Bye Bye Taurus, Hello Escape

[RichardJensen]

AFAIK, the check engine light is regulated by the EPA, as it relates to emissions equip.

 

Therefore, I wonder if the government is involved in something like a warranty action pertaining to the OBD equip, even if it isn't an NHTSA recall?

[fordtech1]

They probably meant there is a TSB for wiring harness repair or pigtail replacement. There is a TSB that covers 1.6 and 2.0 for pigtail and wiring harness splice causing CEL codes. Glad he got it back. I would take a 2.0 ten times over a 1.6. Well at least until I see more of them with trouble free miles.

Edited September 10, 2013 by fordtech1

[V8-X]

You could be right RJ, but think fordtech1 might be on the right path.

 

Thanks fordtech1, I'm sure that's what they meant and either stated recall (instead of TSB) or my father in law misinterpreted what he was told. Either way, he's back on the road and out of the Venza (thank goodness). Will report back if any further issues are experienced as well as when his 2014 is delivered. Hopefully I can get some shots of it soon after delivery.

[RichardJensen]

You could be right RJ, but think fordtech1 might be on the right path.

 

Nah. Ford tech's got this one. I was just taking a shot in the dark. He's either a Ford tech, or he's lying. :D

[V8-X]

Father in law is becoming more and more disenchanted with the Escape. Was over watching the Giants/Broncos game and he didn't have one good word to say.

 

Main gripe right now is the MPG's, even though IR pays for all his fuel bills. Anyways, even when trying to stay out of boost and babying the throttle, he's only averaging about 15mpgs in mixed driving and a little over 200 miles per tank. He was averaging 20mpgs in the Taurus in mixed driving and being as hard on the throttle as he wanted. He hates that he could average 390+ all highway miles (if not closer to 450 miles) per tank in the Taurus, but the best he's gotten on a tank in Escape all highway miles was just over 280. Of course part of the problem is the smaller fuel tank. But even looking at the 3.5L Taurus and EB2.0L Escape, the Escape should be averaging better mpg. He's also noticed some fit/finish issues with interior parts not aligning and noticeable gaps.

 

He knows this is loaner until his 2014 is delivered. And he knows this is just another company vehicle that he doesn't have to pay for anything on, since IR picks up the tab on everything (unless warranty item). But his initial impressions so far is this would not be a vehicle he'd personally purchase, either new or after the vehicle is retired from IR.

 

EDIT: He has a trip up WY all next week which should provide him another good gauge of the Escape and strictly highway mileage. Will report back with thoughts and mpgs after his return.

Edited September 16, 2013 by V8-X

[silvrsvt]

How many miles on it?

[V8-X]

How many miles on it?

 

His loaner Escape if (I remember correctly from my test drive of it) has 20K-30K miles currently.

[EBFlex]

Father in law is becoming more and more disenchanted with the Escape. Was over watching the Giants/Broncos game and he didn't have one good word to say.

 

Main gripe right now is the MPG's, even though IR pays for all his fuel bills. Anyways, even when trying to stay out of boost and babying the throttle, he's only averaging about 15mpgs in mixed driving and a little over 200 miles per tank. He was averaging 20mpgs in the Taurus in mixed driving and being as hard on the throttle as he wanted. He hates that he could average 390+ all highway miles (if not closer to 450 miles) per tank in the Taurus, but the best he's gotten on a tank in Escape all highway miles was just over 280. Of course part of the problem is the smaller fuel tank. But even looking at the 3.5L Taurus and EB2.0L Escape, the Escape should be averaging better mpg. He's also noticed some fit/finish issues with interior parts not aligning and noticeable gaps.

 

He knows this is loaner until his 2014 is delivered. And he knows this is just another company vehicle that he doesn't have to pay for anything on, since IR picks up the tab on everything (unless warranty item). But his initial impressions so far is this would not be a vehicle he'd personally purchase, either new or after the vehicle is retired from IR.

 

EDIT: He has a trip up WY all next week which should provide him another good gauge of the Escape and strictly highway mileage. Will report back with thoughts and mpgs after his return.

 

Is he surprised that a SUV is not getting near the mileage as a sedan? Or was he just expecting something better than 15?

 

Frankly, it doesn't sound as if his experiences are anything surprising. The Escape seems to be pretty mid-pack in both economy and fit and finish.

 

Hopefully this trip will provide some relief at the pump. FWIW, a friend of mine just got issued a new Explorer pi for work. He is averaging about 13MPG (no difference from before).

Edited September 16, 2013 by EBFlex

[V8-X]

Well, the Escape (21/28) has a better EPA rating than the Taurus (18/28). Also the Escape (3,732) is also about 300lbs lighter than the Taurus (4,015). Both are/were AWD, so that isn't a factor. Sure the Escape isn't nearly as aerodynamic as the Taurus. But I'd assume he thought (and I would too), based on these factors that the Escape should bring home similar mpgs as the Taurus. Also based on the Escape ratings, you'd assume that if it's rated at 18 city, you'd get close to or exceed 18 in mixed driving conditions not 15. Having the smaller fuel tank is bad enough, reducing the travel distance. But to have a smaller fuel tank AND bringing home only 15mpgs only makes the issue that much more noticeable. I'm sure he'd be able to live with the fuel economy better if it had a larger fuel tank, OR got 18mpgs or better. Both together would be nice.

 

As for fuel economy and fit/finish, I've seen mixed reviews here on BON as well as a few other sites I frequent. So I was kind of expecting the worse but was hoping for better. He'd heard good and bad from co-workers, so his view may have been tainted from the beginning.

 

Wow, I know the Explorer is bigger and heavier now, so no surprise that it would get the same or worse mpgs, even with a more efficient motor.

 

Is he surprised that a SUV is not getting near the mileage as a sedan? Or was he just expecting something better than 15?

 

Frankly, it doesn't sound as if his experiences are anything surprising. The Escape seems to be pretty mid-pack in both economy and fit and finish.

 

Hopefully this trip will povide some relief at the pump. FWIW, a friend of mine just got issued a new Explorer pi for work. He is averaging about 13MPG (no difference from before).

[jasonj80]

That is one of my main issues with the new escape the gas tank is just small. It makes you feel like you are getting much worse mileage than you are as you always seem to be filling it up. That is one area where I think Ford needs to improve a 3-5 gallon bigger tank would be a huge improvement and would be welcome.

[EBFlex]

Well, the Escape (21/28) has a better EPA rating than the Taurus (18/28). Also the Escape (3,732) is also about 300lbs lighter than the Taurus (4,015). Both are/were AWD, so that isn't a factor. Sure the Escape isn't nearly as aerodynamic as the Taurus. But I'd assume he thought (and I would too), based on these factors that the Escape should bring home similar mpgs as the Taurus. Also based on the Escape ratings, you'd assume that if it's rated at 18 city, you'd get close to or exceed 18 in mixed driving conditions not 15. Having the smaller fuel tank is bad enough, reducing the travel distance. But to have a smaller fuel tank AND bringing home only 15mpgs only makes the issue that much more noticeable. I'm sure he'd be able to live with the fuel economy better if it had a larger fuel tank, OR got 18mpgs or better. Both together would be nice.

 

As for fuel economy and fit/finish, I've seen mixed reviews here on BON as well as a few other sites I frequent. So I was kind of expecting the worse but was hoping for better. He'd heard good and bad from co-workers, so his view may have been tainted from the beginning.

 

Wow, I know the Explorer is bigger and heavier now, so no surprise that it would get the same or worse mpgs, even with a more efficient motor.

 

I gotcha. Yeah, I am not surprised at the mileage he is seeing. It's typical.

 

And the only reason I brought up the Explorer is because it's that much bigger/and porky and yet it's only seeing slightly worse mileage than his Escape. And probably driven harder.

[RichardJensen]

15MPG, in an Escape?

 

That sounds like a car that's been rode hard and put away wet.

[V8-X]

15MPG, in an Escape?

 

That sounds like a car that's been rode hard and put away wet.

It could have been, it's simply one of the loaner vehicles that IR has in the fleet. So most likely the drivers haven't been too kind to it, being it's a loaner, but I'd hope it'd still average better than 15mpg at just 20K-30K in mixed city/highway conditions.

 

Who knows though. I'll report back what he has to say on the fuel economy after his WY travels. And of course provide various points of feedback once his 2014 Sunset Escape is delivered and has a few thousand miles on it. If I talk to him this week, I'll see if I can get a VIN (if he knows it) and see if someone here can locate it. I'm sure it has yet to be built though, being it was only ordered about a month ago.

Edited September 17, 2013 by V8-X

[silvrsvt]

I know this much, my parents have a '13 Escape Ti FWD with the 2L and my dad was complaining about the MPG's on it...had issues with it starting off at 28 MPG or so, then dropping as they went further down the highway. AC use kills the MPG also on it. On the flip side, the 2L Ecoboost has balls to it and can be fun to drive, so I think that aspect might be keeping people's feet into it more and dropping the MPGs...

[V8-X]

I know this much, my parents have a '13 Escape Ti FWD with the 2L and my dad was complaining about the MPG's on it...had issues with it starting off at 28 MPG or so, then dropping as they went further down the highway. AC use kills the MPG also on it. On the flip side, the 2L Ecoboost has balls to it and can be fun to drive, so I think that aspect might be keeping people's feet into it more and dropping the MPGs...

Weird, wonder why the mpgs would drop the further you went. This is not good, since he does put a lot of highway miles on these vehicles (over 80K miles on the 2010 Taurus in 3yrs). Not sure if he's running AC, but being in CO if you haven't seen reports lately, it's actually been unseasonably cool due to the excessive rains and flooding. So don't think the past week or two AC is a factor. But can say the week prior to labor day, it was quite dry and hot, so that could have been an AC period. But you can see why if her puts 80K miles on the vehicle in 3yrs, why the difference between getting 15mpgs versus 20+mpgs makes a huge difference in the fuel bills and time spent refueling.

 

He and I both agree the Escape 2.0 does have some good giddy-up under the hood. This is why he told me and I posted he's been trying to keep a light right foot and out of the boost. He knows them turbos always spooling will be an instant mpg killer.

[silvrsvt]

Weird, wonder why the mpgs would drop the further you went.

 

I've experienced the same problem in my SHO, I think it was due to Cruise control being much more aggressive in newer cars vs older cars. I haven't been on a long roadtrip (over 100 miles one way) in a few months with the SHO to try it without the Cruise control going up I95. I'll get to do it next week when I drive to CT.

[V8-X]

I've experienced the same problem in my SHO, I think it was due to Cruise control being much more aggressive in newer cars vs older cars. I haven't been on a long roadtrip (over 100 miles one way) in a few months with the SHO to try it without the Cruise control going up I95. I'll get to do it next week when I drive to CT.

CC being more aggressive than older cars? How old are we talking?

 

My 2006 F150 with CC engaged is mighty aggressive when it gears down. And we know the 5.4L/4spd is a thirsty girl, but still can average 18-20mpgs highway with CC locked in at 65-70mph with 3.73 gears (roughly 2000-2200rpms) in a much heavier (5500lbs) and less aerodynamic vehicle. Heck, I get 15mpgs in the F150 in city, and typically 16-17mpgs in mixed driving.

 

So the hard part for my father-in-law and I to believe is, how does a 7yr old F150 5.4L/4spd with 51K miles that is roughly 2000lbs heavier with aggressive/slightly over sized AT's tires andf much less aerodynamic get the same mpgs as a 2013 Escape EB2.0L/6spd AWD with street tires?

Edited September 17, 2013 by V8-X

[silvrsvt]

CC being more aggressive than older cars? How old are we talking?

 

My 2006 Mustang GT didn't accelerate as hard nor does it limit the speed going down hill like my 2013 SHO does. I'm sure some of it has to do with it being a stick vs an automatic, but other automatics I've driven in the past were not as aggressive as the SHO with maintaining speed. Ecoboost engines are very senstive to throttle input.

[RichardJensen]

Look. That Escape is not operating within normal parameters. Something's wrong with it.

[SoonerLS]

CC being more aggressive than older cars? How old are we talking?

The CC in my '13 F150 is much more aggressive than the CC in my '06 LS, at least when it comes to braking. There's a particular hill that I descend nearly every day; my LS would hold speed fairly well, but my truck will go so far into engine braking that it feels like it's hitting the actual brakes (for all I know, it may be; I've not looked into it). When I'd had my LS in for service over the years, I took various loaners down that same hill, and most of them would pick up speed; only the LS and F150 would maintain speed.

 

FWIW, the loaners I had included an '11 Mazda6 (I4?), '10 Fusion (I4/6F), '07-ish Mustang (V6), '07-ish Town Car, and a '06-ish Focus.

Edited September 18, 2013 by SoonerLS

[EBFlex]

So the hard part for my father-in-law and I to believe is, how does a 7yr old F150 5.4L/4spd with 51K miles that is roughly 2000lbs heavier with aggressive/slightly over sized AT's tires andf much less aerodynamic get the same mpgs as a 2013 Escape EB2.0L/6spd AWD with street tires?

 

I guess that the definition of progress in some circles.

 

IR should get him into a Grand Cherokee. Nice long cruising distance and a much nicer vehicle. No customer should have these kinds of headaches.

[fordmantpw]

I guess that the definition of progress in some circles.

 

IR should get him into a Grand Cherokee. Nice long cruising distance and a much nicer vehicle. No customer should have these kinds of headaches.

 

Can we at least wait until he gets his new ride to start complaining about it?

[V8-X]

Look. That Escape is not operating within normal parameters. Something's wrong with it.

I can agree and this may be true. But very odd that the Taurus was in need of a motor replacement @80K, which is not normal IMO. And now this Escape is not operating in normal parameters. Not saying it can't happen, but when a person gets two totally different vehicles from Ford and both have abnormal conditions, that puts doubt into the mind of the owner (or driver, since technically IR owned both vehicles). So he's going into the 2014 Escape with his fingers crossed after being burned, or so he feels, by the two previous Fords he's driven.

 

His previous experience with three IR company cars prior to the Taurus and Escape.

 

2002 Ford Taurus - He love this vehicle so much and had so little issues, he actually purchased the vehicle for his then wife after IR retired the vehicle. Of course she proceeded to total the vehicle less than a year later.

2005 Ford Explorer - Was a great vehicle from all accounts, but after 2yrs the tranny failed requiring complete replacement. Other than the tranny, he liked the Explorer but not enough to purchase outright after IR retired.

2007 Dodge Magnum - He's a Mopar guy, but admits he got less than stellar mpgs, the build quality was crappy and materials were subpar.

 

I guess that the definition of progress in some circles.

 

IR should get him into a Grand Cherokee. Nice long cruising distance and a much nicer vehicle. No customer should have these kinds of headaches.

I really like the Cherokee and think he would too, but from what I've been told, IR is downsizing most fleet vehicle sizes. So while he used to get mid-full size cars or SUV's, IR is moving most to vehicles the size of the Escape. Heck, he was lucky enough when he got the Taurus, as all others at that point were already receiving Escapes but he was allowed to order the Taurus for whatever reason. As well, I'm sure IR and Ford have a good relationship, so don't think they'd ever move him into a Jeep.

Edited September 19, 2013 by V8-X

[akirby]

So - problems with an Explorer (tranny), Magnum (fuel economy), Taurus (tranny) and now an Escape (fuel economy). Those things only have 2 things in common - the driver and the maintenance provider. While it's certainly possible these were all coincidental and unrelated, it's certainly suspicious that the same problems are occuring on totally different vehicles (Explorer/Taurus - tranny, Magnum/Escape - fuel economy).

[V8-X]

So - problems with an Explorer (tranny), Magnum (fuel economy), Taurus (tranny) and now an Escape (fuel economy). Those things only have 2 things in common - the driver and the maintenance provider. While it's certainly possible these were all coincidental and unrelated, it's certainly suspicious that the same problems are occuring on totally different vehicles (Explorer/Taurus - tranny, Magnum/Escape - fuel economy).

The Explorer had a trans issue, but review the trans behind the V6 model Explorer for that year/era and you'll find this was a notorious problem, not unique to my father in law.

 

Magnum got bad fuel mileage because it was an old archaic and underpowered V6 motor that had to struggle to pull the weight of the vehicle. The mpgs he got for that car weren't uncommon for V6 Magnum owners as it was naturally a fuel pig.

 

The 2010 Taurus never had trans issues, so not sure where you got this. It had quite a few fit/finish and quality issues. The kicker was that the vehicle needed a motor replacement at 80K miles and the Ford dealer techs couldn't identify why. Had it been due to abuse, I'm sure those signs would more than likely be fairly obvious.

 

The Escape is a loaner and brings back less than stellar mpgs. While this may not be right and something could be wrong with the vehicle, it's also not uncommon as I've read this here and other forums and he's heard from fellow co-workers that while the 15mpgs are low, they too still don't come close to the EPA ratings in their Escapes.

 

Maintenance on all vehicles above was either a Ford or Dodge dealer. IR will only let the manufacturer work on the vehicles.

 

Good attempt at trying to make the driver the problem, but can faithfully say he nor the maintenance are the issue. Heck, he has a personal '99 Dakota 5.2L 4x4 that other than basic maintenance, he has had to drop little to no money into the vehicle for repairs. Except when his oldest daughter (my wife's sister) hit a pole and put a nice sized dent in the passenger side of the bed.

Edited September 19, 2013 by V8-X