Anyone own one or knows anyone who owns the new 2013 Escape?

I see it is completely revamped and nothing at all like the previous Escapes.

I seen one parked in a shopping center and went over to look at it. They do look pretty neat at first glance.

I am still looking for something to replace my current Escape and thought the Jeep Wrangler Unlimited was going to be the replacement, but after taking a ride in one, no, not for me. They not as bad as the 2 door Wrangler with the shorter wheel base, but still not a comfortable ride in my opinion.

The 2013 Escape does look like a Honda CRV, but think the 2013 Escape is tad smaller.

Main concern is the new engines that are offered and the CD4E transmission is history.

I have always been skeptical about buying any vehicle the first year it comes out.

Should be interesting to see how this new Escape sells.

 

The prices on the new Escapes are eye popping. I looked at one yesterday that listed for $36,400. I was in the Louisville area last weekend and not surprisingly saw a lot of new Escapes on the road and loaded on car carriers heading east. I even saw one that had been in an accident and needed a new left rear quarter. That must have been a bummer, but I haven't yet talked to anyone who has the 2013.

 

If you look inside the engine compartment you'll see that a bigger EcoBoost isn't going in there.

 

I did this once and I'll never buy 1st model year again. Wasn't anything major - tensioner pulley - but taking it back to the shop every 15k miles gets old.

 

What do you mean by the bigger Ecoboost engine? The 3.5 L Ecoboost? I would never expect that motor in the Escape since the 2.0 L Ecoboost has substantially more torque than the prior 3.0 V6. The 3.5 L would be a waste of engineering effort and would be a money loser.

 

No, I thought that there was another one in between. Stop at a dealer some time and look under the hood. It doesn't look too mechanic friendly. There is no room for anything. The cowl in front of the windshield extends way out covering access, the wipers are mount through it and the brake fluid fill bottle is attached to it.

 

You have three motor options, the existing 2. 5L, 1.6 Ecoboost and 2.0 Ecoboost. I would go with the 2.0 L Ecoboost because I tow a boat and it is rated 5 mpg better on the highway than my 3.0 V6.

 

I should have left the engine comment out as the point I was trying to make is that it looks to be hard to work on.

 

I've yet to see a 2013. Maybe one could have passed me by on the street, and I thought it was a new Hyundai

A poured-in-place engine compartment would be a deal breaker for me. Before we settled on an Escape, I looked through vehicles across 3 years of auto shows, especially looking under the hoods. I was the only person opening hoods at any of the shows in the times I was there. What I observed about people, was that almost all of them have no clue what is under a hood, nor why someone would look under one. I said a few words with many of the people who stopped for a moment, or who looked at me for "looking underneath". Absolutely pitiful. My industrious grandparents would turn in their graves. I think if the hood was welded closed and could only be opened and serviced by the dealer, that would be fine with many if not most today. But that ain't me, babe.

Fuel Economy - It looks like the swoopy 2013 style alone increases the EPA highway mileage by 3 MPG. From 28 HWY with the 2.5L and 6F35 in a pre-2013 2WD, to 31 MPG HWY in a base-model 2013 with the same engine and trans combination.

Gas Type - When will Ford finally figure out how they want to portray this issue with the Escape Ecoboost engines? First, the Ford website said that 91 octane Premium was "Required". Then they said Premium was "Recommended".
Just checked, now says "Fuel (Minimum) Regular Unleaded". I think they have an issue. They have portrayed the 1.6L and 2.0L Ecoboost engines as sooo fuel efficient... but left out the fact that that is with Premium fuel. Apples and oranges. Not talked about.

So if you go from 2012 to 2013 with the 2.5L 2WD, HWY MPG increases by 3 MPG due to aerodynamics. To get the 2 more MPG (to 33 HWY) with the 1.6L Ecoboost requires Premium. So do the math. Increased purchase cost of the Ecoboost engine, plus the percentage increase in cost per gallon of 91 Premium over 87 Regular. I see it as an operational $ loser.
Also, did anyone notice that they "de-rated" the 2.5L from ~174 HP in pre-2013 cars down to 168 HP in the 2013? Probably done for marketing reasons, as the 1.6L Ecoboost is rated 178 HP, not too far from 174, can't have that...

If someone likes the styling, new electronic toy features, etc., fine, no issue, people always like something that looks different. But speaking for myself, I would not buy one with the idea that I was going to save cost per mile $$ with the Ecoboost versus the previous generation's 2009-2012.

 

I neglected to add: "YMMV"

 

wptski - no problem on the engines. Personally, I've pretty much given up on working on cars with the exception of oil changes and maybe an air filter. I'm glad to read that someone still wants to dig into them.

 

I still have two more years of warranty coverage on my '09 and hate the thought of working on it. I've been working on the brake systems of a '78 and '90 GM products lately.

 

I have seen a couple on the roads around Boston. Quite sharp in my opinion. My two hybrid Escapes are both approaching eight years old and it is time to start thinking about replacements. I like the new Escapes but the kind of driving I do is mainly non-highway. I hate the thought of going from 35-39 mpg down to the 20's. I am going to test drive the C-Max once my dealer gets them on the lot. Part of the test drive is to see how much of my work stuff I can cram into one. If it doesn't fit, no deal.

I had a 2013 GMC Terrain for a week as a rental out in the mountains of northern New Mexico last month. Drove nice, decent power when considering the altitude and some nice features. It got 45 mpg in a 50 mile stretch between Taos and Albuquerque. . Only averaged about 25 for the entire trip (about 1000 miles).

 

I am also on the list to test drive a C-Max as a replacement for my wife's 02 Tribute that has 195,000 miles on it. The key test is whether or not her bike fits in the C-Max when the back seat is down and the front wheel is off the bike. For my 09 Escape, 125,000 miles, I would stick with another Escape as I need to be able to tow my boat so I would likely go with the 2.0 turbo but I have a couple of more years before I have to make that call.

 

About the C-Max, when Ford put the info on it up on their website, I thought the pics inside of the rear area made it look smaller inside back there than the 2012 and earlier Escape.

The 2013 Escape has a longer wheelbase and overall length than the 2012 Escape.
The C-Max has a shorter wheelbase and overall length than even the 2012 Escape.

Comparing the space after the 1st row and after the 2nd row (using cu. ft. listed on the Ford website), the C-Max has less volume by quite a bit as compared to the 2013 Escape. I'll have to hunt up a brocure for the 2008 - 2012 Escape to see what it's numbers were.

The C-Max's 47 City/47 HWY MPG are impressive. And, it runs on 87 octane regular

If indeed the C-Max's internal space is less than the previous generation Escape, but if you can make a go of that, it looks like an interesting vehicle.