Ask the Car People.SM


2013 Ford Escape Gas Mileage - READ ONLY

565 messages,  Last post on May 18, 2013 at 8:42 PM

You are in the Ford Escape Forum.

What is this discussion about? Ford Escape, Fuel Efficiency (MPG), SUV

Please note the engine, AWD/FWD, type of gas you buy, and something about the type of driver you are and your driving conditions (city/highway, commuting) when you post about your mileage.

Messages Page 16 of 57

#150 of 565 EPA testing procedures by automelon48

Dec 21, 2012 (1:09 pm)

There seems to be a lot of misunderstanding about how the EPA tests vehicles. It has changed over the years. Below is the link to see the current procedures.
link title">link title

#151 of 565 Re: MPG's [escapeism] by usa1fan

Dec 21, 2012 (5:19 pm)

Replying to: escapeism (Dec 21, 2012 9:24 am)
100% agree about the "instant" mpg display.

#152 of 565 70driver by 70driver

Dec 23, 2012 (7:45 am)

SEL with the 1.6 engine, with 2700 miles. Best mileage was 33.9 with a bit of tailwind on highway. I don't creep away from stops, but also don't floor it either. Generally get 30-31 mpg on open road/22-24 in local city driving. This is much better city mpg than the 2011 Limited with the V6 and a couple better on the highway.

#153 of 565 same mpg as minivan by mck588

Dec 27, 2012 (1:39 pm)

Sold my 2003 Chrysler T&C Limited minivan to buy a 2013 Escape Titanium 2.0.
 
I was getting 13.8 mpg on the minivan...always with a mix of local and highway. I was excited to finally get rid of it for something more fuel efficient.
 
After 3 months, I have been able to reach 14.8 mpg on my Escape. Woohoo!
 
I am hoping that as the car breaks in I will see an improvement in mpg.

#154 of 565 Re: same mpg as minivan [mck588] by mikeo56

Dec 27, 2012 (1:57 pm)

Replying to: mck588 (Dec 27, 2012 1:39 pm)
First tank of Gas only 175 miles in my SEL FWD 1.6
 
getting 21 around town and about 30 or so on the Hwy,
 
although only had it on Hwy for about 35 miles.
 
During the recall I drove and SEL 2.0 4wd for 2 weeks about 4oo miles
in that I only got 18 around town and 24 hwy

#155 of 565 Re: 2013 Ford Escape Titanium 2.0 AWD: No Eco in my Ecoboost [fortherock] by drjjjj

Jan 04, 2013 (5:08 pm)

Replying to: fortherock (Dec 18, 2012 10:47 pm)
To maximize MPG rating from Feds, design max mpg 50 mph for freeway mpg rating! The domestic manufactures don't seem to have the same sense of ownership when designing new rigs like the Japanese-perhaps a culture issue! I won't touch a domestic vehicle any more-too many bad experiences! Wish it weren't so!

#156 of 565 Re: 2013 Ford Escape Titanium 2.0 AWD: No Eco in my Ecoboost [drjjjj] by automelon48

Jan 05, 2013 (11:40 am)

Replying to: drjjjj (Jan 04, 2013 5:08 pm)
Read posting #150 and go to the link and read that as well. Your 50Mph notion is out of date.
 
There is no doubt that an SUV (or similar shape) will get better mileage at lower speeds. This being said, the EPA ratings are done at a variety of speeds, not 50Mph.
If I drove at 50 Mph in my Escape, I would exceed the EPA ratings.
For people who are wanting to drive 70 + Mph and not see their mileage drop off a cliff, they need to look at a vehicle which is much more aerodynamic.
( ie, cars )

#157 of 565 Re: 2013 Ford Escape Titanium 2.0 AWD: No Eco in my Ecoboost [automelon48] by dizney

Jan 05, 2013 (11:52 am)

Replying to: automelon48 (Jan 05, 2013 11:40 am)
I had the AWD 2.0 for a loaner for the recall !
   It was a PIG on gas........
Glad I bought the 1.6 L FWD. Great gas mieage!

#158 of 565 Re: 2013 Ford Escape Titanium 2.0 AWD: No Eco in my Ecoboost [dizney] by automelon48

Jan 05, 2013 (6:10 pm)

Replying to: dizney (Jan 05, 2013 11:52 am)
dizney... I have put about 10 tanks of gas through my 2.0 FWD. It is getting the EPA numbers. It's all in how the vehicle is driven. The AWD does take about 7% more fuel than the FWD, and if you are using the power that the 2.0T can put out, then you will burn the proportionate amound of fuel.
If I had a loaner, I might be a little more lead-footed as well.
This may not apply to you, but I find it humerous when people rent a 2.0 AWD, "drive it like a rental" and then are surprised at how much fuel it uses.
 
When driven equally, the 2.0 should be using about 8% more fuel than the 1.6.
That's a pretty good offset, considering that the 2.0 makes 35% more HP and 46% more Torque.

Messages Page 16 of 57

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement