2013 Ford Fusion EPA Rated at 37 MPG Highway

The redesigned-for-2013 Ford Fusion goes on sale this fall, and official EPA numbers were recently released for all three engine options.

The most efficient engine — the 1.6-liter, turbocharged four-cylinder — is rated at 25/37/29 mpg city/highway/combined with a manual transmission and at 23/36/26 mpg with an automatic. Most Fusions will be sold with automatics.

Neither figure beats the Nissan Altima (equipped with a continuously variable automatic transmission) at 27/38 mpg. The 2.0 turbo gets 22/33 mpg, which is behind most versions of the just-announced 2013 Honda Accord with the 2.4-liter (26/35 mpg coupe, 27/36 mpg sedan).

These are not the base engines. The base 2.5-liter, a carryover from the previous generation, has been revised to return 22/34/26 mpg. It is only available with an automatic.

The base S model starts at $22,495, and the 1.6-liter with an automatic starts at $24,495 in SE trim. Both prices include destination.

Related
2013 Ford Fusion Gets EPA Ratings, 1.6 EcoBoost Scores 25/37 (Car & Driver)  
2013 Ford Fusion Priced at $22,495
Research New Sedans

Comments

Turbo should be compared to accord v6, not base engine.

Why are you out of the blue comparing the 2.0T to the Honda? And the Honda what? I4? V6? Manual or CVT? For consumers you made this post a whole lot more confusing than it needs to be.

This goes to show how far GM has fallen behind with the Malibu. The Chevy Malibu ECO model is more expensive, slower, and get's worse gas mileage than the Altima.

Why not also mention the fact that the just announced MPG figures for the hybrid version completely blow the competition out of the water....?

That proves those engines are too small for the car. They aren't anymore efficient than the competitions larger naturally aspirated fours and they will probably need head gaskets and other major repairs much earlier

is Harry aware that this post is about the Fusion?

I was wondering why the hybrid wasnt mentioned in this post as well. Also, Accord V6 is rated at 21/34 so that should be compared to fusion 2.0T.

I suggest everyone wait until these cars are compared in the real world before conclusions are drawn. another site compared 2013 Accord to 2012 Camry and neither matched their EPA combined figures in mixed driving. In fact, both failed to match EPA city in mixed. Don't believe the hype, I've seen nary a real world test of Altima in which is meets it lofty sticker rating.

If you mean tests and comparisons by auto magazines, they are hardly "real world tests". Go to fuelly.com or specific owner forums for these cars and you will see that most people meet or exceed the EPA numbers. I always have on every vehicle I've owned and I don't hyperdrive in any sense of the word. A few well documented cases against the Hyundai Elantra and Chevy Equinox not withstanding, just about every car on which I've done heavy research the vast majority of real owners report adequate or good results.

The cars are tested by the EPA the same so it is a good point of comparison...not a guarantee. The real world numbers are out there for all but the very newest additions. If one only takes the time to research the info is out there. Some would prefer to just randomly say, and without any proof offered, that they don't meet the EPA numbers in the real world.

The EPA doesn't test any cars. The manufacturers submit their test results for EPA approval.

Cars are not tested by the EPA, automakers submit results that are certified by EPA. The idea that mixed condition driving yields unrealistic results simply because said results comes from an automotive website or magazine makes no sense. Many of the latest midsize models and crossovers have mileage ratings that seem hard to believe considering the hp and weight of these models. If you have to virtually hypermile to get the EPA results on these cars than the ratings really are useless to regular drivers. I do not believe there is any way a regular driver is going to get 27mpg in an Accord or Altima in City driving unless they are applying a lot of effort. CR often records city mileage that is FAR under EPA estimates and I doubt that is because they are driving like maniacs. Comparison tests of these kinds of cars generally show they are only separated by 2mpg or less in real world driving. The Sonata is case in point, in comparisons with other sedans with lower ratings it has failed to show a real world mpg advantage.

This past weekend we drove my wife's new Altima from NY to VA and achieved 38.6 mpg on the highway. I think the mileage could even improve to 39/40 once the drive train is fully broken in. We love the car and it's super quiet.

if you maintain moderate speeds on the highway its pretty easy to meet or beat EPA estimates. City driving is the issue.

Why was the headline changed?

The 2.0T has only 231HP.

In my experience of owning Japanese, German, and American vehicles the Japanese ones always met their EPA figures. The Germans too except for an Audi TT that was always off by 3-4 mpgs. My best was a Jetta TDI which never came in at or below the rating - always much higher. The absolute worst was our Chevrolet Equinox four cylinder which was always consistently under by 7-8 mpg's and that was with a light foot. From what I can decipher on the internet this is a common problem for the Chevrolet. With gas being so expensive mpg's are very important!

2013 Altima. 200 mile trip average 70mph. I got 41mpg.

Most accurate way is to record your odometer than calculate your mpg when you fill up.