Noah Harbinger

I remember in the late 90s, it was predicted that microtransactions would save journalism from the scourge of the expectation that information on the Internet would be free. Forego obtrusive ads (this was the dawn of the pOp-up) and intrusive user tracking by charging some amount too small to refuse - say, a nickel, which is far more than ad-impression revenue - to read a full article, which would be aggregated by a clearinghouse to monthly payments from the customer, to the content creators. But no, they all want subscriptions. So journalism dies.

Serial hybrid with no battery storage or regenerative breaking? (And no, dynamic breaking is not regenerative breaking). SO basic!

A tax reduction is no less of 'a grant of money' than a check in the mail. You will be hard pressed to find anyone who does not consider tax offsets tied to specific activities a 'subsidy'. Many finance-related definitions of the word explicitly include tax breaks in their description of subsidies.

The school where I work claims that you can't name something "<school> <student organization>", you have to name yourself "<student organization> at <school>" to make it clear that there's no official affiliation between the school and the organization. I imagine it's something like that.

And regardless of whether anyone agrees with that objective (which seems more like a sub-discussion for a political forum, especially with the hateful tone many of these responses are carrying), Ford seems very well prepared to maintain offerings in every segment in the automotive market for places that are passing such requirements. I assume the other automakers have similar plans, I wonder how their timelines and thoroughness compare.

Does anyone have a solid explanation for why that calculation is incorrect? My personal speculation is that the engine control computer back-calculates out the ethanol proportion of the gasoline to determine the 'pure gasoline equivalent' volume, and uses that as the basis of its MPG calculations - maybe based on the calculations done as part of managing the air-fuel ratio. That seems like it would be a pretty reasonable basis to use, since it would even out the differences between fuel so that the displayed measurement would reflect only on driving conditions, driving style, and engine health. (In my Fuelly stats, I use the 'gallons' reported by the second trip odometer for the top-line stats, but record the volume pumped as an 'additional comment')

You have QA? Fancy!

Pushed interaction can be really tricky, they'd better be really careful to get it right. I'm not buying a car for its ability to influence my future purchasing decisions.

She was crossing from the other direction.

Look at the frame of the video immediately before she is hit: She is by the broken white line on the right that indicates the start of the right-hand turn lane - so, about lined up with the top of the X, an even more open and exposed crossing point. (But also, even closer to the crosswalk).

IMHO the big-complex-shape sync/cruise multi-control levers on my C-Max (and the Focus) are my favorite steering wheel controls of any I've seen on any car, any make, ever. No fumbling or taking eyes off the road for the right button.

'13 C-Max, the seatbelt adjuster squeaks a bit, the door handles creak a bit much for my taste when jostled, and there's a rattle in the passenger side somewhere that I haven't yet determined. I wonder if reductions in exterior noise intrusion make smaller noises inside the vehicle stand out more?

I guarantee if you've flown a common-carrier route, you've flown in a plane with autopilot engaged, probably a significant majority of the miles.

Woulda been easy if it lived up to its release EPA rating. But hell, I'd gladly trade the headroom for the MPGs. I woulda bought it if it weren't a hybrid.

Noooo don't orphan my baby! :-o

(Years and years ago) It didn't used to remember your selections, is it persistent now?

My god, the pissing matches! No wonder I stopped coming here.

I've been away a while. I spent far more time reading BON before I bought my Ford than after! I'm definitely lacking context, and skipped most of the back and forth in this thread anyway. I hope I didn't get too political in my response either. I don't think there's any purely monetary case for a new car, period. It's a money sink. When I think of how much more I could have saved by staying in my old car another year... The only way you could ever justify it financially is to assume you want a new car, and thus to compare a new hybrid against a similar new non-hybrid. If you want to see what the worm eats, you compare an apple with a worm to an apple without one. You'd never learn anything about the worm by comparing an apple to a motorcycle. Frankly, I would have bought a C-Max even if it were offered in a conventional engine for a few grand less. Mostly I got it because I like the overall package and think it's one of the best vehicles Ford or anyone has ever put together in my price range, given my wants. Sure, I have fun gaming my commute for MPGs, but that's as much distraction as anything else. Because I don't care that much about the hybrid aspect, I've never actually done the math about whether a hypothetical conventional C-Max would save money compared to my actual C-Max. If you assume the Fusion, with an identical hybrid drivetrain as the C-Max, is a good stand-in to guess how much the hybrid adds to the price, I would expect a $4000 difference between hybrid and non-hybrid (based on the S model). That would have saved $70/month on my 5-year, 2% loan. I average pretty low mileage 1000 miles a month; my previous car averaged 26MPG, I am getting 44MPG on my C-Max. That's a decrease from 38.46 gallons/month to 21.74 gallons/month, or $66.88 /month at $4/gallon. It's probably more fair to again compare standard Fusion (26MPG combined rated) against its Hybrid (42MPG), 23.8 gallons/month, or $58/month. (Looking again, the difference between the hybrid and conventional Titanium trims is only $1600. If that more closely represents the marginal cost of the hybrid drivetrain, then the change to the loan price is only $28/month, which is pretty modest.) I actually feel a bit better now about the hybrid than I did before I started writing this reply!

I don't want to derail things again, but I'd say your picture of "liberal green energy nut jobs" is the straw man. Why do you imagine a "liberal green energy nut jobs" would dislike motorcycles? I'd say to the contrary, nothing says more "liberal green energy nut job" more than riding a small, efficient motorcycle: It doesn't take up as much space (placing less demand on road and parking infrastructure), it's small (requiring less energy and resources to build, deliver, and drive), easier to maintain (keeping the vehicle on the road longer, obviating the need to invest the energy into building a replacement), and less maintenance waste. The only drawback green-wise is their reduced emissions control systems generally contribute more to to smog-forming pollution. By contrasts, hybrids require more materials - especially more hazardous and rare materials, and have more complex systems than normal (reducing expected lifespan, amortizing manufacturing pollution over a shorter time). There are environmental costs to that, not just greater economic costs up front. It really is an environmental sacrifice to drive a fully enclosed pleasure-wagon, rather than a motorcycle or some form of collectivist transportation. But most people don't want to invest a lot of effort in being green, and half-assed is better than no-assed. So really, you're on the vanguard of green. Welcome to the "liberal green energy nut job" family!

What speeds were you averaging on the interstate bits? My last open-road drive was from San Diego to Yuma, across the Imperial Valley desert. There was a horrible cross-wind, but I was averaging 34MPG out and 38MPG back at about 73MPH. And while the cross-wind makes that an unreliable example, it is not too far off my experience driving the Central Valley, where I was getting 34MPG at 78MPH, 37-40 when I dropped down to ~73MPH. For comparison (to give the sense that I'm generally a speed and fuel conscious person), my last three tanks from around town have been 46, 46, and 44 MPG, probably 44 again on the current half-empty tank.

Oh wouldn't that be such a grand world, if every customer knew as much when buying a product as the company does when selling it?

The extra couple of inches required by the plug-in hybrid's batteries would have severely impacted my daily use of my car, so it wasn't an option for me.

I got mine during the period of time when the lower fuel economy was common knowledge, but not yet officially acknowledged, so I was not disappointed when the EPA rating was lowered (except insofar as we found out Ford rather cynically used a loophole to borrow the Fusion's rating knowing fully well the vehicle could never make those ratings on the test cycles - I and so many others thought it was just another gap between testing and reality). I guess the exterior is rather plan (though the candy blue is just gorgeous on it - I think it looks far better than the Focus or Fiesta with the same color. Maybe such a splashy color looks best on a plain canvas?), but I love hatches, and the car works perfectly for my needs. I would have bought it just as happily if it were a standard gas engine - maybe even more happily, since there would have been a bit cheaper, had slightly more cargo space, and maybe a real spare.

Then it's a good thing they sent reminders

I really liked the Freestyle, and I love CVTs. I was sad when they cancelled it. I guess the Explorer is the new Freestyle, though. Though no CVT, of course.