focus diesel? should i ?

focus diesel? should i ?

Author
Discussion

paulmjg66

Original Poster:

2,724 posts

221 months

Saturday 15th July 2006
quotequote all
thinking of geting a focus 2.0 diesel,any body have one,any good?

DennisTheMenace

15,605 posts

275 months

Sunday 16th July 2006
quotequote all
Good cars , the 2.0 TDCI lump is a corker loads of grunt .

paulmjg66

Original Poster:

2,724 posts

221 months

Sunday 16th July 2006
quotequote all
any ideas what sort of mpg i should get ?

DennisTheMenace

15,605 posts

275 months

Monday 17th July 2006
quotequote all
I was getting about 45 out of my C-Max but i wasnt being to kind to it with the right foot

mark r skinner

16,744 posts

224 months

Monday 31st July 2006
quotequote all
I`ve just changed from a mk1 `03 TDI 90hp Focus to an `06 TDCI 115hp (mk2). Only 300miles on the clock so far, but I`ve noticed a fair amount of `turbo-lag`. Anyone else experienced this? Will the engine bed-in with a few more miles on the clock? My first Focus NEVER let me down in 32,000 miles. Hope this one`s the same.

havoc

30,850 posts

242 months

Tuesday 1st August 2006
quotequote all
The Mk2 115bhp has got the 1.6 engine (well, most...I know they HAVE been using the older 1.8 due to supply issues), and because of the lower capacity IS running a fair bit of boost, so will be more laggy.

mark r skinner

16,744 posts

224 months

Tuesday 1st August 2006
quotequote all
Hmmm, from what I can make out, mine`s got the 1.8 Duratorq TDCI engine. Having said that, it`s a grey area. All I could do was match the kerb weight in the book with the sticker on the driver`s door sill....

havoc

30,850 posts

242 months

Wednesday 2nd August 2006
quotequote all
Mark,

The 1.8TDCi shouldn't be any laggier than the old TDDi (less if anything). But any diesel can be laggy if you drive it wrong...just a matter of adjusting your style, I guess.

mark r skinner

16,744 posts

224 months

Wednesday 2nd August 2006
quotequote all
My mk1 focus tdi pulled evenly from less than 1000rpm. No lag, no "powerband", just even acceleration right through the rev-range. The mk2 tdci reminds me of my old 94 Escort turbo-diesel. Although not as bad! I`d like to see the torque curves for the three cars. I`d say the mk1 focus was easy to drive "lazily" ie would accelerate without dropping a gear.

havoc

30,850 posts

242 months

Wednesday 2nd August 2006
quotequote all
mark r skinner said:
My mk1 focus tdi pulled evenly from less than 1000rpm. No lag, no "powerband", just even acceleration right through the rev-range. The mk2 tdci reminds me of my old 94 Escort turbo-diesel. Although not as bad! I`d like to see the torque curves for the three cars. I`d say the mk1 focus was easy to drive "lazily" ie would accelerate without dropping a gear.

I was getting confused by that, but I did a bit of research:-

Mk1 Focus had the following engines:-
88bhp TDi (TDDi), I believe a legacy from the Escort. Probably what was in your Escort.
100bhp TDCi - common rail replacement (some tech share from PSA?), quieter, smoother, but not as robust and early water-pump (oil pump?) issues.
115bhp TDCi - as above but with more boost.

Your Mk2 Focus has the third engine of these three. Your Mk1 probably had engine 1, possibly engine 2. The Mk2 has more power from the same capacity, hence more boost and more lag. You will, unfortunately, need to drive around it.

Be happy though, because the 1.6 115bhp is even laggier, and the 2.0 130bhp has a notchy and uninspiring 6-speed box which is both a step forwards and backwards.

What I'm still confused by is why your old Escort (probably with engine #1) felt laggy when the Mk1 (probably with same engine) didn't...all I can assume is better engine mapping.


Hope this helps.

mark r skinner

16,744 posts

224 months

Wednesday 2nd August 2006
quotequote all
The Escort and the Focus mk 1 were both rated at 90hp but totally different engines. I`ve now had a look at the new Focus handbook and it`s defo the 1.8 duratorq tdci. Having said that, it`s got less than 300 miles on the clock, so still too early to judge it I suppose.