Ford C-Max sales unhurt by fuel economy flub

The Ford C-Max Hybrid's sales are faring just fine, despite the PR pounding the car took because of worse-than-promised gas mileage. C-Max Hybrid sales climbed 12 percent last month. 

Rebecca Cook/Reuters/File
A 2013 Ford C-MAX Hybrid vehicleon display outside the Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan last year. C-Max sales have been largely unaffected by the controversy surrounding the car's gas mileage.

Despite taking a PR pounding from overrated mileage estimates, the Ford C-Max Hybrid seems to be doing fine.

Thanks to growing sales of the C-Max Hybrid five-door hatchback, Ford will continue to push the C-Max as a high-efficiency rival to the Toyota Prius.
 
 Jim Farley, Ford's executive vice president of global marketing, sales, service, and Lincoln, told Automotive News (sub. required) that the company didn't "see any reason to change," and that customers have reacted well to the vehicle.

Indeed, they have.

C-Max hybrid sales for August were up 12 percent over July, with 3,032 units sold.

According to Ford, the C-Max Energi plug-in also had its best sales month of the year, with 621 units sold.

Ford was also keen to note that nearly two-thirds of C-Max hybrid sales came from conquest buyers, with the Toyota Prius being one of the top trade-ins.

Ford also notes that even the C-Max hybrid’s revised, lower mileage ratings best the Toyota Prius V’s. The C-Max is rated at 43 mpg combined (45 mpg city, 40 mpg highway), and the Prius V is rated at 42 mpg combined (44 mpg city, 40 mpg highway).

However, Ford often compares the C-Max to the classic Prius Liftback when discussing cargo space. That Toyota is rated at 50 mpg combined (51 mpg city, 48 mpg highway).

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.