A couple of e-mailers complained today of lousy economy from this, the 2.0 litre stopgap 115bhp DI engine (not the new 128bhp TDci). They are only getting around 35mpg. Anyone else prepared to comment on their experience? Please keep it to the 2.0 DI diesel, not the petrol engines and not other engines in other cars.
HJ
|
HJ,
Whats the difference in this stopgap engine DI engine and the new TDci apart from BHP.
Is it common rail ??
|
|
|
|
Yes, the sales info claims 47 mpg average and with my type of driving - open road and rural, I would have expected 50mpg. I have referred the matter to Ford who claim my mpg is 'within acceptable parameters'. I think I am being fobbed off. What is the claim against Ford?
|
|
|
The TDci is common rail. The DI is merely direct injection. But I think both have 16 valve heads and chain cams rather then the chain and belt system on the old Ford 1.8 diesels.
HJ
|
|
|
Just been chatting to a work colleague re his diesel Mondeo MkII Mondeo and he too is finding a similar problem. He hasn't measured exactly but says the car is no better than the 1.8 Petrol MkI he had prior to it. Also been fobbed off by Ford when the car was in for servicing and told it was "in-specification".
Surely if Ford are claiming their average consumption is a certain level and it proves not to be for a significant number or the majority of these cars then they have essentially "missold" the car have they not? If I'd shelled out my hard-earned for one of these under the misapprehension that it would do 45mpg I'd be pretty peed off if it was no better than a petrol which would have been cheaper to buy anyway...
Given the way that fuel consumption is done these days (urban/extra urban/combined from cold etc as opposed to 56/75/town hot) the figures should be pretty damn realistic - Are Ford taking the mickey here?
|
|
|
There's another thread about this higher on the page. Ford had quoted figures for the EU comparative test. It has always been possible to chip engines so they achieve their best mpg at fixed speeds such as the 56mph and 75mph of the old 'official' tests. Thats why the power delivery of some cars is somewhat less than linear. But Ford can't be held to task for quoting official results of official tests in its advertising. These figures are for comparative purposes and cannot accurately relate to the mpg each individual driver achieves.
HJ
|
Do forgive me if I'm misunderstanding you here HJ but surely the whole purpose of having fuel consumptions figures is that they at least approximately reflect what kind of consumption is likely to be acheived under normal driving conditions. The figures for my car state combined 32mpg and I get 29 with the aircon on and hard driving, 33-35mpg aircon off. These are not far off the figures that these people are claiming for their diesel Mondeos and if my handbook had quoted mid 40s to the gallon and there was nothing supposedly wrong with my car plus other people were experiencing similar consumptions I think I'd be annoyed, like these people are, and feel like I had been misled. Another thread states these figures do not improve however the car is driven.
In this case one has to wonder whether these figures were rigged somehow or whether Ford provided a "specially tuned" engine for the test? I wonder how many of these people would have bought the car if the fuel consumption figures had been combined = 35mpg?
Dan
|
|
|
|
So far we have only had three complaints.
HJ
|
|
Ford DI engines do seem to produce large 'ranges' of consumption, eg my Focus struggles to do 40 where others get 50!
|
|
|
|
if these Di engines aren't giving the correct MPG then by definition, as fuel consumption is worked out by emissions and NOT by fuel consumed, then the co2 figures must be completly out as well. so those company car drivers will be gaining on tax, driving a car thats no better for the environment or the pocket it sems.
got colleagues with these engines also, they say they arent very good on MPG. however my Vectra Di didnt loosen upo properly til 20000, and diesels tend to be tighter anyway. maybe a few more miles and an oil change will help. whats the betting that ford will change the oil spec on service for a low viscosity oil and increase mpg.
|
|
|
|
30k, Mobil 1, Michelin Energies = no significant improvement :-(
|
|
|
![2021 Vauxhall Corsa e 100kW Elite Nav Premium 50kWh 5dr Auto [7.4kWCh]](http://images.honestjohn.co.uk/imagecache/url/crop/90x60/https/cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/0b7ad552d58a0b58a961258327cb7396/30d4675e1a2564fb691b320a4fb0a137.jpg)
