The new Ford GT supercar is arguably one of the most exciting cars to come out of Dearborn, Michigan in recent memory. Actually, it is the most exciting car that Ford has developed in years and the sheer performance numbers – over 600 horsepower – certainly points to the car living up to all the hype it has received. But the world is all about balance and for all the things that’s awesome about the new GT, it also has qualities about that are, well, less so.

Turns out, fuel efficiency is as foreign a concept to the new GT as roll-up windows. But even if that’s to be expected, not a lot of people probably expected the GT to post an anaemic fuel efficiency rating from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. But that’s exactly what it got after the EPA announced that the mighty GT’s fuel-economy ratings amount to just 11 mpg city, 18 mpg highway, and 14 mpg combined. That might not seem like a big deal in the context of today’s supercars, but remember, the GT has a 3.5-liter "EcoBoost" V-6 engine, which should at least imply some kind of decent mileage, loosely as the term “decent” may be used.

Not only is that not the case, but the GT’s fuel economy ratings actually compares to the Lamborghini Aventador (11/18/13 mpg), which by the way is using a 6.0-liter V-12 engine. The new GT’s ratings are even worse than the car it’s succeeding, the original 2005 supercharged V-8 Ford GT, which returned 12/19/14 mpg, albeit adjusted to reflect the EPA’s current evaluations. According to the EPA, the new GT’s fuel economy ratings even call for an estimate of $8,000 more in fuel expenses compared to an average vehicle. To make things more complicated, Car and Driver notes that with those ratings, the new GT could get slapped with a gas-guzzler tax, which in turn would add somewhere around $3,000 to its overall price tag.

The figures are a bit surprising considering that the EPA arrived at those numbers despite Ford giving it an EcoBoost engine. Then again, it’s hard to imagine the people behind the 6,000-plus applications Ford got for the supercar to worry about the extra costs they’ll have to pay for a car that’s already priced at about $400,000.

Continue after the jump to read the full story.

Poor fuel economy returns won't stop buyers from getting the GT

On the one hand, the EPA’s mileage ratings for the Ford GT are a little surprising considering the engine it’s using. Isn’t a 3.5-liter Ecoboost V-6 engine supposed to be efficient, or at least more efficient than, say, a naturally-aspirated V-12 engine? The disparity in the size of the engines alone should point to that conclusion, but somehow, that’s not the case with the Ford GT.

In fact, if you compare it to other supercars today, the GT falls really short in fuel economy ratings. Take a look at the Ferrari 488 GTB, for example. It packs a 3.9-liter turbocharged V-8 engine that’s good for 660 horsepower and 560 pound-feet of torque and its 15/22/18 mpg returns isn’t much too, but it’s still better than the GT. Even the Lamborghini Huracán with its 610-horsepower, naturally aspirated 5.2-liter V-10 engine returns 14/21/17 mpg. Then there’s the Acura NSX, which has a similarly sized combustion engine that’s supplemented by hybrid technology. It rates at 21/22/21 mpg. The common thread here among all three supercars is that all three of them return better fuel economy ratings than the Ford GT. Just goes to show you that as awesome a supercar as the GT is, it’s not a perfect car by any means.

But like I said, those who are interested in buying the Ford GT are unlikely to be worried about the car’s fuel economy ratings. The car, after all, has a rich racing pedigree attached to it so if you think about it in that sense, economy ratings are probably the least of Ford’s concerns and that of the people who are willing to spend close to half a million dollars for it.

It’s all about how fast and powerful the Ford GT is and at least in those two terms, the car appears to be living up to the hype.

Drivetrain Specifications

Read our full review on the Ford GT here.