2021 Bronco MPG?

[Cheshire]

Then you are most likely looking at the wrong vehicle. IF you need more than 18mpg on a good day, you'll probably be disappointed.

You want to enjoy your 4WD, just fill it up when it gets empty and don't worry about it. Otherwise, there's lots of nice family SUVs that great mileage.

The yard stick will be the Base with smaller, less aggressive tires and without heavy metal bumpers, bash guards, rock rails, etc of beefier models. There's no way the Base mileage will be 18mpg. I'd guess it will be comfortably in the low 20s.

Sponsored

 

[Ramble_Offroad]

If I had to guess Stated MPG will top out in the low 20’s. Reality will be less. There will be a huge swing in efficiency from a Base on street tires to the other trims Squatched out. Ford won’t list them all, just 2.3 best and 2.7 best. It is what it is. I already run twin jerrycans on my Tacoma’s aftermarket rear bumper.

I’ll be watching the aftermarket closely for a variety of things; Jerrycan holders is on my short list.

 

[Megawatt]

And when you look at the MPG you can not believe the computer. To find actual mpg you need to do the tip odometer that was reset at fill up reading divided by the gallons you actually filled the tank with.

My 2013 Jeep uses 200 mpg when your off the gas and coasting as part of the mpg average. The Jeep is as aerodynamic as a brick so that 200mgp value use is very small.

My 2018 civic does a better job of using 80mpg while coasting but still high and that will inflate the overall MPG computer at the end.

Will be interesting to see what the Bronco uses on the coasting value. But that is why rated mpg and real world mpg never match.

 

[Dick_Castlesmurff]

And when you look at the MPG you can not believe the computer. To find actual mpg you need to do the tip odometer that was reset at fill up reading divided by the gallons you actually filled the tank with.

My 2013 Jeep uses 200 mpg when your off the gas and coasting as part of the mpg average. The Jeep is as aerodynamic as a brick so that 200mgp value use is very small.

My 2018 civic does a better job of using 80mpg while coasting but still high and that will inflate the overall MPG computer at the end.

Will be interesting to see what the Bronco uses on the coasting value. But that is why rated mpg and real world mpg never match.

I love having a manual so I can coast as much as possible. And I by coast I mean turn the engine off and coast (leave the ignition in ACC). Infinity MPG. Kick start when needed. Back in the day, on the pass between my parents house and my house there was a 20 mile stretch of hwy that I could leave my engine off for and never drop below 50MPH.

 

[indio22]

Correct. My lifetime avg is over 35 in my fiesta st and 33 in my na miata.

Somehow the miata is rated at 22 combined. I assume from translating the old epa values to the new measures.

I wonder if EPA mpg is based on average driver? The way some folks hit the throttle after stoplights, you'd think they were at a dragstrip. Even with my own family, I never went through brake pads like this on my own. For some people it's either throttle or brake pedal, lol.

 

[da_jokker]

Funny how MPG could be so irrelevant to some and actually matter to others... I'm one where it does matter. I'll probably just suck it up (pun intended) unless it is just terrible.

But for me, if I take my Jeep XJ to work (4.0L 6 cyl) instead of my car (2.5L 4 cyl), that day cost me an extra $8 to commute. That's 160 more per month, almost 2K per year.

My hope is that if I use cruise in the Bronco and keep it say 65-75 mph, that I can split the difference and be 25mpg.

I could of course opt for the 2.3, 2 door non-sasquach to get the best MPG but that wouldn't meet my needs.

Need the EPAs Ford! Not to mention the B&P

 

[AZHUND]

This would be drastically higher than the 4x4 Ranger with the 2.3

I assumed with all the people claiming their F-150's get prius-like mileage with ecoboosts that the Ranger would be in mid-20's real world too.

 

[Anthraces]

Nobody knows... except carindigo.com! They must have "all" the inside knowledge to claim 20 city and 26 highway for a combined 22 average.

https://www.carindigo.com/ford/bronco-2021/mpg

If you can't tell, you should take this with a grain of salt... But, it would be funny if it turns out they are right.

they aren’t even quoting the right engine on that link. 2.4l engine with crappy HP/torque. Would be nice to get 22 combined though

 

[D Fresh]

Correct. My lifetime avg is over 35 in my fiesta st and 33 in my na miata.

Somehow the miata is rated at 22 combined. I assume from translating the old epa values to the new measures.

Lifetime over about 40k miles in my FiST is about 25. And I spend a good bit of time on the highway.

Either you drive solely highway miles or enjoy a much lighter foot than I.

 

[Anthraces]

While not buying this truck for high mph, it is a factor in the decision. This is especially true when trying to decide between the 2.3 and the 2.7.

I can live with these comparables

I wouldn’t be surprised if they’re close to these numbers. Although this is 2wd numbers, take another 2-3 off for FWD.

Bronco is heavier, but probably a little more aerodynamic than these pickups. But with off road gear I would guess it will probably be another 1-2 mpg less than this. So probably upper teens, possibly 20.

Not that we ever get these published numbers. Well I don’t anyways lol

 

[Techun]

Lifetime over about 40k miles in my FiST is about 25. And I spend a good bit of time on the highway.

Either you drive solely highway miles or enjoy a much lighter foot than I.

My commute is pretty long and it's 40-65mph with almost no stopping. So I'm in 6th gear at like 2-2.5k rpm for most of it.

But I have ridden along with tons of people who cruise in lower gears at 3-4k for no reason other than they don't upshift. Drives me nuts.

 

[Maxmillian1]

I have a 2002 4runner that still gets 17 city and 21 hwy. I'm so surprised that is gets that MPG at it's age. I'd like to get better. I would have bought a new one years ago but the new ones get the same MPG so I didn't see a reason to pay $600 or $700 a month for a couple of creature comforts. So come on FORD make me happy, give me Explorer numbers... 21city, 28 hwy and an 18 gallon tank.

 

[D Fresh]

My commute is pretty long and it's 40-65mph with almost no stopping. So I'm in 6th gear at like 2-2.5k rpm for most of it.

But I have ridden along with tons of people who cruise in lower gears at 3-4k for no reason other than they don't upshift. Drives me nuts.

I'm good about staying in high gear on the highway, but given the opportunity I'm a bit of a hoon. Also my old knees tell me no need to upshift when you'll be downshifting in 45 seconds when in town.

The FiST was a compromise car for me. Needed to have good enough MPG and be cheap enough to put 16k miles per year on back and forth to work. Also needed to be capable in all weather conditions, winter tires FTW, and be fun to drive.

So far it's been the best compromise vehicle I've ever owned.

 

[Broncocito]

If I can milk 20MPG on the highway on a leveled supercrew 3.5 with mods on 33.1" MT Baja ATZs at a mile up in elevation with stock gearing I anticipate a 2.7 squatched Bronco will get about 21 MPGs

 

[Used2jeep]

Worse case, two lockers and 35's I'd be happy with 18 mpg. I would like to get 400 miles out of a tank, but I'm just not seeing it.

Doubt that the lockers would have any impact other than a few extra pounds if they are electronically actuated.

Sponsored