Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

2013 Ford Escape Gas Mileage



  • We completed our first road trip. Over a two week period drove 2600 miles from MI to FL panhandle and return. 27 MPG combined city/highway.
  • ronsteveronsteve Posts: 435
    For those who are getting the supposed bad MPG:

    How many miles on your vehicle? If it's less than 5000, come back when you have completed the break-in period.

    And how are you calculating MPG? Looking at your trip computer? BS. Fill your tank and reset your trip odometer. Drive until you need gas. Fill your tank again. Divide miles traveled by the fuel used, and THAT is your MPG.

    For anyone with bad highway MPG... SUVs are more sensitive to faster highway speeds than regular cars, because of aerodynamics. You probably don't have to slow down a lot... just a little will make a difference with these beasts.

    My commute is 20 miles one-way... 17 of it is on the interstate. Those 3 miles off the interstate are enough to put me closer to the combined number on my car. Don't expect to hit the highway number unless it's almost ALL highway.
  • Another lecture on how we don't know how to drive, add, subtract & divide.

    1) Break in periods today are complete BS. That may have been the case 20/30/40 years ago but todays cars are so computerized they can make adjustments on the fly. Every new car I've had in the past 10yrs came within 1-2mpg of their numbers right off the bat. The only thing the so called "break in period" does is break in your tires, or wear them out, which leads to better gas mileage. Ever see a NASCAR tire, smooth as a baby's a$$.

    2) Everyone knows how to correctly calculate mpgs on this thread, if you read through it you will see a lot of people who do it both ways, and the computer mpgs are always HIGHER than the hand calculated numbers!

    3) As far as Highway MPGs go, I could drive 70-75mph with a full load in my 2010 Escape (which is as aerodynamic as a box on wheels) and get 27mpg on a 400mi trip. That's 1mpg lower than the EPA est. of 28hwy!

    The 2013 Escape suckered me, plain an simple, it drove fantastic, but it wasn't anywhere near the fuel miser it claimed to be and with the MFT acting possessed 1/2 the time & 3 recalls for fire related issues with the engine I had enough & gave up. If it's working out just fine for you, congrats, you're a lucky one, but just because you're one of the lucky ones doesn't mean the rest of us with problems/issues with it are whinny, complaining little trolls.
  • Well stated. I've had my Titanium AWD 5 months and have 6300 miles on it (overall 25 MPG).
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,788
    "I just got back from working in Arizona and was provided with a 2010 Ford Flex, we called it the "Toaster". This was in Prescott, very high altitude over 5000 ft and very hilly. The Flex with a 3.5 V6 EcoBoost got better than 21 in town and close to 25 on the highway, much better than our new Escape! So I think there is an issue with these vehicles............ "

    I've noticed with several vehicles that they do better at high altitudes.
  • stevedebistevedebi LAPosts: 3,788
    "... I know they have just blown me off and have taken no responsibility for the fact that the car gets nowhere near the mileage claim unless it is driven in absolutely perfect conditions - flat roads with long stretches of no stops. "

    The only thing Ford would have to do is prove they administered the EPA test accurately according to EPA standards. If they tested correctly and posted those results as required by law, they did what they are supposed to do. End of case.

    Hyundai got caught doing bad testing.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,993
    edited March 2013
    Good point. The EPA is investigating Ford's claims for their hybrid mpg, just as they did with Hyundai.

    Lawsuits claim fuel efficiency overstated in Ford C-Max, Fusion hybrids (Detroit Free Press)

    There's talk of reviewing the whole certification process.

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • craign1craign1 Posts: 1
    I have the SE AWD 2.0 which is a small rocket with the ability to two 3,500 lbs. I haven't done the research but this has got to be one of the more heavy and solid small SUVs out there. Others I've been in feel light and tinny. I average 21 MPG when I'm mostly around town, 24 or so with about 50/50 town/highway. Yesterday a 2 hour trip averaging 55 mph with premium gas got me up to 29 mpg. Mind you I'm starting slow off the line and gliding to a finish when possible, using the sport shift to downshift, so the economy computer loves me. I really don't think Ford mis-advertised the MPG but I think all manufacturers should advertise only the average MPG and eliminate a lot of people's misconception. I will say that my mileage has improved since I turned 2,000 miles so I think the "break-in" period is a real thing.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,993
    Is premium recommended for your Escape? If not, you're just wasting your money. (link)

    Is your winter winding down? Warmer weather can help your mpg too.

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • sbro1sbro1 Posts: 1
    First time poster here. Bought my 2013 Titanium Escape 2.0 4WD in late October and have 3,300 miles on it so far. I drive about 60/40 on the highway and haven't seen MPG anywhere close to what was on the sticker. I only use premium fuel and am a very conservative driver. My best tank average is 20.1 MPG. I probably would have made a different decision had a known I would be getting such poor gas mileage. Plus, how big is the tank anyway? I don't think I've ever put more than 11.5 gallons in when I am on E. Ford screwed up big time on both these items and hope they are investigated for deception. With that said, I do love the new Escape.
  • wistrodwistrod Posts: 14
    edited March 2013
    Agree with your question about the tank, and asked it myself months ago. I have the SEL 2.0 4WD. The most fuel it has ever taken was 11.3 gallons. Tripometer said I had 32 miles to empty. I average 22.1 mpg (70/30 hwy/city). I have strong doubts there is a 15 gallon tank on this thing. Last years model had a 13 gallon tank - almost certain they carried it onto this model as well. Still waiting to hear from anyone on this forum that ever put more than 13 gallons in at fill-up. I do like the vehicle. I am ticked off about the mpg (I ought to be averaging at least 26 mpg per the specs and my driving habits). But mostly just wish they had engineered a way to stick a 20 gallon tank on this thing and not a 13.1 (which I'm sure us what's actually there)!
  • johnnyumajohnnyuma Posts: 54
    No. The owners manual specifies regular.
  • donl1donl1 Posts: 109
    I ordered a Titanium AWD in the first week of December. Got my window sticker a few days ago and it's scheduled to be built March 5th. I've been watching these gas mileage posts and it looks like Ford made a mistake in putting in a gas tank that's too small. They did the same thing with the F150 when they introduced the 3.5 ecoboost and it took them a year or so to rectify that. You may see a bigger tank in a year or so but it won't do the rest of us any good.
  • rjak707rjak707 Posts: 1
    I have a 2.0L SE FWD with 1500 miles on it and my wife has a 1.6L SE FWD with about 6500 miles on it. We don't see any appreciable difference in mileage between the 2 cars and generally average 25.5 to 26 MPG, with about a 60/40 hwy/city split.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,614
    The manual says for the turbo engines regular is recommended, but you can get more power using a higher octane.
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,993
    edited March 2013

    Now the question is whether you'll take a mpg hit with this engine going for the more power option. They seem to be competing goals. :-)

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • automelon48automelon48 Posts: 101
    edited March 2013
    Steve, I am trying to do some tests on various fuels in my Escape (2.0 FWD) to see if I can track any difference. So far I don't really see any, but I want to run lot's more tanks through, before I draw any conclusions.

    Generally speaking, a Normally Aspirated engine that is designed to run on regular, will not see any benefit to running Premium. Agreed.

    These Escapes with the turbo MAY be a bit different. In my opinion, these engines should really run Premium, as they push 18 lbs of boost through the turbo. That being said, modern engine control systems (like the one on the Escape) are very good at utilizing any fuel you feed them. They don't knock or complain at all.
    When the specs say that the Escape will make more Hp on Premium, that tells me that it is able to adjust and utilize all of the octane in the fuel. (unlike a lower compression NA engine like the ones generally referred to in the article) That being the case, it should be running at designed efficiency also, while utilizing all of the octane.
    I also have a Normally Aspirated car in the driveway and it is designed for Regular. I never run Premium in it, as I know there would be no mileage or HP gains. (and perhaps even mileage and HP loss)

    The one big factor here is that some gas stations advertise somewhere between 0% and 10 % Ethanol in their Regular fuel. (depending on region, season, local laws, availability etc etc)
    Many gas stations (depending on region) advertise that their Premium fuel does not contain Ethanol. This can be a mileage benefit.
    It's a real crap-shoot trying to figure out what you are ACTUALLY getting at some stations.

    I have been cycling through 5 tanks Premium, 5 tanks Regular and 5 tanks with UP TO 10% Ethanol. If I ever get conclusive results I will share them. It's quite difficult when there are weather changes etc, to have consistant testing.

    By the way, when the turbo is pushing at full boost, it raises the effective compression of the 2.0 motor from 9.3:1 all the way up to 20.7:1 (calculated for sea level)
    No doubt a little extra octane could be used !!!
  • steverstever YooperlandPosts: 39,993
    edited March 2013
    That's great; I really don't drive enough consistently anymore to try that. A tank these days will last me a month or more unless we do a road trip.

    Guess it's time to mention again for those wanting to try ethanol free gas. It's around here, but like your area, it's only available in the premium flavor.

    Need help navigating? - or send a private message by clicking on my name.

  • usa1fanusa1fan Posts: 68
    That's awesome, steve! I sure wish I could get by driving so little that a tank of gas lasted that long.

    For those asking, yes, we do have a 15 gallon tank. Ford's fuel gauge calibration is very conservative, as posted above.

    And some of us do actually routinely get above the EPA combined numbers. I've been able to exceed the EPA highway number too, but only with a whole lot of effort and driving 55 mph maximum everywhere. My 'normal' (based on driving with regular traffic- higher speeds, quicker launches and all) is between 24 and 26 though, with a 60/40ish mix (it's fun estimating these %'s too- what exactly IS city for EPA versus me, or highway?).. 2.0l AWD SEL.

    For what it's worth, since the EPA's updates, I've had a lot harder time beating the numbers posted on windows stickers than with other vehicles. Example- the 2008 Malibu LTZ V6 I owned prior to the Escape always was in the range of the posted sticker, but only rarely got to 30 mpg or above (again, acheived it, but VERY hard to do). It was probably right at 26mpg in the same conditions I get 24-26 for the Escape. Given that one is more aerodynamic, FWD, naturally aspirated, and the other had more frontal surface (higher C/D), AWD, and a turbocharger, I don't feel robbed. I do however, think cars produced since the change in testing standards tend to be harder to get above the numbers on the sticker.

    My favorite cars for fuel economy are still older cars- our 2004 Malibu LT V6 (the first 3.5l GM offered in them, rather than the later version), routinely got over 32mpg, with a best-ever tank of over 38 (all hand-calculated, because I kept logs back then, too lazy now).
Sign In or Register to comment.