larryh

I think the only thing you can do is move to another state. Looking at rankings of auto insurance cost for states, MI has the highest cost with an average rate of $2,541. MN is number 22 with an average rate of $1,614. The lowest average rate of $995 is in VT. http://www.insurancenetworking.com/news/auto_insurance_insure_property_casualty_premium_rates-27459-1.html

The following is an updated chart showing the actual kWh consumed by the car as measured with a Kill A Watt electricity meter connected to the wall outlet vs the kWh of Energy Use (the amount of plug-in energy the car claims was consumed) as displayed on the car's Trip Summary/Odometer console display. I am using the 120 volt charger that came with the car. Also, I am now using the "Charge Now" setting to charge the car and not the "Value Charge" setting. There is now a lot less variation in the data. Any remaining variation is now probably due to round off error. The reported kWh on the car's display console shows values only to one decimal point. I start with a fully charged battery in the morning. At the end of the day, I record the kWh of Energy Use displayed on the console using a trip odometer. I then recharge the battery and measure how much electricity was required using a Kill A Watt meter. The car is allowed to sit overnight until I take the next trip the following day. This is the correct procedure to measure MPGe. As illustrated in the chart, the actual energy consumed by the car is 1.4 times what the car reports. So if the car displays an energy use of 5 kWh, the amount of electricity consumed by the charger to charge the battery for that trip was 5 * 1.4 = 7.0 kWh. This implies that for a trip entirely in EV mode, the true MPGe for the trip is the value reported by the car divided by 1.4. So if the car reports 140 MPGe, the true MPGe is 140/1.4 = 100 MPGe. I am adjusting the values that I enter into Fuelly to account for actual kWh consumed from the power company to charge the car. The true MPGe readings are lower that what is reported by the car. So for the last 1170.1 miles since I previously refilled the fuel tank, the car reported 70.8 MPGe. Using the 1.4 adjustment factor, I compute the actual MPGe to be 63.4. (Note you can't simply divide by 1.4 in this case because gas and electricity were both consumed.) Note that the fuel consumption reported by the Trip Summary/Odometer seems to accurate and can be trusted. It claimed for the 1170.1 miles that I used 11.35 gallons of gas. When I filled the tank with gas, the nozzle shut off at about 11.2 gallons of gas. I added a little more to bring the total to 11.35.

The insurance company is Travelers. So it is $628 per year.

Yes--it says similar for mine: Transit Connect 2002-, 2.0 4V DOHC PFI Gas/Electric, Ice Storm Number 2 Primary Features Build Date: 23.03.2013 Vehicle Line: Transit Connect 2002- Body Style: 4 Door Saloon Version: Series 55 Engine: 2.0 4V DOHC PFI Gas/Electric Transmission: ECVT Auto Trans Power Split Drive: LHD FWD Axle Ratio: 2.91 Final Drive Ratio Emission: 50 State Emission Requirements Air Conditioning: Dual Zone Auto Temp Control A/C Paint: Ice Storm Number 2

For a fair comparison, the details are below for six months of coverage. Don't worry, they make up for it in my homeowners policy. A. Bodily Injury $250,000 each person............... $ 44 $500,000 each accident B. Property Damage $100,000 each accident............. $ 38 D. Uninsured Motorists Bodily Injury $250,000 each person............... $ 9 $500,000 each accident D1. Underinsured Motorists Bodily Injury $250,000 each person............... $ 14 $500,000 each accident E. Collision Actual Cash Value less............. $ 88 $500 deductible F. Comprehensive (Other than Collision) Actual Cash Value less............. $ 86 $250 deductible No deductible for glass............ Incl* G. Extended Transportation Expense $30 per day/$900 maximum........... $ 11 I. Towing and Labor Costs $50 per disablement................ $ 2 Q1. Personal Injury Protection......... $ 22 Non-Stacked Subtotal for your vehicle............... $ 314 Total Premium for This Policy: $ 314 __________________________________________________________________________________ 5. Information Used to Rate Your Policy Discounts and Advantages Safe Driver Advantage Early Quote Advantage Paid in Full Discount Travelers Homeowners Customer Travelers Umbrella Customer New Car Discount 13 FORD FUSION TIT Anti-Theft Discount 13 FORD FUSION TIT

The Titanium version of the Energi already has a subwoofer if that one is acceptable to you. Note that the hybrid electric motor will only work up to 62 mph. The Energi electric motor will go up to 85 mph. So at speeds greater than 62 mph, the Energi will still be able to switch between the ICE and EV, whereas the hybrid cannot. I don't know how much difference that will make in mileage above 62 mph. On my long commutes to my other home, which is 56.5 miles away, I average around 43 mpg in hybrid mode after the battery depletes over several trips. That portion of the trip in hybrid mode is 60% Freeway (speed is 70 mph) and 40% Highway. I am paying $314 every six months for car insurance.

You cannot determine the average MPG in hybrid mode for the ICE from the data in the post. If you drive the car with the battery depleted like a hybrid, you should get 43 mpg or more depending on the type of driving. The car does not separate EV miles into miles attributed to electrical energy obtained by plugging the car into a charging station versus electrical energy obtained from the ICE recharging the battery (and regenerative braking). Any EV miles resulting from the ICE charging the battery should be credited to the ICE when computed mileage--that's energy that didn't come from the electrical socket in the wall.

The EV miles shows are the miles driven when the ICE was off. So the 260 miles are when the ICE and motor are powering the car or when only the ICE is powering the car. Regen miles are included in the EV and total miles. They are simply the estimated additional miles you gained via regenerative braking.

For the 189 mile trip, you have achieved higher MPG than what is stated--probably more like 44 MPG. You ended up with a lot more charge in the battery than when you started. You could now go another 15 miles or so without using gas (but not if you go 80 mph). I suspect that if you had changed the display to show MPGe rather than MPG you would see the higher mileage (assuming it can take negative consumption into account, i.e. more charge in the battery at the end of the trip than when you started). In hybrid mode, MPGe and MPG would show the same mileage provided the charge in the battery at the start and end of the trip was the same. Of course, if you exceed 85 mph, the electric engine can't power the car. I assume that the car will then simply continue to charge the battery until you slow down. Going over 85 mph for some distance may be another way to charge the battery (and to end up with a large fine for speeding at least here in MN :doh: ).

The incentives for a 2013 Fusion Energi are now $2,500. Retail Customer Cash (Program #12316) Cash Incentive: $1,500 Offer Valid: 2013-04-02 - 2013-07-01 Disclaimer: Program #12316:Take new retail delivery from dealer stock by 07/01/2013. Not all Fusion Energi models may qualify. See dealer for residency restrictions and complete details. Retail Bonus Customer Cash (Program #12328) Cash Incentive: $1,000 Offer Valid: 2013-06-26 - 2013-07-01 Disclaimer: Program #12328: Take new retail delivery from dealer stock by 07/01/2013. Not all Fusion Energi models may qualify. See dealer for residency restrictions and complete details.

You could probably get even better mileage with higher driving scores. You should be able to get them up in the 80s.

Yes, the Energi doesn't appear to have any significant Vampire loss. If I charge it and leave it sit overnight, the battery still reads 100% charged in the morning. The Tesla's Vampire loss is far worse than any of the Energi charging inefficiencies. The Tesla's Vampire loss can really get expensive over time. For a Tesla, you would want to defer charging until the last minute to minimize this loss. For the Energi, it is OK to charge it in the evening and let it sit overnight. The 60 watts standy power wasted by the Energi can easily be eliminated by using "Charge Now" rather than "Value Charge". However, it you do that when you get home after work, you will be charging the car during peak rate hours. So I plan to purchase a timer and set the car to "Charge Now". The timer should consume less than 2 Watts. Note that Go times are used for two purposes: Value Charge and preconditioning the cabin. If you use Go times to only pre-condition the cabin, the car does not consume any power from the charger waiting for the Go Time. It simply wakes up and starts drawing power for either the heater or the air conditioner. I don't see why it couldn't do the same thing for Value Charging. Why can't it just wake up at the correct time and start charging? Why does it have to have all the on-board electronics up and running, consuming power, waiting to begin charging?

Yes, 60 watts of power is a lot to be consuming for a "standby" mode waiting to charge the car. If it waits from 5:00 pm to 12:00 am every night to charge, then it will consume 60*7*365 = 153 kWh of electricity per year. So using a typical rate of 0.18 per kWh (it is consuming energy during peak rate hours), that amounts to about $30 per year (for my Electric Company it is closer to $60). So you are already $30 behind trying to save money by waiting to charge at time when electric rates are lower. That's certainly not going to earn any Energy Star ratings. The main purpose of the car is to be efficient and conserve energy. This seems like a glaring oversight on the part of the Ford Engineers. I wonder how much other EVs consume waiting for the time to charge when electric rates are lowest.

I received a reply from MFM support regarding the 60 watts of energy. The car is consuming 60 watts of energy to charge the 12-volt battery and power the control module used by the car to initiate charging.

And it also now impatiently sends you messages to plug it in: 06/25/2013 02:36:21 PM Hello Larry, Fusion Energi is scheduled to start charging in {minutesToCharge} minutes at {chargeTime}, but it is not currently plugged in. Please plug Fusion Energi in so the charge can start successfully. Thank you!

I have determined a source of some of the charging inefficiencies. I used the Value Charge option for several of the charges. While waiting to charge, the car consumes 60 watts of power for the 12-volt battery and the on-board battery charging control module. So I am going to have to collect more data using "Charge Now" rather than "Value Charge". If you want to achieve the highest MPGe, then you don't want to select "Value Charge."

I received a reply from the MFM support group regarding the charger using 60 watts of power prior to the value charge time. The car is using electricity from the charger to charge the 12 volt battery and power the battery control module so that it can initiate charging at the value charge time. I guess they need to maintain power to some of the electronics in the car so that it can initiate charging at the appropriate time and they decided to get the power from the charger. But 60 watts seems like a lot of power for a "standby" mode. I have updated my posts to reflect this.

I received a similar response from my dealer I bought my car. But I would think that all dealers would pay the same price.

Deleted.

If you are not using pre-conditioning or value charge, then go times serve no purpose. For value charge, they determine when MFM is going to schedule charging to make sure the car is fully charged by the go time. If the car is plugged in and the cabin temperature is set in MFM, then the cabin temperature should be at the desired level at the go time. The cabin temperature is set based upon what was selected in MFM and not the previous climate control settings. You should hear the whine of the air conditioner as you did for the remote start. If the car is not plugged in, then preconditioning will not work. For a remote start, the car adjusts the cabin temperature based on the previous climate settings. If the car is not plugged in, you will drain the battery, but conditioning should still work. The ICE is not supposed to turn on when you remote start the car and the car is plugged in and the battery has sufficient charge. But all bets are off if the battery is depleted. I had the ICE start on me with the battery depleted and the car was plugged in in an attempt to heat up the passenger compartment. This happened during run power active mode. Also, I am not sure what it will do if it senses the battery temperature is too high.

Yes, the air conditioner is quite loud. I turned off pre-conditioning for this morning, but it felt like it had heated the car when I opened the door. The charger was consuming electricity when I unplugged the car. It had finished charging the car about 1 hour earlier. MFM states in one place that pre-condition is on, for the next go time, and when I edit the go times, it says that it is off. Accessing the go times via MyFord Touch states that pre-conditioning is off.

Today, I plugged in the car around 3:30 pm. It still had 38% of the charge remaining. MFM estimates the charge time to be a little over 4 hours. MFM claims it will start charging the car at 12:00 am and finish around 4:07 am. It is doing what I expect, charging the car entirely within the highest priority (lowest rate) window of my weekday value charge profile. However, as always, it is consuming 60 watts of power prior to charging at 12:00 am. Consuming, even 60 watts, during the peak rate hours from 4:00 to 9:00 pm is going to wipe out much of the savings I could hope to achieve by subscribing to the Electric Company's ChargeWise Program. 60 watts of power seems like a bit much to power the on-board control module used to initiate charging of the battery. If I want to subscribe to the ChargeWise Program, I am going to have to use my own timer, which is silly, since MFM is supposed control the charging. Note it would have been better to set the window from 9:00 pm to 12:00 am have the highest priority and from 12:00 am to 8:00 am have the second highest priority in the weekday value charge profile. Then the car would have started charging at 9:00 pm until it completed, rather than wasting 60 watts of power from 9:00 pm until midnight waiting to start charging. The car will still have completed charging entirely at the lowest rate during off-peak hours.

I plugged the car in around 4:30 pm this afternoon. It immediately charged to about 21% and is now using 60 watts of power for the on-board control module to initiate charging. It is scheduled to resume charging at 12:00 am and finish by 5:05 am, which is 30 minutes before my go time. So, it is working as expected. The period from 12:00 am to 8:00 am in the weekday value charge profile above is the highest priority charge window. So it will be charging during that window and finish 30 minutes before my go time at 5:35. Since the window is not long enough to complete the charge before my go time, it had to partially charge the battery using the second priority charge window from 9:00 am to 12:00 am in the weekend value charge profile. It would have been better to set the window from 9:00 am to 12:00 am to have the highest priority in the weekend value charge profile and from 12:00 am to 8:00 am the second highest priority in the weekday value charge profile. Then it would have started charging immediately until it completed. That would have avoided wasting 60 watts of power from the time it finished charging to 21% until midnight and the car would have charged completed during off-peak hours at the lowest rate. The car does not consume any further electricity after has fully charged the car.

I suspect some of the variation that I see in the amount of energy to charge the battery has to do with the level of depletion of the hybrid portion of the battery. The level of the hybrid portion of the battery varies from 1/4 to 3/4 of its capacity when I plug it in. So that could explain about 0.5 kWh of the variation to charge the battery. I also suspect that what is reported by the Summary/Trip odometers is the energy applied to the wheels and not the amount withdrawn from the battery. Since the conversion from the energy stored in the battery to mechanical energy is not 100% efficient, you probably lose 1 kWh or more which would explain why the car reports 5.4 kWh when it actually draws 7.6 (total battery capacity) - 1.1 (hybrid portion) / 2 = 7 kWh from the battery. The most that I have seen for a trip is 5.8 kWh. This too might have something to do with how much of the hybrid portion of the battery has been consumed before the ICE turns on. I know that this value decreases when going down a hill as the battery recharges. So who knows what other factors affect it. Does it include climate? Also I suspect the electricity has higher octane in Michigan :hysterical: