The New Thriftpower? EPA Says Less-thirsty 2018 Ford Expedition Tops Its Class

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems

There’s nothing quite as uncertain as that little number staring at you from the window sticker of a new vehicle. It’s two digits long (unless you’re fabulously rich), followed by the word “combined.” We’re talking, of course, about the Environmental Protection Agency’s fuel economy rating, which often turns out to be an impossible-to-reach goal or — if you’re lucky — a lowballed figure.

Back in the days of lapels and flares, the hot gas mileage action was found in the compact and subcompact class. Economy cars, after all. Well, people these days prefer driving a vehicle that seats at least five adults in comfort while towing a boat and hauling 65 pounds of kid’s toys and a dog in the rear cargo area. With the heyday of the cheap little car long gone, the (fuel) economy battle rages anew among the largest, and most lucrative, vehicles on the road.

So, do you believe the EPA when it says the massive 2018 Ford Expedition gets 20 miles per gallon combined?

That’s the official rating for the regular length, rear-drive Expedition, which is wholly new for the 2018 model year. Adding wheelbase or four-wheel traction brings that figure down by 1 mpg in either case, or 2 mpg with both factors combined. Still, the entry-level Expedition’s fuel economy tops its main rival’s rating by 1 mpg, and that’s no small thing for Dearborn brass.

This rating makes it a class-leader.

With Ford, topping the 2018 Chevrolet Suburban’s base price by nearly $1,500 is no big deal if enough buyers come over to the Expedition camp — and if they’re willing to shell out nearly $80,000 for a top-flight variant, all the better. However, fuel economy is a marketing win.

The EPA rates the 2WD 2018 Suburban at 16 mpg city, 23 mpg highway, and 19 mpg combined — 1 mpg below the Suburban in each category. Add 4WD, and the Suburban still sits below the Expedition, though choosing the 4WD Expedition MAX brings the two combined ratings to par.

This shouldn’t surprise, as the two rivals sport very different powertrains. In the Suburban, you’ll find a very familiar 5.3-liter V8 and six-speed automatic. (So, familiar, we’re told it’s actually quite comforting. In the Ford, there’s an upgraded version of the 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 sporting an extra 10 horsepower and 50 lb-ft of torque, hitched to a 10-speed automatic. That brings the model up to 375 hp and 470 lb-ft.

In contrast, the Suburban’s mill generates only 355 hp and 383 lb-ft.

While it looks like Ford has its cake and is able to eat it, too, there’s a reason the saying “your mileage will vary” exists. We haven’t had a chance to spend a week in the new Expedition yet, but past reviews have made us suspicious of the lofty fuel economy ratings of certain body-on-frame Ford vehicles. Two F-150 pickups, in both 5.0-liter/six-speed and 3.5EB/10-speed guise, fell short of the advertised combined rating after a week of fairly forgiving driving.

In his recent test of the 2017 Suburban, Mark “Bark M” Baruth’s mileage was just 0.5 mpg shy of the combined EPA rating. Because of this, we’re taking the EPA rating with a grain of salt.

But who knows, Ford might surprise us all. Certainly, the new Expedition’s aluminum-heavy weight loss regimen points to an automaker that’s concerned about thirstiness. The 2018 model should start rolling off dealer lots later this year.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Steph Willems
Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 36 comments
  • EBFlex EBFlex on Nov 01, 2017

    We know egoboost engines drink fuel in the real world. This will be lucky to see any better than 17.

    • See 1 previous
    • Olivebranch2006 Olivebranch2006 on Nov 01, 2017

      My 2015 Lincoln Navigator 4x4 L gets 17 MPG combined. I've been testing it for 5,000 miles. It has the twin turbo ecoboost v6 and 6 speed transmission. I could see a 300 pound aluminum body weight savings plus the 10 speed transmission saving some fuel. Maybe even 1 mpg more combined.

  • Mike1041 Mike1041 on Nov 02, 2017

    I think of EPA stickers as a guide for comparison only. Achieving the results is not going to happen. Too many factors affect gas mileage to come up with a number that will match your driving style and conditions

  • ToolGuy 9 miles a day for 20 years. You didn't drive it, why should I? 😉
  • Brian Uchida Laguna Seca, corkscrew, (drying track off in rental car prior to Superbike test session), at speed - turn 9 big Willow Springs racing a motorcycle,- at greater speed (but riding shotgun) - The Carrousel at Sears Point in a 1981 PA9 Osella 2 litre FIA racer with Eddie Lawson at the wheel! (apologies for not being brief!)
  • Mister It wasn't helped any by the horrible fuel economy for what it was... something like 22mpg city, iirc.
  • Lorenzo I shop for all-season tires that have good wet and dry pavement grip and use them year-round. Nothing works on black ice, and I stopped driving in snow long ago - I'll wait until the streets and highways are plowed, when all-seasons are good enough. After all, I don't live in Canada or deep in the snow zone.
  • FormerFF I’m in Atlanta. The summers go on in April and come off in October. I have a Cayman that stays on summer tires year round and gets driven on winter days when the temperature gets above 45 F and it’s dry, which is usually at least once a week.
Next