Any info or guesses on the combined fuel economy for the 2.3 Ecoboost engine?
#21
Pascal is right on this one. Believe me, I know from experience that FoMoCo underrates the advertised EPA mileage on just about all (if not all) of their cars. The Fusion hybrid you are talking about will get 47MPG across the board; Ford cut back on that MPG to appease the lead-footed drivers so they can't cry "My hybrid don't get 47MPG!" when they drive like bats out of hell.
https://autos.yahoo.com/news/ford-ad...195334977.html
http://gas2.org/2014/06/13/testing-e...-six-vehicles/
http://www.thetorquereport.com/2014/...omy_ratin.html
Case in point: I have the older 2011 GT 5.0 Coyote with 3.31:1 rear gears. This is rated only at 26MPG highway on stock factory tune. I observe well in excess of that 26MPG highway when I hit my freeways; oftentimes easily breaking 28MPG and also 30MPG.
Ford has always underrated to account for the more critical customers. When they actually drive normally, and get higher MPG readings, they are put in their place with facts of higher fuel mileage sitting right in front of their faces.
You have to be stomping on the gas often to drop below the advertised MPG; that's the way Ford rates their cars.
Correcting my error and doing the dimensional analysis, I did some quick mental calculations and realize that when you add 2 gallons to the miles per gallon, what happens is the advertised MPG numbers are cut down to only a third.
So the Fusion hybrid which was originally advertised at 47 miles / 1 gallon, the arithmetic gives:
47 miles / (1 gallon + 2 gallon) = 47 mi / 3 gallons
which means you are only getting 15.667 MPG.
So the Fusion hybrid which was originally advertised at 47 miles / 1 gallon, the arithmetic gives:
47 miles / (1 gallon + 2 gallon) = 47 mi / 3 gallons
which means you are only getting 15.667 MPG.
#22
I meant 2 miles off per gallon, not 2 gallons!!
So when it stipulates 47mpg it's more like 45 or worse.
Like you just said Jim, add 2MPG to their figures basically.
#23
Wow...where do I even start? What a mess...I apologize for calling it a mess but I'm just saying....
Its one thing to have a debate, but how you responded to me is disrespectful.
You brought out one fact with this quote and your links, and that's perfectly fine because I learned something new.
After that, the rest was disrespectful. You didn't have to say "Yeah so?" That was unnecessary.
Moreover, I observe directly in my own car that I beat Ford's EPA, both according to the dash counter and my own hand calculations. And I do not always drive in steady load conditions; I also drive in stop-and-go rush hour bumper to bumper gridlocked traffic yet my combined average MPG is still nearly 21 MPG.
I trust Pascal's info; he actually owns a Fusion and he has been around Mustangs and Fords much longer than I have.
You're all over the place. You at first rebutted Pascal and said you got 51MPG from a Fusion H but now you flip-flopped and say Ford's MPGs are exaggerated and the actual MPGs are less.
This was completely unnecessary and patronizing. Your whole post did not did not even need these three words.
As you can tell, I'm offended. I can go on, but this argument is not worth a single word more.
With that, I close by giving you some Italian too...ciao, il mio amico
Its one thing to have a debate, but how you responded to me is disrespectful.
You brought out one fact with this quote and your links, and that's perfectly fine because I learned something new.
After that, the rest was disrespectful. You didn't have to say "Yeah so?" That was unnecessary.
You're all over the place. You at first rebutted Pascal and said you got 51MPG from a Fusion H but now you flip-flopped and say Ford's MPGs are exaggerated and the actual MPGs are less.
This was completely unnecessary and patronizing. Your whole post did not did not even need these three words.
As you can tell, I'm offended. I can go on, but this argument is not worth a single word more.
With that, I close by giving you some Italian too...ciao, il mio amico
#24
Granted, I rarely drive spiritedly, maybe once or twice a day max is when I stomp on the gas and rev to redline, but I admit the vast majority of my driving is daily driving in which I only hit just under 3K RPM in first gear to accelerate from a stop and never hit over 2K RPM in any other gear afterwards.
In my own Coyote, I drive the engine in almost always only daily driving conditions.
Its so tempting to stomp on the gas and feel the power, and the few times I do, if I do an instantaneous MPG reading using the dash counter, I see my MPGs are terrible; only around 12 MPG.
#25
Moreover, I observe directly in my own car that I beat Ford's EPA, both according to the dash counter and my own hand calculations. And I do not always drive in steady load conditions; I also drive in stop-and-go rush hour bumper to bumper gridlocked traffic yet my combined average MPG is still nearly 21 MPG.
There's a very good reason the phrase "your mileage may vary" or "YMMV" get tossed around so much.
You're all over the place. You at first rebutted Pascal and said you got 51MPG from a Fusion H but now you flip-flopped and say Ford's MPGs are exaggerated and the actual MPGs are less.
As you can tell, I'm offended. I can go on, but this argument is not worth a single word more.
Last edited by jz78817; 08-21-2014 at 07:17 PM.
#26
You really don't know when to quit. I thought I made it clear that I really don't want to argue with you anymore.
So, just because Mustang Forums is an internet gathering is an excuse to be disrespectful...good luck with that.
So my direct observations are nonsense and not facts? Sorry, you believe that, but direct empirical observations are facts. I only presented facts from my own direct experience.
THAT's IT! I'm through talking to you.
We drifted away from talking about anything that is remotely related to the Ecoboost S550 Mustangs.
I've already said too much to you and I should have already dropped it long ago.
Good Bye and Good Luck making friends on the internet.
THAT's IT! I'm through talking to you.
We drifted away from talking about anything that is remotely related to the Ecoboost S550 Mustangs.
I've already said too much to you and I should have already dropped it long ago.
Good Bye and Good Luck making friends on the internet.
#27
So, just because Mustang Forums is an internet gathering is an excuse to be disrespectful...good luck with that.
So my direct observations are nonsense and not facts? Sorry, you believe that, but direct empirical observations are facts. I only presented facts from my own direct experience.
THAT's IT! I'm through talking to you.
We drifted away from talking about anything that is remotely related to the Ecoboost S550 Mustangs.
I've already said too much to you and I should have already dropped it long ago.
Good Bye and Good Luck making friends on the internet.
THAT's IT! I'm through talking to you.
We drifted away from talking about anything that is remotely related to the Ecoboost S550 Mustangs.
I've already said too much to you and I should have already dropped it long ago.
Good Bye and Good Luck making friends on the internet.
LOOK. the mpg ratings on the Monroney sticker are the result of a clearly defined, government mandated test procedure. Your "direct observations" are not the result of a controlled experiment or of a clearly defined test procedure. They WILL differ from the results of an EPA test. the nonsense you posted was your claim that Ford has their own test procedure to come up with those mpg numbers they put on the sticker, and I told you you were all wet. If you want to get all butthurt now, that's on you.
and I don't need friends. all they do is pretend to like you and stab you in the back later.
#28
In the news today:
A set of leaked window stickers provides the first fuel-economy data for the EcoBoost. If the stickers are genuine, the turbo four will be EPA-rated at 26 mpg combined (22 mpg city, 31 mpg highway) with the six-speed manual transmission (figures for the six-speed automatic weren't released).
A set of leaked window stickers provides the first fuel-economy data for the EcoBoost. If the stickers are genuine, the turbo four will be EPA-rated at 26 mpg combined (22 mpg city, 31 mpg highway) with the six-speed manual transmission (figures for the six-speed automatic weren't released).
#29
My experiences are just that, my experiences. I never got the advertised MPG with any new cars I bought from Ford.
It doesn't mean that you'll have the same results than I do.
Facts negates anything different from anyone else including myself.
After all, the Coyote ratings might be spot on...
Also, use the ignore button with members that you dislike and don't take it too personally regardless.
As a Moderator if I took it personally, I'd wacked a bunch of members on these boards by now. Just sayin'...