Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

2013 Ford Escape Gas Mileage

145791013

Comments

  • utahdriverutahdriver Member Posts: 5
    I can't understand why people buy fords. The way they treat customers and the issues they have had in the past, don't people read the posts buy people who have bad experiences. It is not that hard with the internet surceases to research manufactures. Sure every now and then someone will have an issue, but with ford it is quite common. Look at all the issues they have with the diesel engine in their pickups. In my opinion if a manufactures will not improve one product line, then their other lines are bound to have issues. I purchased a Mazda CX 5 and with 2,000 miles and get 28 miles per gallon in mixed driving, and no problems or recalls. The 28 is what is advertised and Mazda's get better consumer ratings than ford. Wise up consumers.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    My wife put in one tank of super, due to the station being out of other grades.
    That tank and several subsequent fill ups have netted a noticeable improvement in mileage. Was it the octane change? I don't know.
    I had asked her to run 3 tanks of super in a row, but I think she forgot, but that's ok.
    Now I'll be able to run my own tests because I picked up my own 2.0 ecoboost, although in a Fusion, and I keep very detailed mileage records.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    Yesterday, I brought my wife's Escape in for the first service @ 5000 miles.
    She has not had one problem with it and it has every option on the menu.
    While there, I didn't see any other plated 2013 Escapes in the yard, so either people are driving them, or they haven't sold any. ;)
    If I wanted to buy a nice underpowered mini ute, I'd pick a CX-5.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • tim156tim156 Member Posts: 308
    I bet if you took the time to check, instead of trolling a Ford forum, you would find customer service and vehicle complaints on Mazda, Kia, Toyota and Hyundai forums too. You have the right to post here, but if it's only to bash Ford owners and Ford and to brag about your Mazda, don't bother, I at least could care less about how smart you are and how great your car is.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited March 2013
    Actually it's off-topic in an Escape MPG discussion, but I knew you guys would stick up for your rides. :shades:

    Funny that Ford owned a controlling interest in Mazda not too long ago. After reading all the CX-7 engine complaints, I hope the bugs have been worked out of the CX-5.
  • wistrodwistrod Member Posts: 14
    Thanks! Missed your post the first time. I'll try this.
  • usa1fanusa1fan Member Posts: 68
    Actually, using complaints on the Internet as a basis to judge a company is wasting your time. I have yet to read a single forum about fuel economy where there aren't posts complaining that there's something wrong with the car, sue the manufacturer for fraud, yadda, yadda.. The same goes for other topics in general.

    No car is perfect, and every model has a few lemons slip out of the factory. Combine that with the fact that people are much quicker to post about a problem than they are if everything works fine, and you will see overly negative pictures painted fr practically all brands and models, at least if you take what you see on the forums at face value.

    The real benefit of these complaints is to see what problems *are* cropping up, and, if possible, how to deal with them in the case that you experience them. Sometimes, like with this topic, there may not be an answer (or one you want to hear).

    Hope you like your CX-5. I prefer to have more power and a better looking ride, myself, even if, like all things here, that's a subjective determination based on my preferences and taste.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    I thought about mentioning the CX-7, but that would have been too easy and somewhat off topic.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • escapeismescapeism Member Posts: 39
    Hey, what a minute. I think the CX-5 is a nice looking ride. And I would of bought one if the manual tranny version actually came with some options. but its a stripped down, bare bones vehicle that doesn't even have bluetooth. So I bought a Titanium instead. I like my Escape, the first American built car I have owned since 1983. Well, mostly American built, minus the Spanish built engine and Lord knows what else was assembled offshore. And the first non-manual tranny I have EVER owned.

    I WANT A TITANIUM WITH A MANUAL TRANSMISSION!!!
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    " Last years model had a 13 gallon tank - almost certain they carried it onto this model as well. "

    I own a 2008 Escape Hybrid. I put in 13.3 gallons last fill up, and the needle was at empty (which means a couple of gallons reserve). The previous generation Escape has a 15 gallon tank.
  • frenifreni Member Posts: 2
    I have a 2013 Titanium 2.0, my best mileage has been 20.1 (mostly highway) but typically I average not better than 18.1 mpg around town. Very disappointing. David
  • automelon48automelon48 Member Posts: 105
    David, Is your 2.0 AWD or FWD? What are your highway speeds? There seems to be a bit of a theme with AWD owners struggling more than FWD owners. AWD is rated 28 MPG Hwy and the FWD is rated 30 MPG. I get 30+/- with my 2.0 FWD, but I have to max out at 65 ish or maybe 70MPH to get that.
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    The previous Escape model had a 16.5 gallon tank and I was able to get 15.2-15.5 "useable" gallons.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    Was I sticking up for the 04, 09 or 13?
    I can't remember. ;)
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    edited March 2013
    Are we talking the size of your gas tanks or your mpgs?

    :shades: :shades:

    All these reports date from October of last year. I'm hoping we'll start getting some better reports as the weather warms up and some areas switch to "summer" gas.

    We go on daylight savings time in just a week (March 11) and the extra daylight will surely help, lol.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    Add 15, 12 and 9 to those numbers I posted earlier for the average fuel mileage. :)
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • godeacsgodeacs Member Posts: 481
    edited March 2013
    You must be unaware that the 2014 CX-5 has an optional 2.5L engine with 184 hp - hardly underpowered!

    BTW, I am considering both the Escape SE and the CX-5 (but only w/184 hp engine)...tough choice.
  • automelon48automelon48 Member Posts: 105
    edited March 2013
    Looks like the CX-5, 2.5 has similar power figures to the 1.6 Ecoboost, although the Ecoboost has more pull at lower RPM's.
    The 2.5 should be a much better engine than the 2.0 in the CX-5. It should now be very adequate. (by many reports the 2.0 was/is not enough)

    However, for a difference of just 2 MPG I will keep my 2.0 Ecoboost FWD with 46% more torque, 30% more Hp and 75% more towing capacity.

    If I didn't need the extra power and towing capacity and the CX-5, 2.5 was available with a manual transmission, then I would be a lot more interested.
    Did I mention diesel? When that is available, lots of people will flock to it !
  • usa1fanusa1fan Member Posts: 68
    Choice is good- to each his own. I personally find it looks a bit long in the hood outside, and I dislike the screen area of the dash, otherwise the CX-5 is okay.

    Steve- I can't wait to see if warmer months actually do make much difference with my 2.0l. We bought ours in early October, so all of my numbers are pretty decent, IMO.
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "The previous Escape model had a 16.5 gallon tank and I was able to get 15.2-15.5 "useable" gallons. "

    I'm not sure what year you are referring to, page 291 of my 2008 owners manual says 15 gallons.

    Like I said, mine gets about 13 gallons at the "E" marker.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Member Posts: 19,204
    I know the CX-5 is now available with a 2.5 engine, but that's not the one the other poster has.
    2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    MY2010, the Escape got a refresh in 2009 with a bump in HP.
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    edited March 2013
    "MY2010, the Escape got a refresh in 2009 with a bump in HP. "

    I looked it up, and the 2010 Escape hybrid has a 15 gallon tank. The 2010 ICE Escape has a 17.5 gallon tank.

    Actually, my 2008 FEH has the new body style, and it too has a 15 gallon tank. I can go well over 450 miles (many hypermilers get 500-600 per tank).

    They really should have stayed with the 17.5 gallon tank - even if the new Ecoboost gets the advertised MPG, one can never have too much range. Maybe there wasn't room for the larger tank...
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    Ok, first of all, you never said you had the HYBRID Escape, yes, it has a 15gal tank, you might want throw that out so you're not comparing apples & oranges. Secondly, it may say "17.5g" in the manual, but it's wrong, it's 16.5g, it said it on the Ford website, it says it HERE ON EDMUNDS research for the 2010 Escape AND according to Ford customer service, which I called, they confirmed it was a 16.5g tank. Anything else???
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    edited March 2013
    "Ok, first of all, you never said you had the HYBRID Escape, yes, it has a 15gal tank, you might want throw that out so you're not comparing apples & oranges. Secondly, it may say "17.5g" in the manual, but it's wrong, it's 16.5g, it said it on the Ford website, it says it HERE ON EDMUNDS research for the 2010 Escape AND according to Ford customer service, which I called, they confirmed it was a 16.5g tank. Anything else??? "

    Yup, forgot to mention it was FEH. I did not realize the ICE and FEH were different fuel tank sizes, although it makes sense. Maybe they used the extra space for the traction battery?

    However, the 2010 Ford Owners manual, available on the web from the Ford maintenance site, still says 17.5. I accessed it from their site, and that is what I quoted. I don't question your personal knowledge on the issue.

    In any case, they should have stayed with the larger size.
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    I absolutely agree they should've stayed with a larger tank, but it seems most car companies are shrinking their tanks for whatever reason, save weight I guess???
  • izedamanizedaman Member Posts: 16
    they drop 2 gallons, that saves 16 lb's big deal... Id rather be able to go 40-50 more miles
    but the drivers are getting fatter if there counting down to the precise pound of the car..
    MPG if your 300lb = 17 city, 23 HW
    MPG if your 120lb = 23 city, 26 HW
    and EPA MPG there is no driver so thats why the numbers are higher.. I get it now
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    The EPA test does require a driver; have to wonder if only skinny ones are hired. More likely there's a standard and weights are added to bring the total vehicle weight up to par.

    When you're trying to meet CAFE regs across your entire fleet, every ounce counts.
  • automelon48automelon48 Member Posts: 105
    I would like to know where those numbers came from, for the drivers weight affecting mileage that much.
    If anything, I can see this amount of weight difference having a small effect in the city and a negligible effect on the highway.
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    All the little things add up over time (I tossed a row of seats from my minivan when it was new for example; didn't need it and that weight savings helped offset the additional weight of the full sized spare I got).

    Here's yet another factor:

    "Most gasoline in the U.S. today is 8-10 percent ethanol, but the EPA does its tests with 100 percent gasoline in the tank."

    Here's Why Real-World MPG Doesn't Match EPA Ratings

    This Car and Driver story is a good overview of the testing required by the EPA.
  • pdawg1pdawg1 Member Posts: 22
    I just filled our tank with 11.0 gallons. We had less than 40 miles to empty and the actual mileage on that tank was 22.8. With a 15 gallon tank that would have meant we had 4 gallons left and miles to empty should have been around 91. So, there is an issue with tank size or the computer or both. The low fuel light came on so I believe we had maybe 2 gallons left or a 13 gallon tank.
    I work at a Ford dealership and will be talking to my service manager and possibly the service rep on this issue...........
  • automelon48automelon48 Member Posts: 105
    Have a look at post #262.
    Your distance to empty is based on previous 500 miles, not just your current tank. This may help explain the difference.
  • pdawg1pdawg1 Member Posts: 22
    Sorry, calculations are not correct. If my Escape had 2 gallons in the tank and we put in 11, that would be a 13 gallon tank, which is what a lot of people are saying.............but it is still not 15!
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    Yup, that 15g tank is more like a 13g "useable" tank, there's nothing Ford can do for you. You can never use the entire 15gal, there will always be air in the tank because of the automatic fuel shut off on the gas pump. If you are able to keep getting gas into the tank after the fuel shut off engages you run the risk of ruining the emissions control system. They are just going to tell you everything is normal, and unfortunately in this case, it is.
  • automelon48automelon48 Member Posts: 105
    Steve
    I agree that all the little things add up. I will take 50 lbs of "work stuff" out of my vehicle when it's not needed. I don't expect to save a lot of fuel by doing so, I just think it's a waste to move around extra weight for no reason.

    My main point above, is that it is stated that a heavier driver will increase fuel consumption by 41% in the city!!!! Where does that data come from?
  • steverstever Guest Posts: 52,454
    Weight Watchers. :D
  • donl1donl1 Member Posts: 112
    I never had a vehicle in 40+ years of ownership where I complained the gas tank was too big. And that includes pickups that had 2 tanks. ;)
  • pkmoorpkmoor Member Posts: 2
    Have spent some time reading these posts and have never seen so many complaints about expected vs true MPG. In CITY driving, that is.

    We all agree that there's little or nothing wrong when taking this baby, especially the 2.0 AWD Ecoboost, out of the city. But OMG, if you're a city driver like I am (Washington, DC), even if you are not trying to be the fastest when taking off - I have become extremely careful-, you're in for a surprise: I get 13.5 MPG, run out of gas after 180-200 miles. I might as well get a parking spot where I fill up!

    I've driven just about 5500 miles, and am thoroughly disappointed. I truly shouldn't have to scavenger for 100% gas, switch to 91/93, wonder why Ford decided to engage the All Wheel Drive at all take offs from stop, and the many other reasons folks try to explain away the fact that Ford promised good city mileage and can't deliver.

    And please, if you are a 60/40 or 70/30 driver, we KNOW by now that you get 22.24 MPG. That's not what everyone is complaining about. So stop telling us why you love Ford so much. So you like their logo? Good for you. But it has nothing to do with the problem.

    Anyway, my Ford is at the dealership being tested, but I'm sure it's going to be blamed on the user. That's what they do until the EPA gets on this, and they have to eat crow.

    Anyone want to buy an almost new Escape? Got a great deal for ya.
  • dizneydizney Member Posts: 19
    edited March 2013
    Glad I didnt buy the 2.0 ! Got 35.2 mpg just yesterday on my 1.6 !!!!
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    edited March 2013
    "...Anyway, my Ford is at the dealership being tested, but I'm sure it's going to be blamed on the user. That's what they do until the EPA gets on this, and they have to eat crow.

    Anyone want to buy an almost new Escape? Got a great deal for ya. "

    If you do unload the '13, look up a 2010-2012 Escape Hybrid. I was very disappointed when they did not continue the hybrid for 2013. It gets absolutely great city mileage for an SUV.

    On a side note, I never really understood why they engage the AWD from a cold stop. My 2008 AWD FEH does it as well. Interesting to see they carried on that design "feature".
  • pkmoorpkmoor Member Posts: 2
    Dear Craig, I have a 2.0 Titanium and drive mostly in town. Yes, I do take it out, and then the MPG is fine, not great, but fine. We are not complaining about that.

    However, if Ford says that we should get "Up to 22 cty/30 hwy mpg", and we get 13.5 cty, then there's something WRONG with that. I challenge the EPA to actually get 22 cty. Even with 100% gas, which is unavailable in most large cities.

    That is what we are talking about. Stay with the point we are trying to make, and don't confuse it with your Ford love affair.
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    "... However, if Ford says that we should get "Up to 22 cty/30 hwy mpg", and we get 13.5 cty, then there's something WRONG with that. I challenge the EPA to actually get 22 cty. Even with 100% gas, which is unavailable in most large cities. ..."

    He said he is getting 21 in town, and described some of the techniques he uses to achieve that.

    The differences in reports by various owners makes me wonder if the gas blend is vastly different in the various places.
  • wistrodwistrod Member Posts: 14
    edited March 2013
    You state, "We all agree that there's little or nothing wrong when taking this baby, especially the 2.0 AWD Ecoboost, out of the city." Well, I don't agree. Mine now has 4,500 miles on it, and we took a drive this past weekend. We did 260 miles on flat, Illinois interstate. I set the cruise at 65, and we rolled across the flat expanse of Illinois highway. My mpg (based on refueling, not the display) was 22.7 mpg for these 260 miles. Ford's specs indicate that the 2.0 4WD model gets 28 mpg highway. My experience puts me more than 5 mpg under the mark. Not sure how much purer highway driving you could get than a flat 260 mile stretch of highway with a constant speed of 65. Based on the miles I drive per year, and current gasoline prices, this 5 mpg shortfall costs me about $350 per year -- in my eyes, I was flat out lied to and didn't get what I paid for!
  • tinycadontinycadon Member Posts: 287
    City driving can be vastly different, probably more so than the gas blends. Just for the hell of it I decided to count how many traffic lights I drive through on my 2.5mi drive to work in the city. TWENTY TWO!!! I would say don't use City MPGs to compare, period. Just use the Hwy MPGs, that would be a much better comparison, unless you are driving in the mountains it's pretty much all the same. But someone in the city could have 22 lights to get through in 2.5mi and someone else could have 10 lights in 5 miles, just to difficult to compare.
  • pdawg1pdawg1 Member Posts: 22
    I just had my 2.0 4WD in for the miles to empty issue and gas tank size. There is a TSB out on this issue which requires the computer to be totally reset. When I got it back, my miles to empty full went from 280 to 390. Also my display mpg shot up from 22.0 to over 25 after 40 miles city/highway, so I am now doing a manual check of mpg and if it is higher, I would have all you owners go in and have this TSB performed. Will post the mpg after a few more days of driving.............
  • stevedebistevedebi Member Posts: 4,098
    OK, I'm not sure why you posted this to me. I don't doubt that some people get good mileage.

    For the record, the photo indicated 35.2 MPG, per the dash.
  • ghanashyamlghanashyaml Member Posts: 9
    I got my new Ford Escape 2.0T 4WD 2 weeks back. I drove almost 180 miles on it while getting it. So for the first 240 miles or so, my mpg was being shown around 17.8. Now around 385 miles, it is showing 17.1 mpg. Most of my driving is around city with 4-5 lights in for about every 2 miles. And point to note is that for every 2 miles I drive, my drive to empty drops by 10-12 miles :(

    So definitely bug in the system you are saying? I would assume so since I had to fill up at 290 miles and filled around 12.6 gallons. So per calculation 290/12.6, would be approx 23 mpg.

    " There is a TSB out on this issue which requires the computer to be totally reset"
    Where can I find more info about this TSB?
  • pdawg1pdawg1 Member Posts: 22
    Call your local Ford dealer and say you know of a a TSB on 2013 Escape's with a miles to empty issue, it requires no parts but a tech that can do the TSB and reset the system. My miles to empty is more in line with a 15 gallon tank and my display mpg is over 25 average city/highway. Will report when I complete a manual check of mpg later...........
  • automelon48automelon48 Member Posts: 105
    Your DTE or Distance To Empty is based on your last 500 miles of driving, so if your vehicle is new, I would not pay much attention to that display. Yes, the displays do show at DTE that is very conservative, but you may find that it improves after you have driven normally for 500 + miles.
Sign In or Register to comment.