Looking for a new company car and see that Ford at about to bring out a Euro iv compliant Mondeo TDCI 130 bhp. However rather than better emissions and economy its worse - 159g/km against 154g/km and combined mpg of 39.2 against 48.7. Have Ford rushed this to market - I\'m not aware of any other manufacturers who have produced euro iv complaint engines with worse figures.
I see they have yet to announce any other plans to market models with compliant engines - not even the C-Max which has a brand new 2.0 engine in it. Any explanations?
I am now thinking of a Mazda 6 which is about to be made complaint but can\'t obtain any data on it. Anyone who has any information on the if the economy is affected would be appreciated.
|
Hi Simon,
Where have you got your figures from? Ford have not officially released the economy figures for the Euro IV engines yet but 39.2mpg is definitely not correct. There will be very little (if any) difference mpg-wise between the current III and the new IV emission control systems.
39.2 is, however, the combined mpg figure for the new 1.8 direct injection petrol engine - have you confused the figures? Ford have very sensibly (?) marked the new petrol engine as DISI in paperwork to nicely confuse everyone.
Regarding the C-MAX, as far as I am aware all engines will be Euro IV compliant from launch.
Dan J
|
Dan
Got the figures from fleet news who were testing the current model. C-Max wil not be euro IV complaint according to the Ford information service as of Friday.
Simon
|
|
Cheers Simon - I'll check Fleet News when I'm back at work on Monday. They'll be getting a serious hiding if they've got information like that wrong...
|
Excuse my ignorance, but what is "Euro iv"?
Splodgeface
|
|
Simon, you're completely right about the C-MAX - probed around at work, C-MAX diesels are all Euro III on release. IV is of course in the pipeline but as it is expected most sales will be private, concentration was placed on getting the main fleet vehicle, i.e. Mondeo compliant first.
Regarding the Mondeo Euro IV130PS diesel engine: The Stage IV engine is in exactly the same tax band as the current Stage III engine, the MPG figures of 39.2 would simply be unachievable with that level of CO2. Figures are here but they have not been officially released but will be shortly. As I suspected, MPG of the Stage IV 130PS diesel are virtually identical to the current III. Fleet news it would appear have mistakenly quoted the wrong figure...
|
The new Euro IV engine's emissions are 159g/km for CO2 which is 5g/km higher than the Euro III. The whole point of Euro IV though is reducing NO2 emissions and reducing the size of the particles of unburnt fuel. So it has to be a trade off --- I don't think the engine uses a particulate trap like others (e.g. Fiat/GM).
Checking the Ford German site, the emission/economy figures show that the combined mpg figure will be about 47 (against 48.7) for a 4/5 door on 16" tyres. This is based on a figure of 6 litre/km.
As for tax though, the BIK for the EIV will be 15% this year but 17% next year. That compares with 18% and 19% for the Euro III engine (154g/km gets rounded down).
Rob
P.S. Toyota's D-CAT engine's emissions for CO2 are higher than the D-4D.
|
Found Fleet News and read the article. Sure enough it suggests 39.2mpg - showed it to a couple of people who were, shall we say, somewhat unhappy. I have a feeling they'll shortly be getting a telephone call...
The diesel will NOT be doing 39.2 to the gallon. Looking outside technicals and actual facts and figures, no company is going to design and manufacture a more costly diesel engined car that produces identical consumption figures to its petrol model.
|
Thanks Dan, I didn't really believe what I was reading - great to get some inside knowledge.
I've narrowed my company car choice for a EIV diesel estate down to a Mondeo 130ps LX or a Mazda 6 120ps. Whilst the official consumption figures favour the Mondeo I've read a number of tests that suggests in the real world they will be almost identical. The OTR prices, against which my tax bill is calucalted are miles apart at £17,950 (Ford) vs £15,595 (6). Any views as to if its worth paying more for the Ford?
I find it puzzling that new ranges of diesel engines are being introduced by manufacturers that are not EIV compliant (such as the Ford/PSA engines in the C-MAX) and Ford with the Mondeo continue to produce both EIII and EIV variants. I appreciate they are not required until 2005 but surely it pays to be ahead of the game?
|
No problem Simon - I try not to broadcast it too often as I like to be viewed as impartial but I do work for Ford.
It's funny how things happen because I went through some paperwork this morning and sure enough the original plan had been to release the C-MAX as Euro IV. You're completely right though (and I learnt something there!) as they're being released as III. The reason for this, as I mentioned earlier, is that this vehicle is initially being targeted at private buyers. This may answer your last question as well - the extra equipment to make a car Euro IV compliant adds on extra cost to a car, I don't have the figures in front of me as I am at home now but the prices we have for the IV cars differ by a good few hundred quid. Now at the end of the day only company car users care about this - rental, contract hire and private buyers are still going to be in the same road fund licence bracket so couldn't care less and would rather pay less for the car or less per month. In which case if you see why both are still available as if you're paying out of your own pocket for a Mondeo (or you're a rental company who is buying literally thousands of cars) you won't want to pay the extra 500 quid (or whatever) per car! I'm guessing with the C-MAX the decision was made to get an excellent (but Euro III) engine onto the market rather than rush a Euro IV engine through that perhaps costwise would harm sales and also perhaps is not ready (Ford stuffed up the original release of the TDCi Mondeo engine though it's dandy now, brilliant in fact).
As for the difference between the two - the Mondeo is, these days, no longer a "cheap" fleet car as perhaps it once was. Ford has really tried to move it upmarket and to a big extent has succeeded. The new "facelift" 2004 Mondeo is a vast improvement on an already good car. I think comments about build quality and material are crap, you won't notice the difference - the old one was good. What they have done though is to improve what is inside the car - even the LX has electronic air conditioning (temperature controlled Zetec upwards), has improved stereo, nicer looking dash etc. The Mazda6 is an amazing car, for the price unbelievable - but what I would do is have a sit in both. The Mazda, whilst no doubt a beautiful car (better looking in my opinion than the Mondeo), doesn't feel half as nice inside in my opinion as the Mondeo. Out on the country lanes the Mondeo's handling is also better (though not significantly). If I was a private buyer I wouldn't hesitate to go for the Mazda given the price difference, but for the few quid difference per month that you'll pay as tax I'd give it some serious thought!
Hope at least some of that was of help! All t'best - Dan J
|
As a company car? Has to be the Mondeo. I believe it still has best handling/ride/enjoyment/practicality mix in the sector with good build quality. I've had a TDCi Ghia estate on the company - delivered end of June. Pre-facelift but with the 6 speed box. 60 mile commute round trip every day on B, A roads, some dual, and motorway (M4 junction 12 to 7 = start/start most mornings) gives around 46/47 mpg (brim to brim method - trip computer is about 6 mpg optimistic) with 5,000 miles currently on the clock.
I had chosen the car at the beginning of the year. Needed a big car with big boot so usual suspects (A4 Avant etc.) where no good. There would have been the normal delays in ordering the car through the lease company but delivery was promised for end of March, then beginning May, then middle of May finally turning up End of June. So don't know what happened there. Lease company reported "problems at Ford". Could this have been TDCi engine problems being resolved? I don't know.
75 mph at 2000 rpm in 6th is relaxed on the motorway but still plenty of pull without having to drop down a gear. 5th pulls 30 mph/1000 rpm and is extremely flexible.
Have read the various posts about engine/fuel pump/filter problems and have not suffered from any of this. Like Splodgeface's - it's a good 'en.
|
Anyone got any information on when a euro IV complaint version of the C-MAX will be available? I've seen a Ford advert in a What Car supplement that states early 2004 but Ford's information department don'yt have any knowledge of this. Dan J can you help?
Thanks
|
|
|
|
