Ask the Car People.SM


Ford Freestyle - Taurus X

7481 messages,  Last post on Apr 25, 2013 at 10:28 AM

You are in the Ford Freestyle Forum.

What is this discussion about? Ford Freestyle, Ford Taurus X, SUV

Messages Page 703 of 749

#7016 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [stevedebi] by northlakes

Jul 19, 2007 (12:01 pm)

Replying to: stevedebi (Jul 19, 2007 11:22 am)
I looked up my 2005 AWD Freestyle SEL on the EPA web site. They have tables of "original" EPA estimates and the "new" 2008 estimate corrections for your vehicle.
 
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectEngine.jsp?year=2005&make=Ford&mo- - del=Freestyle%20AWD
 
In the case of the AWD 2005 Freebie, the state 19/24 city/highway becomes 17/22 (2008 EST). That being said, I still get 26 to 27 MPG on the highway on long journeys. As the EPA says on the new web site, "your mileage will still vary". It sounds like the new Taurus X is not quite as thrifty with gas as my 2005.

#7017 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [stevedebi] by baggs32

Jul 19, 2007 (12:51 pm)

Replying to: stevedebi (Jul 19, 2007 11:22 am)
But I don't get it. The Acadia uses the same engine and transmission (or started with the co-developed pair), weighs around 700 lbs more, and still gets better EPA. It doesn't make sense. The Acadia is rated at 18 /26 for FWD and 17 / 24 for AWD.
  
It will be interesting to see how the two compare in terms of acceleration and real world MPG.
 
But aren't the mags and owners of Acadia's reporting more like 16 on average? I own two Ford's and both are spot on with EPA estimates for 2008 and at least one of them does better than their 2008 estimate on the highway as I recently found out. I don't see why the Taurus X would stray either then.

#7018 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [stevedebi] by freealfas

Jul 19, 2007 (1:20 pm)

Replying to: stevedebi (Jul 19, 2007 11:22 am)
"The Acadia uses the same engine and transmission "
 
there's nothing the same about the engines, tranny's yes they were co-developed but there is no relationship whatsoever between the ford and gm motors.

#7019 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [freealfas] by bobw3

Jul 19, 2007 (2:34 pm)

Replying to: freealfas (Jul 19, 2007 1:20 pm)
I'm glad I have the Freestyle. My real-world MPG is between 20-30 depending on the driving conditions, with it being able to reach 30mpg cruising at 65mph, and just above 20mpg with mostly non-highway driving. Considering that the Freestyle and Taurus X are practically identical inside, it seems a waste to me to reduce MPG just to give it more power that it really doesn't need. My drive in the Rockies proved to me that the FS has plenty of power.

#7020 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [freealfas] by stevedebi

Jul 19, 2007 (2:51 pm)

Replying to: freealfas (Jul 19, 2007 1:20 pm)
"there's nothing the same about the engines, tranny's yes they were co-developed but there is no relationship whatsoever between the ford and gm motors."
 
Oops, yup, sorry. Same transmission.
 
Worse and worse. The GM uses a 3.6L and the Ford uses a 3.5L. So the smaller engine gets worse MPG!
 
However I note that the GM uses variable valve timing. Maybe the Ford engine is less sophisticated.

#7021 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [stevedebi] by freealfas

Jul 19, 2007 (3:02 pm)

Replying to: stevedebi (Jul 19, 2007 2:51 pm)
Nothing in the spec on the website say vvt. Turbodiesel, I want a turbodiesel for the Flex and even the T-reX. That would make a big difference in mpg and drivetrain longevity...
 
why won't they embrace this, why...

#7022 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [freealfas] by jrl

Jul 19, 2007 (3:20 pm)

Replying to: freealfas (Jul 19, 2007 3:02 pm)
according to C&D, they got a little over 17 mpg with the Acadia in a comparison with the Mazda CX-9....and you know they were not babying it for good mileage....I don't know...It seems that the one thing the x ought to be able to do is be more car like than its competition...but if they can be more suv like and return better mileage...you know people will shop the competition. People seem to want an suv that looks the part..but drives like a car and returns good mileage...it seems this car may look more like a wagon..(thats a turnoff for many people) and return mileage like an suv..it makes no sense...at least the new taurus looks a lot better in person than in photos..so hopefully the x will too! sorry to sound so negative

#7023 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [stevedebi] by bobw3

Jul 19, 2007 (4:18 pm)

Replying to: stevedebi (Jul 19, 2007 2:51 pm)
Yes...the engine & tranny are different, but the interior, dimensions, etc...everything a driver and passenger will see, are the same. The only difference is that the new engine uses more gas.

#7024 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [bobw3] by stevedebi

Jul 20, 2007 (10:45 am)

Replying to: bobw3 (Jul 19, 2007 4:18 pm)
"Yes...the engine & tranny are different, but the interior, dimensions, etc...everything a driver and passenger will see, are the same. The only difference is that the new engine uses more gas."
 
The transmission came from a common source between GM and Ford, so it isn't that different - probably software.
 
In my opinion as a FS owner the car didn't need the extra HP, and the CVT / 3.0L is a really good combination for power and efficiency.

#7025 of 7481 Re: Freestyle/Taurus X [freealfas] by stevedebi

Jul 20, 2007 (10:47 am)

Replying to: freealfas (Jul 19, 2007 3:02 pm)
"Nothing in the spec on the website say vvt. Turbodiesel, I want a turbodiesel for the Flex and even the T-reX. That would make a big difference in mpg and drivetrain longevity...
  
why won't they embrace this, why..."
 
Because they don't have a diesel engine that will meet CARB specs. Currently only vehicles with GVW of 6K lbs or greater can have a diesel. This is basically the F250 pickup and above. The Expedition is not heavy enough. The Excursion (dropped in 2005) had a diesel option. The problem was that to power a vehicle over 6000 lbs, one had to use a very large diesel, over 6L. So the economy, while good for a 6L engine, was not so good in terms of the MPG itself.
 
VW and Honda have technology in the works to put CARB qualified diesels in their vehicles for 2009 models (anticipated, that is - not confirmed). Honda has said it will license the technology, but their current diesels are 2.2L, which is OK for an Accord or CR-V, but too small for the Ford CUVs (or the Honda Ridgeline, Odyssey, and Pilot, for that matter).

Messages Page 703 of 749

To POST a message, please Sign In.

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement