Monthly Update for February 2017 - 2017 Ford Escape

Edmunds.comEdmunds.com Member, Administrator, Moderator Posts: 10,137
edited May 2017 in Ford
imageMonthly Update for February 2017 - 2017 Ford Escape

Our long-term 2017 Ford Escape heads out on a road trip to Mammoth Mountain, with a new roof rack to increase its luggage capacity.

Read the full story here


Comments

  • longtimelurkerlongtimelurker Member Posts: 455
    That's not great fuel economy, although there is no way of telling how many of those 1600 miles were with that roof carrier attached, and even without it, the crossbars themselves are going to cut into fuel economy.

    And it has to be said...this trying to use 87 octane fuel in a turbocharged engine...it never works out well. Use a better grade of fuel and fuel economy will go up. Yes, they will run on 87, but that's still right at the edge of the operating envelope. Once you're outside of the EPA test parameters, you really want to have a better grade of fuel in there.
  • legacygtlegacygt Member Posts: 599
    There's a lot to appreciate about this car. It's very useful (although the same could be said about virtually all of the vehicles in this class) and seems well-executed. The styling has improved since the last version although I would have liked some more drastic changes since the last version was probably the worst design ever on an Escape.

    About the fuel economy: I feel like I've been leaving the same comments regarding Ecoboost efficiency for years. When a Ford with Ecoboost does not come close to the EPA numbers it should not be a surprise. This is pretty close to being a rule. Ford is putting undersized turbo engines in larger cars. I have no problem with turbo power. There are many benefits and efficiency can be one of them. But if the engine is undersized and the turbo must be spooled up constantly under normal driving conditions, the car is not going to see much better efficiency than a larger engine. There are examples where Ford does provide a "right sized" Ecoboost engine. But they are guilty of putting smaller engines in cars that are too large to get out of their own way without the turbo spooling up. This works fine on the EPA test cycle which must allow for infrequent and lethargic acceleration. But real world driving requires frequent use of the turbos in these cars and mileage suffers accordingly.
  • busbodgerbusbodger Member Posts: 11
    What was the interior noise like?
Sign In or Register to comment.