If you are thinking of buying a Mondeo diesel for its fuel economy, think again.
I have just bought a new 2.0 TDCi Titanium X Estate fitted with a DPF, which will not achieve more than upper 30's mpg. The DPF has had an effect on fuel economy, so if you want a Mondeo IV diesel to get more MPG, at the moment it is best to go for the 1.8 TDCi which does not have the DPF as standard.
Edited by rtj70 on 24/08/2009 at 00:16
|
|
Whats the mileage? if less than 25k it's not run in yet.
|
Well this is not just my personal experinece with this car and engine.
The car is quite new, but the improvement in fuel consumption will have to be in the region of 25% to get anwhere close to what Ford claim the car is capable of.
Does the Sale of Goods Act in the UK cover things like fuel consumption figures for new cars? It seems like with co2 emissions,in reality the cars are not even close to the claims.
|
Diesels need a different driving technique to get the best economy and power out of them.
The 2.0 is a Peugeot/Citroen/Ford joint engine and I've not heard many problems with it.
My Citroen C5 has the 2.2 173bhp diesel (same engine as the 2.2 TDCI 175) and it is more economical than my older C5 with the 2.0 8v 110bhp diesel.
I don't think DPF's make much difference when you drive them on the motorway, however short jouneys and cheap supermarket fuel will slaughter your economy.
I reckon a diesel needs 10k to loosen up, and after that needs the occasional hard run to keep things clear of soot.
Ben
|
At 10k miles this astra was poor on fuel but when it got to 16k a little better, the van at work was better at 25+k and performance to match.
|
Mine's an AUTO 2.0 TDCi Mk4 Mondeo and I get 29 mpg urban and 47 mpg on a long run, mainly A roads and some Motorway. It's done nearly 12k miles and I'm quite pleased with the consumption for an automatic. Tyre pressures make a noticable difference on this model, just 3 or 4 psi down drops the mpg by about 10%.
|
|
|
|
Whats the mileage? if less than 25k it's not run in yet.
Seconded, my diesel A4 took over 20K before the MPG became sensible for a diesel.
|
|
|
|
I've run a 2.0 TDCi manual Zetec estate for 15,000 miles and 18 months, and averaged a genuine 42.5mpg (measured by fuel added vs. miles, NOT from the computer) in that time.
Worst tankful was the first (37mpg) and the best has been 47mpg. This is less than my previous Passat PD130, but I expected this as the Mondeo is both larger and heavier.
Economy has improved noticeably (i.e. 5% or more) in the past 2,000 miles, compared with last summer.
This is 70% urban driving (journeys of under 10 miles) and 30% longer / motorway use. On the standard 205 / 55 16" tyres. I'm not regarded as a gentle driver.
No DPF problems in that time, apart from a 'oil service' message reset (a known issue).
I have posted elsewhere about how owners can check and correct the somewhat slapdash underbonnet assembly-line work, especially on key components like intercooler hoses etc.
I'm happy to detail how to do this (works for both Mondeo IV and S-Max), if anyone wants.
|
Fuel economy depends on weather, traffic, speed and your driving style.
Unless you match the etsts done - which you cannot - you are unlikely to win any case.
Add in running in .. and I would say you have no chance.
You have calculated your mpg from brim to brim over several 1,000 miles?
|
Well at 2000kms the fuel consumption average for a fastish run to the UK and back to France, has given me a dramatic improvement to just over 38mpg brim to brim, on supermarket fuel with Millers additive.
Diverted into Calais on the way home to fill up at a BP station.
Has anyone any experience of the diesel additive sold by United Diesel?
Edited by Monsieur Kev on 24/08/2009 at 21:41
|
|
|
|
How can you point to the DPF as the culprit?
My xtrail (171bhp) is fitted with a DPF, and yet i get more mpg with it fitted that i did with the less powerfull 2.2 fitted to my first xtrail, with out a DPF.
Both costantly run on supermarket fuel, and no additives added.
I think you should be looking elsewere for your poor economy, perhaps a faulty injector?
Edited by xtrailman on 24/08/2009 at 23:21
|
I was never overly impressed with the MPG for my Mondeo MkIII TDCi 130PS (Euro IV non-DPF). I put it down to it being EuroIV and often not getting to operating temperature on short runs etc. Never terrible mind.
The replacement Mazda6 2.0d 143PS with DPF does more MPG without trying. I know I could get more MPG but prefer to make progress - legally just don't accelerate as slowly as I might.
So I don't think DPF makes that much if any difference.
|
The DPF does make a difference on the urban cycle, IIRC it does a forced regeneration by injecting extra fuel, ergo you will get less mpg.
IIRC the Mondeo is set up to protect the DPF so rather than having to buy a new DPF after a couple of years you are wasting more fuel, naughty in terms of the environment IMO.
Edited by kith on 25/08/2009 at 11:55
|
If the car is driven in line with handbook requirements the DPF shouldn't need to force regenerate.
If it is force regenerating on a regular basis the car is unsuitable for the type of journeys being undertaken.
My Jaguar 2.2 DPF has force regenerated twice. Once when I had just took ownership - I suspect the previous owner hadn't done enough mileage in it, the fact it flagged early for a service also suggested this.
The second time was a couple of weeks ago when I only used the car for a few very short stop start journeys over the course of a week.
My experience with A3s with and without DPF is it made little difference to MPG. The DPF one force regenerated only about 4 times.
|
@DaveyJP - I've found my Mondeo IV seems to do a 'failsafe' regeneration every 500 miles or so.
I believe this is programmed into the ECU to try and avoid the need for driver intervention (which VAG cars and some Mazda models demand).
Several times now I've done long, fast m/way journeys with revs at 2,500+ for hours at a time, and two days afterward the car will start a regeneration on my normal commute.
These regenerations tend to be fairly short in duration, compared with the forced regens on occasions when the car hasn't been driven on longer journeys.
|
|
|
|
I bought a 130TDCi Ghia new in March 2004 and that car had exceptional performance and economy. So good in fact, that when I replaced it with a 2.2 TDCi, I thought Ford had fitted the wrong engine!
I regularly brimmed the 2.0 130TDCi and did 85,000 miles in two years in it. Driven carefully, cruising at 75mph in 6th, it would return over 50 mpg no problem. I sold it to a friend three years ago and he is still getting superb economy out of it, especially on Michelin Primacy tyres.
So this Titanium X is my third Mondeo on the trot since 2004. I have got the tyres aired to fast motoring and I am now driving the car in my normal style. It will be interesting to see how the economy improves. If I can average a genuine 42mpg out of it, I would be happy considering the size and weight of the car. Now that the engine is loosening up a bit, this 2.0 with 140bhp is more than satisfactory and the gearing is much better than my last MK3, which was far too low in first and second gears.
|
On the latest tankful for an autoroute roundtrip of just 128 miles, the economy has dropped to 33.72. Will see if this is a one off due to the relative low mileage between fill ups and the possiblity I managed to get more fuel in this time somehow.
Will run the tank almost empty before the next fill up.
|
|
|
I regularly brimmed the 2.0 130TDCi and did 85 000 miles in two years in it. Driven carefully cruising at 75mph in 6th it would return over 50 mpg no problem. I sold it to a friend three years ago and he is still getting superb economy out of it especially on Michelin Primacy tyres.
Hi, with my car Mk4 2.0L diesel I can get over 50mpg on 'A' roads and I can demonstrate how the same can be achived around town as well, usually I average 30-36mpg. Some say my car is unique, however I can get above average mpg with my Mazda 2 as well. Now I've had my engine ECU remapped my fuel consumption has improved again...
Cuke
|
After putting in a double dose of United Diesels additive which I had just received, the engine started to run rough. That seemed to clear and then the trip computer showed a fuel consumption figure in the high 40's.
I had been driving the car quite hard and this may have been a factor. I reset the average consumption on the trip computer and at the end of my journey the figure was 47.8 mpg. The computer had never averaged over 40 mpg before.
I need to brim it again to make sure these figures are not false, but it appears that something has happened to improve the mpg.
Edited by Monsieur Kev on 03/10/2009 at 17:44
|
|
|
|
>>I bought a 130TDCi Ghia new in March 2004 and that car had exceptional performance and economy. So good in fact, that when I replaced it with a 2.2 TDCi, I thought Ford had fitted the wrong engine!
I regularly brimmed the 2.0 130TDCi and did 85,000 miles in two years in it. Driven carefully, cruising at 75mph in 6th, it would return over 50 mpg no problem. I sold it to a friend three years ago and he is still getting superb economy out of it, especially on Michelin Primacy tyres.
So this Titanium X is my third Mondeo on the trot since 2004. >>
My 2002 Ghia X TDCi 130 has averged nearly 47mpg over 139k miles, I have had it since new. It also pulls like train from 1500 rpm, still as strong as it ever was.
Of course the Mk IV has the PSA/Ford engine a different unit, how do you find the refinement of the Mk IV? Not noise, rather vibration and harshness? Having driven many diesels and been a passenger in many others very few if any seem to rev as crisply as mine, also I had a C4 Picasso hire car recently with the 1.6 PSA/Ford engine and that felt harsh in comparison.
|
At nearly 17K miles, the 2.0 PSA lump in my Mondy IV estate is fairly sweet. It's only a little clattery when cold in low ambient temps, and revs smoothly right round to 4500+
It does get worked hard every couple of weeks and I did a firm, early break-in process. On motorways it's excellent. My only gripe with the powertrain is that it's slightly overgeared in 4th, 5th and 6th. 4th gear especially is about 10% too long, IMHO.
NVH is certainly miles better than my old Passat PD130 ... mind you, that's not saying much :¬)
Edited by craig-pd130 on 03/10/2009 at 21:49
|
|
well im getting 41mpg from a 55 plate Tourneo 2.0 Tdci (55k miles) i do 145 miles per day/6 days a week term time on a school contract, mainly rural roads, i think thats quite good
|
As previously mentioned fuel consumption depends mostly on how and where you drive. I run Citroen XM 2.1 diesels, an engine design that is now over 20 years old and a car weighing in excess of 1.5 tons, my average consumption is well over 40 mpg with 50+ on a long journey, I regularly get in excess of 800 miles on a tankful. But, I do live in a rural area and I don't drive hard or fast.
Modern common rail engines are more fuel efficient so should be capable of a better mileage than this. Unfortunatly they are not as durable, these old Peugeot engines can do 300,000 miles with no serious problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
