I've had many ecoboost Mustangs as rentals, they'd make for a great DD. Decently quick, good fuel economy, and good trunk space.

My parents have a Ford Escape, 2020 or 21 I think. It has the 2.0 Ecoboost in it. When I was up there last year during Christmas, borrowed it on a road trip and was pretty impressed. You could cruise at 75 without missing a beat, even on steep hills it never downshifted. Just all kinds of torque always available.

After posting, I started driving it a bit harder. Seems a bit counterproductive to produce an engine that you have to drive hard to make it be smooth when ecominy is supposed to be important, but I drive most vehicle hard.

Outside of the weird low rpm / low speed stuttering there is plenty of power. Tried and saw the nice acceleration at highway speeds on the way home. Overall, as I said, I like this better than the GM offerings.

Still azed that with all the supposed improvements in technology and iterations they have been through since we owned an Expy, they mpg has only improved by 3 or 4. Kind of sad. Guess physics still wins.

It got the job done and was a comfortable ride (cept for the crappy rental company tires.).

Its a piece of **** designed to power extremely light duty disposable pieces of ****, meant to be driven by people who dont do anything with their trucks, and wont keep it more than a few years.

For that design goal, it works.

Ag for Life said:

---

JamesPShelley said:

---

Eco this. Eco that. Just give me the 6 or 8 banger. Until I'm compelled... mandated by some governing body... II'll never own a 4-banger. Never. MPG? lol.

---

Um, the 3.5 and the 2.7 are 6 bangers and so is the 3.5 L powerboost.

Or is this just an old man yells at clouds thing?

---

Yes. I admit it. It is an old man thing.

Wife wants a newer SUV ish type vehicle. We've dogs. I've always owned 6 or 8 bangers (since the 70s, and including some boats (i.e Olds, Cad. Mercedes). It's the "4-cylinder" thing. I just can't wrap my head around a 4 banger not working as hard, or as hard as, a 6 or 8. It's a longevity thing for me... wife doesn't care. I like to work on my own cars (hobby), and keep them a long time (~10 years).

I've been researching used vehicles... and find myself skipping anything that revals 4 banger. Now... I did see some vehicle with a 2.5 liter 4, and thought, "OK... maybe". 2 liter, not happening with me. I'm just real apprehensive about pulling the trigger. Wife will say, "Oh, that looks nice". I say, "Yeah. I want reliability... something reasonably easy to tool on... and won't struggle like a typical slow-ass 4 banger coming up that final hill on the 62 getting me home.

I don't want to spend more than $22... $23K, out the door. I'v spent thrice+ on other vehicles... not doing that again. Don't need anything fancy, but should have backup, nav, etc. And it shouldn't have to wind out to 7,000 RPMs coming up that final hill.

That $22K Lexus in another post. I'd snap that up in a hearbeat.

Cheers.

htxag09 said:

---

Absolute said:

---

Final whammy, got 19.2 mpg on the highway which is barely better than what I remember from the 2004 v8 expedition we had way back when,that drove much better in my failing memory.

---

I feel like your memory may indeed be failing you if you think the 2004 v8 expeditions got nearly 20 mpg.....

My mom had one, pretty sure average was like 12-14 mpg. Perfect condition roadtrip, maybe 16-17.....

---

I have a 1999 Expedition 4x4 with the 5.4L V8 and almost 240,000 on the odometer.

Last week, I drove it from LA to Houston and averaged about 14 mpg while driving 80-90 mph the whole way.

I think you could get better mpg driving slower, using more cruise control and of course if you had the 4.6L engine in a 2WD Expedition.

Even then, I think that approaching 20 mpg would require a unique set of circumstances.

And I'm not sure about all this altitude trailering talk with the EcoBoost.

I can vouch for the old 5.4L V8 driving like a dream at altitude even while trailering. I've towed 2x U-Haul 6x12 trailers from Denver to LA and had no problems at all.

https://www.garrettmotion.com/news/newsroom/article/how-to-turbocharge-at-elevation-counteracting-lower-air-density/

Absolute said:

---

After posting, I started driving it a bit harder. Seems a bit counterproductive to produce an engine that you have to drive hard to make it be smooth when ecominy is supposed to be important, but I drive most vehicle hard.

Outside of the weird low rpm / low speed stuttering there is plenty of power. Tried and saw the nice acceleration at highway speeds on the way home. Overall, as I said, I like this better than the GM offerings.

Still azed that with all the supposed improvements in technology and iterations they have been through since we owned an Expy, they mpg has only improved by 3 or 4. Kind of sad. Guess physics still wins.

It got the job done and was a comfortable ride (cept for the crappy rental company tires.).

---

A 4 mpg increase when the baseline is 14 mpg is almost 29%.

And the newer vehicles are achieving that with significantly more power and lower emissions.

You are right about physics -- motivating a 5600 lb vehicle which crap aerodynamics is always going to be a challenge.

So a year later for the same purpose rented another big suv to take the kid back to school. Picked the Expy. This time it was a max, so bigger and a year or two newer. It had a weird option setup, didn't know you could still get a vehicle without adaptive cruise control.

This one was a much more impressive engine experience. Makes me think there was something wrong with the one last year. This one was responsive and nice to drive. Recently drove a friend's new V8 f150 and honestly this one actually seemed to be just as peppy and worked better with the transmission.

Which brings up another question. If you are going to have ten gears and have it switching as fast as it does to try to stay in as high a gear as possible, is there really any reason not to just have the cvt with its fake shift points? Not that I like those, just feels weird.

Still stand by my doubt that switching to a much more complicated engine with many more expensive failure points to gain a couple mpg is not great for the consumer, but whatever, not winning that argument.

Absolute said:

---

So a year later for the same purpose rented another big suv to take the kid back to school. Picked the Expy. This time it was a max, so bigger and a year or two newer. It had a weird option setup, didn't know you could still get a vehicle without adaptive cruise control.

This one was a much more impressive engine experience. Makes me think there was something wrong with the one last year. This one was responsive and nice to drive. Recently drove a friend's new V8 f150 and honestly this one actually seemed to be just as peppy and worked better with the transmission.

Which brings up another question. If you are going to have ten gears and have it switching as fast as it does to try to stay in as high a gear as possible, is there really any reason not to just have the cvt with its fake shift points? Not that I like those, just feels weird.

Still stand by my doubt that switching to a much more complicated engine with many more expensive failure points to gain a couple mpg is not great for the consumer, but whatever, not winning that argument.

---

Same 10spd as the truck. So it needs a real transmission to lock out and handle towing.

I believe car rental companies have removed adaptive cruise control. Last 4 cars I've rented have had the button/option but no response. Hell, most didn't have cruise control at all (and were higher trim rides). Very likely a liability thing.

Hadn't thought about towing. That makes sense.

Guess I could see that on the cruise control. Last couple I rented did have it. Not a big deal, but made me realize how used to it I have become.

Same. I set cruise control on 45mph roads. Lol

Also been a V8 guy but absolutely loving my new 3.5. I just did my first long tow and it was Amazing.