2025 MPG for AWD

[commadorebob]

Better than the EB AWD.

Sponsored

 

[surfstar]

That was the biggest disappointment for me when I sat in one at the auto show this year in New york. I know it's supposedly a cheaper vehicle in for a truck it is but my 2016 VW Golf which cost $24,500 new has an interior that looks like an S-Class and comparison. But I guess I'd get used to it

My 2016 Sportwagen cost $18,5xx thanks to Dieselgate dealer discounts. Base model, stick shift. Awesome deal and fun to drive. Miss it. I averaged 38 mpg over my ownership. Gas 1.8T.

The interior and fit and finish were much better than a Rav4 Prime that cost twice as much! Sad the VW wagons (and non-GTI Golfs) are no longer offered here.

 

[Gonzo chris]

My 2016 Sportwagen cost $18,5xx thanks to Dieselgate dealer discounts. Base model, stick shift. Awesome deal and fun to drive. Miss it. I averaged 38 mpg over my ownership. Gas 1.8T.

The interior and fit and finish were much better than a Rav4 Prime that cost twice as much! Sad the VW wagons (and non-GTI Golfs) are no longer offered here.

My Golf has the 1.8t . Almost got the sportwagen but went with the Golf SE.

 

[inline_five]

That was the biggest disappointment for me when I sat in one at the auto show this year in New york. I know it's supposedly a cheaper vehicle in for a truck it is but my 2016 VW Golf which cost $24,500 new has an interior that looks like an S-Class and comparison. But I guess I'd get used to it

Keep in mind $24,500 in 2016 is $32,500 today.

But yeah I agree. $500 more in materials (if that) and at least it would be scratch resistant. Even hard ABS would've been fine. The plastic door panels are just so incredibly scratch prone. I'll probably have to buy new front ones right before I sell it so it looks a lot better.

 

[Peter Lukasch]

I am curious what sort of effect having AWD on the Maverick will do to MPG. I just did a build on a 25 and it came in at about the same price as my 24. I dont understand why the black out package forces me to go to AWD. My 24 has the black out package, which I like so its impossible to do an actual comparison.

The 2025 AWD Hybrid is approx. 60 lbs. heavier than the 2024 FWD model. So figure a hit of 1-2 MPG for the extra weight frictional loss of a driveshaft/diff etc.

 

[MavDaddyDan]

I am in the same boat. I needed a new vehicle at the start of this year and really liked the Maverick. Found one on a dealer lot and picked it up. When I started hearing rumors of the '25 I told myself I would get one unless they updated the infotainment screen and gauge cluster, gave it hybrid AWD with 4k tow, and offered it in Eruption green. I ordered one as soon as the books opened.

I put an order in for a 25 and will be selling my 24 when it comes in. I love my Maverick, and I want to drive it until the wheels fall off. I’m estimating it’s going to cost me about $3k to make the switch after all is said and done. To me, that’s a no brainer to add AWD, 4k tow, 360 camera, more safety features with CP 360 2.0, and bigger screens.

 

[surfstar]

oh hell no. PHEV, plug in hybrids, get HORRIBLE MPG. That is why they never list it, in a PHEV MAYBE they will list the MPG of the ICE engine. If you want MPG out of a hybrid you have to get one of the HEVs.

Energy doesn't store well. You lose 90% of the power when charging a battery. Now watch cause some idiot will come in talking about how they don't measure HEVs or EVs in mpg. But all they have to do is put 1 gallon of gas into an electric generator and charge the car. Drive the car and see how many mpg ...

Figure how many electrical engineers there are and none thought of that. ROFLMAO, They know.

 

[LSchicago]

I just can't bring myself to pay $34k for the same interior that scratches so easily. I'm cool with the rest of the vehicle being cheap, I just don't want it to look 10 years old after the first year.

Mine doesn't have any noticeable scratches after a year in the plastics after a year, except a few marks down low from shoes. Be conscious of what you are doing, and you won't scratch it.

 

[Derwood]

I see people saying this all the time but I only have a couple scratches and those are not really noticeable. But I also take care of my vehicles and have no kids or dogs.

It DOES scratch easily. So nothing going on or near my dash period except for the holder on top and the cubby. I'm careful not to let my keys rap against the interior doors too.

 

[MarcoG]

What's the point here? You bought a 24 now you're looking at a 25?

That new U shape front bumper is a deal breaker for me and they should also offer a chrome delete, especially on the chrome looking surrounds on the lower front bumper of the Lariat. So unnecessary.

 

[Phimosis]

That was the biggest disappointment for me when I sat in one at the auto show this year in New york. I know it's supposedly a cheaper vehicle in for a truck it is but my 2016 VW Golf which cost $24,500 new has an interior that looks like an S-Class and comparison. But I guess I'd get used to it

Unreasonable comparison. New Golf is $32k starting price for the econo version and $48k when fully optioned with the higher output engine and trans. And the Golf is much smaller interior, exterior and cargo capacity.

 

[Gonzo chris]

Unreasonable comparison. New Golf is $32k starting price for the econo version and $48k when fully optioned with the higher output engine and trans. And the Golf is much smaller interior, exterior and cargo capacity.

Disagree. You're talking the golf R I'm talking a regular 2016 golf has a nicer interior. A $32k golf today does also

 

[rivermaverick]

It is about 2 mpg less adding AWD.

About right. A loooong time ago we were going to go into limited production of the Ford Capri with AWD, the inevitable question was 'what about the fuel milage?'
The explanation given was: If you have a 2-wheel drive car you are just dragging 2 'dead' wheels along, if you drive these wheels you gain about 4% efficiancy. However in order to drive those wheels you need more 'stuff', more weight and more friction etc. which amounts to about a 6% loss. So overall about a 2% loss in fuel milage.
Modern AWD systems may be more efficient, I'm not sure how those figures work out on a Hybrid or EV with electric drive.

 

[Phimosis]

Disagree. You're talking the golf R I'm talking a regular 2016 golf has a nicer interior. A $32k golf today does also

Base golf = $32k. Base maverick hybrid is $23,900.
fully optioned Golf R = $48k. Fully optioned awd ecoboost Lariat Tremor is $40,700.
If you rewind the clock to 2016 before the golf went through 33% price inflation, any ford product would also have been 33% cheaper. And comparing maverick to golf is like comparing an f-150 to a maverick. The price will never be comparable because the vehicle is a lot larger.

 

[LADemien]

I am curious what sort of effect having AWD on the Maverick will do to MPG. I just did a build on a 25 and it came in at about the same price as my 24. I dont understand why the black out package forces me to go to AWD. My 24 has the black out package, which I like so its impossible to do an actual comparison.

I see no reason not to get the AWD if fuel mileage is a concern. I have a 2022 Maverick Lariat 2.0 AWD 4K tow. Gas mileage varies a lot depending on how much turbo the right foot likes. Just did a 14 hour drive from lower Alabama to Tampa and back. The readout on the truck read 34.6 mpg, which I have determined is about 1.5 to the good, so 33 mpg on long trips with some city driving, but I use cruise control in Eco mode. I average 26 - 28 mpg city driving with a pretty heavy foot.

Sponsored