Thoughts? I'm not liking the amount of integrated parts!
youtu.be/pCsWm4cCMbs
|
|
Trying to think of the last time Ford got a Diesel engine right and I'm drawing a blank...Their best were all Peugeot designs, from the Mk II Granada through the Mk II Transit and Sierra 2.3 to the current PSA 2.0 in the Mondeo. They've an awful reputation here when they do it themselves and current form on engine reliability ain't great. I certainly wouldn't touch one until it's well proven but I do agree with their idea to launch it in the Transit before it lands in any passenger cars. This will give it a good test.
Edited by SLO76 on 09/11/2017 at 20:19
|
Trying to think of the last time Ford got a Diesel engine right and I'm drawing a blank...Their best were all Peugeot designs, from the Mk II Granada through the Mk II Transit and Sierra 2.3 to the current PSA 2.0 in the Mondeo. They've an awful reputation here when they do it themselves and current form on engine reliability ain't great. I certainly wouldn't touch one until it's well proven but I do agree with their idea to launch it in the Transit before it lands in any passenger cars. This will give it a good test.
Well i'm happy enough with the 1.8tdci in my transit connect. Had it nearly 8 years now and taken the mileage from just under 60k to 133k. Never had any issue with it, just routine servicing.
Going back a little further, i used to have a mk2 fiesta diesel, and i thought that was great. That was the car which took me from Wigan to Aberdeen in 5 hours despite packing 54bhp (and that was when new, mine had over 100k when i bought it for £250). Mind you, someone did tell me that the 1.6 engine in the fiesta was actually a peugeot engine?.
|
Trying to think of the last time Ford got a Diesel engine right and I'm drawing a blank...Their best were all Peugeot designs, from the Mk II Granada through the Mk II Transit and Sierra 2.3 to the current PSA 2.0 in the Mondeo. They've an awful reputation here when they do it themselves and current form on engine reliability ain't great. I certainly wouldn't touch one until it's well proven but I do agree with their idea to launch it in the Transit before it lands in any passenger cars. This will give it a good test.
Well i'm happy enough with the 1.8tdci in my transit connect. Had it nearly 8 years now and taken the mileage from just under 60k to 133k. Never had any issue with it, just routine servicing.
Going back a little further, i used to have a mk2 fiesta diesel, and i thought that was great. That was the car which took me from Wigan to Aberdeen in 5 hours despite packing 54bhp (and that was when new, mine had over 100k when i bought it for £250). Mind you, someone did tell me that the 1.6 engine in the fiesta was actually a peugeot engine?.
The 1.6 diesel is the infamous 'diesel of doom' often featuring in tales of woe on these pages.
|
The 1.6 diesel is the infamous 'diesel of doom' often featuring in tales of woe on these pages.
The mk2 Fiesta dates from around 1983. The 1.6 Diesel fitted to this car didn't have a turbo.
Is the 'diesel of doom' not a lot more recent than this?
|
The 1.6 diesel is the infamous 'diesel of doom' often featuring in tales of woe on these pages.
The mk2 Fiesta dates from around 1983. The 1.6 Diesel fitted to this car didn't have a turbo.
Is the 'diesel of doom' not a lot more recent than this?
Yes, my fiesta was a 1985 model and it's n/a 1.6. So even if it was a peugeot engine, it would have nothing to do with the so called 'diesel of doom', which must have been at least 20 years later. When I was told it was a peugeot engine, I wasn't convinced. At the time, peugeot didn't make a car with a 1.6 diesel. But I could be wrong!
|
|
"The 1.6 diesel is the infamous 'diesel of doom' often featuring in tales of woe on these pages."
Nope, this noisy old rattler was Fords own work. Was almost bareable in the lightweight Fiesta but try in in an Orion for the full glacial (all 54bhp of it) old school Diesel effect. Pig to start on cold mornings too unless in daily use.
Edited by SLO76 on 09/11/2017 at 22:46
|
|
Sorry - I didn't comprehend all the post and thought it was a more recent model, rather than one from 30-odd years ago. I'll blame the lateness of hour for my error.
|
|
|
|
|
"Well i'm happy enough with the 1.8tdci in my transit connect. Had it nearly 8 years now and taken the mileage from just under 60k to 133k. Never had any issue with it, just routine servicing."
You've been lucky... though the older TDDi also used in the Connect was fairly robust once you got it started.
|
|
The original 1.6/1.8 IDI diesels were designed by KHD not Ford.
|
As a driving instructor my dad had every Fiesta diesel from mid 90s 1.8 non turbo to 1.4 tdci. All did well in excess of 100,000 miles with no trouble.
The achilles heal of the 1.8 was the 36000 belt change interval, it was optimistic.
What about the 2.0 and non dpf 2.2 used in the X type and millions of Mondeos?
|
What about the 2.0 and non dpf 2.2 used in the X type and millions of Mondeos?
Good point. The late 2000s Ford/PSA TDCIs are very reliable and it's a nice engine to drive. It's no ball of fire but it's quite civilised.
Had one for 3 years in a company Mondeo IV. My only criticism was that it was saddled with over-long gearing in 4th and 5th, presumably to try and help economy, and this blunted the in-gear go a bit.
|
What about the 2.0 and non dpf 2.2 used in the X type and millions of Mondeos?
Good point. The late 2000s Ford/PSA TDCIs are very reliable and it's a nice engine to drive. It's no ball of fire but it's quite civilised.
Had one for 3 years in a company Mondeo IV. My only criticism was that it was saddled with over-long gearing in 4th and 5th, presumably to try and help economy, and this blunted the in-gear go a bit.
Different engines. The 2.0 & 2.2 used in the X-Type and Mk 3 Mondeo are completely different to the PSA 2.0/2.2 used in the Mk 4 Mondeo.
|
"Different engines. The 2.0 & 2.2 used in the X-Type and Mk 3 Mondeo are completely different to the PSA 2.0/2.2 used in the Mk 4 Mondeo."
Was about to say. The Ford Puma diesel wasn't a good engine, with common timing chain, turbo, EGR and injector problems. They were often total money pits. Though they were in general quite pleasant to drive with bags of torque. For every punter you meet who complained of nonstop problems you'd always meet another with one that ran to 200k without issue. Good maintenance is key but they are still far more prone to problems than the 2.0/2.2 PSA motors that replaced them.
I should clarify my claims on the older 1753cc Endura motors. These were quite simple and robust but they were slow and inefficient compared to rivals, the electrical system wasn't up to the job of turning a cold diesel motor over either. Every morning I'd go round my yard starting cars and checking them over in prep for any test drives and you could almost guarantee that anything with the old Endura under the hood would need jumped, particularly Sierras and Mondeos. Peugeot's XUD 1800's and 1900's were a light year ahead. The Mk V Escort in particular with the N/A 1800 was pig slow and struggled to beat 40mpg as your foot was permanently on the floor. Why anyone bought one of these over a 306 1.9 diesel I'll never know.,
Edited by SLO76 on 10/11/2017 at 10:53
|
|
2009 S-Max 2.0 TDCi, five years. No problems at all.
|
|
|
|
|
It seems every engine has it's fans and detractors, often with merit in either case.
As for my experience, i've had over 200k miles of reliable motoring with a Land Rover TD5 engine including heavy towing, I know several people with TD5s that have made it to 300k, not bad for a 2.5. The rest of the drivetrain does get worn but i'm talking about the engine itself. .. others have had nightmares with injectors, headgasket failure, but that crop seems to have run its course now given that the last td5s were made in about 2007.. As I write this it occurs to me the td5s that have had a harder life seem to last longer than those on school runs!
|
|
|
|
