Last post on Sep 24, 2011 at 8:01 PM
You are in the Ford Fusion/Mercury Milan
What is this discussion about?
Mercury Milan, Ford Fusion, Sedan
#5653 of 5819 Re: 2010 Ford Fusion [lehrer1]
Aug 11, 2010 (5:02 pm)
i think it is sort of a capacity issue. the 3.0 is also used in the escape.
there may only be so many 3.5's that can be produced.
btw, we have an 04 escape with basically the 3.0 as my '07 fusion.
we also have an '09 escape with the same 3.0 in your fusion.
the '04 escape has averaged 19.2 mpg's over 81k miles and the '09 is averaging 21.8 over 18k. the '09 has 40 more horsepower.and also has the 6 speed transmission.
#5654 of 5819 Re: Deep scratch [desgnr]
Aug 11, 2010 (5:04 pm)
I had the same thing happen. There is a turrtle wax that is tinted black and comes with a wax stick that looks like lipstick. It is good for the lower area on the front.
#5655 of 5819 2010 milan I-4 mpg
Aug 12, 2010 (2:16 pm)
Last two fills show 33.3 mpg which is an improvement from the initial 31.9 mpg. Mixed driving, 20% highway;70% suburban; 10% city. The refuel warning seems to come on at a little over 15 gallons fuel used. Since the tank capacity is 17.3 it would appear that Ford has built in a very generous buffer supply at about 2 gallons.
Car is quiet and smooth and I don't notice significant power difference from prior V6 but I have not put it to heavy acceleration maneuvers yet since the engine is still under 2K miles. The MPG gauge is pretty accurate and seems to indicate that at 65-70mph on highway the mpg will aproximate 35 mpg. Since the Ford manual discourages calculating MPG until there are 1-3K miles I expect these numbers to improve as the car loosens up.
A Theory: The people that get the highest MPG performance from their car without hypermiling are the same one who get 80,000 miles before a brake job is necessary. It is amazing to me how many people use the brake often for no obvious reason except that they don't look more than one car ahead and are surprised by every change in their immediate visual field. Obviously the less you use the brake the less you will need to accelerate to keep in flow and the better your MPG. You save money on both ends: better fuel economy and fewer brake jobs over the course of years.
#5656 of 5819 Re: 2010 milan I-4 mpg [pod]
Aug 12, 2010 (4:48 pm)
The refuel warning seems to come on at a little over 15 gallons fuel used. Since the tank capacity is 17.3 it would appear that Ford has built in a very generous buffer supply at about 2 gallons.
This is my only complaint about my Fusion. What good is that extra 2-3 gallons of fuel if you dare not use it? I'd rather it told the truth. Still, it has plenty of range, I've gone 430 miles once and only filled 14.5 gallons. I just think it's a waste if capable of more.
Anyone want to try and see how many more miles you can really go after it says 0 miles to go?
#5657 of 5819 Re: 2010 milan I-4 mpg [pod]
Aug 12, 2010 (4:49 pm)
I see a lot of people having to frequently use their brakes on the freeway because they are tailgating the car in front of them. Because they leave so little room they have to brake frequently, they can not just coast for a moment to adjust to slight changes in speed by the car they are behind.
But I think going 80,000 miles on front brakes is also dependent on where you drive. To go that far you would probably need to do a lot of freeway driving (without tailgating and riding your brakes).
#5658 of 5819 Re: 2010 milan I-4 mpg [xmech]
Aug 12, 2010 (4:55 pm)
I don't think I'd want a refuel warning light to come on only when the tank is empty. 2 gallons seems about right...that allows you 50-60 miles. You don't have to buy gas just because the little light comes on, I assume the fuel gauge is not indicating "empty" when the light first comes on?
#5659 of 5819 Re: 2010 milan I-4 mpg [jeffyscott]
Aug 12, 2010 (5:39 pm)
It also prevents the fuel pump from running dry and causing premature failure.
#5660 of 5819 Re: 2010 milan I-4 mpg [jeffyscott]
Aug 12, 2010 (7:11 pm)
Actually the 2010 Milan (and I presume the Fusion) have a pretty accurate mpg calculator and it tells you how many miles left on tank starting at 50 miles left I think. I managed to put 15.3 gallons in when the calculator said zero miles left. So it is not exactly as vague as simply the needle points to empty. I will need to check the manual for tank capacity but I am fairly certain that I read 17.2 or 17.3 gallons. I'm not sure whether the sensor knows when you refuel or simply reads a float level in the tank. I suspect the latter. The calculator then converts the gallons left into miles left from it's memory of how many mpg you average.
The point about keeping the fuel pump under liquid is a good one although I suspect they could just locate it in a sump off the tank so that it would be wet even when the fuel is very low.
In time I'm sure I'll test the limits beyond empty but the car is so new I don't want to insult it by running out of gas.
#5661 of 5819 Re: 2010 milan I-4 mpg [akirby]
Aug 13, 2010 (8:53 am)
A guy I used to work with told me that whenever he got a "new" car, he put a can of gas in the trunk and then would drive it until the tank was completely empty so that he would know how far he could go before the tank was really empty.
#5662 of 5819 Re: 2010 milan I-4 mpg [jeffyscott]
Aug 13, 2010 (6:03 pm)
I like that idea and will try that in a few thousand miles. A reminder to Fusion/Milan owners with the new capless fillers: a special funnel is provided (under the trunk floor cover) to allow portable gas cans to be use to fill the tank. They caution that if you insert the spouts of portable gas cans they may damage the capless device. The funnel is a clear polysomething color and strapped in with the jack under the trunk floor cover.
I did read the owners' manual again and yes the capacity of the tank is 17.5 gal for FWD and 17.2 gals for AWD for the 2010 models.