rmc523 Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 (edited) Ford does pretty well agains Toyota SUVs/crossovers: (italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine) Escape: FWD/4x2 , AWD/4WD/4x4 4-cyl (man)22/28 20/26 , 19/24 V6 18/24 , 17/22 Hybrid 34/30 , 29/27 Rav 4: 4-cyl 24/30 , 23/27 V6 22/29 , 21/28 --- Edge: V6 18/25 , 17/24 Highlander (08): V6 18/24 , 17/23 --- Explorer: V6 15/21 , ? V8 15/21 , ? 4-Runner: V6 18/22 , 17/21 V8 17/20 , 16/19 --- Expedition: V8 14/19 , ?* EL: V8 ? , ? (not listed) Sequoia: V8 15/18 , 15/18* Land Cruiser: V8 13/17 , ? --- Taurus X: V6 16/24 , 15/22 Flex: V6 ? , ? (I'm guessing similar numbers to Taurus X) No Toyota competitor to Taurus X (unless compared to 3 row Highlander) or Flex --- Sienna: V6 19/26 , 18/23 No Ford competitor. Rav 4 beats Escape, except for Hybrid (no Rav 4 hybrid) Edge beats Highlander 4-Runner easily beats Explorer's lousy FE Expedition beats Land Cruiser easily, ties with Sequoia. * No Toyota Flex or Taurus X, as stated above. *Expy 1mpg better hwy, Sequoia 1mpg better city Car/Truck comparisons coming... Edited August 12, 2007 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 12, 2007 Author Share Posted August 12, 2007 (edited) Ford also doesn't do bad compared to Toyota Trucks: (with the limited data there is, being the truck segment) (italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine) Ranger: 4x2 , 4x4 I4 - 21/26 , - 3.0L V6 - 16/20 , -* 4.0L V6 - 15/20 , -* Tacoma: 4-cyl man - 23/28 , 19/23 4-cyl auto - 21/27 , ? V6 man - ? , ? V6 auto - ? , ? Sport Trac: V6 - 15/21 , - * V8 - 15/21 , 14/20 * --- F-150: not listed Tundra: V6 - 17/20 , - * 4.7L V8 - 15/18 , 15/18 * 5.7L V8 - 16/20 , 14/18* --- Super Duty: No Toyota competitor* --- E-series: No Toyota competitor* Tacoma 4-cyl beats Ranger, no Tacoma V6 figures available. V8 Sport Trac in a class of its own sort of. No F-150 figures available b/c of the class, same w/ Super Duty/E-series. Tundra wins only because no F-150 figures available. *Win by default, because of lack of FE figures on company websites or no competition by the other manufacturer NOTE: I compared Ranger AND Sport Trac to Tacoma, because Sport Trac has a Crew Cab available. Maybe Ranger shouldn't be compared to Tacoma because of its' size? Car comparison coming... Edited August 12, 2007 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 12, 2007 Author Share Posted August 12, 2007 (edited) Ford does OK comparing Toyota/Ford car fuel economy (italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine) Focus (07): FWD , AWD Duratec 20 I4 - 27/27 , - Duratec 23 I4 - 23/32 , - Corolla: I4 Man - 28/37 , - I4 Auto - 26/35 , - --- Fusion: I4 - 23/31 , - V6 - 20/28 , ? Hybrid - Coming! Camry: I4 - 21/31 , - V6 - 19/28 , - Hybrid - 33/34 , - --- Mustang: V6 - 19/28 (18/26) , - 4.6L V8 - 17/25 (17/23) , - ( / ) = auto 5.4L V8 - 15/21 , - no Toyota competitor --- Solara: 4-cyl - 21/31 (22/31) , - ( / ) = auto V6 - 18/27 , - no real Ford competitor --- Taurus: V6 - 18/28 , 17/24 Avalon: V6 - 19/28 , - --- Yaris: no Ford competitor (yet) Prius/Matrix: no Ford competitor Corolla edges out Focus, I'm not sure, but I thought I heard 08 Focus #s will be better than 07 #s. Fusion beats Camry, albeit w/ less powerful engines. Fusion Hybrid is coming! Avalon barely beats out Taurus (I'd take Taurus) Edited August 13, 2007 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Wait a second here...I thought Toyota was suppose to get way better fuel economy then anything from Detroit and that is why everybody wants one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcsario Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Err... the one with that reputation would be Honda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 12, 2007 Share Posted August 12, 2007 Not that I doubt your numbers rmc but go ahead and take down those Mustang vs Solara comparison because the first thing 90% of the guys around here will say is that the Mustang has no competition, that it is in a class by itself and can't be compared to any other car on the market. So lets be consistent shall we? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bystander Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 Ford does OK comparing Toyota/Ford car fuel economy (italicized, red = winner, FE per model, engine) Focus (07): FWD , AWD Duratec 20 I4 - 27/27 , - Duratec 23 I4 - 23/32 , - Corolla: I4 Man - 28/37 , - I4 Auto - 26/35 , - --- Fusion: I4 - 23/31 , - V6 - 20/28 , ? Hybrid - Coming! Camry: I4 - 21/31 , - V6 - 19/28 , - Hybrid - 33/34 , - --- Mustang: V6 - 19/28 (18/26) , - 4.6L V8 - 17/25 (17/23) , - ( / ) = auto 5.4L V8 - 15/21 , - Solara: 4-cyl - 21/31 (22/31) , - ( / ) = auto V6 - 18/27 , - --- Taurus: V6 - 18/28 , 17/24 Avalon: V6 - 19/28 , - --- Yaris: no Ford competitor (yet) Prius/Matrix: no Ford competitor Corolla edges out Focus, I'm not sure, but I thought I heard 08 Focus #s will be better than 07 #s. Fusion beats Camry, albeit w/ less powerful engines. Fusion Hybrid is coming! Mustang vs. Solara - not really a good comparison in any way, shape, or form. Avalon barely beats out Taurus (I'd take Taurus) The Fusion is not rated for higher MPG than the Camry, in any configuration. The numbers in your post are the old EPA ratings for the Fusion and the new (lower) EPA ratings for the Camry. The ratings for the 2007 Fusion I4 based on the new rating system are 20/29, not 23/31 (which are the ratings from the old rating system). The 2007 Fusion V6 is rated at 18/26 for FWD and 17/24 for AWD. The Avalon, based on fueleconomy.gov, is rated at 20/28 for 2007. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furious1Auto Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 Err... the one with that reputation would be Honda. I thought all things Asian where superior pissface!~ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
630land Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 The media peretuates the notion that all Ford makes are big trucks, and big cars. As if an Accord and Camry get 50mpg city, and there is no such thing as an Asian truck/SUV. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bb62 Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 The problem with Ford Fuel economy (and except for the Escape hybrid which BUYS this first generation hybrid technology from Aisin {which is owned by Toyota}) is that traditionally Ford has refused to invest in new technologies for both the powertrain and the weight of the vehicle. The drive for cost reductions is the all incompassing goal of Ford (whether now of 10 years ago) that has led to Ford trucks being the most heavy on the market and the engines not incorporating technologies as DI, CVVL, cam switching, and other technologoes that Ford wanted to play"fast follower". Engine technology is not something that Ford whould generally be proud of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 (edited) Not that I doubt your numbers rmc but go ahead and take down those Mustang vs Solara comparison because the first thing 90% of the guys around here will say is that the Mustang has no competition, that it is in a class by itself and can't be compared to any other car on the market. So lets be consistent shall we? I got the #s off of the Ford/Toyota websites, so whatever is displayed there is shown here. I just compared them b/c the Solara was the CLOSEST thing to Mustang. I know that the ONLY way they are similar is they both have 2 doors, 4 wheels, a hood and trunk, and an engine. that's about it. I'll put them in a separate category though. Edited August 13, 2007 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 It could be worse...it could be GM which is still using noisy, unrefined, unsophisticated OHV engines which they are trying to pass-off as "High Value"...but really, thats a beaten horse we've discussed here about whats under the hood. Ideally, around the Explorer/Firestone senario, Ford had some great plans with it's engine family. Mazda was taking the lead in global I4 engine engineering. Ford would improve Duratec family, and a new wave of Modular V8 engines. Some of that is taking place though and Ford is trying to gloablize their engine plans, it's just, that it's taking much longer because of limited resources. Unfortunately for Ford, that 99-01' plan was great THEN, but the competitors are already "there", they've BEEN there for awhile. And what was high-tech, new, fresh then, today is dated, and has-been. So they've had to re-invent their engine plans again and again, yet all these re-inventing continues to push back introductions over and over.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
retro-man Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 (edited) and there is no such thing as an Asian truck/SUV. Hmmm. Sorry. I totally misunderstood your statement. My mistake. Edited August 15, 2007 by retro-man Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 (edited) The Fusion is not rated for higher MPG than the Camry, in any configuration. The numbers in your post are the old EPA ratings for the Fusion and the new (lower) EPA ratings for the Camry. The ratings for the 2007 Fusion I4 based on the new rating system are 20/29, not 23/31 (which are the ratings from the old rating system). The 2007 Fusion V6 is rated at 18/26 for FWD and 17/24 for AWD. The Avalon, based on fueleconomy.gov, is rated at 20/28 for 2007. I got these numbers off the Ford/Toyota websites. I didn't even think about the new ratings for 08 vehicles when I posted these. I'm sure the websites will be updated soon, after which, I'll update the #s on this topic. According to the Toyota website, Avalon #s are 19/28. Most of these are 07 models, so (most of) the #s would represent the old rating system anyways. Edited August 13, 2007 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 I got the #s off of the Ford/Toyota websites, so whatever is displayed there is shown here. I just compared them b/c the Solara was the CLOSEST thing to Mustang. I know that the ONLY way they are similar is they both have 2 doors, 4 wheels, a hood and trunk, and an engine. that's about it. I'll put them in a separate category though. The truth is it was fine by me buddy. But in the past when I have pointed out that people cross shop the Mustang with other cars on the market it was made clear to me by numerous posters around here that you can't really cross shop the Mustang or compare it to anything because it's in a class by itself until the Camaro comes back. Now I know what a load of s*** that is but apparently it passes for logic around here at some level. That's the only reason I said anything. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if someone cross shopped a Mustang and a Solara. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 (edited) The truth is it was fine by me buddy. But in the past when I have pointed out that people cross shop the Mustang with other cars on the market it was made clear to me by numerous posters around here that you can't really cross shop the Mustang or compare it to anything because it's in a class by itself until the Camaro comes back. Now I know what a load of s*** that is but apparently it passes for logic around here at some level. That's the only reason I said anything. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if someone cross shopped a Mustang and a Solara. They won't be able to do that much longer, Solara is gone. Edited August 13, 2007 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sixt9coug Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 The Ranger numbers are off a bit. mine is a 4x2 and was rated at 16/24. i think even the new EPA estimates are about the same. (3.0 V6 with a manual) i get over 21mpg averages out of a tankful without even trying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 Speaking of Rangers have you seen how the truck seems to be holding its value now that gas has gone up. I looked at several on a used lot just the other night and they were still commanding 17K price tags with 4 bangers and 20 thousand miles. Wow. Ford should not get rid of this truck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 They won't be able to do that much longer, Solara is going away. (At least thats what I heard) Yes. The Solara was discontinued. So the truth of the matter is, it really WASN'T any sort of competition for the Mustang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 Yes. The Solara was discontinued. So the truth of the matter is, it really WASN'T any sort of competition for the Mustang. I know it wasn't. IMO I don't know who would compare this: to this: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 I know it wasn't. IMO I don't know who would compare this: to this: BlackHorse, apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smok Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 The Fusion is not rated for higher MPG than the Camry, in any configuration. The numbers in your post are the old EPA ratings for the Fusion and the new (lower) EPA ratings for the Camry. The ratings for the 2007 Fusion I4 based on the new rating system are 20/29, not 23/31 (which are the ratings from the old rating system). The 2007 Fusion V6 is rated at 18/26 for FWD and 17/24 for AWD. The Avalon, based on fueleconomy.gov, is rated at 20/28 for 2007. So he is trying to make a point by playing with old vs new numbers. It's either intentional or just plain dumb. People, get your facts straight before posting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share Posted August 13, 2007 So he is trying to make a point by playing with old vs new numbers. It's either intentional or just plain dumb. People, get your facts straight before posting... 1- Im not understanding what you're trying to say. 2- Are you telling me to get my facts straight before posting or bystander? I dont really care if youre telling me to, as I have said, I got this info from the company websites, so they need to update their info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackHorse Posted August 13, 2007 Share Posted August 13, 2007 BlackHorse, apparently. :slap: Now sit there and let that sting while I talk micro-nuts. I personally wouldn't cross shop a Mustang with a Solara. In point of fact I wouldn't shop a Mustang at all because I don't like this current body style but that's another story. But I gurantee you somebody out there has cross shopped the two if for no other reason then they fall in the same price range. I would however cross shop a Mustang with cars like the Eclipse or even the Sky / Solstice. I personally know a gal who was tryinig to decide between the Mustang and Mini-Cooper. She went with the Mini. So trust me, despite your "it can't be done" point of view. It is done, everyday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.