Hyundai Santa Cruz Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Motor Trend has reported the EPA's fuel economy estimates for the Santa Cruz's NA and turbo variants:

"Curiously, the base-engine (2.5-liter) Santa Cruz with all-wheel-drive generates the best fuel economy in the lineup with an EPA-estimated 21 mpg city, 27 mpg highway, and 23 mpg combined. Choosing the front-wheel-drive model delivers the same 21 mpg city and 23 mpg combined, but for some reason drops the highway number by 1 mpg to 26 mpg. (Typically, two-wheel-drive versions of new vehicles are more fuel efficient than their all-wheel-drive counterparts, thanks to lower weight and less driveline drag.) Normalcy returns to the fuel economy estimates when it comes to the optional turbocharged engine, which (with all-wheel drive) drops the Santa Cruz's mpg ratings to 19 mpg city and 22 mpg combined, while somehow maintaining the base-engine's 27-mpg highway best."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
That is a little disappointing, and it'll be interesting to see how the Maverick stacks up.

I will say that the EPA estimated combined rating on my '12 Ford Focus is 29 MPG, but I routinely get 37-39 MPG on a tank of gas, and have gotten as high as 42 MPG in ideal conditions. So I'm hopeful that 23 MPG estimate on the Santa Cruz can be increased to at least 30 MPG with a light foot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
34 Posts
FWIW, our 2019 Santa Fe 2.0T FWD is rated at 20 city, 25 highway and 22 combined. We don't baby it and are usually at 25 mpg combined and 27-28 mpg is pretty typical on the highway (actual calculated mileage, not the computer readout).

Speculating on the Santa Cruz seems a little premature, but I bet with a light foot it would do just as well if not better given the slightly better EPA numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
Maverick will have a hybrid option
Plus smaller engines. I assume the Maverick will get better mileage then the SC. Based on the data the SC gets about the same MPG as the 2WD Ranger. The Maverick has to offer decent savings here or what's the point of it?

Overall I wouldn't read much into a +/- 1 MPG difference as there are so many variables in fuel mileage. For example normal vs sport mode, temperature, elevations changes, driving styling, etc. You can likely improve the MPG by short shifting the DCT.

The turbo does fine on the highway because its off boost which brings is back to being the base NA 2.5 liter. Also my understanding is the AWD system is only active below 37 MPH, so once at highway speeds the drive-line loss is almost negated. The extra AWD weight is only a penalty under acceleration, it has little effect on cruising.

My experience in towing is when I switched from a 4.0l V6 to a 4.7l V8 the mileage didn't change one bit because the V6 had to work so much harder. I bet a similar thing is going on here, the turbo's extra power means it doesn't need as much fuel to motivate the vehicle. Thus in the end both engines get the same mileage. Which brings us to the real question here: what is the price difference between the two engines.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
29 Posts
Maverick has been revealed. 40mpg city has been announced. Highway and combined rating should be in the mid-high 30s.
I think I saw 33 MPG combined on Ford's website. Which is respectable for a truck, and makes the Santa Cruz's mileage look pretty bad. That being said, I think the Hyundai still looks like the more enticing option...it's all gonna come down to pricing schemes at this point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
297 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
150 Posts
That being said, I think the Hyundai still looks like the more enticing option...it's all gonna come down to pricing schemes at this point.
Which Hyundai still hasn't announced. Hopefully this forces their hand. Ford has a complete online configuration available to play with all the options and costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7 Posts
I would have preferred a two door, more compact, truck by either Ford or Hyundai. I hope the Maverick out performs the dismal Ranger’s reliability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
That is a little disappointing, and it'll be interesting to see how the Maverick stacks up.

I will say that the EPA estimated combined rating on my '12 Ford Focus is 29 MPG, but I routinely get 37-39 MPG on a tank of gas, and have gotten as high as 42 MPG in ideal conditions. So I'm hopeful that 23 MPG estimate on the Santa Cruz can be increased to at least 30 MPG with a light foot.
Agree.....the new Maverick is suppose to get 40 mpg in the city....and all ..even the base model will be
hybrid unless you choose another engine. I'll take that 40 mpg every day!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
40 Posts
I would have preferred a two door, more compact, truck by either Ford or Hyundai. I hope the Maverick out performs the dismal Ranger’s reliability.
Huh? My ranger has been Rock solid and I don't see many issues on the ranger forums. If you go to any vehicle focused site you typically see some common issues. The Bronco Sport forum reflects some first-year issues and since the Mav is based on the same platform I'm assuming it will have similar problems until they're ironed out... I'm sure the SC will also have some first-year issues.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
147 Posts
Ah right...I was think about the Highway MPG, which is 33. It's a shame that hybrid doesn't appear to be available in AWD.
AWD uses a less efficient heavier and bulkier transmission, and they want max MPG and need room for the battery, not to mention that the FWD version with its lightweight CVT is already quite heavy for its power so the extra weight and driveline loss of AWD could make it too painfully slow.

3700lbs/190hp = 19.5lbs/hp which honestly I'm not even sure if I can live with that, but we'll have to see how much that 125hp electric motor makes it feel faster around town than it actually would be say accelerating on an entrance ramp.

To put that in perspective, 15lbs/hp is considered about average (that's what Chrysler Pacifica is at), and something like a Mustang with the four banger is a bit under 11.5lbs/hp (peppy but not a Corvette) while a Crosstrek is 18lbs/hp (a vehicle considered slow) and the hybrid Maverick is slower than that.

The Hyundai Tucson 2.5 AWD is 3650lbs, but the SC is stretched out compared to it. Add the turbo with intercooler and bed and extra length, and I'm guessing the SC will be 3900lbs. That would make the base SC with the 2.5 even slower than the Maverick, while not giving the benefit of crazy fuel economy, so would be pass for me, but the AWD turbo version would be 3900/275hp is around 14lbs/hp or a bit above average acceleration.

The Maverick 2.0 option is direct injection only, unlike the SC's 2.5T that is port and direct injection, which means the Ford is likely to have the usual carbon fouling issue at high mileage, so that one is out for me.

So long story short, I think I'd be happy with a basic spec Maverick XLT FWD hybrid and enjoying the extra money in my pocket, or a SC SEL Premium or Limited trim AWD w/ the 2.5T, depending on how bad the sticker shock for the SC will be in those trims.
 

·
Registered
2020 Chevy Equinox LT AWD 1.5T, 2012 Dodge Journey CVP, 1997 GMC C1500 5.0L 2WD
Joined
·
23 Posts
Ford is going to market the crap out of that 40mpg city on the hybrid - but in the same breath they'll talk about 4,000lb max towing - which you can't get without the 2.0T in the Maverick. IF you're looking for something small and truckish for city use, I think the Maverick base hybrid powertrain is your absolute winner. If you do highway driving ... meh. Heck, I've been getting 35+ mpg REGULARLY with our 2020 Equinox AWD on the highway with the little 1.5T. The SC won't be able to compete with anyone seriously looking at the base model Mav at 20K. The discussion has already ended.

Where it is going to be interesting is with the mid to top-trim levels of the Maverick ... where the value proposition is questionable at best. I specced one out the other night online and with the options I wanted (not even the top Lariat, just an XLT) it was within 2-3000 of a mid-tier Ranger. By the time you put in the 2.0T with AWD, the 4K tow package, etc ... it's not a great deal. It doesn't even have keyless ignition standard! These days, that's just crazy. And that's where the SC is going to need to shine. It has a MUCH better list of standard equipment - but the price needs to be right to win people over. Especially with the marketing angles Ford is (misguiding all the way) going to take. Every time they say 40mpg and 4K towing in the same sentence ... I'm going to want to smack an agency hack in the head with a tow strap.

Hyundai just needs to get the pricing out there and let us play with online configurations ... or Ford is going to win their market over before they have a chance.
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top