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 27 of 57

#258 of 565 Re: DTE [stevedebi] by automelon48

Feb 07, 2013 (11:06 am)

Replying to: stevedebi (Feb 07, 2013 10:19 am)
Steve, You are correct. I have driven over in Germany, and the European cars / philosophy is very different than what we see here in North America. Smaller engines, squeezing a bit more out of them.
A few years ago I rented a Ford Mondeo wagon with a 2.0 TDi-6sp-manual. It was a pleasure to drive, VERY fuel efficient and very respectable power. 228Kph (142Mph) on the autobahn was plenty quick!
I look forward to having a diesel selection in North America in (hopefully) the not too distant future.

#259 of 565 Re: DTE [stevedebi] by woodinva

Feb 07, 2013 (1:22 pm)

Replying to: stevedebi (Feb 07, 2013 10:19 am)
After speaking with a cousin of mine who is a retired FORD executive; he tells me that the reason Ford doesn't bring diesels to SUV'S AND THE MID SIZE car market has to do with re-tooling and re-engineering mainly. If they built SUV's to handle the extra torque they would have to redesign brake systems to handle the load, front ends, transfer cases for 4WD and differentials. Plus they may have to offer higher capacity transmissions to get better fuel efficiency. Then once they increase the strength of these products to handle TDI they would have to have to INCREASE the prices of the vehicles. When they increase the prices of the vehicles; people tend to have a 10 year replacement philosophy and not a 6 year replacement philosophy. The car manufacturers enjoy the fact that most of you replace vehicles in 6 years time or shorter. Repeat business keeps them profitable. However future CAFE requirements will force them to bring diesels to this country but if they can extend it for a few more years it works to their 'profit plans' that are projected 5- 10 years in advance.
  
It is now known that JEEP will offer their GRAND Cherokee with a diesel engine option again; this engine is by the same company that made them when Daimler Benz was running Chrysler. Except that the company has sold its ownership from DAIMLER now to a 50 -50 partnership between GM- FIAT.
 What do you want to bet that GM will soon be offering a well proven variant of that engine in its products for the US in the near future.
 If FORD WERE SMARTER they would be offering a turbo diesel in the EXPLORER and larger class vehicles right now before they experience a loss in market share...they have the engines for them..in different markets right now.Australia , South America sell them right now.

#260 of 565 Escape an MPG disappointment for me too by dons8

Feb 07, 2013 (3:43 pm)

We went from a 2003 Highlander to a 2013 Escape and so far the MPG (nearly 2000 miles) have been a real comparative disappointment. Despite the 300 pound weight drop and the small displacement engine the highway cruising MPG seems to run around 24 MPG and the city MPG is down around 18. Starting and stopping quickly kick in the turbo unless you keep the RPMs down under 2500 (preferable under 2000) which quickly gets you a mad line of cars behind you. The heavier 6 cylinder Highlander claimed less and delivered more. We also got a new Focus and that car is also getting about 4-MPG less than claimed for City although I'm able to get and beat the highway MPG if I hold it at a steady cruise of 65. I'm left with little option, but to think Ford designed to the EPA tests rather than to the customer and that I should have bought a Highlander hybrid and an Altima (Focus trunk too narrow to carry two golf bags without taking out the woods).

#261 of 565 Re: DTE [woodinva] by explorerx4

Feb 07, 2013 (6:54 pm)

Replying to: woodinva (Feb 07, 2013 1:22 pm)
In Europe, the 2013 Escape is sold as the Kuga. It has 2 diesel engine options.
http://www.ford.co.uk/Hidden/Configurator/configureKuga
Click the Engine & Transmission tab.

#262 of 565 Re: DTE [automelon48] by automelon48

Feb 07, 2013 (7:27 pm)

Replying to: automelon48 (Feb 01, 2013 9:24 am)
Just did a bit of digging on the DTE indication. It is based on your Running Average Fuel Economy (or RAFE) which is your average fuel economy over the last 800Km or 500 miles.
You can find out what your RAFE is, if you go into the diagnostics mode as described in an earlier post.
I just checked my RAFE and it is at 8.4 L/100Km or 28 MPG. (mostly highway, but not all) 2.0 FWD
So now, even with my fuel guage sitting at just over 1/8th of a tank, the DTE is showing 117Km or 73 miles.

#263 of 565 Time vs. Distance for Fuel Economy ??? by automelon48

Feb 07, 2013 (7:43 pm)

With all the discussion on this forum, and all the various results from different owners, I think we have all overlooked the Trip Timing function on the dash.
It would be very interesting for everyone to report their Trip Time and their distance and their mileage for a tank of gas. This will give us average speed, which is pretty important when considering fuel economy.
If one driver says their City fuel economy is poor, and has an average speed of 12Mph and another reports good City mileage and has an average speed of 25Mph, it would make sense!
 
For me, I have not reset my Trip 1 timer (as far as I recall) since taking delivery of the vehicle.
I now have 149 hours showing. (yes, the hours roll over after 99, so my display actually shows 49 hours)
I also have 6,551 Kms (4,068 miles) on the ODO. This calculates to a lifetime average speed of 44 Kph or 27Mph. The actual speed would be slightly higher than this, as having the ignition ON, but the engine not running, still keeps the clock going.
 
Anyone with good or bad mileage want to post some time vs distance vs mileage data for one tank? Or maybe the lifetime average if available?

#264 of 565 Re: Time vs. Distance for Fuel Economy ??? [automelon48] by mikeo56

Feb 08, 2013 (1:24 pm)

Replying to: automelon48 (Feb 07, 2013 7:43 pm)
Anyone with good or bad mileage want to post some time vs distance vs mileage data for one tank? Or maybe the lifetime average if available?
 
   
Life of 1.6 ltr FWD
1286 miles 62 hours 23.3 avg.miles per gallon
according to the cars screen information.
I know there is a lot of idle time in there.
with about 375 miles on hwy.
 
I will let you do the #'s

#265 of 565 Re: Time vs. Distance for Fuel Economy ??? [mikeo56] by automelon48

Feb 08, 2013 (3:03 pm)

Replying to: mikeo56 (Feb 08, 2013 1:24 pm)
1286 / 62 hours = 20.7 Mph average. And 23.3 MPG average. That does look like either a lot of idling or a lot of road congestion. Good information. Thanks !
 
My lifetime average is 27 Mph with lifetime average MPG of 24.3. 2.0 FWD

#266 of 565 Re: Time vs. Distance for Fuel Economy ??? [automelon48] by mikeo56

Feb 08, 2013 (3:56 pm)

Replying to: automelon48 (Feb 08, 2013 3:03 pm)
Lots of Idle. For sure.
Remote start everyday sometimes let it run out.
Cold outside avg temp about 35 lots of idle time with work, and warming up, talking to people with engine on.
Small town so no congestion at all,
ahh..... life in a small rural town.
Interesting. If people have not noticed it is only the ones who have the AWD that get the bad gas mileage, that is why we got the FWD.
I had a loaner with the last recall it was a 2.0 AWD and it got 18 town and 24 Hwy, I was keeping close watch.
I also seems like mine FWD is getting just a little better since I crossed over the 1,000 mile mark.
No problems love the car, and the mileage I am getting.

#267 of 565 My city mileage sucks! by cbc410

Feb 13, 2013 (10:47 pm)

I have around 3300 miles on my Titanium FWD. Since I got it, it only gets around 14 - 16 mpg in all city driving. Freeway is 26-32 depending if the road is flat or not. I drive very conservatively and always get the highest marks on their little Eco Driver read out. I have taken the car to the dealer to be checked out and they say I am getting that mpg because of the winter fuel (which is less efficient), because I live in the Bay Area hills, and because of city traffic conditions with lots of stop signs and lights. Even with all that, the mpg shouldn't be off by more than 30%. My 2001 Volvo wagon gets the same mpg and it isn't suppose to be as fuel efficient plus it is an old car. Also, city driving is suppose to full of lights. And even on flat roads, the mpg is bad unless I can coast through all green lights. It is so frustrating to me that Ford feels no shame that they misrepresented the mpg on this car. I never would have purchased the car. I told them my concerns on day 3 of owning the car and they just told me to wait until the break in period is over. Now I feel like I have spent a ton of money on something that will have a horrible resale value and has already lost $10,000 in value just from no longer being brand new.

Messages Page 27 of 57

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement