Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
On highway as you described with constant speed at max 60 I ALWAYS get 35 to 38 MPG
Answer : Look at your RPM's above 60 a lot more on the 16L !
2) If you drive 60mph on the highways in the DC area (when it's not totally clogged) you're taking your life in your own hands.
3) It's being marketed as a "have your cake & eat it too" in regards to MPGs. So if you need to change your driving habits to get the high MPGs compared to your normal driving habits (got better MPGs in my 2010 Escape) then it's completely misleading advertising by Ford.
I'm not a Ford basher, I've had numerous Ford's in my lifetime, but this 2013 Escape IS NOT what it's being made out to be. I would've been better off with a V6 Edge.
As a foot note:
Trip from Phoenix to Minneapolis, speeds at 70-75, overall average 25.6
Best mpg's on relatively flat terrain, 5 mph tail wind, 75 mph 30.6
Current MPG's, Hwy/City combined, temps in single digits 24.4
She put super unleaded in because all the regular was sold out due to a pending snow storm.
With my 17mpg city you would think i was getting to 100 mph between lights....
I am getting about 23 in town "not city" and about 28 HWY going 65-70 more if at 60. That is why we bought a FWD even though we live where it snows in the winter. GAS MILEAGE W/ FWD
Not sure if the gas changed or the weather or something else.
Wow, that is low. What does it do at 60 MPH? Is that with a 2.0, or 1.6?
That's City/Hwy, idling, etc. Snow tires and Canadian winter driving.
My configuration is rated 22/30 with a combined rating of 25.
I am not trying to rub salt in your wound, just stating my experience.
I expect mileage to improve when the weather warms and when we switch back to "summer gas". (and when I put my all seasons on for the first time!)
PS, If you have a 2.0AWD then it is rated 21/28 24-combined.
And you're right - pay close attention to what the class members get compared to the lawyers.
Hyundai Agrees To Settle Fuel-Efficiency Lawsuits
I'm sure there are some idiots that gun it all the time and complain...
But the way I drive in the city, I don't think can be beat. Ultra-slow acceleration, maximize coasting between red lights (foot off pedal as MUCH as possible without driving everyone around me absolutely crazy).
Stop and go traffic just kills this thing. Doesn't matter how hard you try. Sure if you can coast on green lights with no traffic you'll get OK mpg.
If I'm forced to drive that way (super-maximize mileage) then I don't even need the freaking turbo! I could drive the way I drive with a 120hp engine... There should be an ECO button which reduces the turbo involvement or something. People reviewing the paltry SkyActive engine of the Mazda CX5 were saying the engine didn't have enough guts, but I'm sure it'd be PLENTY for the driving style imposed on Escape owners.
I cannot get anything over 375 km (235 miles) out of a city tank in normal Toronto, Ontario conditions. Can't imagine what it'd be like if I was driving "normally", not like a Prius owner trying to get to 600 miles on a tank.....
Also it annoys me that you'd have to drive at 55-60 mph to get decent hwy mileage. That's just not reality, not one bit. Optimizing fuel ratings for that speed (so that the marketing department can have a field day with stupid claims) is just playing the system and pissing people off. If someone drives 55mph on a 60mph highway, then he's selfish, a danger to others, and probably causes all kinds of episodes of road rage around. In 2013, a car should provide decent mileage at an average speed of 70mph.
I love the car otherwise, but let me say that once this lease is over, I will not be looking at any EcoBoost model from Ford.
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.
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 [non-permissible content removed].
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.
I've noticed with several vehicles that they do better at high altitudes.
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.
Lawsuits claim fuel efficiency overstated in Ford C-Max, Fusion hybrids (Detroit Free Press)
There's talk of reviewing the whole certification process.
Is your winter winding down? Warmer weather can help your mpg too.
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. :-)
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 !!!
Guess it's time to mention pure-gas.org 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.
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).