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



  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 11,852
    The owner's manual only mentions more power.
    Maybe they can't put anything about better mileage because it's not officially tested that way.
    2017 Ford Fusion SE 2014 Ford F-150 FX4
  • automelon48automelon48 Posts: 105
    For EPA testing, pure gasoline is used, while most Regular fuel that is available is the public is E10. When you buy Premium gasoline, you are not only getting a higher octane rating, but the fuel MAY also be pure gasoline, without the Ethanol.
    You would need to check in your area to find out what is contained in the various fuels. (sometimes it's hard to really get a definitive answer, and sometimes the blends vary on season and availability of the Ethanol etc)

    Clearly, the Ecoboosts are designed to make use of the higher octane if you put it in. Whether or not the octane alone makes a measureable difference, I would love to know. I am running some of my own tests and if I get any good data, I will share it.
  • pdawg1pdawg1 Posts: 22
    I would get it done now, no reason for the display to be inaccurate. It can take up to two hours for the re-program, so make an appointment, also have them check tire pressure to 35 as the Ford engineer my service manager was talking with wanted that verified for mph. I am doing a second manual check and will post that figure also.
  • tim156tim156 Posts: 308
    If it's off, there is no reason not to have it reprogrammed, but it's not critical, so no one needs to panic. My door jam sticker states the recommended tire pressure is 36 psi, has Ford engineering changed this? Not that 1 psi is going to make any difference.
  • wistrodwistrod Posts: 14
    Tried an experiment last week. We have three grades available here - regular at 87 octane, mid-grade at 89, and premium at 91. I've been using nothing but the regular grade since day one (now at 4,500 miles). I filled up with mid-grade this past week. My typical weekly commute had me averaging 22.3 mpg with the regular grade. This past week I averaged 25.7 mpg. Couldn't believe it, as this is about a 15% increase in mpg. Will try the premium grade next time around and see if there is another jump. Obviously, my 2.0L 4WD can approach the mpg Ford says it can, just not with regular grade gasoline. Makes me wonder if there is something screwed up in the ECU fuel mapping and/or tuning?
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    edited March 2013
    I commend your experiment. Satisfying to realize proof in the pudding, eh?

    One reason (probably the primary one unless the mid-grade was ethanol's not in Cda) for the better mileage on the mid grade, is because Ford has designed their ecoboost engines to run on 87 octane because they knew that even if they stated it called for 89 to 91 octane, that many users would still fuel with 87, is that they have created engine management parameters that sense which fuel octane is being used. When it senses that 87 is being used, it retards the timing electronically, in order to protect the combustion from happening too soon, which causes damaging ping and knock issues.

    But the spin-off from retarding timing in the case of these turbos, is that that reduces both power output and fuel economy. So when you use a higher grade gas, the engine management senses it and again will electronically advance the timing which will give higher fuel mileage, and providing the octane is high enough, can boost engine output too without causing the knock and ping.

    I will be interested to read your findings and comparos after trying 91. There may be a point of diminishing returns regarding better mpg vs the extra cost of the higher octane. I think the USA also has ethanol free gas in the 91 grade. That is the way it is in Cda. I guess, too, that in order to have really conclusive findings, it would require enough tanks in both directions so are allowing for prevailing headwinds/tailwinds and hills etc.. and also if one pump delivers more gas than the one beside it..(this is a big issue here in Cda, we have some VERY crooked retailers here in Ont and trying to fight them with our crappy Weights and Measures Gvt Offices, seem to be a waste of time and loads of frustration..ask me how I know..)(no surprise really..obviously Weights and Measures are in bed with big oil).

    So with the same line of thinking here, I would recommend that if anyone tows a trailer heavier than 1200 lb or regularly carries the vehicle's capacity in weight, to use mid grade. It probably does literally pay for itself and is easier on the engine in terms of heat created (turbos by their very nature creates a lot of heat, and anything that retards potential pinging, helps counter that) and longevity. If you tow a trailer of 2000lb and up I would definitely recommend 91 octane.

    So anyone who wants even more detail (if you are like me, you like to know why is he saying that..what does that mean and why?) then the reason high test allows more advanced timing without the potential engine damaging ping and knock, is because 91 octane has a higher flash point..i.e. all fuel will combust quicker or sooner when under pressure. 87 takes less pressure to combust at exactly the same time as 91 does, so picture if the piston is on its way up and getting ready to be sent back down due to the spark plug firing the gas that creates the explosion, then if you present a gas that is too eager to ignite (87) with the exact same timing settings as consider 'advanced' in the quest for fuel economy and performance, as a gas that ignites late (91), then the 87 igniting too soon in relation to the piston not being in the right position in regards to what is known as TDC (top dead centre) the 'premature' combustion is what creates the ping/knock. This is the explosion actually trying to fire the piston back down, before it has had a chance to reach its TDC position (or more specifically before it has reached that specified advanced or retarded timing position in degrees relative to TDC). And what controls the spark plug firing (and when) is the timing settings. So you can see that when you set the timing advanced, it allows more pressure to build in the CC (combustion chamber) (and more pressure means more power and potentially more thorough combustion of the gas which creates fewer emissions and increases FE) and in relation to combusting the fuel, before actually igniting the fuel. And conversely then, if you present a fuel too eager to ignite (87) with the same timing settings, you are not getting an ideal timing and explosion process and can create very real and expensive damage to the engine.

    So Ford has 'idiot-proofed'* you might say, the system. But those who check into why something is what it is and why maybe a higher cost fuel can be justified etc. often can reap the benefits of getting into the why of some things.. Owner's Manuals are written always with the intention to not possibly glaze over their owner's eyes, allowing for the best mix of costs and longevity potential regarding maintenance and running costs, AND/BUT also keeping themselves out of court..

    * So has BMW (and many others, most brands in fact that are FI which is all in NA now) idiot-proofed their engines, cuz we all, I'm sure, have seen many BMW and MB owners fueling up at the gas stn with the 87 nozzle.. :(
  • steverstever Posts: 52,572
    The only station that offers ethanol free gas in my area only offers it in the premium blend. The other stations have premium, but their premium has ethanol in it.
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345 we have some stations reduce ethanol by half (so 5% instead of 10%) in their mid-grade. And to complicate things, some PetroCanada (ugh) :( our gvt had no business, getting into business) stations 91, still has the dreaded ethanol.

    I made a great discovery recently was a website that lists gas stns and their location and what grades they sell and what ethanol content levels in each.

    And even more recent surprise to me, I have found two Shell stns within a 50 miles radius (wish it was a lot closer but at least one of them is in a direction I go at times so take all the jerry cans with me if I can) that actually sell ethanol-free 87! !!!!!!! Like wow, who wudda thunk? I'll really believe it though once I fuel there and find my mileage went up, which it will at least 2 to 2.5 mpg if the 87 really doesn't have any ethanol..

    Apparently out east, it is a lot easier to find ethanol free stations.

    Oh...another kicker here for bike owners who think they have to use the highest octane that Sunoco 94 has ethanol in it :( E apparently boosts octane levels and is one of the cheap ways Sunoco offers their 94 that way..this might only be in Cda tho?
  • steverstever Posts: 52,572
    I made a great discovery recently was a website that lists gas stns and their location and what grades they sell and what ethanol content levels in each.

    Something different from you mean?
  • crkyolfrtcrkyolfrt Posts: 2,345
    No..that's the one..think I musta discovered it when you posted it 2 months ago?? lol Thanks, btw :thumb up:
  • steverstever Posts: 52,572
    edited March 2013
    Well, I discovered it from someone else here on the forums (Morin2?), but happy to pass it on. :-)

    Looks like they offer a POI file too if you have a navigation gizmo.
  • Good information guys, i love this forum!

    On a side note, is there a way to tell if this reprogramming was already done by my dealer before I purchased it? Like in settings, version or anything?
  • pnjfpnjf Posts: 1
    just found your discussion on 2013 Escape mpg averages. We just sent Ford our 2nd letter complaining that our 1.6L 4 cylinder eco-boost with 9300 highway miles is getting (or reading) our mpg as 25.5, far below what the Ford sticker average estimated at 32. We do very little city driving, and from here in rural Michigan we've driven it to Chicago and back and to Nashville and back. We cruise at 70 mph, so I get that we won't get 32 at that rate. But the Escape was recalled (we didn't have it for a whole month) and the mpg actually dropped from 26.5 to 25.5 after the repair. I'll check the TSB info with my dealer and will do a manual reading this week. Don't believe I can add anything to the discussion other than trying what you guys suggest and giving you feedback. We thought it was a problem particular to just our car, but now it seems others have the same issues. Anybody know if there's an EPA review of complaints for this?
  • pdawg1pdawg1 Posts: 22
    It is not a recall, just a TSB for a concern. Your vin would have a history of all repair work at your dealership or the one the vehicle came from.
  • automelon48automelon48 Posts: 105
    Is your 1.6 a FWD or AWD?
    The hwy ratings should be 33 MPG for FWD or 30 MPG for AWD.
  • wistrodwistrod Posts: 14
    I mis-spoke last week in my response -- the premium grade gasoline sold in my parts is listed as 93 octane (not 91). I filled up with it this morning -- first refuel since I put in the 89 octane mid-grade last week. After the first 35 miles with the 93 octane (mostly highway) my mpg actually went down! I'll post the results once I go through the full tank. As previously noted, switching from 87 octane regular to 89 octane mid-grade resulted in an increase of about 3.5 mpg.
  • automelon48automelon48 Posts: 105
    I do not want to harp on the Ethanol too much, but that may be what you are getting with the 93 octane.
    Because Ethanol itself has a very high octane number, it gets added to gasoline to raise the octane rating of the gas.
    So what you may be buying is a mixture of 89 or 90 octane gasoline which they then put Ethanol in (10%)to raise the octane rating to 93 and voila, you have 93 octane fuel, which has less energy in it.
    Whereas, some stations will have 91 octane gasoline which is pure.
    Some companies have sold 92, 93 or 94 octane fuel at the same price as 91 because of a perceived "free" benefit. Most times they have just diluted the gas with Ethanol. Yes, the octane rating goes up, but you need to burn more of it.
    If you really want to know what is in your local fuel, you can do a quick test at the pump, with a graduated test tube or glass jar, a bit of water and a bit of the gas. The FAA suggests this method to ensure that no Ethanol is used in aircraft. (there are a select group of aircraft that can use automotive grade fuel)link title
    Do some research on ethanol fuel testing, you will be amazed how easy it is. There are companies that sell "kits" for this, but it really amounts to a test tube with some markings on it.
  • automelon48automelon48 Posts: 105
    edited March 2013
    There have been more than a few discussions on this thread about the fuel we use in our Ecoboost Escapes.
    Just to keep it "interesting", here is another thing to consider. Winter fuel vs. summer fuel.
    I have always known that there are multiple blends throughout the year, but this article -gasoline-whats-the-difference-13747431 really clarified things.
    I am sure many of us on this forum are in different regions, so we are likely all going to experience different fuel blends at different times.
    If you go from one extreme to another (fuel-wise) I would bet the results would vary quite a bit.
    Since we know that the EPA testing is done with Ethanol free fuel, I would also bet that it is done with the higher quality summer fuel as well.

    I am looking forward to warmer weather to see how my Escape 2.0 FWD will do. I took delivery in November in Canada, so I have been using the inferior winter blends since then.
    My 18-tank lifetime average is 24.33 MPG combined. Hand-calculated.
  • ...2500 miles...have yet to get over 20mpg
  • dizneydizney Posts: 19
    edited March 2013
    This is why I didn't buy the 2.0L AWD.
    With the 1.6L on the highway I always get 35 to 38 mpg when not driving fast! 60 max ! Laugh all you want but sorry to say 58mph is the sweet spot which kicks my mpg up the fastest! Bottom line drive faster use a lot more gas ..........

    Look here: jpg
  • johnnyumajohnnyuma Posts: 54
    edited March 2013
    Mostly city or hwy? What part of the country? Thanks.
  • wistrodwistrod Posts: 14
    edited March 2013
    Here's a blurb from Car & Driver about the EPA fuel economy testing:

    "Measuring fuel economy during the tests is likewise hugely complex, which is why the automakers and the EPA both follow precisely the same protocol. For openers, the chemical composition of fuel varies slightly, so simply retrieving it from a local gas station won’t produce repeatable results. The EPA has a specialized company manufacture small batches of consistent fuel, which is 93 octane (cars running 50-state certifications get a slightly different, 91-octane “California” blend). Before being used, the gas is analyzed to measure its properties, and fuel economy is then calculated based on the measured carbon content of the various tailpipe emissions—unburned hydrocarbons, carbon dioxide (CO2), carbon monoxide (CO), methane (CH4), and oxides of nitrogen (NOx)—that are collected in bags made of a special Kynar plastic. A $350,000 gas-analyzing machine then makes minute measurements. The one-percent accuracy of this machine from Japanese company Horiba is amazing considering the minuscule amounts of some of the exhaust constituents—some in quantities as low as a half-dozen parts per million."

    If this stuff is true, seems to me nearly impossible to replicate EPA measurements in real life based on corner store gas and real life driving conditions.
  • tinycadontinycadon Posts: 287
    What are you getting hand calculated?
  • automelon48automelon48 Posts: 105
    If indeed the EPA uses pure 91 or 93 gasoline for testing, then we are definitely playing in a different ballgame running 87 octane "winter fuel" which in many cases also has ethanol. Like I said, I am looking forward to summer when the weather conditions and the fuel is a bit better. I plan on running various octanes and actually testing my fuel for Ethanol, just so I know.
  • pdawg1pdawg1 Posts: 22
    I don't know if this has been stated before, but the EPA highway test is also 55 mph. I am guessing this might have been set back when the national speed limit was 55, but most likely it is because the manufacturers get a better mpg at 55 to post on the vehicle. Now, how many highways and interstates have a 55 mph limit? A better speed for the highway test should have been at least 65, then this forum probably would not exist...........
  • steverstever Posts: 52,572
    edited March 2013
    The average highway testing speed is lower than that, but it appears that some parts of the highway test exceed 55 (to simulate passing situations, I assume). And there's a newer high speed test where speeds briefly hit 80 mph.

    Detailed Test Information (

    I think the main thing is that the EPA rating gives you a consistent baseline to compare one model against another brand, even if you don't hit the numbers (although some of us always seem to manage to meet or exceed the EPA ratings).
  • izedamanizedaman Posts: 16
    edited March 2013
    I have always met my numbers within 1 or 2 + or -... until this car
    and it did not matter winter summer spring fall, cheap gas.. however chevron regular did bump me up 1 or 2 mpgs. only thing that has helped with the escape if bumping my psi to 38psi, that has got me to low 20's mpg combined
  • john364john364 Posts: 5
    What I find frustrating about the gas mileage I'm averaging with my 2.0 AWD (Avg of 19.7) is that a colleague of mine who owns a 2013 Ford Explorer V6 gets the same mileage that I do and she drives in the city most of the time! The explorer is 4500 pounds and 3.5L V6 and my Escape is about 1000 pounds less and has considerable less power. And yes she has a lead foot! To the person who drives on average 60 miles per hour on the highway, I've tried driving at that speed and lower and still don't get the posted MPG.
  • steverstever Posts: 52,572
    I have always met my numbers within 1 or 2 + or -... until this car

    Me too and usually better. It would drive me nuts if I couldn't hit the EPA numbers after a few thousand miles of "break-in".
  • ronsteveronsteve Posts: 437
    The average highway testing speed is lower than that, but it appears that some parts of the highway test exceed 55 (to simulate passing situations, I assume). And there's a newer high speed test where speeds briefly hit 80 mph.

    When the city and highway cycles were the only two tests, they used to apply flat correction factors to get to the estimates you see on the sticker.

    I'd love to be able to call up detailed info, beyond the sticker, to see what a vehicle got on each of the cycles.

    My Volvo was rated at 21/29 on the old system, and 20/27 on the new one. The one time I recall doing much driving that matched the highway cycle (a few days in the Outer Banks), I averaged about 32mpg. My "mostly highway" commute here looks a lot like the high-speed cycle, and I average about 25mpg.

Sign In or Register to comment.