FWD

2.5L = 22/31
1.6T = 23/33
2.0T = 22/30

AWD

2.0T = 21/28
1.6T = not yet released

 

Good. It'll be trying to ****** the crazy equinox sales. Hopefully there is some power. The 4 banger crossovers are sooooo sluggish.

 

I'm actually a little more impressed with the Equinox considering that it is still up 10hp and 5tq and only down 1mpg city/hwy while staying normally aspirated. Hopefully the Escape's turbo will provide a nice flat torque curve.

The 2.0T is the most impressive IMO compared to V6 competition.

 

I agree. Equinox is also larger. Will be interesting to get some 'real world' MPG numbers on it but on paper, I think I'd pass.

 

I believe the Equinox is only larger on the outside. Interior capacity is higher for the Escape.

 

I made sure of my statement before I posted it.

Edmunds has Equinox with more front head room, rear head room, and FAR more rear leg room. Escape has more front leg room and the rest of the measurements are virtual ties. 99.8 cubic feet of total interior volume for the Equinox vs. 98.1 for the Escape.

 

...and the Equinox doesn't look like a Hyundai...

 

Ok, I looked it up. Interesting to say the least.

Wheelbase:
Equinox: 112.5
Escape: 105.9

Overall length:
Equinox: 187.8
Escape: 178.1

Cargo volume behind front seats:
Equinox: 63.7cf
Escape: 68.1cf

Cargo volume behind second row seats:
Equinox: 31.5cf
Escape: 34.3cf

Total interior volume:
Equinox: 99.7
Escape: 98.1

Equinox has about 1" more headroom, Escape has about 2" more front legroom, but 3" less second row legroom. Front shoulder room is basically the same for both. Rear shoulder room shows the Escape with about 1" more front and rear.

Escapes base curb weight is about 250lbs less than the Equinox, which makes sense, since the Escape is very space efficient for its size.

 

...Which is essentially what I said in my original post.

It seems the Escape puts a premium on cargo space whereas the Equinox is oriented a bit more on people space (particularly the 2nd row). IMHO I think more families looking at small SUVs will put the premium on 2nd row passenger space.

At any rate, I'll stand by my original statement that Equinox is slightly bigger and gets almost the same mileage. And Silverado C-10 is correct, it's far better looking.

 

The equinox may be rated at 32 mpg highway, but do some reading around and you'll discover that like many GM vehicles these days, its real world economy seems to be pretty hard to achieve relative to most other vehicles on the market.

I'll bet the real world economy of the new Escape 1.6T are much better than the equinox.

 

Ha ok.

Actually you can find that for almost any car. But it depends. Optimize a vehicle for the EPA test cycle and it won't perform the same in the real world.

 

I love everything about the new Escape except the exterior looks. I prefer the more truck/SUV like look of the current generation.

I think I'd rather have the GMC Terrain.

The AWD Equinox has no problem getting 29mpg. I've seen as high as 31mpg on a 100mile trip while driving my parents. The Equinox does do better once the engine has been broken in.

 

The wife's 2011 4-cyl fwd 'nox has no trouble pulling off 31-31.5mpg at 70mph on a hilly freeway drive from MN into WI, these people that complain about the 'nox efficiency either have something wrong with their car or expect it to get the window sticker number at 80+mph with some city driving intermixed.

 

Threxx is right. EPA MPG are becoming harder to achieve with many car buyers. Since most of these companies know how the EPA test cycles work, they know how to optimize the vehicle for the test cycles. The real world driving results have been mixed between people who can achieve it, and those who can't.

 

We just purchased a 2012 Ford Edge with 2.0 Ecoboost rated 21/30 MPG.

Right now we're averaging 21 MPG in mixed driving. So I can convey the difficulty in trying to obtain the rated MPG.