2010 Ford Transit Connect fuel economy

The EPA just published fuel economy estimates for the Ford Transit Connect, a small commercial van. The numbers look impressive, even more so than Ford’s original estimate: 22 mpg in the city and 25 mpg on the highway. As always, EPA fuel economy numbers are for comparison only.

Meanwhile, we like the idea of the Transit Connect as a more efficient choice for small business owners and contractors than full-sized vans. The four-cylinder Transit Connect is somewhat smaller inside, but it is almost 50 percent more efficient. For comparison purposes, the EPA rates full-sized Ford E-Series at 13/17 mpg city/highway. The Chevrolet and GMC vans are rated at 14/18, city/highway with a V8 engine, and 15/20 with a V6.

Looking at pickups, the full-sized Toyota Tundra V6 pickup is rated at 15/19 mpg, and even the relatively-efficient Honda Ridgeline is rated at 15/20. Only four-cylinder-powered small pickups like the Ford Ranger can match the Transit Connect’s mileage. And any pickup has much less enclosed cargo space.

But don’t think that Transit Connects will be running around getting 22 to 25 mpg. The EPA tests the truck as if only a driver is aboard. If Transit Connects sell to the commercial buyers that Ford expects, most of them will be driving around with up to 1,600 pounds of cargo. With a relatively small 136-horsepower, 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine, the weight will definitely hurt their mileage.

—Eric Evarts

Comments

[Jerry Koriga]

Isn't it true that any vehicle loaded with 1600 pounds would have reduced fuel economy? Why does this magazine insist on publishing negative comments about everything positive the domestic automakers do? Maybe if the writers in this biased magazine actually drove american products you'd see them in a different light. Quit trying to justify your personal purchases by convinincing everyone else you are right and justified in buying foreign.

[Jeff Bartlett - Consumer Reports]

With all stories/blogs, we try to inject a reality check. And the reality is, this small-displacement, low-torque engine will likely be taxed with a fully laden vehicle. Used as it was intended, as a working truck, the Transit Connect will likely not deliver the EPA figures in the real world. That said, we applaud its entry into the U.S. market and expect it to be quite successful.

In editing, I added the 1,600-lb comment. For the record, two generations of my family worked on domestic automaker assembly lines, and I've owned several domestic products, including a Firebird and Corvette. No agendas here, just trying to give a more open take than you may find elsewhere online, particularly from ad-supported Web sites.

[Greg]

You didn't mention the cargo version of the Dodge Grand Caravan. Isn't it offered anymore? Then there's the Dodge Sprinter. It's big, but it has a relatively small diesel engine.

Jerry: Ford will import the Transit Connect from Turkey.

[Rod]

Something most reviews are not taking into consideration is the Transit Connect is coming with a 1:4.2 rear, which most people have not experienced. I've driven full-size vans (started with a VW camperbus, 1900 lb payload) for 38 years and paid special attention to ordering the most economical rear end (typically 3.22-3.55, reduced by overdrive transmissions to about 2.5-2.9). It is the economy rears that rapidly change in fuel efficiency and power with cargo, wind, or altitude. I suspect the Connect's 4.2 will have reasonable pep and mpg will not deteriorate that badly when loaded. Note also the Connect's max gross weight is "light" at "only" 5000 lbs. I am ready to buy one and dump my unstable E-150. Beware the "Family Concept" van and the taxi version changes the middle seat height (compared to current Ford sales info) to a much higher center-of-gravity design (see the NHTSA website for why that is very important).

Incidentally, the 1600 lb payload is for a stripped out cargo Connect without driver (but with gas). Add my nearly 200 lb as driver, include the middle seats, and add the available repositionable/removable load partition (a must for safety and utility), then my educated guess is that the real payload is about 1200 lb. That is a bit marginal, but then most families overload their vehicles (and tires!) on long trips without realizing it.

[Fred]

Ford offers a 38mpg diesel engine in Europe. When will US auto makers realize MPG matters? I'll be first in line for the diesel Ford transit.

[Iva Kimmelman]

I like the idea of this van.
Where is it made?
In the cargo version, are there "tie" downs?
I would be using it to transport dogs to and from shows, and field trials, and need a way to secure the crates.

I currently own, (and LOVE!!) a 2001 Ford E-150 conversion van. I love it's size, emenities and safety, but it is a gas whore, of course.

I also have a 2006 Nissan Quest. I like it okay, it has all the bells and whistles, but I like my big Ford van better.

I am thinking of dumping them both for a Transit.
Any clue how long the wait would be?

[Herman Schiller]

I'm looking at the Transit Connect as a replacement for my '93 Plymouth Voyager with 5-speed manual and the 2.5 liter engine. I would find the Transit Connect much more attractive if it had a 2.5 lier engine, 5-speed manual, and a taller final drive ratio. I found that when I switched froma 2.2 L to a 2.5 L in the Voyager (different years) my fuel mileage acually improved. Small engines lose gas mileage to friction because they're revving to high more of the time.

[Andy A]

These have been used in Europe for ages. It's about time they came here. My 1993 Ford Econoline 250 is a gas hog and a money pit. I'll certainly consider this vehicle for my business. I wish some of the other European van would enter our market as well.

[PTM]

I had a test drive on the recent 13 day tour and enjoyed it. Acceleration was not phenomenal, but for city stop and go was fine.

Here's a comment from a colleague discussion at another board: (Your thoughts please)

"With a load of 500 pounds, the curb weight will be 4,000 pounds. That's that
average weight of a Ford Tauras, BMW 5 Series....the new minivans (Honda,
Toyota) weigh about 4,300 pounds empty.

The 4 speed auto will give poorer gas mileage, and I would think that with a
load, you're going to be "on the floor" a lot which will decrease mileage, and
put a lot more stress on the engine and tranny.

My old Quest has a 3.0 V6, with only 155 hp and 180 ft. lbs. of torque (again,
torque maxes at around 4,500 rpm....usually you will have max. torque with a
diesel by 1800 rpm...) a four sp auto, and it weighs 3800 pounds with the seats
out. It's a dog, and it averages around 18-20 mpg..."

[Ron Swanson]

Why hasn't the automotive press looked at this car as a Honda Element beater? Forget the commercial cargo carrier and soccer mom minivan themes.
This baby wants to go to the beach loaded with yuppie STUFF. And it wants to get there it gaudy metallic colors behind a diesel and 5 speed. Did I mention that I would also like a TV feed into the overhead monitors on the bulkheads for gameday tailgate parties? And maybe they could round things out (literally) with a swing out barbeque over the bumper so I could do the burgers at halftime. Ford, are you listening? I'm lusting after one of these guys if you just push the envelope. Get it right and I'll write the check pronto.

[Chris Fracker]

I will be taking delivery of one in August. This type of van has been used in Europe for years. The emphasis is on utility for delivery and service use (plumbers,electricians,florists). It would be nice to see the diesel here soon.

[Wendell]

Well, I agree that this type of van has been missing from the USA market. Why? Foolish auto manufacturers! Why haven't you auto makers asked the business owners who have been needing a small vehicle for years? Now, it needs to have a diesel engine with a 5 or 6 speed manual so it gets the mileage that we want. The Big 3 have missed the market for years without a efficient diesel engine.
Also, the price must be affordable or you might as well keep it over in Turkey. If you CEO's would through out the Mafia unions, you could afford to build this type of van here in the states and make it very reasonable to purchase. Step up and take control of your auto companies. Keep Obama and government out.

[Sara Mathews]

I am interested in the Transit as a car to haul my dogs to shows in. I looked at the cargo version today and was amazed by how much space there is. However, I do sometimes take people to ride so would like the option of rear seating. Do the family versions with seats have rear air also? Are the seats easy to remove when necessary?

I've had 2 Ford Windstars and was happy with them overall - except for transmission problems. Does this van have a more reliable transmission than the Windstar?

[Paul Bodnick]

It shouldn't be long before someone loads one with 1600 lbs and checks out fuel economy, acceleration, etc. I'm waiting.

[Steve Milbret]

After talking with Reps from Ford they have no intention of utilizing a diesel in the near future. I explained they were missing the mark by not using a diesel and also not bringing the taller transit to The States. They could really take the market from Dodge because of all the issues with the Sprinters.

[Michael S]

I drove around Europe in a Peugeot 308 SW 1.6 petrol loaded with passengers and cargo, and honestly, it was fine. The car likely weighed in at over 3800 lbs, and even with a meager 114 lb-ft of torque (same engine as in the MINI Cooper), it cruised at 80 mph all day and averaged 6.6l/100km, or 36 mpg, which was surprising as its revs were quite high. The 2.0L in the Transit Connect will be sufficient.

[Ken]

One of the best driving experiences of my life was driving a Transit in Ireland a few years ago!

Stick with diesel, getting 30+ MPG. 6 of us with golf bags & luggage - lots of room.

This "new" form is classic US car maker going the wrong direction.

Will we never learn...

[Tim]

I have one for about a week and 1/2 and like it.It needs some storage for small things and you need to get a cell phone that will work with it's bluetooth thats the only problem.Was told ford is working on a list but so far all phones on the list are outdated.

[HHR]

Probably one of the worst decisions I made was to buy two Sprinter cargo vans, nothing but problems almost from day one.My hope was to keep the vans for tens years and offset intial cost by the fuel savings.Between the time lost in the shop and repairs that idea has blown up in my face. So this new Transit may be a bright spot, I'll be watching and would love for a chance to dump these two dogs. Chrysler, by the way has told me to take a hike, no wonder they're going under.

[Eddie]

Contrary to the belife that the government should stay out of the auto industry I believe that the new mileage standards prompted the introduction of the Transit to the US market. Sometimes big business need a reason to do the right thing.

[Paul]

I looked on the Ford UK site at the transit connect. I don't even think they offer the gas engine as an option. For some reason the companies in the US do not want us to get great fuel mileage. Diesel Transit Connects would fly off the showroom floors at 38 MPG. Hmmmmm. You don't suppose there is some sort of colusion between the Gov't, oil companies and auto manufacturers. Naaaaahhh can't be.

[martin]

Paul,

I agree with you. For years I have suspected that there has been collusion going on between the filthy repugnant oil companies and all car manufacturers. there have been cars that have been on the U.S market that have gotten great fuel milage and then they were discontinued. For example; the early 90s Honda civic got approximately 44 mpg in the city and 50mpg on the highway. Today Civic get good gas milage, but not anywhere that good. Another example is an early 90s model of the Toyota tercel, they made for one year. The following year, the changed the transmission on the car, and it did not get anywhere as good the gas milage. Why???

The bottom line:

We, as American consumers, need to take a stand. We should only buy cars from the big three and the foreign companies when they start producing the cars that we want. REMEMBER that when you buy a car, you are putting your seal of a approval and endorsing its price.

[Steve Hallgring]

My wife and I have a small business making ceramic logs and caves for tropical aquarium fish to spawn in. We often travel great distances with 1000+ lbs of product in a 1994 Chevy Suburban. When we are not driving through mountain ranges we get between 17-18 mpg. A few years ago we drove around Texas on flat roads for four days on interstate highways and got 20 mpg with the air conditioning blasting. The prospect of driving a smaller less comfortable vehicle that gets about the same mileage empty that we get loaded in our comfortable old suburban makes very little sense to me. Now......double the mpg with a diesel and the logic changes. Show me something Ford.

[AKB]

Its an intriguing vehicle, but I am a little surprised that Ford went for a gas 2 liter that only is getting 22/25 mpg especially when the van with a diesel is getting 38 mpg.

I do like the comment about the transit being used by non-commercial users for a sports wagon to lug toys around. If offered with 38 mpg, it would leave Honda Elements behind for this use. I owned an Element for 4 years and honestly felt Honda should have gone for super fuel economy, but after being on the market for 6 model years, I have yet to see a more efficient version of the Element (diesel , hybrid, etc) I gave up the Element for a Honda Ridgeline and while getting 2 mpg less, gained alot more capacity and utility with the Ridgeline.

[Jim Fackert]

DIESEL DIESEL DIESEL DIESEL DIESEL

Get the message, Ford? 38 mpg and better performance, cleaner running, longer life. Why in heavens name is Ford going half way with the Transit Connect and the Fiesta? Demonstrating AGAIN that american auto companies have NO clue what americans really want?

It's all that is sold in Europe. I would buy one tomorrow IF it were available with diesel engine.

No way at 22 mpg with gas.