Any noted MPG differences between Maverick Adaptive Cruise, Standard Cruise and Driver Control??

[MaverickDragon]

Has anyone seen a difference in MPGs attributed to adaptive cruise vs standard cruise vs driver only with their Maverick?

I don't have ACC on my XL Maverick, but I use the standard cruise intermittently.

I'm in the habit from my other vehicles to cancel cruise and let the car slow down a bit on an uphill rather than letting cruise apply a lot of throttle for a small hill, and let it speed up a bit on the downhill, rather than braking.
If it's flat terrain, I just let cruise control keep the speed steady.

I seem do better than cruise when I control it myself on varied terrain, but I haven't actually tested that in the Mav.

There's probably a difference between the B and hybrid, due to the hybrid regeneration, but I wonder if anyone has noted a difference.

Sponsored

 

[Cherokee]

I had a 1 mpg drop from constantly using auto lane centering.
I could feel the tires scrubbing from time to time doing steering corrections.
I bleed excessive speed when it slows too soon and too hard looking ahead.
Where I can simply lift and coast a bit without braking.
Braking burns fuel because I have to re accelerate every time.

 

[Ryom]

Got 40mpg driving from Southern PA to Ontario Canada using ACC traveling I-81 & CA-401 the entire way. I'm not going to fret too much about 1 MPG as the ACC made it a very pleasant drive.

 

[Wahjahbvious]

ACC isn't as good at granny driving as I am.

I still use it some, because it's convenient, but I get better mileage on my own.

 

[Cherokee]

ACC isn't as good at granny driving as I am.

I still use it some, because it's convenient, but I get better mileage on my own.

Yeah I will admit auto lane centering is helpful when your cleaning your glasses or picking your nose or eating breakfast at 65 mph,
Or rolling a joint. :'P

 

[Ecorydr]

Yeah I will admit auto lane centering is helpful when your cleaning your glasses or picking your nose or eating breakfast as 65 mph,
Or rolling a joint. :'P

Remembering the ole Sonic tray days.......... mult-purposeful!

 

[commadorebob]

I have noticed no difference. I'm less likely to feather the throttle using cruise, so I'm sure either one is better than not using it.

 

[JazznSF]

I had a 1 mpg drop from constantly using auto lane centering.
I could feel the tires scrubbing from time to time doing steering corrections.

Mazda calls it "Lane Keeping." When I first got the Mazda 3 I thought there was a problem with the front end geometry. It kept fighting me during lane changes on the highway. Then I discovered the reason. It was the "Lane Keeping" feature on the Mazda was fighting me. That "feature" was permanently relagated to the trash bin.

When I first got the Maverick the "Auto Lane Centering" was like the Mazda system on steroids... and angry just like a gym rat who's addicted to said steroids. Took me two days of hunting through menus to figure out how to permanently disable that "feature." (Have I mentioned how awful the owner's manual is for these vehicles?) Now that it's no longer trying to run me off the road, I like my new Maverick much better!

But, to stay on topic... I think on long trips (say, more than 120 miles) on reasonably level roads, in reasonably light traffic, ACC is a great thing. Even if the mileage is the same, the stress reduction is welcome. My gut feeling is that it probably saves fuel in reasonably light traffic.. However, the heavier the traffic the more that heavy braking/acceleration events happen. At that point I'd say that ACC doesn't make sense, especially in the Maverick.*

*Just like Auto Lane Centering, the ACC in the Maverick is much more aggressive than the "Radar Cruise" system in my recently sold Mazda 3. I find I use ACC less in the Maverick than I did in the Mazda because of that overly aggressive braking/acceleration programming.

 

[HeyBales]

I've noticed on some steep hills going into Branson area to get to AR - normal Cruise kinda does what earlier vehicles would do.
Not initially apply enough throttle as hill starts and then gets steep fast, lose enough speed, it went nuts trying to make it up.
Not nearly as bad as dropping a gear to accelerate back to set speed - but still got that idea it was trying to make up for the loss.

In those cases manually I can increase speed at the bottom and increase throttle before it loses speed - so it's only about maintaining set point not accelerating back up.
That is better for mpg - but that's only a few hills like that.

I'm sure rolling hills on a long trip would cause the same effect though perhaps not as noticeable - but it should add up to be seen in mpg.
I don't use CC around town but if highway is kinda dead I will - I feel it on minor hills doing the same thing.

Shoot - I notice myself manually losing speed on hills - why I'll use the CC sometimes.
So I gotta plan on doing it better than CC will.
After 3 hrs to get to that point on the trip - I'm itching for something more interesting.

 

[Randorita]

I use ACC and like it. Theoretically, if you are in Eco mode it should handle acceleration and deceleration better and get you that 1mpg improvement. I don't know, because I keep forgetting to use it.

As for lane keeping, I dont use it. My dad taught me how to drive on the highway 60 years ago and I hug the outside of the lane. Lane keeping tries to keep me in the center. Also, if I remember correctly, it will fight you on lane changes if you dont use your blinkers. That's fine, unless it is an emergency lane change to avoid an obstacle, then it can cause problems resulting in an accident.

 

[JazznSF]

I use ACC and like it. Theoretically, if you are in Eco mode it should handle acceleration and deceleration better and get you that 1mpg improvement. I don't know, because I keep forgetting to use it.

As for lane keeping, I dont use it. My dad taught me how to drive on the highway 60 years ago and I hug the outside of the lane. Lane keeping tries to keep me in the center. Also, if I remember correctly, it will fight you on lane changes if you dont use your blinkers. That's fine, unless it is an emergency lane change to avoid an obstacle, then it can cause problems resulting in an accident.

I keep forgetting to try Eco Mode as well... now I'm curious about that. I'll give it test drive!

Lane Keeping (or whatever Ford calls it) is so aggressive in the Maverick it is alarming. It's been disabled and will stay disabled... I learned how to use manual lane keeping in 1972, with a device called a Steering Wheel...

 

[zorki1c]

I use ACC A LOT. I don’t find the lane centering to be a problem. One of the reasons we got the Lariat was all the bells and whistle and I frankly don’t think I would be happy with a model with less features

 

[MaverickDragon]

I've noticed on some steep hills going into Branson area to get to AR - normal Cruise kinda does what earlier vehicles would do.
Not initially apply enough throttle as hill starts and then gets steep fast, lose enough speed, it went nuts trying to make it up.
Not nearly as bad as dropping a gear to accelerate back to set speed - but still got that idea it was trying to make up for the loss.

In those cases manually I can increase speed at the bottom and increase throttle before it loses speed - so it's only about maintaining set point not accelerating back up.
That is better for mpg - but that's only a few hills like that.

I'm sure rolling hills on a long trip would cause the same effect though perhaps not as noticeable - but it should add up to be seen in mpg.
I don't use CC around town but if highway is kinda dead I will - I feel it on minor hills doing the same thing.

Shoot - I notice myself manually losing speed on hills - why I'll use the CC sometimes.
So I gotta plan on doing it better than CC will.
After 3 hrs to get to that point on the trip - I'm itching for something more interesting.

Pretty much what I expected.
I'm thinking that the EB is probably more affected than the hybrid, as the hybrid can use the electric to keep momentum going uphill and uses regen going down.
For my local trips into the little town at 25 - 35 mph, the truck gets ~ 50mpgs on Eco mode.

In my case, it's different than most as 95% of my driving is in traffic that doesn't exist, so ACC has no value. My excursions are also at times where what little traffic there is, is minimal.

There isn't even a traffic light within 30 miles of my location, but hills are everywhere, and pretty big ones as the altitude goes from a mile up where I live to 7000 feet where the businesses live...

Needless to say, the mpgs are a lot better on the return trip..

 

[F150 2.7 TT user]

New Tremor and on a long road trip. Last tank of gas went to a 250 mile chunk of NM/AZ high desert and the canyon run to south west Phoenix. Mostly 75 MPH, in Sport mode, ACC on all the way, the 2 L Ecoboost got a hand calculated 29 MPG. Have put near 4000 miles on this road-trip, lowest calculated was 26 MPG.

This was on CO 550 heading to Durango. Sorry no non-cruise or normaln mode yet the Tremor is too new and I'm having fun with it so far!

 

[Mervin the Maverick]

I think the only advantage of any cruise control for me is I am less likely to get a speeding ticket.

I don’t think cruise control will engage the throttle as smoothly as if you do it yourself (like anticipating an uphill stretch).

Sponsored