for safety or reliability. Were it not for some of those "unnecessary" regulations, we'd still be driving around in cars that get crappy gas mileage and are essentially death traps. The invisible hand of the market has limited ability to control bad actors once the market gets beyond a certain size.

There's a reason that regulations take a long time to change. It is because those regulations are in place for decades. You want to take your time to try to get it right and address the concerns of all the stakeholders involved. Do regulatory agencies get it right all the time? Absolutely not. Do they have to balance competing and contradictory input from stakeholders? Yup. It's a messy time consuming process. Manufacturers want stability so they can effectively plan out their products for the next decade to meet those regulations, so they don't want a constantly shifting landscape that changes on a whim depending upon who is in the White House.

We'll eventually get something that makes Ford and other manufacturers publish winter guidance for vehicles. But it will have to be for all vehicles, not just the Electric ones.

We just have a different philosophy regarding freedom. I want more, you want less.

When the government steps in and regulates something, you have no idea if the free market would have corrected that problem more efficiently or effectively because it is too late. You cannot undo what the government did.

I am 100% certain that there would be more efficient and voluntary market developed solutions that would provide better results than a big bureaucracy that blocks, hinders and depresses the economy.

I know, you think big government is mostly good. I disagree. We can agree to disagree. There are plenty of examples that prove I am right, but we should get back to talking about cars, since this is a car forum. Maybe we can debate via PM if you are interested.

 

[Jim_In_Mass]

I have a '21 Premium SR RWD, so an EPA estimate of ~230mi. It's now late November in New England, and I'm seeing the GOM say 180-ish at 90% charge when I leave the house in the morning. And I expect that estimate will be lower come January/February.

Am I disappointed? Yes, mildly. Is this a deal breaker? No.

Is this the government's fault for providing one mileage range data point from a universe of possible outcomes? Not really. (I have low expectations of anything the government does/says, largely confirmed from experience.)

I bought my MachE expecting it to be my daily driver, with a roughly 70-80 mile commute. In the summer, I was seeing 220+mi (at 90%), and I could go twice (never did really want to push it for three) to the office and back w/o recharging. Now in November I'm coming home and it's showing 50%-ish charge/100mi range after one commute, and not wanting to push it I'm plugging it in overnight.

I had a weekend trip with my wife in early October, roughly 100 miles each way, just fast-charged once on the way back. If we did this now in the winter, with colder weather, I'd probably want to fast-charge once each way. (At least until we have way more fast chargers around.... this is the real answer to range anxiety.)

When I bought my Sonata (EPA was 30-ish I think) the salesman was saying he had one which he drove in eco-mode and he was seeing around 40 MPG. Never happened for me. Even in "eco-mode". I usually saw mid/high-20's. (There's probably a joke out there with "How can you tell a salesman is lying....")

The beauty of an EV is being able to just drive it out, bring it home, and recharge it overnight on your electric bill. All "filled up" in the morning to do it again. For less cost than gas.

As folks have pointed out, what really matters is whether you're getting the range you need rather than what salesmen or Ford or reviewers or random folks on a forum claim you can get. And that the car is good to drive and looks good to you and you like driving it.

Sponsored