T-dubz Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 46 minutes ago, akirby said: Bingo. Above 60 mph the wind resistance goes up exponentially with speed. Set cruise to 65, hit the reset and watch the mpg for a few miles. Then do the same at 85. I wonder what speed the epa is based off of? My commute is on tolls which is why the speed limit is so high, but just the regular highways are 70-75 around me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, T-dubz said: I wonder what speed the epa is based off of? My commute is on tolls which is why the speed limit is so high, but just the regular highways are 70-75 around me. For fuel economy estimates, EPA uses 5 tests. Highway focused tests are HWFET and to a certain extent US06. HWFET. Average speed = 48 mph Max speed = 60 mph Distance = 10.26 miles Duration = 765 seconds US06. Average speed = 48.4 mph Max speed = 80.3 mph Distance = 8.01 miles Duration = 596 seconds Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 11 hours ago, SoonerLS said: According to the EPA, my truck's average fuel economy is 17MPG. At almost 125K miles, running a 5Star tune, and with a toolbox full of tools and junk and stuff in the bed, I'm averaging closer to 18MPG. Maybe I should complain about those inaccurate EPA numbers? You can submit a complaint, but even better, you can track your truck's fuel economy and share the data with others on EPA's My MPG site. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 34 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said: Thank you for the clarification. We can re-visit this conversation in 2022, after the "much better" 2020's have some time & mileage on them. Most of the new designs were out by 2017/2018. So they’ve been around for 2-3 years already. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, rperez817 said: You can submit a complaint, but even better, you can track your truck's fuel economy and share the data with others on EPA's My MPG site. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/mpg/MPG.do Maybe it’s different in Texas but around here 18 > 17. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotRunrGuy Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) 15 minutes ago, akirby said: Most of the new designs were out by 2017/2018. So they’ve been around for 2-3 years already. Sorry, but my 2018 EB failed due to a cooling problem, so they aren't quite "there" yet. HRG Edited January 9, 2020 by HotRunrGuy added work order comment 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T-dubz Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 29 minutes ago, rperez817 said: For fuel economy estimates, EPA uses 5 tests. Highway focused tests are HWFET and to a certain extent US06. HWFET. Average speed = 48 mph Max speed = 60 mph Distance = 10.26 miles Duration = 765 seconds US06. Average speed = 48.4 mph Max speed = 80.3 mph Distance = 8.01 miles Duration = 596 seconds thanks for the info. I’m kind of shocked at how low those speeds are. Half the test(Hwfet) was under 50 mph on the highway. Who drives that slow? If you are driving like that on a highway around here, you are just asking for trouble lol. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said: Sorry, but my 2018 EB failed due to a cooling problem, so they aren't quite "there" yet. HRG A sampling size of one isn't really a good indication of how good/bad a product is. I get that a single bad experience can ruin someones expectations of a product and not make them buy it, but statistically there is always going to be "bad" or unlucky cars out there. I had a POS SVT Focus that was my second new car that was just a turd that spent alot of time at the dealership (thank god for free loaner cars via SVT at the time)..all my other Ford products that my wife and I have/had have been pretty good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 32 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said: Sorry, but my 2018 EB failed due to a cooling problem, so they aren't quite "there" yet. HRG That's a defect and a completely different issue. I was talking specifically about the need to run a rich fuel mixture to keep the heads cool under normal operation which resulted in less than stellar fuel economy and sooty tailpipes. That's what they fixed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 19 minutes ago, T-dubz said: I’m kind of shocked at how low those speeds are. Half the test(Hwfet) was under 50 mph on the highway. Who drives that slow? If you are driving like that on a highway around here, you are just asking for trouble lol. Depends on what highway you're on. My work commute is all 45-50 mph. You don't get above that unless you're on an interstate or some backroads are 55. But now you know why folks are unable to match the EPA ratings - almost nobody drives like the EPA cycle. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtisH Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) I’ve got just over 34,000 miles on my 2018 Mustang Ecoboost (10 spd auto). Over the life of the vehicle, I’m averaging 25.3 mpg. I have the Performance Package so its EPA rating is 20 city, 29 highway, and 23 combined. I’m pretty satisfied. Edited January 9, 2020 by CurtisH 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rperez817 Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, akirby said: Maybe it’s different in Texas but around here 18 > 17. ? It's the same in Texas. Regarding EPA, as an agency of the federal government they get complaints for anything and everything they do, on all sides. Edited January 9, 2020 by rperez817 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 3 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said: Sorry, but my 2018 EB failed due to a cooling problem, so they aren't quite "there" yet. HRG It failed because they decided to run an open block design with the WRONG type of stress relief between the cylinders. They have switched from the cut grove to drilled because the cut was taking up space they needed for headgasket sealing and causing the gasket to be stressed. The replacement blocks all are coming with the cross drill now. I'm gonna guess they went with that across all lines now, not just the 1.5. But Ford is the king of one hand not knowing what the other is doing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotRunrGuy Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 6 minutes ago, YT90SC said: It failed because they decided to run an open block design with the WRONG type of stress relief between the cylinders. They have switched from the cut grove to drilled because the cut was taking up space they needed for headgasket sealing and causing the gasket to be stressed. The replacement blocks all are coming with the cross drill now. I'm gonna guess they went with that across all lines now, not just the 1.5. But Ford is the king of one hand not knowing what the other is doing. Thank you sir. Any idea if the 2.0 EB in my '19 Edge might suffer the same fate? Not sure if the engine plant in Spain was using the old (cut) or new (drilled) design? HRG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 (edited) .double post. sorry Edited January 9, 2020 by YT90SC oops Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 9 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said: Thank you sir. Any idea if the 2.0 EB in my '19 Edge might suffer the same fate? Not sure if the engine plant in Spain was using the old (cut) or new (drilled) design? HRG The current TSB for 2.0 is only for 15 thru 18 Edge. So I am gonna make a good assumption and say you are good to go. All other 2.0's have specific thru 2019 build dates and vary by line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotRunrGuy Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, YT90SC said: The current TSB for 2.0 is only for 15 thru 18 Edge. So I am gonna make a good assumption and say you are good to go. All other 2.0's have specific thru 2019 build dates and vary by line. Thank you. HRG Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotRunrGuy Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 31 minutes ago, YT90SC said: It failed because they decided to run an open block design with the WRONG type of stress relief between the cylinders. They have switched from the cut grove to drilled because the cut was taking up space they needed for headgasket sealing and causing the gasket to be stressed. The replacement blocks all are coming with the cross drill now. I'm gonna guess they went with that across all lines now, not just the 1.5. But Ford is the king of one hand not knowing what the other is doing. Is that similar to the slots that were discussed on the 7.3? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 Yes. Identical cut type. That is not the open block/deck design like the 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 have. It is worrysome though. The saving grace may be that it is iron and not all aluminum like the fours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted January 9, 2020 Share Posted January 9, 2020 1.5 block for sale on Fleabay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) On 1/7/2020 at 4:02 PM, jpd80 said: They basically have to because the Equinox can be had for about $4K-$5K less, the base model is going for under $20k on some lots. Equinox is basically Focus/Cruze prices and doing a crap ton of business, 37,000 sales last month to Escape's 18,500 odd sales. I know people think the Escape is better but selling an I-3 Ecoboost is hard work when people start asking where the four cylinder went. The compact CUV market is basically taking over the midsized sedan market and with that comes a lot of pressure with pricing. These are not aspirational vehicles anymore. They are simply a transportation appliance. When the compact CUV is basically the middle class family sedan shoppers will be watching their pocketbooks and trying to get the best deal. I also think the base I-3 engine will hold it back as well. Odd number cylinder engines have just never been very accepted in automobile applications. Remember when GM used that odd-ball I-5 in the Colorado and Canyon? They actually crammed a V8 in there after a few years to try and improve sales. The I-3 is just not a good idea for a vehicle in this class. You can’t charge more for the same or less unless you’re Apple. Edited January 10, 2020 by 2005Explorer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 35 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: The compact CUV market is basically taking over the midsized sedan market and with that comes a lot of pressure with pricing. These are not aspirational vehicles anymore. They are simply a transportation appliance. When the compact CUV is basically the middle class family sedan shoppers will be watching their pocketbooks and trying to get the best deal. You can’t charge more for the same or less unless you’re Apple. Or apparently Ford So I wonder if Ford will be dragged kicking and screaming back to pricing reality with Escape and baby Bronco for that matter.. Edited January 10, 2020 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 34 minutes ago, jpd80 said: Or apparently Ford So I wonder if Ford will be dragged kicking and screaming back to pricing reality with Escape and baby Bronco for that matter.. Ford might be able to price baby Bronco slightly higher and get away with it depending on the perceived value of the vehicle. The Escape on the other hand is no more aspirational than a Fusion (and probably less so than the former Fusion Sport V6) so I don’t see the current pricing strategy working long term. The fact is it’s a very competitive class and all of the major automakers have very good products in this class. You made a comment about the good prices that Chevy had on the Equinox and to be honest I can’t think of one reason why someone would pay more for an Escape over an Equinox unless you just have to have the Ford brand. I’m not saying things have to be “cheap” but price must match perceived value especially in a class like compact CUVs. Ford either needs to increase the value in the vehicle like a nicer interior (the small details count), a standard 4 cylinder engine and a few other standard features that others don’t have or lower the price. Edited January 10, 2020 by 2005Explorer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, 2005Explorer said: Ford might be able to price baby Bronco slightly higher and get away with it depending on the perceived value of the vehicle. The Escape on the other hand is no more aspirational than a Fusion (and probably less so than the former Fusion Sport V6) so I don’t see the current pricing strategy working long term. The fact is it’s a very competitive class and all of the major automakers have very good products in this class. You made a comment about the good prices that Chevy had on the Equinox and to be honest I can’t think of one reason why someone would pay more for an Escape over an Equinox unless you just have to have the Ford brand. I’m not saying things have to be “cheap” but price must match perceived value especially in a class like compact CUVs. Ford either needs to increase the value in the vehicle like a nicer interior (the small details count), a standard 4 cylinder engine and a few other standard features that others don’t have or lower the price. The concern I have with baby Bronco’s price is that basically, it’s “not the real Bronco” and most folks will see right through it as a reimagined boxy Escape with a classic Ford front clip and let’s face it, that’s all it really is. Question is will buyers buy it figuratively and literally. The one thing Ford absolutely cannot afford is to screw up any more launches, they cost hundreds of millions in lost revenue that never gets recovered. Edited January 10, 2020 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 10, 2020 Share Posted January 10, 2020 (edited) Good news is that sell down of '19 Escape continues, it's gone from 5,000 to 4,400 in the last five days. The '19s now have up to $6,000 off MSRP but most of them are still dearer than discounted '20 Equinoxs Edited January 10, 2020 by jpd80 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.