2013 Explorer Mileage Rating

[VinceL]

Looks like the 2013 FWD is now rated at 24mpg highway.

Are they managing expectations, or is this a result of the new axle ratio?

 

[peterk9]

Looks like the 2013 is now rated at 24mpg highway.

Are they managing expectations, or is this a result of the new axle ratio (can't recall if just the Limited got a new ratio)?

Vince in the 2013 Explorer thread, Sgt1411 posted the following; New Final Drive Ratio's for the 3.5L Ti-VCT V6 Engine. It was confirmed by Cory.

Peter

 

[FordService]

Looks like the 2013 is now rated at 24mpg highway.

Are they managing expectations, or is this a result of the new axle ratio (can't recall if just the Limited got a new ratio)?

Vince in the 2013 Explorer thread, Sgt1411 posted the following; New Final Drive Ratio's for the 3.5L Ti-VCT V6 Engine. It was confirmed by Cory.

Peter

Vince,

Peter is correct; “New Final Drive Ratio's for the 3.5L Ti-VCT V6 Engine” is listed as a product change on the 2013MY.

Thanks for the post, Peter.

Cory

 

[EX-SV]

In order to not slow down acceleration, have the 6 speed tranny gear ratios been changed too (in light of new final drive axle ratio)?

 

[peterk9]

In order to not slow down acceleration, have the 6 speed tranny gear ratios been changed too (in light of new final drive axle ratio)?

Are you referring to the quick slow down when you start to coast? If not, I can't say I have noticed a slow acceleration in getting up to speed.

Peter

 

[VinceL]

Okay, it was for the engine and not just the trim. Thanks for the replies!

I was attempting to rely on my memory, and I really should know better by now!

 

[EX-SV]

Are you referring to the quick slow down when you start to coast? If not, I can't say I have noticed a slow acceleration in getting up to speed.

Peter

I'm referring to measured accleleration. Usually a final drive ratio without any changes to engine and tranny gear ratios will result in slower acceleration.

Examples: 0-30 mph, 0-60mph.

btw-have you driven a 2013 Explorer?

 

[peterk9]

I'm referring to measured accleleration. Usually a final drive ratio without any changes to engine and tranny gear ratios will result in slower acceleration.

Examples: 0-30 mph, 0-60mph.

btw-have you driven a 2013 Explorer?

No I have not. Haven't seen one on the lots yet. I don't know how you would tell a 2011 from a 2012 or 2013 when driving by one. I don't think there are any exterior changes. There is only one dealership close to me and he doesn't have any Explorers. Mine is further away and I won't be going there for a few weeks.

Peter

 

[VinceL]

I know the ratio for the V6 went from 3.16 to 3.39, so that should give it better acceleration, but worse gas mileage, ceteris paribus.

 

[EX-SV]

I know the ratio for the V6 went from 3.16 to 3.39, so that should give it better acceleration, but worse gas mileage, ceteris paribus.

If that's the case and highway gas mileage increased, then most likely transmission gear ratios were juggled and other changes made to engine tune.

 

[VinceL]

But the mileage went down from 25 to 24. That is what prompted this whole thing. Of course, if you thought (and since I wasn't specific enough in my original post) that I was speaking of the 4WD model, it would seem like the mileage did go up. Please pardon my lack of clarity

I was referring to the FWD model losing 1mpg on the highway.

 

[EX-SV]

Mileage chart might be in order, lol:

FWD AWD

2012 V6 18/25 17/23

2013 V6 17/24 17/23

Really not much difference and none w/4wd. Flex-fuel compatible for 2013. If those final drive ratio changes are accurate, should explain drop on fwd.

 

[Asystole]

Edmunds shows a 0-60 at 8.3 secs

 

[VinceL]

Mileage chart might be in order, lol:

FWD AWD

2012 V6 18/25 17/23

2013 V6 17/24 17/23

Really not much difference and none w/4wd. Flex-fuel compatible for 2013. If those final drive ratio changes are accurate, should explain drop on fwd.

That is much clearer!

I was content to be as confusing as possible...

But that does show something. When I check Ford's website just now, it lists the 2012 as 17/25. You put 18/25. Thing is, I remembered it being 18/25. That is just hinky!

Whoa-whoa-whoa!!!! Hold on a sec. The Ford website says 18/25 for the 2013. When I was searching inventory earlier today, the window stickers say 17/24.

It would seem I nor Ford have a clue! lol

Okay, looking again, it depends where on the Ford site you look. On the 2012's, if you click compare models, the numbers are one set. If you look at the specs page, the numbers are a different set. Go figure!

The numbers for the 2013's match in both places, but are different from the window stickers you can view online.

Where does the truth lay.......

 

[EX-SV]

That is much clearer!

I was content to be as confusing as possible...

But that does show something. When I check Ford's website just now, it lists the 2012 as 17/25. You put 18/25. Thing is, I remembered it being 18/25. That is just hinky!

Whoa-whoa-whoa!!!! Hold on a sec. The Ford website says 18/25 for the 2013. When I was searching inventory earlier today, the window stickers say 17/24.

It would seem I nor Ford have a clue! lol

Okay, looking again, it depends where on the Ford site you look. On the 2012's, if you click compare models, the numbers are one set. If you look at the specs page, the numbers are a different set. Go figure!

The numbers for the 2013's match in both places, but are different from the window stickers you can view online.

Where does the truth lay.......

In short, I used the best source for EPA gas mileage ratings, the EPA website.

Ford has plenty of weasel-out language to suggest everything is "subject to change", which makes it easier to be inconsistent and sloppy with numbers.

 

[VinceL]

In short, I used the best source for EPA gas mileage ratings, the EPA website.

Ford has plenty of weasel-out language to suggest everything is "subject to change", which makes it easier to be inconsistent and sloppy with numbers.

Okay, that clears that up. Thanks

 

[FordService]

...Okay, looking again, it depends where on the Ford site you look. On the 2012's, if you click compare models, the numbers are one set. If you look at the specs page, the numbers are a different set. Go figure!...

Hey guys,

The updated fuel economy was to make the performance feel better at highway speeds. The performance improvement won’t change the combined fuel economy.

Thanks for pointing out the site details; we’ll be updating those as soon as possible!

Cory

 

[VinceL]

Thanks for the clarification Cory!

 

[EX-SV]

Yes thanks, good to know. Or as stated on site: "Ford reserves the right to change product specifications at any time without incurring obligations"

 

[doinit10]

Inconsistencies on 2013 Explorer web page

Cory, while you're at it you might check the inconsistencies on the 2013 Explorer web page. I am referring to the options list on the "Models and Pricing" list on the Limited specifically the 302A and 303A packages and also in the text below vs. the "Build Your Own" information for the 302A and 303A packages. In the "Build Your Own" section it clearly states these 3 options as included in these packages: 1) heated steering wheel, 2) power tilt/telescoping steering wheel and 3) lane keep assist. These are not on the "Models and Pricing" list. BTW, is the power tilt/telescoping steering wheel included in the memory seat function? Also, on the Technology Facts Sheet Page: http://media.ford.com/mini_sites/10031/techfactsheets/. There is only one category (MyKey) that lists the Explorer even though many of the technologies are on the Explorer. I guess Explorer owners are just smart enough to know that and the others aren't! Also I have never seen anywhere whether the Explorer has "pull-drift compensation" on its EPAS power steering - clarification please. I know, I have too much time on my hands. BTW, I have had several tsb's applied to my Explorer and they have all been good and I have an excellent dealer to fix them.