Howdy, Stranger!

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





Ford Escape

1143145147148149

Comments

  • tim156tim156 Posts: 308
    It's official, the EPA has certified the mpg's.
    http://www.autoblog.com/2012/04/27/2013-ford-escape-1-6l-ecoboost-officially-rat- ed-at-23-33-mpg/

    1.6L=23/33
    2.0L=22/30
    2.4L=22/31
  • tinycadontinycadon Posts: 287
    Motor Trend just posted their road test results for the 2.0l awd titanium model and 1.6l fwd se model. The 2.0 awd did 0-60 in 6.8s while the 1.6l fwd did 0-60 in 8.9s.

    http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/suvs/1205_2013_ford_escape_titanium_test/
  • stickguystickguy Posts: 13,585
    these out yet? haven't seen any, so I assume no.

    but from reading that article, the 1.6 seems to be plenty of engine for my needs if I was to get one of these.

    2013 Acura RDX (wife's), 2007 Volvo S40 (when daughter lets me see it), 2000 Acura TL (formerly son's, now mine again), and new Jetta SE (son's first new car on his own dime!)

  • bg516bg516 Posts: 15
    i was reading on one post that motor trend had a 0 to 60 time on the 2,.0 turbo of about 6.6, i don;t get it, the kia sportage with about the same engine, trans combo does it in 6.0 and the ford is a better engine / trans package,
    i have been waiting for the escape before buying a new cuv/suv, as i owned one before and loved it.
    so what gives in the acceleration times, also what is the 40 to 60 times?
  • tbk81tbk81 Posts: 9
    Just ordered yesterday. 2013 SEL 2.0 EB AWD. 500 under invoice to match x-plan price. Delivered 6-8 weeks. :)
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,968
    edited June 2012
    Please check back with us and give us your impression when it arrives. Meanwhile, here's a Wall St. Journal review to help tide you over:

    "The traditional SUV is going by the wayside," says Alexander Edwards, president of the automotive division of Strategic Vision, a San Diego, Calif., market-research firm. In 2006, small SUVs accounted for just 9% of the market, he says. Now they represent about 14% of all vehicles sold in the U.S.

    Part of the appeal of the smaller crossovers lies in their sleeker, more carlike design—a shift from a decade ago when the rugged contours and genuine off-road capability of the big SUVs lured buyers away from family sedans.

    The Rise of the Petite SUVs
  • tbk81tbk81 Posts: 9
    I was quoted in the article! I have now test driven an se and titanium. Very nice overall. Technology is very nice, understands voice commands. Seats could be better but I'll try that again.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,968
    edited June 2012
    Very cool. :)

    (Good thing I didn't make any snide comments, lol).
  • markus5markus5 Posts: 102
    Are those EPA mileage ratings for the Ecoboost engines based on regular or premium gasoline. ? The power ratings are given for both, and the increases in power with the premium seem insignificant for the additional cost. My question is about the mileage and driveability using the regular gas.
    My Ford dealer also sells Mazda, I plan to test drive back to back against the new CX-5 which I test drove last month and impressed me in every category except power.
  • tim156tim156 Posts: 308
    Those are EPA numbers. I believe manufacturers can't or won't issue their internal numbers, they have to wait for the "official" numbers. I haven't seen anything regarding mpg's using higher octane and those numbers are with 87 octane. Higher octane will increase HP and torque. If this is a concern to you, I'd check the crash test results for the CX-5, I just read an article that it had a poor rating.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    edited June 2012
    If this is a concern to you, I'd check the crash test results for the CX-5, I just read an article that it had a poor rating.

    Care to share a link?

    The CX-5 is an IIHS "Top Safety Pick" and just received the highest European crash test score which I was lead to believe is more strict than the NHTSA. The CX-5 also was "best in class" going by the Euro test method.

    94% - Adult occupant
    87% - Child occupant
    64% - Pedestrian
    86% - Safety assist

    http://www.iihs.org/ratings/ratingsbyseries.aspx?id=746

    http://www.euroncap.com/results/mazda/cx-5/479.aspx

    I could not find any NHTSA scores yet, so I have no clue what you might have read. Everything points to the CX-5 being very safe.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    I haven't seen anything regarding mpg's using higher octane and those numbers are with 87 octane. Higher octane will increase HP and torque.

    I believe the member was asking whether the EPA estimates were achieved using Premium Fuel since the advertised HP and TQ are achieved using Premium Fuel. I went to fueleconomy.gov and it appears they tested the Escape w/ EcoBoost using Regular Fuel.
  • fnamowiczfnamowicz Posts: 191
    With the price of gas today why would ford put in a engine that they would recommend using premium fuel.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,968
    edited June 2012
    Unless something changes, the recommended fuel is regular unleaded. 2013 Ford Escape SUV Features & Specs

    To quote Mr_Shiftright, premium fuel is not a doggie treat for your car, and if the engine isn't designed to run on premium, there's no advantage to using it. It might even hurt your mpg.

    shipo, "What about fuel types & gas mileage?" #228, 9 May 2006 6:36 pm
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,897
    Why does Acura say when they recommend premium that the car the will run fine on regular but if you want the full hp/tq or whatever you can use premium? Is'nt that an idicator that in SOME engines putting in premium can get you slightly better performance?
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,968
    edited June 2012
    The sensors can be tweaked to retard timing or whatever is needed to run on regular. In those situations (i.e., where premium is "recommended" but not "required"), the computer handles it. I don't think the opposite is true.

    Lots of people run regular in their cars where premium is "required" without obvious distress. But usually in those cases the extra hp and higher mpg make premium a better value.

    Why use premium gas when regular will do? (USA Today)

    To Save Money on Gas, Stop Buying Premium

    Maybe the real reason Acura and other luxury brands tune their engines to require premium is because it adds a "luxury" cachet to the brand. ;)
  • fnamowiczfnamowicz Posts: 191
    The recommended fuel for the 1.6 engine is premium.
  • Stever@EdmundsStever@Edmunds YooperlandPosts: 38,968
    edited June 2012
    That'd just about be a deal killer for me.

    At least the percentage differential between regular and premium when you get up in the $3.50 - $4.00 a gallon region is less than back in the day when regular was $2 and premium was $2.20. Going from $4 to $4.20 isn't quite as bad.
  • m6userm6user Posts: 2,897
    I've been seeing a lot of stations add .12 for midgrade and .25 for premium. I think the oil companies are realizing the 10% increase of old is now 5% and the public can "weather" a little increase.

    Anyway, so some engines can be enhanced by higher octance but still run regular just fine but they have to built to do that and just putting premium into an engine strictly designed for regular does absolutely nothing. Am I getting that correct?
  • robr2robr2 BostonPosts: 7,601
    The 1.6L will run on 87 but just like any turbo engine, it returns the best fuel economy and performance with premium fuel. Using regular is just a false economy in high compression engines.
Sign In or Register to comment.