oh yes it goes like poo off the shovel on the motorway, and cruises happily at 90 all day, but to be honest fuel consumption even if i am carefull is poor at below 40
Clearly indicating something is wrong, a TDCi 130 can do well over 50 mpg on the m/way.
.... my 2.2 vectra diesel was much bettter in theengine dept,
The TDCi is infinitely more refined that the 2.2 Vectra, and the the 130 produces 25% more torque!
and the current 1.9 CDTI versions leave the fordsgasping
>>
Clearly a further indication that yours is playing up.
some dealers can cope with work out the orduinary some cant, think i will try a new dealer next time..
Good idea, let us know where you are, we may be able to recommend a dealer.
|
Time to report back.
I gave my BIL a lift down to get the car today and the repair has been done. We had a chat with the technical guy and it looks there was an internal electronic fault in the fuel pump.He said that hes replaced and few and in fact had a focus on the lift undergoing the same repair. The total cost for the problem, including money paid out by the warranty company is about £1800 which is completely mind blowing. The two ford dealers are totally useless in diagnosing the problem, but as the deisel mechanic said, it is very difficult to prove that theere werent other oproblems that they fixed. So getting any sort of refund would be a problem, although the warranty paid for it anyway. The guy said renault and pugeot have the most faults, toyotas are best, so buy jap cars lads.
We took it for a run and it goes well now, which is should considering the cost of repair. I could buy a decent used motor for the cost of fixing one of these.
|
Glad you got it sorted. The DDS systems used by Ford are made 'down to a price' and are not the most robust - hence the occassional component failure. Unfortunately the cost of components and the investment in staff training and diagnostic kit means that they are expense to fix when they do 'throw a wobbly'. Ford dealers are not known for high levels of customer satisfaction, so your experience does not surprise.
I just hope that the car now proves economical so that you can at least recover some small proportion of your investment!
|
Glad you got it sorted. The DDS systems used by Ford are made 'down to a price' and are not the most robust - >>
Aprilia, you make regular digs at the Delphi componentry used by Ford though present no real evidence. You mention poor connectors relative to Denso though I have not heard of one connector related problem in a diesel Mondeo or X-Type. It is clear that relative to the number of vehicles on the road and the mileages covered the Duratorq TDCi units are amogst the most reliable as well as being amongst most efficient and refined so there cannot be much wrong with the components used.
>>Ford dealers are not known for highlevels of customer satisfaction,
>>
That is simply not true!!! Although as with all dealers they vary from dealer to dealer, Ford dealers have done very well in customer satisfaction surveys over the past three or four years, ahead of MB, VW, Audi etc.
|
Cheddar
You keep going on and on about your Ford TDCI and how good it is etc etc. They are a nice car when they're working well. However they CAN be problematic - I know that from the people that repair them - they are getting plenty of business fixing these cars, and remember that there are not actually that many out there (they were only introduced a few years ago). You say you have not heard of problems with them - well I have, and take a look at the thread you are posting on!
I don't think Ford dealers have ever been particularly highly rated for their service. In Which? August 2004 they have a 'dealer rating' feature. Ford come in about 3/4 the way down the table. Admittedly they are above the likes of Fiat, Chrysler, Renault and VW - but that is damning with feint praise. You will perhaps argue that this is down to 'expectations' - i.e. you think people expect Ford to be outstanding and therefore downgrade the dealer when they are not - I would argue the opposite; I think people do not have particularly high expections of Ford, they just expect them to be average.
In terms of overall reliability of these cars, you will find that in Germany DEKRA and ADAC produce annual car reliability guides. These are extremely detailled and based on very large sample sizes (someone once posted a web link on here). The TDCI's do not come out particularly well (nor particularly badly, I have to say). They are about average for reliability. Whether or not this is acceptable to a buyer is for them to judge, but given the potentially high costs or repair it is wise to be very cautious when buying a second hand example.
Let me make it clear that I actually think the Mondeo TCDi is a very nice car. They handle well and are a pleasure to drive when running well, but like many modern CR Diesels they are using complex cutting-edge technology produced at a bargain price. If I needed to cover a large annual mileage and was planning to sell the car at 3-4 years then I would seriously consider buying a new example. I would not consider buying a used example at 3-4 years - they are not a car you want on your hands at 6+ years or so.
What is your response to the problems highlighted in this thread? There is the original poster and then another chap who's apparently had two faulty TDCI's, all with poor response from the dealers (all presumably different dealers) - are they imagining it all?
There is a poster on the BR (Screwloose) who repairs these cars professionaly and I would be very interested to hear his opinion - although I think I can guess what it would be!
|
|
Just read my own post and noticed an error - the Which? dealer survey is August 2006 (not 2004).
|
|
|
Aprilia,
>>You keep going on and on about your Ford TDCI and how good it is etc etc. >>
No I dont keep going on and on, I simply tell it as I find it. The fact is that mine has been great over 4 years and 110k miles and it still compares well with numerous other similar cars that I take the time to drive, the dealers have also been good. If I had a 2 grand CR related bill I would not be chuffed thoigh having saved IRO £4500 in fuel costs over a petrol car I cannot complain too much, further more the resale is better despite your best efforts to knock CR diesels at every opportunity.
and remember that there are not actually that many out there (they were only introduced a few years ago). >>
The 2.0 and 2.2 TDCi in the Mondeo and X-type and variants in the Transit must be one the most numerous diesel engines on the road today and also must cover a very high average annual mileage per unit. It might seem like a recent introduction however it is coming up to 5 years ago that the 2.0 TDCi 130 was introduced in the Mondeo in which time many have gone on to do stellar mileages.
>>not heard of problems with them - well I have, andtake a look at the thread you are posting on!
>>
Thats the nature of a motroing forum.
You will perhaps argue that this is down to 'expectations' -
No I wouldn't!
i.e. you think people expect Ford to beoutstanding and therefore downgrade the dealer when they are not -
No, my point about expectations relates to Seat and Skoda versus VW and Audi, Ford came into it due to the previous Galaxy being a variant of the Sharan and Alahambra.
In terms of overall reliability of these cars, you will find that in Germany DEKRA and ADAC produce annual car reliability guides. These are extremely detailled and based on very large sample sizes (someone once posted a web link on here). The TDCI's do not come out particularly well (nor particularly badly, I have to say). >>
The Focus has been at the top of the Dekra ratings on a number of occasions.
|
You seem to be extremely sensitive to any negative comment about Ford and their TDCi - are you a Ford employee?
I do not 'knock CR Diesels at every opportunity' - as stated previously I think they make a good buy for high-mileage drivers buying new. My view is that they are a much less sound buy at 3-4 years old for the private buyer. This thread seems to provide excellent supporting evidence for that view. There have been quite a few posts in 'Technical' where people have experienced CR Diesel problems and have been remedied for less than £1k. How many people want to cancel the family holiday because a fuel pump has packed up?
If you want to see some who really knocks CR Diesels then do a search for posts by 'Screwloose' - he repairs them.....
|
You seem to be extremely sensitive to any negative comment about Ford and their TDCi - are you a Ford employee?
No and frankly Aprilia I really think it is a bit much when one cannot defend a product and company from whom good service has been forthcoming without being accused of having an ulterior motive. I am simply a satisfied customer!
And I can tell you I have not always been a Ford fan, to the contrary despite my dad having various Fords, amongst other cars, when I was young I had a string of Vauxhall company cars, not because I did not have a choice, rather at the time I thought they offered the best combination of value, equipment, performance etc. However I got fed up with the dealers making a mountain out of minor problems and have found three different Ford dealers to be a revelation in comparison.
There have been quite a few posts in 'Technical' where people have experienced CR Diesel problems and have been remedied for less than £1k. How many people want to cancel the family holiday because a fuel pump has packed up?
So on that basis I would still be at least £3500 better having run a CR over 110k miles compared to a petrol car, that is assuming the petrol car did not need any unforseen repair.
If you want to see some who really knocks CR Diesels then do a search for posts by 'Screwloose' - he repairs them.....
Frankly (for the second time) Aprilia, I reckon Screwloose's posts are more balanced than yours in that regard.
Regards.
|
Why does every thread about diesels become a "petrol vs diesel" argument?!?!?!
Aprilia is correct - CR diesels make brilliant sense for a high-mileage driver who buys new and only keeps for a few years. Modern petrols seem more reliable in the long-term, and are less likely to throw up £1k worth of problems in one go.
Diesels aren't perfect, and the Ford Duratorq certainly isn't. Petrols aren't perfect either, although they're a lot simpler than CR diesels at the moment. Diesels used to last a long time because of their simplicity. Fitting a common fuel rail with huge diesel pressure (thousands of bar), at a low price, will of course compromise the long-term reliability of the injection system.
Yes, the technology is economical, because it turns the injected fuel into a fine mist rather than a squirt. It's also quieter, because the fuel is injected several times per stroke. But it isn't long lived, as we regularly hear on here.
Lastly, 110k is no mileage for any car. Old Vauxhall Petrols used to last 300k, as did PSA diesels.
|
Why does every thread about diesels become a "petrol vs diesel" argument?!?!?!>>
it is not petrol -v- diesel as such rather it is contemporary diesel economy and drivability -v- possibilty of costly CR (PD, piezzo or whatever) repairs, petrol, as the alternative, being the benchmark comparison.
My point is that if I had to pay £2000 now in CR related repairs I would still be £2500 better off than if I had had a similar 2.0 petrol car from new.
Aprilia is correct>>
Usually, I agree, though not always. ;-)
>>Diesels aren't perfect, and the Ford Duratorq certainly isn't. Petrols aren't perfect either, although they're a lot simpler than CR diesels at the moment. Diesels used to last a long time because of their simplicity. Fitting a common fuel rail with huge diesel pressure (thousands of bar), at a low price, will of course compromise the long-term reliability of the injection system. >>
The same was said about EFi, ABS etc etc, there are a lot of 5, 6 , 7 year old CR diesels on the road and very few horror stories.
Aprilia would argue that higher specific outputs will effect a diesels mechanical longevity however petrol cars are also increasing in specific output. take the VW 1.4 turbo/supercharged (TSi?) as just one example, technology in part designed as an alternative to diesel producing over 100 bhp / litre, two types of augmentation, is that going to last as long as a CR diesel engine?
|
Hi Guys
The BILs Mondeo diesel is still running OK but hes gutted at the cost. Repair prices for these are totally totally insane and to mcuh for an ordinary working guy. Aprilia is correct that these are OK if they dont go wrong. Neither BIL or I are technical but when you look under the bonnet of these mondeos there is just so much stuff under there and its all packed in really tight which I guess is one reason why repair costs are so extreme. at the end of the day a mondeo is just an average family car, its nothing special, repair costs should be far more modest. You expect to pay out on Mercedes repairs, but over £1000 for an electric fuel pump on a Ford is outrageous. The ford dealers didnt really seem to know how to fix it either its like alien technology to them.
|
Having read this thread I'm starting to wonder if I should take the TDCi badge off my Mondeo and replace it with one saying Timebomb.
Aside from
1) correct maintenance,
2) driving with mechanical sympathy,
3) not running the tank down too far and using one of the better brands of diesel (Shell Diesel Extra tends to be my preferred brand, mainly because the Shell garage I go to is one of the cheapest in the county and is also on my way home), with regular doses of Millers for good measure, to ensure the fuel system stays as clean as possible,
is there anything else that I can do to reduce the risk of this sort of expensive failure? Or is it one of these things that is a matter of luck, irrespective of how carefully I look after the car?
I'd also be interested to know whether either of the 130 or 115 variants shows a greater propensity to develop this kind of fault than the other, or whether they are about the same. These appear to me to be the most common examples and they must both be fairly numerous.
|
Having read this thread I'm starting to wonder if I should take the TDCi badge off my Mondeo and replace it with one saying Timebomb.
You clearly have not read all of the thread then.
is there anything else that I can do to reduce the risk of this sort of expensive failure? Or is it one of these things that is a matter of luck, >>
Premium diesel is a good idea, NEVER making the mistske of putting petrol in helps and, as with any failure, luck comes in to it. However as I said above it is clear that relative to the number of vehicles on the road and the mileages covered the Duratorq TDCi units are amogst the most reliable contemporary diesels as well as being amongst most efficient and refined. Aprilia acknowldges above that TDCis "are about average for reliability" not too bad for engines that are apparently so complicated and must cover significantly higher than average mileages.
|
You clearly have not read all of the thread then.
Actually, I have: the overall message I got from it was that
a) Mondeo TDCis are excellent cars (a view I would wholeheartedly endorse on the basis of 3 months and nearly 6,000 miles of ownership of one), but
b) at 3-4 years old have a tendency towards developing engine faults that seem to be both difficult to diagnose and extremely expensive to repair, and
c) the general standard of dealer service is patchy.
As I had planned to keep my car for 5+ years (and it was already 9 months old when I bought it), you'll appreciate that point b) is of particular concern to me. c) is less of a worry as the dealer I have been using seems to be very efficient.
However, if I have misunderstood what was being said, then I apologise.
|
>> You clearly have not read all of the thread then. >> Actually, I have: >>
Sorry if I was terse :-)
>>the overall message I got from it was .....................
b) at 3-4 years old have a tendency towards developing engine faults that seem to be both difficult to diagnose and extremely expensive to repair, and
That is, I believe, a misconception that has been propogated here, yes, if faults develop it can be costly and yes, faults do occur though not more readily than with other contemporary diesel. If problems appear to be common they are only in line with the popularity of the engine type in the market. The 2.0 and 2.2 TDCis are fitted to the Mondeo X-type and variants are in the Transit making them fairly numerous and they cover a higher than average annual mileage per unit.
|
Cheddar, I'm glad you've had a good result from TDCi experience, but your 'survey' covers a sample of one. Statistically I find Aprilia's evidence (concerning Ford dealers' performance as well as TDCi reliability) far more compelling. In fact this thread, with input from other posters, has been very instructive.
Glad too that A_Lees's BiL got a result, and (fingers crossed) hope that the solution has been found. Hope too that the chap recovers from his financial ordeal...
|
Cheddar, I'm glad you've had a good result from TDCi experience, but your 'survey' covers a sample of one. Statistically I find Aprilia's evidence (concerning Ford dealers' performance as well as TDCi reliability) far more compelling. >>
I have never mentioned a 'survey' though my experience goes beyond my own vehicle, Aprilia does not really present any firm evidence so I cannot see how it can be 'compelling' though even he, as I said in my last post, acknowldges that TDCis "are about average for reliability" which is not too bad at all once the fact that they cover much higher than average mileage per unit is accounted for.
|
I've had two EGR valves fail on my Mondeo TDCi since it was new. Third birthday approaching. First failure allowed it to still drive but second ground it to a halt.
Mine is a company vehicle but do not think I would buy any common rail diesel privately out of warranty. Too risky until the support network there.
|
I am with paulb on this one and am planning to sell my 53-reg TDCi Ghia X in the next six months or so. As many of you know, I got mine six months ago at a very good price. Since then I have driven it from 96k to 109k and averaged 40mpg in central London, full-throttled country-road and fast motorway driving.
I liked the Mondeo but, aside from the uncertainty of expensive repair, just didn't like the engine/gearbox combination and the fuel consumption.
Firstly, the engine has dreadful throttle response - a lot of pull from 0% to 25% of throttle but no change between 25% and 100%, regardless whether it is within the turbo zone or not.
Secondly, it requires too many up and down change. From 5mph (1st) to 80mph (4th), it requires 3 gearchange whereas my old QX could have done it all in 2nd.
Thirdly, the fuel consumption is heavily dependent on throttle opening. I did an experiment where I have driven the same 45 miles trip from Canary Wharf to Rehill in Surrey for the last few months and it returns 42 mpg if I use 10% to 40% throttle compare to 36mpg if I use 75% to 100%. Yet, I did not felt much difference in acceleration.
Lastly, it fails to match the manufacturer's combined figure. For the trip above, both figures are below the combined figure of 45mpg. My old QX 3.0 returned 26mpg on the same trip driven fairly quickly vs. quoted 23mpg.
Furthermore, my regular trip from London to Edinburgh takes 5h 45m to 6h using A1 and A68, averaging 65mph to 70 mph for the whole journey. The Mondeo returned 46mpg, about the same as what's quoted, yet the QX returns 30mpg, 30% better than quoted. Now, I know that manufacturer's quoted combined mpg figure is not accurate but I expected with similar driving style, all cars give a similar trend to whether it is above or below the combined mpg figure.
However, I dislike the throttle response from all diesel cars, including the automatic 530d I drove for a week. I prefer small throttle = small acceleration and more throttle = more acceleration.
My next car will probably be a Celica, though I can only afford a 140, or a Corolla 190. Which is better will be in another discussion thread.
|
>>> I am with paulb on this one and am planning to sell my 53-reg TDCi Ghia X in the next six months or so. >>>>
Mine has just under 46k on it and has had problems. Not sure I'd risk it out of warranty.
>>> Firstly, the engine has dreadful throttle response >>>
Apart from when I had EGR problems (and some TDCi Mondeos also need their ECU updating) the throttle response and acceleration is good. You're not going to get to 80mph in two gear changes quickly but mine could do (eventually) with no gear change... but most diesels do not rev like a petrol. You're comparing a 3.0l petrol QX with a 2.0 TDCi Mondeo. How about we compare a 4.0 Audi diesel with your old 3.0l petrol QX??? Which would be quicker I wonder. Apples and oranges comparison both times.
Finally your MPG in the Mondeo for London - Edinburgh about 50% better than the QX. And that's for each miles so a big saving? No? According to Autoroute London to Edinburgh 397 miles. So at 86p/l for petrol and 92p/l diesel. And your 46mpg for Mondeo and 30mpg for QX... The Mondeo cost about £36 in diesel where the QX cost about £51 in petrol. Each way difference is £15. If this is a regular run and you do not like diesel you have money to burn. I've got close to a real 60mpg out my Mondeo at times.
Furthermore (after the finally)... you get used to diesel torque... might be what you have not got used to. Sure an auto 530d fine to drive. Took me a bit and the Mondeo is said to need getting used to. On a test drive of a Euro III version I stalled it at the dealer. The Euro IV that I got was no problem.
|
The characteristics Gazza describes are turbo related and not TDCi or even diesel specific, if you depress the throttle perhaps 25% of the way down and hold it acceleration will build at this constant throttle opening, this is a function of the way turbo charging works, I actually like it, the feeling of being shoved forward and having to lift off slightly just to reduce the rate of acceleration.
This does mean that the first 25% of the throttle provides perhaps 75% of the performance, however on most TDs you can make indecent progress not exceeding 3000 rpm and using the wave of torque to shove you along as per above rather then revving it for every last bhp, ultimately the latter would only be slightly faster and IMO it is less satisfying, in say a winding road situation, changing down and revving hard between corners than letting the wave of torque waft you from corner to corner.
|
A_lees
That fuel pump was not really expensive at £1k. It is operating to tolerances and pressures much higher than any other piece of hydraulic equipment you are ever likely to encounter - including military aircraft hydraulics, ABS systems etc etc. A small fragment of human hair inside it would be enough to wreck it. I suspect that the reason it failed was nothing to do with the fuel used, but more likely a component failure due to it having to be made down to a price. Failure of these HP pumps is not exactly rare - the specialist breakers sometimes have them, but they sell quickly. My friend has sourced a number of these for customers - I will try to find the contact details and post here in case its of interest to others. I think he has had them for around £300-400. Of course the snag with buying a used item is that it may be faulty, or worse still shed swarf into the rest of the system and wreck it, so it really needs to be checked out by someone who knows what they are doing.
|
Gazza
I understand what you mean about the throttle response.
In a typical turbodiesel you get a non-linear response with a small lag added in - some people can live with it and others can't. I recently drove a new Vectra Diesel auto. It was absolutely superb for cruising at 60-80mph - very very quiet and engine just ticking over. Unfortunately in urban driving it was an absolute pig - the lack of linear throttle response, coupled with a bit of turbo lag and then auto-transmission lag meant that pulling out of a junction was a 'lull' followed by a sudden burst of acceleration. Not pleasant at all. I drove a Renault Megane 2.2 Diesel (6-sp) in the summer and that was bad too. The best of bunch, IMHO, are some of the Pug HDi's, but they suffer pretty bad relaibility problems and the factory changes the design every month.
In terms of fuel economy, I think the manufacturers always overestimate these days. Which? give the Mondeo an overall figure of about 42mpg.
|
I am told that the most common cause of CR injection pump failure is mis fuelling, petrol in the system breaking down the diesels natural lubricicity. Likewise PD pumps IIRC.
In a respect I suppose that this supports Aprilia's earlier point in as much as buying second hand you cannot be sure what a previous owner has done in this regard. On the otherhand I know someone who spent nearly £1000 getting diesel out of a Volvo's FI system in the days before petrol cars had smaller filler apertures. Apparently Ford will soon launch a design of filler aperture for diesels that does not allow the smaller unleaded nozzle to be inserted.
Also one hears of water in the oil filler, brake fluid in the washer, etc etc. So many problems can be down to finger trouble or brain fade.
|
The PD "pumps" (actually unit injectors) are more tolerant of mis-fuelling than CR high pressure pumps because nearly all of the moving parts are lubricated by engine oil.
Reaching for cover, from experience I would say that Bosch fuel systems are made from the very best materials and machined and hardened under closely controlled conditions. I cannot say the same for the Delphi systems used by other engine makers.
659.
|
I agree with a lot of the comments posted recently... my girlfriend's Clio DCi is an absolute pig to drive in traffic, it lurches forward, then stops dead and nearly stalls (just with light throttle movement), then when you need some heavy acceleration absolutely nothing happens for a good second! It also runs as rough as hell when cold, but apparently all this is normal.
The old Pug 205D it replaced smoked a bit on a cold start, but ran fine, had good throttle response and was a lot easier and more pleasant to drive. Economy is the only factor where the Renault wins, and as the engine design is nearly 20 years newer, this is perhaps to be expected. CR is one step forward, 2 steps back IMO. I'm dreading any fuel system problems which might arise in future, £1000 for a new Delphi pump doesn't sound appealing.
|
|
|
|
