tjl

Looks like Ford's web site finally has the 2015 Focus build, price, and inventory search up as the main one for the Focus (instead pointing to the 2014 Focus build, price, and inventory search with the 2015 Focus as a future vehicle).

Here it is: http://bp3.ford.com/2015-Ford-Focus?branding=1&lang=en#/Technology/

http://www.ford.com/cars/focus/specifications/exterior/indicates that the hatchback is shorter than the sedan.

http://www.ford.com/cars/focus/specifications/capacities/indicates that the hatchback is 12 pounds lighter in the 2014 SE and Titanium models. S: 2935 (sedan) SE: 2960 (sedan), 2948 (hatch) Titanium: 3055 (sedan), 3043 (hatch) Electric: 3640 (hatch) ST: 3223 (hatch)

Looks like http://www.fueleconomy.govlists the 2015 Focus fuel economy. 110/99 electric (MPGe) 30/42 1.0L turbo, M6 (SFE) 29/40 1.0L turbo, M6 27/40 2.0L, A6 26/38 2.0L, AS6 (probably the version with SelectShift) 26/36 2.0L, M5 23/32 2.0L turbo, M6 (ST) The order guide posted in the other thread indicates that the 1.0L turbo package comes with an SFE badge on the sedan, but not the hatchback. Perhaps the aerodynamics are different enough to matter?

Recently, I got a 2014 Focus as a rental car. It had the Powershift dual-clutch automatic transmission (being in the US, automatic transmission in rental cars is expected). I could find none of the commented-about problems with it, even when intentionally trying to see if it would be rough and jerky in very low speed parking lot driving.

Unfortunately, that seems to describe a lot of drivers on the road today who are looking at their cell phones or are otherwise not paying attention.

CR's actual review was quite positive. They did get 37mpg in their tests, rather short of the 47mpg EPA rating at the time, but still excellent in comparison to other cars they tested (though not as good as the 41mpg they got on the Prius V). The negative press is more in terms of falling short of expectations set by the 47mpg EPA rating, rather than the fuel economy actually being "bad".

Seen them on some Toyota (Lexus), BMW, Volkswagen (including Audi), and Tesla vehicles. GM DRLs these days do not seem to be the poor implementations used by GM in the 1990s (e.g. high beam DRLs that were annoying to others if the driver did not turn on the regular low beam headlamps at night, or the turn signal DRLs that can give misleading "turn signal" indications on a quick glance if one of them is burned out).

The order guide (see post #4 of http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/49801-c-max-hybrid-order-guide/ ) lists a "Tire Mobility Kit" as a standard feature. Does this mean that there is no spare tire? If not, is there even a space to put a spare tire?

Post #4 of this thread: http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/49801-c-max-hybrid-order-guide/

Going "leading edge" "green" does have its price, but you can go "green" the old fashioned way and save money, such as buying a car no thirstier than you actually would use, or buying recycled auto parts to repair your car.

If a SYNC upgrade takes 40 minutes, does the car have to be idling the whole time? Or can it just be "on" without the engine running while upgrading the SYNC? Or can you be driving somewhere while upgrading the SYNC?

Here are the weight classes used for EPA fuel economy testing (based on the actual vehicle weight + 300 pounds): http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=32a17d143446f8a0dc75fa7ce7193ca4&rgn=div8&view=text&node=40:18.0.1.1.2.2.1.44&idno=40

Automatic transmission programming for light acceleration (common in EPA test cycles, designed for slow accelerating 1970s cars). If you normally don't accelerate that slowly, it may have no effect on your actual fuel economy. Lowering the weight to get under the threshold for the next 250 pound weight class. If a vehicle is at the bottom of the weight class, dropping just a few pounds may make it "250 pounds lighter" for EPA test purposes, even though the difference is much smaller in real life.

The 2012 Civic is not the only recent Honda that CR has been less than impressed with: Honda redesigns: Is the automaker resting on its laurels? Beyond that, even the minor refresh of the 2012 Accord was a downgrade in CR's testing: Test complete video: Honda Accord

Does the engine cover have any sound deadening material in it?

Whenever I have read about which automaker the UAW targets for the first contract negotiations, it is usually mentioned that each automaker wants to be the first, because the first contract sets the pattern that the UAW wants to get with the others. Thus, the first automaker may give things to the UAW that are cheap for them to give, but not so cheap for the other automakers, or get things from the UAW that are valuable for them to get, but not so valuable for the other automakers.

These are all automatic transmission cars: Focus SE sedan (non-SFE, non-Sport): 18 city, 43 highway Focus SEL hatchback: 19 city, 39 highway Civic LX: 19 city, 47 highway Elantra GLS: 20 city, 39 highway

Better would be to roll back the corn subsidies that result in all of the ethanol being made in the first place. But Iowa has most politicians (both Democrats and Republicans) with presidential aspirations in its pocket on the issue of corn subsidies (McCain was a rare exception).

Actually, my mistake. It was a Taurus. (I still think of "Taurus" as the 1986-2007 cars, not the Five Hundred derived version of 2008-2009 or the revised version of that from 2010.) I don't know why they had a Maxima but no other Nissans in the Chevrolet test drive area (the Buick / GMC test drive area was in a different parking lot).

GM is having Main Street in Motion events in various cities. Basically, the bring a bunch of GM cars for display, and have coned routes in big parking lots to test drive GM cars and some competitors. I went to one to check out the Volt. Found that they had some rules: 1. You have to drive a Cruze before you can drive a Volt. 2. You have to drive any other GM car before you can drive a Corvette or Camaro. 3. You get only two Corvette or Camaro test drives. 4. Corvette, Camaro, and Volt test drives are accompanied by event staff. The had three courses in the Chevrolet section, a regular course, a Corvette and Camaro course, and a Volt course. The first two were coned in the parking lot, while the Volt course was on lightly traveled public roads. There was a separate Buick and GMC section. The Corvette and Camaro course had a straightaway to test 0-30 acceleration (space constrained). Among competitors, they had an Elantra (the new one), Civic, Accord, Corolla, Maxima, Five Hundred, and Pilot. No Mustangs or other sporty competitors to compare with the Corvette and Camaro, and no hybrids or electrics to compare with the Volt. No Chrysler cars either (I guess they did not want to make it look like they were shooting fish in a barrel). All of the test drive Cruzes were LTZ automatics, while all of the display Cruzes were "42mpg highway" Eco manuals. Perhaps they did not want people burning up the clutches learning how to drive manual. Oh, and the Volt? Drives like a normal car in the limited test drive on lightly traveled city streets.

Yes, the base model has that engine. Its EPA fuel economy is only 24/34 manual, 23/29 automatic.

However, in CR's ratings, it scored higher than only the soon-to-depart Chevrolet Cobalt in the small car with automatic transmission class. The one that they tested had an MSRP of $20,300, higher than that of the $18,445 Hyundai Elantra that they tested which they rated at the top of the class. Even the Mitsubishi Lancer and Suzuki SX4 are rated higher than the new Volkswagen Jetta.

Some people may actually prefer that, since it allows a relatively clean installation of an aftermarket head unit. A double DIN head unit with GPS navigation costs a lot less than factory GPS navigation.