I tend to be rather critical of many new vehicles and I was aware of that before before I tried an EV earlier today. I wanted to leave prejudice behind and try to approach with fresh eyes. The vehicle was a Ford Kuga. The hybrid one with a rather limited range which augments the 2.5 petrol engine. I found it actually worked rather well. It was quiet and well built. All the main controls seemed to work without needing an acclimatisation period. From the point of view of accessible transport, I really have no complaints.
I'm not a fan of LED screens but in the partly sunny daylight, I had no issues. Similarly, visibility was not bad but almost immediately, I noticed I had to move my head around more to see past the obviously strong pillars. This is a characteristic of 21st century designs.
The trim level was Vignale which meant nice leather seats which were OK for comfort and allowed a fairly natural of perhaps standardised seating position. In many ways it was better than virtually all older cars but similarly didn't seem quite as comfortable. I found that strange.
I had no issues with the rather light brakes either. Why so so many people always seem to lurch to a halt? The steering was easy, light and responsive yet wasn't as smoothly linear as my older cars. For normal driving it was fine but I suspect it wouldn't be so nice if the pace was raised. That's not a suggestion of poor handling. I'm sure it handles very tidily as all recent Ford products do but I suspect it is all engineered to try to maintain a constant feel rather than convey early warning and subtle intricacies of the road which my 156 does so notably well. I felt it cornered more like a 147 than a 156, which I prefer.
From the point of economy, I was disappointed. Although it was a gentle drive on rural back roads, the discharge motive battery meant the petrol engine kicked in often to recharge the battery just enough to maintain motion through the electric motor rather than help with motion. As such, I thought a displayed 27mpg was poor compared with 45mpg or so that I'd expect to be displayed by the 156's inaccurate trip computer. With a fully charged battery, I am told the Kuga should display 70mpg. As such, I think the Kuga's better fuel economy relies on conditions and style of use very heavily to be beneficial. I can see the point but the benefit is reduced by the weight of the vehicle. That being the case, it suggests people aren't willing to willingly accept less for more. In short, it's economic credentials seem to me to be more of a placebo than universally beneficial. Personally, I'd rather work less and forgo the idea of having a fairly new and expensive vehicle.
I'm not a fan of LED screens but in the partly sunny daylight, I had no issues. Similarly, visibility was not bad but almost immediately, I noticed I had to move my head around more to see past the obviously strong pillars. This is a characteristic of 21st century designs.
The trim level was Vignale which meant nice leather seats which were OK for comfort and allowed a fairly natural of perhaps standardised seating position. In many ways it was better than virtually all older cars but similarly didn't seem quite as comfortable. I found that strange.
I had no issues with the rather light brakes either. Why so so many people always seem to lurch to a halt? The steering was easy, light and responsive yet wasn't as smoothly linear as my older cars. For normal driving it was fine but I suspect it wouldn't be so nice if the pace was raised. That's not a suggestion of poor handling. I'm sure it handles very tidily as all recent Ford products do but I suspect it is all engineered to try to maintain a constant feel rather than convey early warning and subtle intricacies of the road which my 156 does so notably well. I felt it cornered more like a 147 than a 156, which I prefer.
From the point of economy, I was disappointed. Although it was a gentle drive on rural back roads, the discharge motive battery meant the petrol engine kicked in often to recharge the battery just enough to maintain motion through the electric motor rather than help with motion. As such, I thought a displayed 27mpg was poor compared with 45mpg or so that I'd expect to be displayed by the 156's inaccurate trip computer. With a fully charged battery, I am told the Kuga should display 70mpg. As such, I think the Kuga's better fuel economy relies on conditions and style of use very heavily to be beneficial. I can see the point but the benefit is reduced by the weight of the vehicle. That being the case, it suggests people aren't willing to willingly accept less for more. In short, it's economic credentials seem to me to be more of a placebo than universally beneficial. Personally, I'd rather work less and forgo the idea of having a fairly new and expensive vehicle.
