Pretty good MPG with the Badlands!

[tburner]

I don't trust the onboard computer. I've been recording the reported lifetime avg, trip avg (reset between fill ups), and calculating actual consumption every time I fill up and the computer is always 1-2 mpg higher. My lifetime avg is 24.8 mpg calculated vs 26.9 mpg per the onboard computer.

I have a Badlands, drive almost exclusively in Eco, don't have a lead foot, don't have a whole lot of hills to climb, and do a lot more city driving than highway. I've seen over 30 mpg once from a full tank of interstate driving. My predominantly highway tanks are typically 25-27 mpg and my predominantly city tanks are 22-24 mpg, both hand calculated.

Sponsored

 

[Osco]

Tburner,
That’s more like it.
My 1.5L does roughly 28 hwy, 26 city. On a 50/50 mix of city and highway I’m kinda 27 ish.
Of course if I reset my dash and granny drive away. The first 20 miles I can take a dash picture showing 35 mpg or more, just sayin,,

 

[Mark S.]

My predominantly highway tanks are typically 25-27 mpg and my predominantly city tanks are 22-24 mpg, both hand calculated.

I just looked at my window sticker again. EPA estimates 26 MPG highway, 21 MPG city, and 23 MPG combined. Imagine that!

The Bronco is a boxy design that pokes up high into the wind; aesthetic design was clearly given priority over aerodynamics. Based on my experience with EcoBoost-equipped cars (we've owned Ford EcoBoost-powered cars for nearly a decade) wind will be the biggest factor affecting fuel economy. My guess is the absolute best fuel mileage will occur at higher altitudes while driving at moderate highway speeds (below 65 mph) when winds are light. Why high altitude? Because the air is thinner and will cause less drag.

I once drove my EcoBoost Mustang (traded ? for the Bronco ) on a long cross-country over the mountains. The best fuel mileage I achieved during the trip was across Wyoming on I-80. The average altitude for that stretch of road is above 6,000 ft, and the speed limit is 80 mph. With the cruise control set at 90 mph the RPM was right at 2500, which is very close to peak torque for the 2.3L EcoBoost engine. I saw nearly 34 mph for that leg of the trip, which I found to be remarkable in every way for an engine capable of producing 310 HP.

Modern technology is truly marvelous!

 

[Chief of the Boat]

I started keeping track of my MPG>

 

[omahafordowner]

I get about 19 mpg with my Badlands. City driving, but it's mostly driving in residential 30 mph stop and go. I would typically get 12-14mpg in my 2014 ecoboost limited flex.

 

[SportWest]

the computer is always 1-2 mpg higher

Same with the 1.5L, based on my calculations vs. the computer.

The fuel economy numbers reported here make me want to order a 2.0L Badlands at some point -- paying a bit more for the extra power seems worth it.

 

[Leenaya]

I started keeping track of my MPG>

You seem to like driving. I don't really care for it so average about 10 miles a day or 50 miles a week. Only fill up once a month or less in my current vehicle. Ordered the badlands because its tank should be able to handle 300 miles on mostly interstate for my longer trips down to Florida from Georgia. Its too bad they don't offer a secondary fuel tank for longer trips, say, to Yellowstone.

 

[MAJB Retired]

Bronco BB 1.5L with 2490.1 on the odometer as of the last fill up. I keep the record on a spreadsheet for all of my vehicles and the Bronco is right now averaging 26.5. Mostly country driving on flat lad here in Indiana. The daughter drove it from Indianapolis to Des Moine last week, so that wsa about 100o of highway mileage. My 2018 Explorer (V6) is averaging 20.045 at 33,051 miles while my 2007 F150 (5.8 L V-8) has a fantastic mileage of 14.730 at 90,610 miles (definitely not my daily driver...LOL)

 

[jhbass]

I averaged 28 mpg last month driving from NC to upstate NY (in Eco mode).

 

[GA_Pete]

Current odometer: 10,271 miles

• Highway - normal mode: 29.7 mpg (typically ~70 mph)
• City - normal mode: 21.6 mpg

These values are reported by the trip computer and are consistent. I have a FE. I know, not a Badlands.

 

[Mark S.]

I averaged 28 mpg last month driving from NC to upstate NY (in Eco mode).

I'd be very curious to see a comparison between ECO and NORMAL modes on highway fuel economy. I don't think ECO mode will make a difference on the highway. It works by reducing throttle response and shift points, not by making the engine any more efficient. If I'm right, then ECO mode will not make a difference when holding a steady RPM for long distances.

If someone decided to do this test please keep track of all the variables (terrain, wind speeds, etc.). I believe speeds and wind will affect fuel economy much more than ECO mode.

 

[DMEARC]

I don't think ECO mode will make a difference on the highway. It works by reducing throttle response and shift points, not by making the engine any more efficient. If I'm right, then ECO mode will not make a difference when holding a steady RPM for long distances.

Eco mode on the 1.5 will deactivate one cylinder under certain conditions.

 

[DMEARC]

. Why high altitude? Because the air is thinner and will cause less drag.

True, but the biggest gain in MPG at higher altitudes occurs because the less dense air must be countered with less fuel in order to obtain the proper stoichiometric ratio.

 

[DMEARC]

I would have never guessed it could beat the 1.5L in a mpg fight !!!

Trust me, it can’t. ?

 

[Jrl]

Current odometer: 10,271 miles

• Highway - normal mode: 29.7 mpg (typically ~70 mpg)
• City - normal mode: 21.7 - 22.0 mpg

I run Shell V-Power NiTRO+ exclusively (93 octane)

These values are reported by the trip computer and are consistent. I have a FE. I know, not a Badlands.

Best I can do 27.7 on road , city 18.5 . That works for me . First edition badlands .