Mk3 2.2 TDCI Mondeo or Mk4 2 litre?
Discussion
Been wondering what to buy to undertake a 140 mile per day commute along dual carriageway and m/way and thought that a Mondeo would do the job. Looking locally at cheaper cars (rather than buying new and instantly reducing the value massively by putting loads of miles on it) I have come across a 60,000 mile 2007 2.2 TDCI Mk3, the top spec Titanium X model...or a little but more buys higher mileage Mk4 (about 100K miles) 2 litre, from 2008, again in Titanium X spec.
The Mk3 does seem to have a bit of a rep for becoming a money pit as it gets older, but I am thinking that buying one with 60K miles and then just going up and down the motorway on it might mean its a while before they all manifest? Or am I being overly optimistic!!
Alternatively the Mk4 seems to have less issues and again, is capable of huge miles, but obviously starts with 40K miles more and is also I suspect a fair bit slower than the Mk3 2.2, which is basically the ST TDCI model in non sporty kit.
What would your option be?
The Mk3 does seem to have a bit of a rep for becoming a money pit as it gets older, but I am thinking that buying one with 60K miles and then just going up and down the motorway on it might mean its a while before they all manifest? Or am I being overly optimistic!!
Alternatively the Mk4 seems to have less issues and again, is capable of huge miles, but obviously starts with 40K miles more and is also I suspect a fair bit slower than the Mk3 2.2, which is basically the ST TDCI model in non sporty kit.
What would your option be?
My 55 plate 2.2 TDCi is on 217k now - I use it to do 110 miles a day, mostly motorway. It's a great commute car - I get 55mpg and it's plenty quick enough too. It does have a full Ford service history and is serviced every 12.5k on the dot.
Other than a new clutch and flywheel at 168K it's not been expensive to maintain at all. I did refresh the suspension around the same time as the clutch with Bilstein B6 dampers, Eibach springs and OEM bushes all round which transformed the car - it'll be good suspension wise now for the foreseeable life of the car.
Other than a new clutch and flywheel at 168K it's not been expensive to maintain at all. I did refresh the suspension around the same time as the clutch with Bilstein B6 dampers, Eibach springs and OEM bushes all round which transformed the car - it'll be good suspension wise now for the foreseeable life of the car.
Just as above, i replaced the DMF and clutch on my last mk3 diesel at 168.000 miles. I sold that car with a mileage of 240.000 miles. It was still flying through its MOTs and its emissions were the same as the day it left the factory.
It always amuses me that people can be surprised that a ten year old car may need money spending on it.
On the flip side the mk4 is a more modern and advanced car. The 2008 models are ok, but not a patch on the later mk4.5
It always amuses me that people can be surprised that a ten year old car may need money spending on it.
On the flip side the mk4 is a more modern and advanced car. The 2008 models are ok, but not a patch on the later mk4.5
Raynkar said:
Just as above, i replaced the DMF and clutch on my last mk3 diesel at 168.000 miles. I sold that car with a mileage of 240.000 miles. It was still flying through its MOTs and its emissions were the same as the day it left the factory.
It always amuses me that people can be surprised that a ten year old car may need money spending on it.
On the flip side the mk4 is a more modern and advanced car. The 2008 models are ok, but not a patch on the later mk4.5
I own a 11 year old car and 17 year old car so spending money on it isn't an issue, however, there's spending money and spending a grand or more on a DMF on a car which cost only £1500 or so to start with. There are many stories of the DMF / EGR etc going on these Mk3s at much less than 168,000 miles.It always amuses me that people can be surprised that a ten year old car may need money spending on it.
On the flip side the mk4 is a more modern and advanced car. The 2008 models are ok, but not a patch on the later mk4.5
Out of interest, why is the Mk4.5 so much better? It was just a facelift wasn't it?
greenarrow said:
Out of interest, why is the Mk4.5 so much better? It was just a facelift wasn't it?
AFAIK just a minor facelift with the addition of daytime running lights and very minor interior changes.A couple of engines got different outputs, for example the 2.2 went from 175ps to 200ps - but from what I've heard many people prefer the 175ps version anyway. Same with the 2.0 140/163 - many people prefer the 140 version.
The 2.0 (140) and 2.2 (175) are the best for tuning/chipping, if that's your thing.
I have a Mk4 Tit-X 2.2 (175ps) and have owned a few Mk3 models as well.
A high-spec and well looked after Mk3 would still be a lovely car to own. They're nice to drive with refined handling and a nice amount of driver "feel".
The Mk4 is big. Too big. Compared to other vehicles of the same size (a cruise ship for example) it still handles nicely, but personally I found the Mk3 big enough.
The Mk4 still has hydraulic power steering which most competitors don't - that's a positive thing IMO.
The seats in Titanium/Titanium-X models are very comfortable. Lower models are OK, but not great. I'm very fussy about driving position and seat comfort, and my Tit-X seats are fantastic - in fact that's the main reason I bought it.
Overall the Mk4 feels more modern, refined and grown up. But still involving to drive.
I drove a Mk4 2.0 (140) for a while and thought the engine was fairly nice. Mondeo diesels aren't competitive with German diesels - not even in the same league unfortunately - but if your expectations aren't too high then the 2.0 (140) suits the car well, is smooth enough and isn't awful on fuel.
The 2.2 feels fast (400Nm torque) but it seriously guzzles diesel. I have a commute with lots of traffic but in my previous Passat 2.0 TDI (140) DSG I still managed 55mpg most days. In the same conditions I've only once managed as "high" as 43mpg in the Mondeo - normal is more like 36mpg. I've had a couple of 30mpg tanks which is simply not acceptable. Some owners claim they get 50mpg+ from mixed driving in their 2.2 but that's BS - the vast majority of owners say 35-40mpg is normal.
Reliability... I'd say the Mk4 is slightly better, but not by much. They both will have occasional issues.
The Mk3 diesels don't have a DPF, so one less thing to go wrong. But with a 140 mile commute you are very unlikely to experience DPF issues anyway (and I like being able to put my foot down without generating a black cloud).
AFAIK both the Mk3 and Mk4 diesels have very expensive DMFs, so if your clutch goes be prepared for a big bill. But this is the case with many modern cars I believe.
Overall... I don't think I would want another diesel Mondeo. But if I was buying one, then I prefer the Mk4. And the 2.0 (140) is a decent engine if it's fast enough for you.
On the other hand if I saw a bargain of a Mk3 in high spec and excellent condition, I would be tempted.
Edited by R E S T E C P on Tuesday 7th February 16:17
Gassing Station | Ford | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff