2013 Ford Fusion Hybrid Se Pearl White Must See Low Miles, Leather Must Sell on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case. Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.

Coronavirus shakes up America's truck market: GM outselling Ford and Ram

FCA, Ford and General Motors joined the rest of the U.S. auto industry in taking heavy volume hits due to coronavirus-related shortages of both cars and customers. The saying goes that a rising tide lifts all boats; it stands to reason, then, that a falling one would have the opposite effect.  However, as we learned Thursday, the automotive market can behave in unpredictable ways. While the F-Series remained the best-selling nameplate in Q1, GM's full-size trucks are now outselling Ford's again for the first time in years, and with this upward thrust from the General, FCA's Ram was unceremoniously booted out of a hard-earned second place.  While late-March sales declines hit just about every major automaker in one way or another, the model-by-model results weren't nearly so uniform. And because the market tends to be a zero-sum game, for every winner, there generally has to be a loser.  In this case, that winner was GM, and its rise had to come at the expense of another automaker, in this case, Ford. F-Series sales dropped 13.1 percent in the first quarter of 2020, while sales of GM's full-sized Silverado and Sierra surged nearly 28% in the same period. FCA's Ram lineup managed a steady-as-she-goes 7% increase. All-in, GM finished the quarter with 197,743 full-size trucks sold to Ford's 186,562. Here's the full breakdown: Ford F-Series: 186,562  Chevrolet Silverado*: 144,734 Ram P/U: 128,805 GMC Sierra: 53,009 *includes 1,036 Medium Duty sales Things are a but murkier in the midsize segment, where the Chevy Colorado slipped 36% to just 21,430 units sold — just a few hundred better than the slow-selling Ford Ranger's Q1 numbers. The GMC Canyon experienced an almost identical slide, finishing the quarter with just 4,483 units sold. For perspective, Jeep sold more than 15,000 Gladiators and Toyota's midsize Tacoma slipped less than 8%, finishing the quarter with nearly 54,000 sales.  We suspect this discrepancy in full- and mid-size truck sales comes from shifting incentives. Ford, GM and FCA would like to keep selling bigger trucks because there's far more profit margin built into their list prices. Even with tens of thousands of dollars in manufacturer money on the hood, big trucks still make money.  Since these automakers report quarterly, we won't get another good look at these numbers until July, but if you thought that 2019 represented the new normal for U.S. auto sales, well, think again.

Your official Ford Transit specs are here, $29,565* to start

Ford has released the full list of pricing and specs on its new Transit, the replacement for the long-lived E-Series cargo van. Prices are set to start at $29,565 and can increase rapidly from there, depending on length, engine and wheelbase, among other options.
Let's talk first about those new engines. The base is the familiar 3.7-liter, naturally aspirated V6. It boasts 275 horsepower and 260 pound-feet of torque and can return up to 14 miles per gallon in the city and 19 mpg on the highway. This engine can also be adapted to run on LPG or compressed natural gas. Of course, there are better alternatives, for a price, the first of which is Ford's well-received, 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6. It packs 310 hp and a best-in-class 400 lb-ft of torque (available at just 2,500 rpm) while matching the naturally aspirated engine in both city and highway fuel economy.
Then, there's the diesel. With a 3.2-liter, five-cylinder diesel mill at its disposal, the Transit generates 350 lb-ft between 1,500 and 2,500 rpm, along with 185 hp. This engine hasn't been rated by the EPA, although we'd be really, really surprised if it didn't handily best either of the gas-powered engines in fuel efficiency. A six-speed automatic is standard, regardless of engine.