FFE vs Fiat 500e

[jonessoda]

Hey all,

In another thread where I posted pictures of my FFE, Hybridbear asked about differences that I've noticed between the FFE and the Fiat 500e, which I've had for a year now. I figured I'd post it here in a more relevant section, with a few more additions now that I've gotten to drive the FFE a little more. I'll add to these as I think of them, and if you have any specific questions about the 500e, I'm sure I can get you an answer.

So far:

1. The FFE is more comfortable for bigger people. I'm 6'4", 240. I sit lower and the telescoping steering wheel is a huge asset for taller folk. The Fiat doesn't have a telescoping steering wheel and you sit a little higher in it. I fit in it fine, but I fit in the FFE better.
2. The "shifter" (it's just buttons) in the Fiat is a huge waste of space, and I hit my right knee on it when driving. They could have made it skinnier and avoided having that happen to people like me.
3. Surprisingly, the Fiat has a better use of trunk space. The actual trunk of the FFE is bigger, but when you lay down the back seats in the Fiat, it's flat from trunk door to front seats. The hump in the FFE for the battery really limits the single size of items you can put in there. For example, I just transported a 9,000 BTU rolling air conditioner in its carton in the Fiat, that would have never fit in the FFE.
4. The Fiat is significantly peppier by a large margin, especially from a rolling start. That little car is quick! The FFE also seems to have its sweet spot around the same speeds, it's just not on the same level.
5. The FFE has a quieter ride. The Fiat has a good amount of road noise.
6. The Fiat does not have Bluetooth streaming capability. There is an AUX jack, but I use streaming radio on my phone any time I'm in the car, so SYNC is much better for phone integration. The Fiat does have Bluetooth connection for hands free talking, so I was a little surprised to find out I couldn't Bluetooth stream.
7. The FFE has a relatively poor turning radius, it seems. Sure, the Fiat can turn tighter because of its shorter wheel base, but I have a 1978 Chevy Malibu station wagon that can turn tighter than the FFE, and it's probably 2 feet longer. But in comparing the 500e to the FFE, the Fiat is much more maneuverable into tight spaces.
8. I'm pretty sure the Fiat can go quite a bit further on a charge. IIRC, the EPA ranges are 87 for the 500e and 76 for the FFE, and there does seem to be at least that much of a difference in real world driving. I'll have to pay more attention this as I put some more miles on the FFE.
9. The 500e doesn't have a "L" setting. Now that I've gotten a little more wheel time in the FFE, I really like being able to pop down in "L" mode instead of getting into the brakes when I want to slow down. The 500e has relatively decent drag when coasting, but I personally prefer being able to apply maximum drag (regen) on the fly.
10. The Fiat can show actual KW demand in real time, during motor and generator operations. I don't think the FFE has the option to see the actual number (please correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen it). It's interesting to be able to see the actual power number while you're driving.
11. Some people may not like this, but I love that the FFE is completely silent. The 500e will play a sound when less than 20 something MPH (25 I think?). It's not an obtrusive sound, but it's similar to the Fisker Karma if you've ever heard one of those.
12. The 500e shows speed in a digital read out, which also shows cruise setting in digital read out. I don't like that the FFE doesn't have that. My Fusion Hybrid showed the cruise setting in a digital read out, I don't know why the FFE doesn't do that.
13. The 500e has a GOM (guess-o-meter) and battery %, whereas the FFE has a GOM and a bar for battery level (no number). The GOM in the FFE is all over the place. My morning commute is a lot of downhill, traffic, and no climate control; which equates to very efficient driving. My afternoon commute is mostly freeway speed, uphill, and AC on, which is very inefficient driving. The GOM will give me my starting budget based on the last driving session, so when I get to work, I have a huge surplus, and when I get home, I have a huge deficit. In other words, it's not very accurate for my purposes. Having the actual battery percent would be nice because then I can say I used X% driving to work and X% driving home, which would give me a better idea of how much I'm using.

 

[WattsUp]

7. The FFE has a relatively poor turning radius, it seems.

I have never found the FFE turning radius to be that "poor". It's not as tight as other cars I have had, but it hasn't ever really caused me any trouble in parking lots, or U-turns.

12. The 500e shows speed in a digital read out, which also shows cruise setting in digital read out. I don't like that the FFE doesn't have that.

Personally, I prefer having the big analog speedometer. Something about digital displays make it seem like "nothing is happening", whereas a moving needle seems more connected to reality.

That said, I wouldn't mind a little display reminding me of the set cruise speed. I wouldn't even mind a simulated analog display with a virtual set speed marker on it. And, I do really like the two color displays on each side of the speedometer, especially with the clear, simple, and configurable graphics they contain. Overall, I find the dash on the FFE to be very effective and pleasurable to use and look at. Ford really got the dash right.

 

[hybridbear]

7. The FFE has a relatively poor turning radius, it seems. Sure, the Fiat can turn tighter because of its shorter wheel base, but I have a 1978 Chevy Malibu station wagon that can turn tighter than the FFE, and it's probably 2 feet longer. But in comparing the 500e to the FFE, the Fiat is much more maneuverable into tight spaces.

10. The Fiat can show actual KW demand in real time, during motor and generator operations. I don't think the FFE has the option to see the actual number (please correct me if I'm wrong, but I haven't seen it). It's interesting to be able to see the actual power number while you're driving.

11. Some people may not like this, but I love that the FFE is completely silent. The 500e will play a sound when less than 20 something MPH (25 I think?). It's not an obtrusive sound, but it's similar to the Fisker Karma if you've ever heard one of those.

12. The 500e shows speed in a digital read out, which also shows cruise setting in digital read out. I don't like that the FFE doesn't have that. My Fusion Hybrid showed the cruise setting in a digital read out, I don't know why the FFE doesn't do that.

7. I agree. So does the C-Max Energi. The Fusion isn't that great either in that regard.

10. Wow! I wish the Focus Electric did that. If Torque starts working with the Focus Electric then I'd be able to see that on my tablet.

11. I'm glad it's silent. We hated the Prius noise. Can you turn off the noise in the Fiat? I wouldn't mind a configurable noise on the Focus that the driver could turn on or off easily.

12. I agree about the cruise control. The C-Max also doesn't show the cruise control speed. I had told my parents about how the Fusion shows the cruise control speed and then my parents were surprised to get their C-Max Energi and not have that display. I didn't expect it to be on the Focus since it has the same steering wheel as the C-Max.

 

[jonessoda]

Edited to add #13.

11. I'm glad it's silent. We hated the Prius noise. Can you turn off the noise in the Fiat? I wouldn't mind a configurable noise on the Focus that the driver could turn on or off easily.

You can't turn it off, one of the things I really don't like about it. I had briefly considered finding the speaker that plays the sound and disconnecting it, but then I realized I didn't care that much.

 

[jmueller065]

There is a % number for the % battery remaining, its just buried on the center screen.

Press the "leaves" button at the bottom of the MFT (center) display and you'll see the % value.

 

[NightHawk]

There is a % number for the % battery remaining, its just buried on the center screen.

Press the "leaves" button at the bottom of the MFT (center) display and you'll see the % value.

Yeah I check that screen often.
I wish on the little screens by the steering wheel they could show a battery percentage in addition to the estimated mile range left on the battery display too though to make it easier!

 

[WattsUp]

I wish on the little screens by the steering wheel they could show a battery percentage in addition to the estimated mile range left on the battery display too though to make it easier!

Me too.

Fwiw, the blue level in the battery display is reflective of the % state of charge (with the GOM miles overlaid on top) but it is not easy to eyeball the percentage.

But, be glad the Leaf screen exists. Many of us owned the car before they added that screen (I believe it was in the MFT 3.6 update) and, without it, there was no way to know the SOC percentage from inside the car (other than by running the MFM app).

 

[flounder73]

"The FFE has a relatively poor turning radius, it seems. Sure, the Fiat can turn tighter because of its shorter wheel base, but I have a 1978 Chevy Malibu station wagon that can turn tighter than the FFE, and it's probably 2 feet longer. But in comparing the 500e to the FFE, the Fiat is much more maneuverable into tight spaces. "

Very true because it's essentially the same as the ICE front drive focus. Meaning that the steering rack sits behind the front wheel centerline (because the engine sits parallel to the wheel centerline) whereas in a RWD vehicle (engine sits perpendicular to wheel centerline), the rack sits in front of the front wheel centerline. With the steering rack in front of the centerline, the front wheels can be turned quite a bit farther. My 2010 ford expedition has a turning radius of 20ft while the FFE has a turning radius of 18 ft. For a truck that's much larger than the FFE, it can turn in almost the same amount of space.

 

[michael]

I agree the Ford GOM changes too quickly with short term changes in driving conditions (go up a hill, appear to lose many miles, etc). On the other hand, the RAV-4 changes very slowly and may take days to reach a new equilibrium.

To me, the cup of energy still wins the prize...don't pay attention to the quickly moving instant Wh/mile line, but look at the blue "need to achieve" cup. I find it a very reliable indicator of whether I will reach my destination without recharge.

I agree the FFE turning radius is much larger than I would expect of a car this size...

 

[WattsUp]

To me, the cup of energy still wins the prize...don't pay attention to the quickly moving instant Wh/mile line, but look at the blue "need to achieve" cup. I find it a very reliable indicator of whether I will reach my destination without recharge.

I agree, and I think in general, Ford really created something quite clever with its EV displays in the FFE. Once you understand what the cup means, and how the status/surplus number works (esp. when the navi is engaged), managing energy usage in the FFE is really quite intuitive.

Problem is, Ford doesn't really explain these displays very well and naive users end up assuming that a status like +21 means "tons of regeneration has happened" (which of course it does not) and/or think big swings in the GOM estimate reflect changes the actual level of energy stored in the battery (which, again, it does not).

 

[WattsUp]

I agree the Ford GOM changes too quickly with short term changes in driving conditions (go up a hill, appear to lose many miles, etc). On the other hand, the RAV-4 changes very slowly and may take days to reach a new equilibrium.

With its fairly small battery, I think the GOM in the FFE really has no choice but to react quickly to changes in driving conditions. If your driving conditions are stable, I've found the FFE's feedback and estimation to be quite helpful and accurate.

 

[michael]

To me, the cup of energy still wins the prize...don't pay attention to the quickly moving instant Wh/mile line, but look at the blue "need to achieve" cup. I find it a very reliable indicator of whether I will reach my destination without recharge.

I agree, and I think in general, Ford really created something quite clever with its EV displays in the FFE. Once you understand what the cup means, and how the status/surplus number works (esp. when the navi is engaged), managing energy usage in the FFE is really quite intuitive.

Problem is, Ford doesn't really explain these displays very well and naive users end up assuming that a status like +21 means "tons of regeneration has happened" (which of course it does not) and/or think big swings in the GOM estimate reflect changes the actual level of energy stored in the battery (which, again, it does not).

Exactly. I'm not aware of this level of integration between GPS and budget in other cars, definitely not in the ones I know well (Volt and Rav)

On a similar topic, the backup camera with the lines is far better than the equivalent in the Volt or Rav too.

Now if they would just double the range....