2017 AWD 3.0T Gas Mileage

[newlinux]

What kind of gas mileage are people getting with this engine? I've only put 100 miles on mine almost all city driving, but I'm curious what to expect from real driving, not ratings.

 

Thanks.

[Zalvern]

Even with a a lot of spirited driving, I get about 24 - 26 mpg when traveling via highway and that's usually an average speed of 70 - 80 mph. I do not really encounter much stop and go clustered city traffic, but lowest I have for residential zones is 19 - 20 mpg. Winter fuel is a bit lower as a result, and numbers are better once the winter blend is gone (along with performance).

 

I'd like to say the estimate fuel economy given on the sticker is pretty spot on, but I'm doing better than what sticker suggests and at higher speeds with Sport gear (and this is all before I got tuned, post tune hasn't really changed much to my notice). MPG will vary for everyone but if the question is: Do the sticker average seem accurate? I would say yes, if not a bit better than sticker averages.

[pjrocco]

I drive all city and I average 20 mpg. Very spirited driving style. 

[newlinux]

I've pretty much only been doing city driving (fair amount of stop and go) and as I complete my first tank of gas I think I'm going to be around 14-15mpg :(. Granted it is winter driving, and the car is far from broken in, but I hope it improves. Dealer probably put 87 octane in it too...

[brucelinc]

We drove the new Continental from Minneapolis to Southern Iowa over Christmas weekend and averaged 23.5.  That was 95% Interstate cruising.   The car was brand new with less than 100 miles on it when we started and the weather was cold, snowy and miserable on the trip down but better on the return.     I thought that was pretty decent mileage considering the circumstances.  The Conti has a 3.39 axle ratio vs 3.16 in the MKZ so the Z cruising mileage will likely be better.

[JHVJXN]

Just under 2500 miles on mine now. Mpg is improving as it breaks in. Was around 17.5 then up to 18.5 now at 20 mpg. All city driving.

[drolds1]

I've pretty much only been doing city driving (fair amount of stop and go) and as I complete my first tank of gas I think I'm going to be around 14-15mpg :(. Granted it is winter driving, and the car is far from broken in, but I hope it improves. Dealer probably put 87 octane in it too...

That's all I get in that type of driving with my 3.7 which has 100hp less and is well broken-in. ;) 

[JeffASfBay]

Hello everyone, I'm fairly new around here and considering a '17 3.0TT AWD (low mileage used). I know there are some new owners since this last post, so I was hoping to revive this thread regarding gas mileage.

 

I'm editing this post since I've now read two other threads in different forums about gas mileage being much lower than expected. I don't know about the MKZ's before 2017, but 2017 & 2018 power/torque figures for the 3.0 twin turbo are rated as 350/350 for front wheel drive, and 400/400 for all wheel drive, USING 93 OCTANE GAS. I'm beginning to wonder if the poor mileage figures are due perhaps in part to people using 87 octane gas. I realize that the ECU can have more than one octane rating mapping, but if the engine is designed for 93 octane gas (and has a higher compression ratio and I don't know what other features/factors to maximize output using 93 octane), then while one can run 87 octane gas without knock (pre-ignition), I've read on other forums that one can expect worse gas mileage too. Does anyone know what octane gas that Ford used for the official mileage numbers?

 

So I'm interested in:

 

1) What year and engine do you have

2) What mpg are you getting (please specify city/highway mix)

3) What grade fuel are you running

4) If you have run 91 octane (or 93 - never seen that where I live though), did you get better mpg than when running 87?

5) If you have run 91 octane, did you feel more power?

6) Has anyone ran their car at a drag strip? If so, what ET and trap speeds did you get? Please say if you were running any aftermarket performance gear (including re-chipped ECU)

 

We've had to loan one of our cars to our student in college, leaving us with only one vehicle, a 2001 Suburban. Not a very inspiring vehicle to drive, plus it gets around 13-15 mpg around town (closer to 13). So I'm looking to get a 2nd car that is comfortable, and that is quicker than average. I'm considering the Kia Stinger GT2, but that's a brand new model and it's not cheap. I'm less worried about residual value as we keep our cars 10-20 years, but there are other reasons to be concerned about the Stinger. I'd also consider a Genesis G80 (or G70 when it comes out). I'd sure like to think I will get 20 mpg around town if I'm driving sensibly. 

 

Thank you.

Edited December 10, 2017 by JeffASfBay

[R2D2]

1) 2014 2.0 Hybrid

2) 38.0 mpg over life of car (approx 47,000miles)

3) 87 Oct

4) never used other Oct

5) n/a

6 No

 

In conclusion you will pay for power vs. milage.... you want more power you get less milage, you want better milage use less power... you really can't have it both ways

 

I have absolutely no issues getting up to 70 mph highway speed and I do not have to floor it :)

Edited December 12, 2017 by R2D2

[longislander]

2017 3.0T AWD, 6000 miles on it. I use 93 Octane. Mostly short trips in suburban setting with many stoplights, half of it during morning rush hour traffic. Under those conditions, consistently 16 mpg. I've gotten 24 mpg on highway trips.

[Airflow]

I get about 15-16 city. 24 or so highway. Computer shows 17.5 average and that’s mostly city with spirited driving. Tuned 3.0 AWD. The car is FAST and worth every penny of gas.

[drolds1]

In conclusion you will pay for power vs. milage.... you want more power you get let milage, you want better milage use less power... you really can't have it both ways

 

 

This about sums it up succinctly.  As they say, "there's no free lunch."  You don't get both. Not at this price anyway.  You're looking at a 4300lb, AWD sedan with TT400hp engine.  It's not for those whose primary concern is fuel economy.   Anytime you start dipping into the throttle (and you will), the ECU starts commanding it to dump fuel in.

 

That said, this car can produce some impressive MPG, depending on how it's driven.  See my post here and those following. I can, and do, regularly beat the EPA highway numbers.  Much has been written about  Ford's Ecoboost (Lincoln "T") engines not producing the published EPA figures.  Just log on to the Ford Fusion Forum to see what I'm talking about.  It's very difficult for the average driver to replicate the EPA driving cycle.  BTW, mine is a 2017 AWD 3.0, no tune.  As I stated in earlier posts, this car gets better mileage than both my 2014 MKZ 3.7 did as well as some 2.0 EB Fusions/MKZs.  In all fairness, in local driving, it doesn't do too well at all but I knew that going in and I didn't want the car for fuel economy.  Right now, ambient temps are in the 30s and I've done nothing but local driving with frequent warm-ups and starting/stopping, the worst possible conditions for mileage.  It's right around 12-13mpg since I fueled up a couple of days ago.  In better weather conditions, it'll run about 15-16 under the same circumstances.

 

The engine is not designed to run on 93 octane fuel.  It's designed to be able to run on regular but it won't develop the full, rated 400hp.  The 2017 owners guide says this:

 

 

We recommend regular unleaded gasoline with a minimum pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87. Some stations offer fuels posted as regular with an octane rating below 87, particularly in high altitude areas. We do not recommend fuels with an octane rating below 87. To provide improved performance, we recommend premium fuel for severe duty usage such as trailer tow.

 

There you have it.  Regular is recommended by the engineers who designed the engine.  In this case, I assume that the EPA uses regular for testing when it's recommended by the factory.  They do, however, use 100% gasoline; no ethanol blends, which produces better mpg.  They do say that they adjust the published figures for that and will switch to E10 for testing at some point.

 

I've never tried 91 octane fuel.  We have 93 available here.  I have tried regular, though.  I've never compared mpg with regular vs. premium.  I'm sure there is somewhat of a difference based on fundamentals, i.e., the ECU will pull timing to compensate for the lower octane fuel, thus reducing mpg.  I can't say how much. It's probably not significant on a cost basis. Some members of my Lincoln LS club reported a noticeable difference but that's quite some time ago and those engines were designed to run on premium (91 octane) fuel.  Not a fair comparison.  I will say that I notice a difference in performance on premium, especially in the summer.  This TT engine hates heat and is burdened with a relatively small intercooler.  It runs like crap on regular in the hot weather when you crack open the throttle, exhibiting lagging throttle response and stumbling.  It's like a different car in the cooler weather. 

[MKZMark]

I have a 2017 2.0 FWD and am averaging 25mpg in mixed driving, probably more highway than city. On 89 octane, I'll probably try a tank of 93 at some point to see if there's a difference.

[brucelinc]

I have a Continental with the 3.0.  It has a 3.39 gear vs. the 3.16 in the MKZ so it should use a bit more fuel.   With an aftermarket tune, we recently drove from Minneapolis to Dallas and averaged 25.4 on the trip down and 26.7 on the return.  Obviously, that was all highway driving.   Around town, it typically is around 19-20 although I don't do much city driving.  The aftermarket tune did improve the mileage by about 1-1.5 MPG on the highway.

 

I have taken the car to the dragstrip both in stock form and tuned.  Stock, it ran 13.56 @ 102.6.  Tuned, it ran 12.80 @ 108.7.    The conditions were similar in both cases - pretty hot and humid.  The tune is relatively mild and I have no other modifications. 

 

I have never used anything but 93 octane fuel, other than experimenting with a mix of 93 and E85 a few times, equaling around 95 octane.  I paid for the top engine so I want top performance.

[houtex]

I have a 2017 MKZ 3.0 AWD. My daily commute is about 20 miles, mostly highway and I average about 24 MPG.

This past week I took my first road trip and averaged close to 27 MPG going. Coming back it was much colder, more traffic and raining. Averaged 24 MPG. I have 10,000 miles on my car and I use 93 octane gas.

Edited December 28, 2017 by houtex

[Stoked]

91 is all that is readily available in my area, but I can get 93. I can even get 100 race fuel but I think that would be useless without a tune to use it properly. 

 

I will say that I have noticed a performance difference between 91 and 93, in sport mode. Like the RS I had before this, and my GT350 now, the performance characteristics change considerably.

 

I have my GT350 tuned by Lund, and when running E85, the car picks up some considerable power. I'll look to do this with the MKZ a little later down the road, after my little PTU scare, I want to be sure the car is well-sorted before I go messing with warranty coverage. It sees close to 60 miles per day and other than that one incident, it's been rock solid so I'm not TOO concerned.

 

As for MPG, I see about 17-21, average use. 

 

FWIW - I had a 3.0 FWD as a loaner and I would ABSOLUTELY spring for the AWD with this car. The power felt similar in take off but you can easily tell where the power overdrives the front wheels in it.