I drove in the "real world" today...

[tombarker13ffh]

Had to take an impromptu interstate trip this morning and I didn't have much time so I set the cruise at 70mph and let her go. About 70 degrees headed south with a SSW 5 mph wind and occasional drizzle. Worst part is it ruined my average for the 1000-mile challenge...

 

 

I'll post the return trip as soon as I finish driving it. It'll be much better at 65mph.

[acdii]

Hey 41.9 at 70 is darned good! The 10 can do better at those speeds, but that is very close to it. If my replacement does that I will be very happy with it.

[tombarker13ffh]

Pretty sure I'm gonna be pushin 50mpg on the return trip. Tank average is at 44.8 and climbing...

[tombarker13ffh]

Here it is. Love this car.

Edited May 17, 2013 by tombarker13ffh

[CombsAuthor]

That's awesome Tom.

 

But how was it downhill BOTH directions?

[corncobs]

That's awesome indeed. Where other people have under performing FFH your FFH seems to be over performing.

 

Really nice numbers!

[acdii]

Yeah he got the extra batteries they took out of mine! :)

[rjent]

Tom, how many miles was it until you think it "broke in" or have you seen these results from the beginning? I have about 600 miles on now and I am getting about 41 at 65 in very hilly terrain. I have another 150 one way trip next week, so that will be a better test, but I was just curious if you think it improved over time.

 

Thanks in advance.....

[Charrua]

I just returned from a 2900 mile road trip where I kept the ECO cruise at 70. I averaged 41 MPG for the whole trip. Assuming I would have improved to 48 driving at 65 I did a quick calculation to see difference in time and money.

 

I basically saved 3 hours of driving and spent an extra $30. As much as I love driving the Fusion, I'd say that it was money well spent.

 

On trips of less than about 30 miles, on the other hand, I always keep it at 60-65. It just isn't worth the few minutes of time saved.

[tombarker13ffh]

Tom, how many miles was it until you think it "broke in" or have you seen these results from the beginning? I have about 600 miles on now and I am getting about 41 at 65 in very hilly terrain. I have another 150 one way trip next week, so that will be a better test, but I was just curious if you think it improved over time.

 

Thanks in advance.....

I dunno, I made this same trip south with about 400 miles on the car in the middle of February and still got 43mpg. The first picture I ever took of my trip results was 56.5 mpg on my work commute. But I was mostly driving 50-55mph on two-lane highways. I've still not driven many interstate miles. Unfortunately, I can't say I've seen much of a break-in improvement for sure.

[Riggo]

@tom

Is tour terrain relatively flat?

[rico567]

RE: the issue of break-in. From my reading, I have been given to understand that there's really not much break-in involved any more. While it was very real back in the day, due to modern manufacturing techniques and factory processes, cars are delivered basically "broken in." This does not appear to apply to the TDI engines, for some reason, that can take as much as 30K miles to break in. Has anyone actually documented a "break-in" effect in a contemporary vehicle. Just to my casual keeping track of mileage over the years, no new vehicle we've driven in the last 15 years has shown the slightest sign of mileage improvement from new.

[tombarker13ffh]

@tom

Is tour terrain relatively flat?

Yes, except for the bottom 40 miles of Illinois.

 

In a stable climate I think a break-in effect could be noticeable but because most FFH buyers are breaking in their cars from winter to spring its difficult to differentiate any improvements from temperature changes. Seems to me my work commute has mostly improved since February because the motor doesn't have to warm up as much.

 

That said, I'm certainly seeing 580+ miles per tank, even on this tank, when I saw 400 at first. Ford definitely specifies a break in for the hybrids, which isn't really common anymore. I think the break in period is supposed to be for the batteries, not the engine internals, like a conventional break in period.

Edited May 18, 2013 by tombarker13ffh

[acdii]

There is a learning curve as the systems adjust to each other, and can take several hundred miles, and has to be relearned every time the battery is disconnected for more than a few minutes. There is also a period of time as all the moving components loosen up as they are pretty tight from all the seals and everything, and that can take a few thousand miles to fully free up. For the engine itself, they are run up at the factory to seat the rings, but there is still a run in period of at least 500 miles until the rings are fully seated, and which is why it states in the manual to vary your speed during this time, you dont want the engine run at a constant speed and load during this time.

 

However after the first 1000 miles, all this is done, complete, fully broke in. The rest of the "break in" period is actually the tire wear. It can take 10K or more before the wear enough to roll smoothly. The more miles on the tires, the better the MPG will get. Proof of this is my 2010, it still has the original tires, and while they still have some tread left, they are due for replacement. However, look at the kind of MPG I am getting now, 47-48 MPG where last year I was getting 43. If I hang onto this car I will have to replace the tires, and I can say with high certainty that the MPG will drop. It will take at least another 10K for the MPG to improve after that.

[tombarker13ffh]

I really just posted this because it seems there's a lot of people asking about mileage at 70-80 mph ("real world") and the car can do well at least at 70mph, even better at 65. Driving style does have a lot to do with it though. I dont gun it passed people on the interstate. At 70mph, I'm still usually the one getting passed. Except, there was a point on the way down where I was passing a truck and another truck was roadside so I accelerated hard to get out of the way so he could get over and the kW gauge on the Empower display maxed out in the yellow at the top and it was loud and shaky and hit it really fast like it downshifted. Scared me.

[tombarker13ffh]

Here's an elevation map of southern Illinois. The cooler colors are the lower elevations. Looking at the map, one would think I'd get better mileage driving south, but that wasn't the case. Like I said, there was a SSW 5 mph wind, but I don't know if it had that much of an effect. I didn't feel any wind resistance heading down. I guess the biggest factor was driving 65mph instead of 70mph.

 

 

[hybridbear]

On our road trip in June I'm going to try some experimenting with traveling at 65 MPH to see how the fuel economy is at 65 vs 60 MPH. I'm hoping that we can average 45 MPG for the entire trip

[DeeCee]

On our road trip in June I'm going to try some experimenting with traveling at 65 MPH to see how the fuel economy is at 65 vs 60 MPH. I'm hoping that we can average 45 MPG for the entire trip

I recently completed a 467 mile trip with 280 of the miles with cruise set at 68 mph. My trip average was 44.9. Had the AC running the whole trip. I expect you should see your 45 mpg average goal.