Does the Focus just have low mpg? - Page 3 - Focus Fanatics
Ford Focus Forum
HomeContact UsAbout UsGalleryDiscussion ForumsMarketplace


Go Back   Focus Fanatics > Ford Focus Third Generation > MK3 Focus

MK3 Focus The place to chat about general questions, window tinting, exterior body, interior and lighting upgrades for the third generation 2012-Current Focus.

Search This Forum | Image Search | Advanced Search    
Ford Focus Tire & Wheels FocusFanatics Merchandise

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-19-2012, 03:29 PM   #21
suss6052
Focus Addict
 
suss6052's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Fan#: 95752
Location: ..., MI
What I Drive: 2013 Ford Focus ST2 Ingot Silver

Posts: 12,376
FF Reputation: 23 suss6052 Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (3)
Quote:
Originally Posted by poorblackfocus View Post
Mid 50's were in a very hilly area actually and normally done at night with a just waxed car on a normal 30 mile trip I take. But i really don't see how answers any questions beyond the break in.
I mean yeah how i drive is the biggest effective contributor to mpg. but even to use the fuely website as a reference would leave you with the fact that it gives the 2006 cobalt a higher mpg than the 2013 focus. I mean realistically i think its in the gearing at this point. cobalt does 5th at 40 mph, while the focus can go into fifth much earlier. The gearing allows it to run at 2.5k rpm at 65, while in the focus the rpms are well above that(anything above 500 rpm means its using more gas).
Unless you're talking about the 5 speed manual in the Focus, the 6DCT will be turning over at only 2600 rpm at 70 mph, and 2000 rpm at 55 mph in 6th.

The 5MT does come closer to 3000 rpm at 70 mph with the 16" wheels and tires.
__________________
Moderator for: DURATEC Ti-VCT Performance, ST Performance, MK3 Focus
suss6052 is online now  
    Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 12-19-2012, 10:55 PM   #22
Supramk3
Focus Enthusiast
 
Supramk3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Fan#: 96347
Location: Sandpoint, ID
What I Drive: 2012 Ingot Silver S 31.01.2012 BD

Posts: 300
FF Reputation: 3 Supramk3 Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slo86GT View Post
Hate to stir the pot, but Honda did it... for at least 6 years running.

85-91 CRX HF.

yep my grandma bought an 87 off the showroom floor and justy sold it this year with 80,000 original miles and pulled 50mpgs all the time. and my '12 Focus S pulls 42mpg highway when its clear out and 55-65mpg and moderate driving.
__________________
2012 Ford Focus S, Silver 4DR w/ Manual Trans, Federal SS657 205/65R15s, Tinted Taillights, Muffler Delete
1995 Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo, Dark Green, 4.0L Inline 6, Cooper STs, Leather
Supramk3 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-19-2012, 11:05 PM   #23
CDNFocusFan
Focus Enthusiast
 
Join Date: May 2012
Fan#: 99542
Location: Toronto, Canada
What I Drive: 2012 Tuxedo Black Metallic Titanium

Posts: 158
FF Reputation: 1 CDNFocusFan Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
I just did a 900 km drive and my average was 38MPG over the whole trip, all highway, cruise set to 105 KPH. (90 zones) Only have about 4600 KM on the car.
CDNFocusFan is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 12:34 AM   #24
michaelwb
Focus Jr. Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Fan#: 105890
Location: Los Angeles, CA
What I Drive: 2012 Focus SE Sport

Posts: 27
FF Reputation: 1 michaelwb Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zx3matt View Post
I get mid 40s on a regular basis and I am NOT an eco-conscious driver.
Interesting. I played with the trip computer today, resetting it several times on the highway to see what MPGs I got at constant speed.

I stayed in the far right lane and kept my speed between 52 and 57 mph, letting the car slow down as it went up nearly imperceptible inclines and gliding as much as possible. My MPGs stayed around 45 MPG.

Perhaps it's my 18" Titanium wheels and 5-speed transmission. An SFE might do better.
michaelwb is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 06:44 AM   #25
kam327
-----<M>-----
 
kam327's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Fan#: 94700
Location: Tampa, FL
What I Drive: '14 Ruby Ti w/ Handling Pkg

Posts: 2,374
FF Reputation: 11 kam327 Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by michaelwb View Post
Interesting. I played with the trip computer today, resetting it several times on the highway to see what MPGs I got at constant speed.

I stayed in the far right lane and kept my speed between 52 and 57 mph, letting the car slow down as it went up nearly imperceptible inclines and gliding as much as possible. My MPGs stayed around 45 MPG.

Perhaps it's my 18" Titanium wheels and 5-speed transmission. An SFE might do better.
My steady state MPG at 55 mph is around 47 mpg and I have the DCT and stock 17" tires. So you're pretty much right on. ZX3's mid-40's claim seems a little far fetched but steady state MPG at 45 mph is almost 60 mpg so if he's spending a lot of time on country roads around 45 mph then I can see it being possible.
kam327 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 08:53 AM   #26
foh-kuhs
Focus Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Fan#: 94954
Location: Duvall, WA
What I Drive: 2012 Focus Titanium, Silver Ingot

Posts: 53
FF Reputation: 1 foh-kuhs Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slo86GT View Post
Hate to stir the pot, but Honda did it... for at least 6 years running.

85-91 CRX HF.

Still impressive but to keep a comparison apples to apples, new EPA estimates are calculated differently. Converting to new standards, City mpg drops 10 MPG. From fueleconomy.org:

Compare Old and New EPA MPG Estimates
1987 Honda Civic CRX HF
Manual 5-spd
4 Cylinders
1.5 Liters
Regular Gasoline

New MPG tests are more realistic
New MPG
42 City 46 Combined 51 Hwy
Old MPG
52 City 54 Combined 57 Hwy
foh-kuhs is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 09:41 AM   #27
kam327
-----<M>-----
 
kam327's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Fan#: 94700
Location: Tampa, FL
What I Drive: '14 Ruby Ti w/ Handling Pkg

Posts: 2,374
FF Reputation: 11 kam327 Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by foh-kuhs View Post
Still impressive but to keep a comparison apples to apples, new EPA estimates are calculated differently. Converting to new standards, City mpg drops 10 MPG. From fueleconomy.org:

Compare Old and New EPA MPG Estimates
1987 Honda Civic CRX HF
Manual 5-spd
4 Cylinders
1.5 Liters
Regular Gasoline

New MPG tests are more realistic
New MPG
42 City 46 Combined 51 Hwy
Old MPG
52 City 54 Combined 57 Hwy
Very interesting. I too went to the site and noticed that the dozen or so versions of that car in 1987 varied widely in gas mileage, with as little as 26 city / 30 hwy with a 5MT just like the subject car and same engine displacement. How the hell did they increase fuel economy by 70% for the "HF" version?

The only light the wikipedia page sheds on it is that the HF version weighed about 150 lbs less than the regular version, which since the regular version weighed only 1,865 lbs is a substantial reduction.

Of course those cars all weighed so little back then due to a lack of any safety features or creature comforts, that's how they stood a chance of getting reasonable mileage despite a lack of direct injection and other technical goodies.

Which leads us to the fact that you may have gotten close or in some limited cases even better mileage than the '12 Focus in your 25-year-old compact but you would've been toast in any sort of accident whereas the Focus will keep you relatively safe as shown by several posts on this site.
kam327 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 10:46 AM   #28
pozi240
Focus Enthusiast
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Fan#: 94835
Location: Halifax, NS, Canada
What I Drive: 2012 Focus 5 door SEL Kona Blue

Posts: 360
FF Reputation: 4 pozi240 Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kam327 View Post
Very interesting. I too went to the site and noticed that the dozen or so versions of that car in 1987 varied widely in gas mileage, with as little as 26 city / 30 hwy with a 5MT just like the subject car and same engine displacement. How the hell did they increase fuel economy by 70% for the "HF" version?

The only light the wikipedia page sheds on it is that the HF version weighed about 150 lbs less than the regular version, which since the regular version weighed only 1,865 lbs is a substantial reduction.

Of course those cars all weighed so little back then due to a lack of any safety features or creature comforts, that's how they stood a chance of getting reasonable mileage despite a lack of direct injection and other technical goodies.

Which leads us to the fact that you may have gotten close or in some limited cases even better mileage than the '12 Focus in your 25-year-old compact but you would've been toast in any sort of accident whereas the Focus will keep you relatively safe as shown by several posts on this site.
Hey Kam!
I can shed a little more light on that, the "HF" Civic's and CRX's had a completely different drivetrain , they used a special 1.5 3valve VTEC-E (the "E" being a very different design than the regular VTEC systems of the day). Whereas the regular VTEC was designed to adjust timing and lift for power, the "E" system was for economy only(lots of overlap to reburn exhaust gases)... they used a small 1.5 motor, that got a measly 60hp (the regular 1.6EFI motors in the other civics were around 91hp by comparison), and had an aggressive EGR system that reburned the spent gas over and over again making it quite the gas mizer. These cars were pathetically slow, even though they wieghed less than 2300lbs. They also used special lighter wheels (they had expensive forged aluminum wheels and hard LRR type tires). I think their may have even been some underbody plastic covers (completely covering the lower side of the engine and car) as well. (back then, no cars had the undertrays like they do today. It wasn't a very "fun" car to drive, but, they were quite amazing on gas... LOL.
__________________
2012 Focus SEL 5 door 303a w/Lux pkg in KonaBlue
2012 Escape Limited w/park assist
2010 F150 Supercrew XTR 5.4 4x4
2008 Kawasaki Concours 14 (street)
2008 Kawasaki ZX10R (track only)
pozi240 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 10:54 AM   #29
Slo86GT
Focus Addict
 
Slo86GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Fan#: 88885
Location: Hockley, TX
What I Drive: 2013 Sterling Gray Focus SE

Posts: 849
FF Reputation: 2 Slo86GT Good Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (1)
Your statements are valid, I agree. It was a toy car compared to cars now. The car made the best use of archaic tech. 8 valve four cylinder in the earliest models 12 valve later, 1.5 liters, 1800 lb curb weight, and a carburetor, or later very very choked down MultiPoint-FI.

But the original reply was to "No gas car at 50mpg". Maybe not current, but these did it, and did it real world, even after the changes to the window sticker reporting.


The CRX's had no VTEC. They were simply choked down intake tracts to increase efficiency, and decrease the amount of fuel guzzling abuse the owner could impose.

The VTEC-e (efficiency) engines did not appear until 1992 when the hatchback VX came out. It was amazing. Lightweight wheels, 92~ hp, and a manual trans only. Only got high 30's in the MPG department, but was a great platform and actually felt like a real car.

In 1996 the HX is now a coupe with either an 5 speed manual or CVT transmission with a similar high efficiency VTECe engine.

:thumbup:
__________________
2013 Focus SE 5M Daily Driver
2003 Mustang GT V8/Auto Wife's Daily
1986 Mustang GT V8/5M Toy
- Jody -
Slo86GT is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2012, 11:11 AM   #30
kam327
-----<M>-----
 
kam327's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Fan#: 94700
Location: Tampa, FL
What I Drive: '14 Ruby Ti w/ Handling Pkg

Posts: 2,374
FF Reputation: 11 kam327 Great Standing Member
Buy-Sell-Trade Rating: (0)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pozi240 View Post
Hey Kam!
I can shed a little more light on that........
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slo86GT View Post
Your statements are valid, I agree. It was a toy car compared to cars now...........
Thanks for the good contributions guys/gals. I also read on Yahoo answers I think that the gears in the HF were more widely spaced on the 5MT. Not the most reliable source I know.
kam327 is offline  
    Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks & Social Networks
-->
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:02 PM.


Copyright 2002-2014 FocusFanatics.com. All Rights Reserved : Terms of Use : Privacy Policy : Advertise Information

Focus Fanatics Ford Focus Forum offers many fun ways for you to engage with other Ford Focus Owners from across the world. Whether it be about the aftermarket performance modifications, technical how-to's, European tuned suspension or awesome fuel economy similar to the Acura TLX or Fiesta ST. You can find all Ford Focus and Focus ST related information here. Join our Ford Focus discussion forums and chat with local Focus enthusiasts in your area.