MPG Figures Are In for Ford's Greenest Utility Vehicles

by Steph Willems

December 10th, 2019 9:18 AM

mpg figures are in for fords greenest utility vehicles

The Mustang Mach-E isn’t yet available for public consumption, leaving a trio of hybrid SUVs as the brand’s electrified vanguard. For 2020, the Escape returns to its hybrid past, joined by the newly electrified Explorer and its plug-in Lincoln Aviator twin.

EPA figures have been revealed for all of these beasts, so let’s take a look at what gas savings that additional expenditure can get you.

The hybrid Escape utilizes Ford’s venerable 2.5-liter four-cylinder; an Atkinson-cycle unit in this guise. Mated to the four-banger is an electric motor juiced by a 1.1 kWh battery pack. Combined output is 200 horsepower, with output funnelled to the drive wheels through a continuously variable automatic.

A plug-in hybrid variant due next year will surely up the model’s green appeal, but for now it’s your only fuel-sipping choice (barring the 1.5-liter three-cylinder base model). In front-drive form, the Escape Hybrid earns an EPA rating of 44 mpg city, 37 mpg highway, and 41 mpg combined. Saddle the model with all-wheel drive and the figures drop slightly to 43/37/40.

In comparison, the gas-only three-cylinder Escape returns 27/33/30 in front-drive guise, which is considerable in its own right. Previously rated, the 2020 Explorer Hybrid doesn’t crest the 30 mpg mark; it’s thirst comes in at 27/29/28 for the front-drive model. Shave off 3 mpg to get the AWD stats.

Moving far up the MSRP ladder lies the Aviator, which opts for potency and panache with its hybrid offering. With 494 hp and 630 lb-ft of torque on tap, the Aviator plug-in is a green hot rod that demands big bucks. Exclusivity is provided by having the plug-in Explorer relegated to the overseas market.

According to the EPA, the electrified Aviator — available only with AWD — returns 23 mpg when the model’s 13.6 kWh battery pack is kept in reserve, pushing the twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter V6 to the forefront. Operating as a conventional hybrid, the Aviator bests its gas-only stablemates by 2 or 3 mpg, depending on whether the challenger is FWD or AWD.

With the electric reserves brought online, that figure rockets to the equivalent of 56 mpg (MPGe) — not bad for a midsize, high-zoot utility vehicle. It may take a while to recoup the added sticker via gasoline purchases, however, as the cheapest Aviator hybrid starts just a tick below the $70k marker.

[Images: Ford]

#Aviator #EPA #Escape #Ford #FordEscapeHybrid #FuelEconomy #Green #Hybrids #Lincoln #LincolnAviator #PHEV #LincolnAviatorPlug-in

Comments

Join the conversation

7 of 36 comments

Sportyaccordy on Dec 10, 2019

No word on the Corsair PHEV? Very excited about that.

Like Reply
- Dal20402 on Dec 10, 2019
  
  It's a 2021 model, so not yet. Once both of them are out it will be interesting to see a comparison between it and the inevitable Lexus version of the RAV4 Prime.
  
  Like
IBx1 on Dec 10, 2019

Regarding the information on the Lincoln, and in general, MPGe is an absolutely useless metric. It is emission-based given some obscure basis of where the electricity comes from, and has nothing to do with combined range or fuel efficiency. They should show electric range from a full charge and put that next to the standard MPG measurements.

Like Reply
- See 3 previous
- Dal20402 on Dec 10, 2019
  
  MPGe is not "emission-based" and I wish you wouldn't just make stuff up. It's a straightforward conversion of units of energy. One gallon of gas has roughly the same energy content as 33.7 kWh of electricity. For pure electric vehicles, MPGe is just measuring miles per 33.7 kWh of electricity pulled from the wall (thus "MPG equivalent"). It gets more complicated with PHEVs because the MPGe number takes into account both the time when the car is running on electricity and when it is running on gas, and every owner will have a different percentage of time and mileage spent on electricity. I'd find it more useful to see an MPG number on gas and an MPGe number on electricity, and make my own calculation about how to weigh the two.
  
  Like
- Conundrum on Dec 10, 2019
  
  @dal20402 Yeah, and with a thermal power plant running at an average 40% efficiency, the approx 34 kWh per gallon of coal pit tar crude fed to it produces perhaps 12kWh at the plug after transmission and distribution losses. So MPGe is the very height of projected mental conceit and misdirection of the uneducated. It's political. It equates two entirely separate things because the dopes who promote EVs cannot really face reality because it would spoil their agendas of society changing over to EVs, so they are forced into making false comparisons in an attempt to change reality or influence the average dope. It's like rewriting history - revisionism. How far does an EV go on 12kWh compared to a gas vehicle running on 34 "potential" kWh from a gallon of gas -- THAT should be the real metric, otherwise why bother to train engineers in thermodynamics in the first place? Or do you want us to be dopes too? MPGe is English/History/Arts graduate non-technical-in-the-extreme stacked-deck green puffery, probably dreamt up by people who know the average citizen is a total technical dunce and will believe anything fed them by "authority". Or maybe it's worse than that - imagine if the people who put out MPGe as a metric actually believe their own bullsh!t. That's unreality carried to its illogical conclusion. Sure, I know the usual protest will surface that solar and wind are carbon-free, but when you hook an AC generator of any kind to the grid, it's impossible to tell where the energy was input when some is withdrawn elsewhere. Another thing most people cannot grasp because they equate a DC battery circuit to an AC circuit. They are totally different. Another reason why society trains engineers - someone has to debunk nonsense and understand what's really going on.
  
  Like
- Scoutdude on Dec 10, 2019
  
  MPGe is in a sense emission based. That metric was developed to be used in CAFE calculations, both for full electric and plug in hybrids. While CAFE was originally all about reducing dependence on foreign oil, it is now very much about CO2 and the better MPG the lower the CO2 g/mi.
  
  Like
- Dal20402 on Dec 10, 2019
  
  @conundrum It's one thing to adjust MPGe for the efficiency of the particular power mix in a given place. That would be useful information. It's quite another to pretend 40% is the best you're going to do. Only coal is that bad, and it won't be providing energy in the US for much longer. Gas is closer to 60%, and of course it doesn't really matter for solar, wind, or hydro. As an example, the utility that provides my power gets 97% of it (and increasing) from hydro, wind, solar, and nuclear. MPGe significantly understates the environmental benefit of driving an electric car in my area, but it's useful as a cost-measuring device.
  
  Like

Recent Comments

BEPLA My own theory/question on the Mark VI:Had Lincoln used the longer sedan wheelbase on the coupe - by leaning the windshield back and pushing the dashboard & steering wheel rearward a bit - not built a sedan - and engineered the car for frameless side windows (those framed windows are clunky, look cheap, and add too many vertical lines in comparison to the previous Marks) - Would the VI have remained an attractive, aspirational object of desire?
VoGhost Another ICEbox? Pass. Where are you going to fill your oil addiction when all the gas stations disappear for lack of demand? I want a pickup that I can actually use for a few decades.
Art Vandelay Best? PCH from Ventura to somewhere near Lompoc. Most Famous? Route Irish
GT Ross The black wheel fad cannot die soon enough for me.
Brett Woods My 4-Runner had a manual with the 4-cylinder. It was acceptable but not really fun. I have thought before that auto with a six cylinder would have been smoother, more comfortable, and need less maintenance. Ditto my 4 banger manual Japanese pick-up. Nowhere near as nice as a GM with auto and six cylinders that I tried a bit later. Drove with a U.S. buddy who got one of the first C8s. He said he didn't even consider a manual. There was an article about how fewer than ten percent of buyers optioned a manual in the U.S. when they were available. Visited my English cousin who lived in a hilly suburb and she had a manual Range Rover and said she never even considered an automatic. That's culture for you.  Miata, Boxster, Mustang, Corvette and Camaro; I only want manual but I can see both sides of the argument for a Mustang, Camaro or Challenger. Once you get past a certain size and weight, cruising with automatic is a better dynamic. A dual clutch automatic is smoother, faster, probably more reliable, and still allows you to select and hold a gear. When you get these vehicles with a high performance envelope, dual-clutch automatic is what brings home the numbers.