With fewer “bangs” per revolution, it seems slower-revving than it is 2,100 rpm on the tach at 120 km/h – already quite relaxed – feels more like 1,600 rpm. Properly balanced like this one, a triple can be surprisingly smooth and avoids the gritty harshness that can afflict four-cylinder engines. It sounds different than a four but, I would argue, not worse. Open this photo in gallery:ĭon’t let the engine’s unusual three-cylinder configuration put you off. My SEL AWD test stickered at $35,049 base and came to the table with $3,350 worth of options, most notably a panoramic-vista glass roof ($1,750) and an $850 package that adds voice-activated navigation and adaptive cruise control with stop-and-go to the Co-Pilot360 driver-assist suite, which is standard on all Escapes. Pricing starts at $28,549, with all-wheel-drive a $1,500 stand-alone option. The three-banger is standard on the S, SE and SEL trims, each with front-wheel-drive standard. The combo of fewer cylinders and more gears, along with meaningfully trimmed vehicle weight and other measures, lowers fuel consumption by 16 per cent, according to the combined figure from Natural Resources Canada (20 per cent in city driving). The previous Escape also offered a 1.5-litre engine, but this totally new mill totes three cylinders instead of four, partnered with a transmission that grows the ratio count from six to eight. Although the 1.5 is standard on most trims, its appearance at the media preview drive last fall was frustratingly brief, so when a test sample became available on home ground, we seized the chance to get better acquainted. But for those who do care, there are not one but two hybrid options – self-charging and (coming this spring) plug-in.Īnd then there’s the 1.5-litre turbo mainstream base engine. For those who don’t care, you can still buy an Escape with a quick-and-quiet 260-horsepower, 2.0-litre turbo engine. By the mere fact that the Escape is a compact, its carbon footprint is already quite modest, and Ford has amplified that with fuel-saving powertrains. The Escape, on the other hand, will sell in the millions. Nothing against the Aviator per se, but in the climate-emergency era, how relevant is a large $75,000-plus luxury SUV that few can ever afford? The Ford Motor Company did reach the final three, but with the Lincoln Aviator. But I also think the electorate got it wrong when they didn’t even vote the Ford Escape into the finals. Truth be told, I do fully endorse the eventual winner. In this age when democracy is in jeopardy or retreat around the world, it seems small-minded to take issue with how my fellow jurors voted in the 2020 North American Car, Utility and Truck of the Year awards.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |