@Herman_Mays, have you seen this paper yet?
The mutation rate in human evolution and demographic inference, Aylwyn Scally, http://keinanlab.cb.bscb.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/papers/Scally_2016.pdf
The figure here shows mutation rate estimated in several ways:
You can see that the pedigree based methods (blue) produce results that are consistent with several other methods, not just pedigree. You can see that the variance of pedigree methods is high, but it is not that bad.
The paper also goes into depth about the (relatively small) mismatch between human-chimp divergence and the divergence computed by mutation rates and time alone. As @glipsnort alludes, some of this is resolved by taking coalescence into account. There is a discrepancy, but it is not large.