2018 5.0 Highway MPG

[millhouse]

You are now changing everything to fit your agenda. Again making assumptions and now changing the parameters to meet your agenda. Classic attempt to correct you bullshit call.

I am not changing anything and have no agenda. The only one making assumptions is you. You might want to look into the scientific method a bit bud…

https://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-projects/science-fair/steps-of-the-scientific-method

Making claims I never made. Making assumptions based on our own internal knowledge or lack there of.

You’re the one that claimed to be getting (an unreasonable) 35mpg not me. Your response didn’t come with any caveats or asterisks. The OP was asking for a reasonable answer on what to expect on highway road trips at 50mph….not what your gauge once read when the stars aligned. Your post was meant to be boastful, not informative.

Take what is said for exactly what it is and read several of my posts that I was not claiming this as a normal occurance only that this is what my car did under the circumstances.

Re-read what the OP’s question was…and what your original answer was and get back to me.

Wind direction will be necessity because you will claim the wind changed from a 20 mph south wind to 45 mph north wind after I made the turn.

You are incapable of admitting you are wrong and the car got 34.7 mpg on that particular day, on that particular route, under the conditions that say.

That’s ok that you can’t, no sleep lost here.

You don’t seem to understand, I have no doubt that your gauge told you that you got 34.7 MPG. I have every doubt that is what you were actually getting. It could have been a tail wind, a slight downgrade, an inaccurate gauge, drafting etc.

What I don’t understand is how you can actually believe you were getting 10mpg over what the car is rated for without doubting something is awry. Do you honestly believe you actually got 34.7 mpg and had no downgrade, no tailwind and no inaccuracy in your gauge…..really?

Sponsored

 

[millhouse]

No worries and thanks. Just some good internet key board cowboy fun.

Please, don't take anything personal...I can be a keyboard ass at times but am in no way trying to belittle you. :cheers:

 

[Ebm]

I'm beginning to think no one in this thread knows how the EPA gets their fuel mileage numbers. :lol:

 

[Loki-GT]

I'm beginning to think no one in this thread knows how the EPA gets their fuel mileage numbers. :lol:

I get how the EPA gets their numbers, I also know how to calculate mileage.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

 

[Houston Kid]

You don’t seem to understand, I have no doubt that your gauge told you that you got 34.7 MPG. I have every doubt that is what you were actually getting. It could have been a tail wind, a slight downgrade, an inaccurate gauge, drafting etc.

What I don’t understand is how you can actually believe you were getting 10mpg over what the car is rated for without doubting something is awry. Do you honestly believe you actually got 34.7 mpg and had no downgrade, no tailwind and no inaccuracy in your gauge…..really?

Finally, we agree. The car could have gotten 34.7 mpg according to the car cpu under those circumstances. I know many have reported the car cpu is very generous on it's numbers by as much as 1.5 to 2 mpg higher on average than actual.

The EPA rating on the car is computed vastly different than what I did. I arrived at a cruising speed then set the cruise, then reset the cpu, and did not touch the gas or brakes for 19 miles on a section of road that the overall elevation goes from 50 feet to 160 feet with a fairly neutral wind. I never claimed it to be anything other than that and that is nothing near how the EPA arrives at a their ratings.

I know there is no way in hell the car under normal driving conditions gets 34.7 mpg average over the course of a tank of gas.

I posted my current overall average for the car which is 16.9 mpg. Vastly different from 34.7 mpg.

If you figure in the generous nature of the cpu, I maybe as low as 14.9 mpg average for the 2,400 miles I have driven the car. Just to see how much my cpu is off, the next fill I will reset trip A, drive that tank down, fill the tank and do the math for a realistic avg for comaprison.

I like to race red light to red light btw. On the freeway I normally drive it like I stole it so the 34.7 mpg very much surprised me because most tanks avg around 15 according to the cpu. It does increase if a road trip or two is thrown in thus the 16.9 mpg overall average I posted earlier which maybe 14.9 in reality.

 

[Ebm]

.

I get how the EPA gets their numbers, I also know how to calculate mileage.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

Not you. Others...

 

[Loki-GT]

Not you. Others...

I knew dat! :cheers:

 

[Eric L]

I have a zero option 6M base 2017 GT...3595lbs (Texas Motorplex scale)...The avg mpg is normally .5mpg to 1.5mpg generous on the meter versus hand calculated. This could be due to fuel neck not quite full, human error, etc...I normally get 26ish mpg hand calculated, some highway, some rush hour, some school drop offs, etc. (avg 38 mph)...I think base wheels, slow driving and quite a few variables affect mpg's, therefore they can vary widely...

31.7mpg was a 90 mile ride from New Boston, Tx, to Mena, Ark...90 degrees, 7mph tailwind, 800' elevation increase

 

[Loki-GT]

I have a zero option 6M base 2017 GT...3595lbs (Texas Motorplex scale)...The avg mpg is normally .5mpg to 1.5mpg generous on the meter versus hand calculated. This could be due to fuel neck not quite full, human error, etc...I normally get 26ish mpg hand calculated, some highway, some rush hour, some school drop offs, etc. (avg 38 mph)...I think base wheels, slow driving and quite a few variables affect mpg's, therefore they can vary widely...

31.7mpg was a 90 mile ride from New Boston, Tx, to Mena, Ark...90 degrees, 7mph tailwind, 800' elevation increase

A few years back my Father had a 2013 Taurus SEL, I had the 2013 Taurus Limited with the 20" wider wheel/tires both were AWD. I averaged 1.5 mpg to 2 mpg less than him we determine was the difference in tire width which was nearly 2 inches. This was determined driving the same trip using both cars with 4 people in each car.

Even though mine averaged less there was no way I would prefer the smaller uglier wheels to gain 1 to 2 mpg, no way.

 

[Bull Run]

I get how the EPA gets their numbers, I also know how to calculate mileage.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/how_tested.shtml

This is why I like to use EPA figures because they do their tests in a controlled environment. These gas milage threads are ultimately useless since driving environment and driving styles differ greatly, and this isn't even accounting for different trim levels (i.e. Prem being heavier or PP having lower gearing).

 

[Hack]

I would expect a slight improvement. However, internet braggers are notorious on fuel economy threads on the internet.

What's the difference in the EPA ratings? That's probably the most objective measure you are going to get.

Post #6 in this thread.

This is why I like to use EPA figures because they do their tests in a controlled environment. These gas milage threads are ultimately useless since driving environment and driving styles differ greatly, and this isn't even accounting for different trim levels (i.e. Prem being heavier or PP having lower gearing).

I still agree with you.

 

[WildHorse]

[MENTION=34967]Eric L[/MENTION] Thank you Sir! You confirmed what I said mileage wise. Same weight too (mine scaled at 3580lbs).

 

[Kansas GT]

I'm sitting at 20.7 MPG average according the the dash after around 1,800 miles on my '18 GT PP (3.73 gearing). That's with RTR Tech 7 19x9.5s (275/40/19 Michelin PS A/S 3+) if that makes any difference.

My driving is pretty balanced between highway and city streets. Highway driving tends to be around 80-85 MPH now that I'm no longer breaking it in and timid. Speed limits around here are 70 MPH for the most part, and people tend to drive 80. Drive mode stays in track in dry conditions and normal in wet conditions.

Overall, I continue to be impressed by the fuel economy. I didn't purchase this car with fuel economy in mind, but I'm pleased with getting 20ish with my driving habits.

 

[sed6]

Just did a 500 mile trip, averaged 25.5 MPG at 80 mph with 2 people and a trunk full of luggage. I'm happy with that!

 

[tripleyellowmustang]

I've read PP owners here absolutely swearing they get 30MPGs on the freeway.

This shows you that what people here claim is worth something slightly less than nothing.

Ha, ha, my thoughts exactly. If these guys would contact Ford to substantiate their mileage claims, I'm sure Ford would give them millions of dollars to duplicate their particular engine.:lol:

Sponsored