Remote start eats up fuel that is not recorded. 10 minutes remote start 5 days a week equates to nearly an hour of the ICE running, which can easily reduce your tank MPG to what you see. I experimented with it last year and it used at least 2 gallons of gas just for remote start each tank.
I hadn't considered that the computer doesn't compute the remote start fuel used. I imagine that must be the major contributor to the difference between the reported and actual mpg.
The cold is nasty too. In the summer I was getting about 44mpg. During the winter it's gone as low as 33. Yet one more reason to look forward to summer's arrival!
I did expect a drop in the winter. My expectation was the drop to be similar to my previous car... down to around 32-34 mpg. Not down to 28.
One fill-up is not enough to be accurate because of the variation of fuel pump shutoff Ten fill ups are needed. The car computer readout is generally about 4% high on mpg but very accurate. Cold winter weather can cause a 15 mpg hit on economy.
I can appreciate that filling up this car may be different than my previous cars. But I wouldn't expect a nearly 20% difference between reported and actual mileage to be from pump variance.
Somewhat low results should have been expected when it is cold out AND you use the engine as a matter of comfort and convenience instead of for propulsion.......that is, remote start and keeping it "running" while eating lunch.
A return to warmer weather should make for a dramatic increase......but I have a hard time getting much over 35 because I'm not obsessed with mileage and just drive it.
I'm not disappointed in the low result itself. I am disappointed in just how low the result is. I've always utilized the engine for comfort and convenience in addition to propulsion (explained more below), so I didn't expect 41 mpg. But 28? That's below what I was expecting.
Your dash mpg will almost always be a little optimistic, compared with your manual calculations, but it will give you a better idea of your actual driving efficiency during times when you're using remote start, since your dash numbers aren't affected by the remote start events. Long sentence, I know. I hope it makes sense to you, though.
As far as cold goes, I just had my worst tank ever in the 64 I've recorded. Single digits are a killer.
Your quarter mile trip to lunch and eating while idling is definitely costing you quite a bit of efficiency, too. Remember, mpg is 0 when burning gas while not moving. You can't change that math.
Oh yes, I am so happy with all the tools the car offers to monitor fuel efficiency while driving. Right now I'm still figuring them all out and using them to monitor how my normal driving habits affect mileage. Eventually I'll use them to improve my driving. I am already letting the brake coach do it's job. The first few days I was happy to get 88% on normal stops. Now I'm disappointed to get 99%!
Thanks for all the input guys!
I guess my frustration is more than the car (on it's first tank) didn't meet my expectations. I didn't go into this with my eyes shut and my dreams high... I expected to get what I was getting with my previous car. The Focus I was driving was rated for 28/37. The vast majority of my driving is on the highway so in the summer I was exceeding that... getting between 38 and 40mpg per tank. In the winter I was down to between 32 and 34. With the FFH I was expecting to meet those same numbers; 32-34. If I got more than that, I'd be happy. I got less, so I'm disappointed.
And it's not as though I got those mileage numbers from the interwebs or personal stories... Ford and the EPA told me that this car with it's additional 1000 pounds would exceed the mileage of my previous car. The only variation between how I drive this car and how I drove my previous car is the remote start. And even that's not a big difference. In cold weather like this I would often go out and start up my previous car and let it idle/warm-up for 10 or 15 minutes before going to work. Now instead of that being 'often' it's 'every time'. The idling at lunch? I already did that, so that was built into the 32-34 mpg.
From reading about everybody's experiences here, I can see that this car is capable of getting far more than I'll ever expect to get myself. Seeing people getting upper 40s and 50s mpg gives me hope that I should be able to get upper 30s or low 40s in the summer.
TLDR? My disappointment stems from not getting the 32-34 mpg I was getting on a car that had lower listed mileage when driving and treating the cars in the same manner. It's NOT from not getting mileage in the 41-47 mpg range.