BachelorFrog
 |
|
EPA releases fuel economy figures for 2013 Ford Fusion
1.6T L, 4 cyl, manual 6-spd--25 city, 37 highway
1.6T L, 4 cyl, automatic--23 city, 36 highway
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 33 highway (FWD)
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 31 highway (AWD)
2.5 L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 34 highway
|
superchg2
 |
|
It looks like the 2013 Altima is the one to beat, with the 2.5 cvt rated at 38 highway m.p.g.'s.
We rented one last week and that number (38) is for real.
|
JDMImport
 |
|
BachelorFrog wrote:
EPA releases fuel economy figures for 2013 Ford Fusion
1.6T L, 4 cyl, manual 6-spd--25 city, 37 highway
1.6T L, 4 cyl, automatic--23 city, 36 highway
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 33 highway (FWD)
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 31 highway (AWD)
2.5 L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 34 highway
|
Very disappointed in the city rating for the automatic. That's just terrible. I wonder what the combined rating is??
|
HONDA AFVM
 |
|
JDMImport wrote:
BachelorFrog wrote:
EPA releases fuel economy figures for 2013 Ford Fusion
1.6T L, 4 cyl, manual 6-spd--25 city, 37 highway
1.6T L, 4 cyl, automatic--23 city, 36 highway
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 33 highway (FWD)
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 31 highway (AWD)
2.5 L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 34 highway
|
Very disappointed in the city rating for the automatic. That's just terrible. I wonder what the combined rating is??
|
The Accords #'s will be on par with Altima.........BUT, with ECO, it will blow the gas door off the Nissan...... ;-)
|
DCR
 |
|
|
I think ECO mode is a pure gimmick. It hasn't done anything in the CR-V I own.
|
P54
 |
|
DCR wrote:
I think ECO mode is a pure gimmick. It hasn't done anything in the CR-V I own.
|
You have to cooperate.
|
xBeastx
 |
|
|
Mother of God...with these huge sedans getting close to 40 MPG, what does that mean for compact cars in the future? Will the regular civic get 50 MPG HWY when it receives the Earth Dreams engine and CVT?
|
CarGuyLee
 |
|
JDMImport wrote:
BachelorFrog wrote:
EPA releases fuel economy figures for 2013 Ford Fusion
1.6T L, 4 cyl, manual 6-spd--25 city, 37 highway
1.6T L, 4 cyl, automatic--23 city, 36 highway
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 33 highway (FWD)
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 31 highway (AWD)
2.5 L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 34 highway
|
Very disappointed in the city rating for the automatic. That's just terrible. I wonder what the combined rating is??
|
Me too, makes me wonder why they couldn't just do some tweaking on the 2.5 and get similar numbers as the 1.6. and very disappointed the 25/37 is manual only....al la Chevy Eco.
|
BachelorFrog
 |
|
BachelorFrog wrote:
EPA releases fuel economy figures for 2013 Ford Fusion
1.6T L, 4 cyl, manual 6-spd--25 city, 37 highway
1.6T L, 4 cyl, automatic--23 city, 36 highway
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 33 highway (FWD)
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 31 highway (AWD)
2.5 L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 34 highway
|
1.6L Ti-VCT GTDI I-4 EcoBoost
hp: 178 @ 5,700 (premium fuel)
hp: 173@5,700 (regular fuel)
tq: 184 @ 2,500
2.0L Ti-VCT GTDI I-4 EcoBoost
hp: 240 @ 5,500 (premium fuel)
hp: 231@5,500 (regular fuel)
tq: 270 @ 3,00
2.5L Duratec 16V I4 Engine
hp: 170 @ 6,000
tq: 170 @ 4,500
for the lulz.....
|
P54
 |
|
xAbSoLuTexZeRo wrote:
Mother of God...with these huge sedans getting close to 40 MPG, what does that mean for compact cars in the future? Will the regular civic get 50 MPG HWY when it receives the Earth Dreams engine and CVT?
|
Once a bigger car is up to speed and if aerodynamics and gearing is right it does not take very much to maintain the speed. A bigger car will usually suffer in the city compared to a smaller one. Sometimes, or rather usually, a bigger car can have better Cd than smaller ones and that helps keep the mpg down once you are up to speed.
The ED Civic should at least get 45mpg HWY. Since the current one got 47mpg? I think in CR testing I see no reason why the new ED Civic should not go well beyond 50 mpg in real life.
(BTW, God have no mother).
|
P54
 |
|
BachelorFrog wrote:
BachelorFrog wrote:
EPA releases fuel economy figures for 2013 Ford Fusion
1.6T L, 4 cyl, manual 6-spd--25 city, 37 highway
1.6T L, 4 cyl, automatic--23 city, 36 highway
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 33 highway (FWD)
2.0T L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 31 highway (AWD)
2.5 L, 4 cyl, automatic--22 city, 34 highway
|
1.6L Ti-VCT GTDI I-4 EcoBoost
hp: 178 @ 5,700 (premium fuel)
hp: 173@5,700 (regular fuel)
tq: 184 @ 2,500
2.0L Ti-VCT GTDI I-4 EcoBoost
hp: 240 @ 5,500 (premium fuel)
hp: 231@5,500 (regular fuel)
tq: 270 @ 3,00
2.5L Duratec 16V I4 Engine
hp: 170 @ 6,000
tq: 170 @ 4,500
for the lulz.....
|
Now compare these numbers for the 2.0L turbo engine with the Honda 3.5L V6 Accord engine.
|
nash24
 |
|
DCR wrote:
I think ECO mode is a pure gimmick. It hasn't done anything in the CR-V I own.
|
You got to have it turned on DCR! joking
It does more when the a/c is on, if you have the a/c off and driving for fuel economy it wont do much
|
auto_enthu
 |
|
I wonder why Ford decided to keep 2.5L around, since 1.6LT looks better in all aspects, atleast on paper.
|
BachelorFrog
 |
|
auto_enthu wrote:
I wonder why Ford decided to keep 2.5L around, since 1.6LT looks better in all aspects, atleast on paper.
|
For rental companies, esp when 33% of Fusion goes to them.
|
auto_enthu
 |
|
BachelorFrog wrote:
auto_enthu wrote:
I wonder why Ford decided to keep 2.5L around, since 1.6LT looks better in all aspects, atleast on paper.
|
For rental companies, esp when 33% of Fusion goes to them.
|
I guess that makes sense, since it looks like they did not improve the existing 2.5L a bit. It looks like it has the same MPG numbers that that the current Fusion has.
|
xBeastx
 |
|
P54 wrote:
xAbSoLuTexZeRo wrote:
Mother of God...with these huge sedans getting close to 40 MPG, what does that mean for compact cars in the future? Will the regular civic get 50 MPG HWY when it receives the Earth Dreams engine and CVT?
|
(BTW, God have no mother).
|
I was referring to the rage face.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Thread Page - [1] |
|  |