2009 Ford Flex: Fuel Economy Update

Wasn't the Cadillac SRX better on fuel than this? I bet you can get a nice used SRX cheaper than the Flex.

Room for 7 and a real 20 mpg average isn't bad at all.

These are right on the mark, you guys aren't afraid of the gas pedal, after all. Re: the SRX, didn't it take premium? And this has more room, too.

The SRX averaged less than 20mpg on it's longest trip so... no it's not better on fuel. The Flex is much more roomy than the SRX too. Those third row seats in the SRX are a joke, but I'm sure it probably handles a bit better.

Impressive, for such a big and heavy CUV. Wonder what the city mileage is like, compared to the highway (after all, this thing did go cross country)

You're beating the EPA's combined estimate. I'd say that's pretty good.

Yeah, I seriously thought automotive journalists were better than that. The 24mpg is highway EPA fuel econ. And I have to concur, for a vehicle that has nearly as much room inside as an Expedition, has more scoot and far more style inside and out, you're doing really good on the fuel front. I averaged about 20-22 from my old V6 Mustang.

You guys averaging over 20 MPG in this car is quite good. Our old Mazda Tribute didn't even average that, and the Flex has 0.5 liters more displacement, 2 more seats, an extra 60+ horsepower, and about 800 pounds extra weight to haul around. I'm pretty impressed, especially because I know I'd get better mileage with it than you guys would.

"You're beating the EPA's combined estimate. I'd say that's pretty good."

I'd say that's a first for IL.

20 mpg is great for a 3 row.

Eat that crap minivans! Minivans get 18 mpg. Sienna, Odyssey, and the Grand Caravan are the big fat fuel guzzlers that take more credit than they deserve.

Cargo volume of the Flex.. 83 cubic feet

Cargo volume of the Grand Caravan.. 144 cubic feet

Cargo volume of the Odyssey.. 147 cubic feet

Cargo volume of the Sienna.. 149 cubic feet

Best tank of the Caravan 30 mpg
Best tank on the Flex 25 mpg
(no recent numbers on the other two long term)

Minivans rule (unless you really have an urge to drive a hearse)

oh no you did not just say "Best tank".
You have just fallen to the sleazy car salesman's "highway mpg" false advertising level.
Despicable.

Best (and worse) tanks are important because it shows you the range of what you can get. Average is often less important unless you live in the same city, climate and have the same driving style.

If you can't match ""highway mpg", that doesn't make it false.

firstwagon,

you only get those cubic feet numbers if you remove those pesky 2nd row seats. Only the Caravan offers stow and go, and given the build quality, driving characteristics, and predicted reliability of the Caravan, I'd look elsewhere.

You forget to compare averages and worst gas mileages too.

Worst Tank Caravan... 9.7 mpg
Worst Tank Flex... 14.9
Average Tank Caravan... 18.6 mpg
Average Tank Flex... 20.1 mpg

Isn't the Flex AWD too and tows 1000 lbs more? Minivans are great. Don't get me wrong. My first vehicle was a 1988 Ford Aerostar that routinely got my lawn mower from yard to yard, but minivans are also for people who hate driving IMO.

Minivans hold more but the Flex looks better and is more innovative. Also, the Flex's interior kills every minivan on the market including the media darling Odyssey.

This is an AWD Flex in their fleet right? The EPA lists 22 mpg for the AWD Flex and 24 mpg for the FWD version. If they are getting OVER 24 mpg for an AWD version then that can be considered outstanding especially since the motor is probably barely broken in yet. Over 24 mpg for a FWD version, while not quite as impressive, is still quite good.

I'm not sure why she's complaining about getting a best of nearly 25 mpg out of a Flex by saying it doesn't agree with the EPA's estimates. They tell us to expect 18 mpg combined out of the AWD and 19 mpg combined out of the FWD version. Their 20+ mpg bests both and, again, is quite impressive.

I think Kelly should think about re-writing her comments above.