Focus ST Claims 23MPG City, 32MPG Highway

Jack Baruth
by Jack Baruth
focus st claims 23mpg city 32mpg highway

Sometimes, the Ford Facebook pages bring you horrifying news like “We commissioned Tanner Foust, Vaughn Gittin Jr., Brian Deegan, Ken Block, and other amazing drivers to take the Focus ST through its paces against competitors for our upcoming video series dubbed, ‘ST Sessions.'”

If the thought of indirectly paying those four, ah, individuals to “hoon” by purchasing a new Focus ST hasn’t completely made you lose your appetite, there’s now some actual news regarding the car to share:

The ST’s 23/32 rating puts it slightly ahead of the VW GTI, which doesn’t have nearly the power, and well ahead of the Mazdaspeed3. While Ford’s Facebook fans often possess all the intellect of the aforementioned baseball-cap-directionally-challenged Brian Deegan and therefore somehow expected the car to match the “Omni Miser’s” 50MPG highway rating despite recent EPA adjustments, most people are pretty satisfied with 26mpg combined.

Want more power with better real-world mileage? You might have to buy an Impala.

Join the conversation
14 of 76 comments
  • SV SV on Jul 12, 2012

    For a 250hp car, that's quite good. I'm more surprised by how terrible the Speed3's mileage is: about the same as a typical large V6 crossover. Yikes.

  • Jetcal1 Jetcal1 on Jul 12, 2012

    I barely make 30 MPG with my castrated Fit (auto) on my daily commute of 80 miles with about 60 miles of it 70-74 MPH burning E10. I would be happy with 25 and thrilled with 28 real world.

    • See 3 previous
    • Burgersandbeer Burgersandbeer on Jul 13, 2012

      This is a great illustration of why B-segment and sometimes even C-segment cars are not great tools for highway commutes. The gearing is too aggressive to get decent economy while keeping up with traffic. When the gearing isn't aggressive, they are frustratingly slow.

  • NormSV650 NormSV650 on Jul 12, 2012

    So nice to have a discussion about fuel economy and performance cars with no one mentions America's most efficient full line manufacturer. :)

  • Ciddyguy Ciddyguy on Jul 12, 2012

    It's been just over 6 months since I bought the '03 Mazda Protege5 I own now and in that time, I've come to realize that this class of car (C class) with a 2.0L motor never really got much beyond low thirties AT BEST since, well, old buck was a pup - until more recently and even then, some cars do it better than others. That said, I once had a 1988 Honda Accord (mine was the FI LX-I with a power moonroof and factory alloys), a sporty looking though not so sporty driving 4 door sedan with a 2.0L, 120hp naturally aspirated 4 with a 5spd and I bet I never got more than 32mpg on the highway as that was what I expected out of that car at the time. The same went for the Mazda (with the same sized, but with 130hp 4) though in reality, according to the newer number figures, both cars (the Mazda and the Honda) get closer to 28mpg Hwy, 22 city with 24 average, according to the fuel mileage website from the US Gov. Not that I'm complaining now as on my road trip in early June, I managed around 25mpg all told since almost all of that tank was highway mileage, which included rush hour on my way to Tacoma from Sedro-Woolley, which sits about 60 miles north of Seattle. All told with a trip to Olympia (and a fill up before getting on the freeway) to my youngest sister, I put about 330 miles on the Mazda that weekend and loved every minute of it. I had to do roughly 220 miles on the 4th of July as I missed being able to take the ferry over to Bainbridge Island from Seattle (as a walk on) to be at the parade they do every year and had to drive around to meet family, taking the Tacoma Narrows Bridge and driving up the peninsula to get to the island. I've done that drive many times in other cars and love doing that drive too (and it's a pretty drive once on the peninsula). The point is, the car is rated at 22-28 with 24 being the combined average and with a lighter foot, I can achieve close to that but doubt I get over 25-26mpg though at 65-70 with a 4spd autobox (sport stick) as anything faster than that in 4th, mean creaping past 3000rpm. And the main reason I am not complaining is that I can actually afford to fill the tank since it has 14.5Gallon in it, that's why. but still, I do wish it did a bit better than it does, but sadly, it's sensitive to the rpms it has to run at so that does not help the mileage any at all, plus we run E10 gas here, so it's no more than 10% ethanol and that'll drop the mileage down by what, 2mpg or so by itself. That being said, I've long felt that C segment cars, 32 for highway, low to mid 20's city, B segment cars a bit more, mid to upper 20's city, mid thirties or so highway being the norm and that goes back some 20 years or perhaps more.

    • See 5 previous
    • Ciddyguy Ciddyguy on Jul 14, 2012

      @sastexan Burgersandbear, I'd say, it's both the size of the tank AND the mileage, which is partly why we have smaller cars. they typically get better mileage than a larger car, and for roughly the same cruising range can do it on a smaller sized tank. If you have to fill your tank up at roughly the same intervals, I'd rather pay less per fill up than not if I had a choice, especially if my budget is of limited means. This allows me to do the occasional road trip whereas I may not in a car that cost considerably more to fill up.