Topic: Day-by-Day Review: 2013 Ford Escape SE 4WD; Day 1

[Blueprint]

Re the Odyssey  my nephew in Guelph Ontario has a 2011 and has taken in it numerous times to his Honda service department to find out why it is such a gas pig. Sorry don't have the details of what his l/100km is but every conversation we have about cars, he makes it heard he is not a happy camper with the vans fuel economy. And to note he is a typical Canadian Asian car maker fan.Only Toyota's and Honda's make it to his driveway. But he has been told all is normal for his van, nothing wrong with it.

Anyway some interesting 2013 (I am assuming USA) Escape sales stats.......Escape Sales
In September 2012, 23,148 Escapes were sold. This is the best September Sales month ever. This gives us a lot to be proud of at Louisville Assembly Plant.  Approximately 50 % of its sales are  coming from people trading in a non-Ford vehicle with high-series Escapes (SEL and Titanium) now accounting for nearly 60% of sales. In addition, the Eco Boost represented just over 90 percent of all Escapes sold in September.

Ford expected a take rate of 97% for the Ecoboost engines at time of launch... The "S" is a rare bird!

[Cord]

Financing, like everything auto-related, is negotiable. I got rates for my Honda mid-way between the promo rates and the full ones, while still getting the "cash" rebate. With the term and cash I had in mind, that was the cheaper combo.  YMMV, of course.

Just to clarify, Ford Credit's rates are not negotiable. What may happen is that another lender may have a rate between the manufacturers incentive rates and their full rates.

[Blueprint]

Financing, like everything auto-related, is negotiable. I got rates for my Honda mid-way between the promo rates and the full ones, while still getting the "cash" rebate. With the term and cash I had in mind, that was the cheaper combo.  YMMV, of course.

Just to clarify, Ford Credit's rates are not negotiable. What may happen is that another lender may have a rate between the manufacturers incentive rates and their full rates.

In my case, I did finance with Honda Canada Finance, at "interim" rates that were not advertised. I did not negotiate the rates per se, but if I had not asked...

[Danno001]

Wind was basically nil this weekend. And if anything it would be a tailwind to Montreal and headwinds on return.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus

Agreed on wind direction - have made the trip many times myself. Air resistance increases exponentially vs. speed. Tells me the Escape is behaves like a brick at higher speeds.

[greengs]

Just read C/D comparo for a few issues ago...

CR-V faster and more frugal than Escape 1.6 ... but Escape the better handler. In the 6 compact ute comparo, Escape had worst observed fuel economy (21 mpg, vs 26 for best-in-test CX-5).

Please don't say that the CR-V might be a better CUV than the Escape. You will be stoned (or your smite count will jump by at least 50). Ford is on a roll nowadays and critics are not welcome.

And Motor Trend rated the Escape 1.6 SE ahead of the CX-5 which was ahead of the CR-V.  If we can agree that all three have almost identical (within a few percentage points of each other) interior capacities, then how does one offer more utility than the other?  Mazda has 40/20/40 rear seats, Honda has easy to flip forward rear seats and Ford has a powered hatch or the upgraded hands free.  Add in the Tiguan which has sliding rear seats and you have four features that I wish I could get in one vehicle.  As that isn't the case, the powered hatch provides the most utility to me out of the four and I'm willing to give up the equivalent of a Jack Russell Terrier in capacity to the CR-V to not have to look at its bulbous back end.  And this is before putting the 2.0l DI turbo w/6 speed transmission up against the Civic's (oops, CR-V's) old 2.4l V-Tec w/..........yawn, 5 speed transmission.

An argument could be made that the old 5 speed is lighter than the 6 speed and that the old 2.4L will be much more trouble free than the overburdened little turbo motor down the line.  I love turbo engines as much as the next guy.  In fact I drive a twin turbo car as a daily driver but unless you try to keep out of boost it's not very easy to get decent fuel mileage.  The fact that all that torque is there means that it usually gets taken advantage of often.  Or maybe that's just me haha.

Edit: our other car, the 2012 Odyssey is horrible on gas too.  Averages around 14L/100kms around town.  About 9L/100 on the highway.

[whaddaiknow]

Edit: our other car, the 2012 Odyssey is horrible on gas too.  Averages around 14L/100kms around town.  About 9L/100 on the highway.

If you're a leadfoot, 14l/100km isn't all that bad given all the heft that goes through constant stop and go mayhem.
And I find it REALLY funny that you should say 9L/100km is horrible (no less) on highway (I bet at 118km/hr no less) for a 2-ton bus and yet wing says that 8.3L/100km for a MUCH  smaller CUV is "not bad" Wing even put an exclamation mark next to his 8.3 number he was so impressed!!!

So which one of you is biased against Honda in favour of Ford? 

[Sir Osis of Liver]

AWD adds an instant 15% penalty for fuel economy.

[whaddaiknow]

James B - Did you notice if you had a tail wind or head wind on you trip to Montreal? The 8.3 L/100 might have been caused by a tailwind. I find wind direction at highway speeds can make a 10% difference in fuel economy.

Regardless. 8.3l/100km at a steady 108km/h is FAR from good by today's standards. My Odyssey got 7.8l/100km to Montreal and 8.3l/100km back with 4 people on board with A/C on with cruise set to 110 km/h. On a 900km stint to Toronto around the same time with 2 people on board and a set of winter tires on steel rims in the back (quite heavy) I still managed 8.3l/100km average which included city of Toronto traffic. But the Odyssey is a 2-ton bus with a 3.5l V6. Where is the fuel saving advantage of the 4-cyl turbo that is less than half the size???

The authors say that the competition they've tested didn't fair much better. How come the much larger Odyssey does better on the highway? At steady highway crusing it shouldn't matter.

It's seems we're driving the same bus. Driving to Boston during break-in, with the family of five on board, luggage and a new set of steel wheels picked up in the US, managed 8.9 l/100km at 120-ish speeds. I'm sure I would match your numbers at lower speeds. Around town, though, we're in the 14-15s on wifey's mostly within-suburb short trips.

So that makes two of us who get excellent highway mileage from our Odyssey.
Wing, will you call both of us liars?
If you were so impressed with the Escape's 8.3L/100km, would you use any superlatives about the Odyssey?
Honda employs cylinder deactivation that is on at all times and engages automatically at every suitable opportunity. I guess it just works.

[whaddaiknow]

AWD adds an instant 15% penalty for fuel economy.

Tell me about it. I struggle getting anything below 10.5L/100km of premium fuel combined from my 328i xDrive.

Still, in the Escape, is it always on or on-demand? If it's on-demand, how would it affect fuel economy when it's not engaged other than some extra weight? I don't see the extra weight accounting for an extra 15%?

[Blueprint]

James B - Did you notice if you had a tail wind or head wind on you trip to Montreal? The 8.3 L/100 might have been caused by a tailwind. I find wind direction at highway speeds can make a 10% difference in fuel economy.

Regardless. 8.3l/100km at a steady 108km/h is FAR from good by today's standards. My Odyssey got 7.8l/100km to Montreal and 8.3l/100km back with 4 people on board with A/C on with cruise set to 110 km/h. On a 900km stint to Toronto around the same time with 2 people on board and a set of winter tires on steel rims in the back (quite heavy) I still managed 8.3l/100km average which included city of Toronto traffic. But the Odyssey is a 2-ton bus with a 3.5l V6. Where is the fuel saving advantage of the 4-cyl turbo that is less than half the size???

The authors say that the competition they've tested didn't fair much better. How come the much larger Odyssey does better on the highway? At steady highway crusing it shouldn't matter.

It's seems we're driving the same bus. Driving to Boston during break-in, with the family of five on board, luggage and a new set of steel wheels picked up in the US, managed 8.9 l/100km at 120-ish speeds. I'm sure I would match your numbers at lower speeds. Around town, though, we're in the 14-15s on wifey's mostly within-suburb short trips.

So that makes two of us who get excellent highway mileage from our Odyssey.
Wing, will you call both of us liars?
If you were so impressed with the Escape's 8.3L/100km, would you use any superlatives about the Odyssey?
Honda employs cylinder deactivation that is on at all times and engages automatically at every suitable opportunity. I guess it just works.

Just to prove the Odyssey's fuel efficiency even more:

- we vacationed to Washington & Wildwood in a rental Traverse LT awd (Ody on order) and only managed 12.6 l/100 km over 2500km;
- last month, I rented a 2013 Ford Flex awd for a business trip to NB and got - 12.6 again over 2000km.

Even with "on demand" awd, there's a price to pay from the excess weight and friction in the driveline in SUVs / crossovers. Love the Flex, though!

[whaddaiknow]

Just to prove the Odyssey's fuel efficiency even more:

- we vacationed to Washington & Wildwood in a rental Traverse LT awd (Ody on order) and only managed 12.6 l/100 km over 2500km;
- last month, I rented a 2013 Ford Flex awd for a business trip to NB and got - 12.6 again over 2000km.

Even with "on demand" awd, there's a price to pay from the excess weight and friction in the driveline in SUVs / crossovers. Love the Flex, though!

Love the Flex, too. But in all fairness, you are comparing the FWD Ody to AWD GM and Ford. A comparison to FWD Traverse and Flex would be more convincing as the only variable would be the AWD system.