First Australian Road Test Mondeo

[csv8]

How about Cortina ??? old name but known

[kevino]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

Personally I think my Falcon is better equipped with its digital speedo which allows accurate speeds to be maintained to avoid any risk of speed camera fines. Even the titanium model doesn't have a digital speedo which I couldnt do without anymore (only because of those cameras).

Who needs blind-spot detection, pedestrian detection with auto-stop, enhanced Park Assist and lane departure warning when you are concentrating on your driving and know how to park?

Yes what happens when that stuff breaks down how much to fix. How much to fix after a low speed collision damages all the sensors. Are Ford liable in an accident if ''lane departure warning'' system fails.
I will be buying a car without all these fancy problems sorry safety features.

[Binny]

I love some of the comments under the drive review saying they were interested in one but aren't now due to what the review says. FFS the review is one persons opinion just go and test drive one and make your own mind up.
FWIW Caradvice and TMR have far more comprehensive reviews on their sites and are generally more praising of it.

[Top_Ghia]

Originally Posted by Brazen

I'm not really a diesel person but it is pretty compelling in the Mondeo with 400nm of torque, a higher tow rating and 5.1litre combined fuel consumption. Has there been a lot of issues with the dual clutch? Is it a wet or dry clutch?

It's the wet clutch version which is fine. It gets an oil change every 60,000km which adds a bit to the service cost but it's it works very well.
But they still need to expand the petrol wagon range.

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by NX74205

It is, but considering that this is a brand new car whose engine probably haven't even been run in properly yet, I think that's something that'll improve over time.



Yeah, I agree. I love the car, but I just wish that it looked a bit more like the UK spec Titanium - 19" 5 twin spoke rims, chrome grille, no bodykit.

image



Why? Fusion means nothing to Australia. It's too American. Besides, while the Fusion and the Mondeo share the same platform and the same panels, they are quite different cars - Fusion is sedan only, Mondeo is hatch and wagon only; and there are features (such as LED headlamps, panoramic sunroof) that you can get in a Mondeo but you can't in any Fusion.

The MA-MC series Mondeos are very decent cars, good to drive, and generally well built. Those who say the Mondeo name is tainted are living in the past.

Hopefully they might offer a rim option package for the Titanium.

[cycle myth]

I owned a 2013 Zetec Hatch EcoBoost.

Excellent car.

The new car has a later version of the engine and drivetrain.

I was averaging 8.2 l / 100 km (on the same drive my Kuga diesel was getting 7.5).

This review is just a first quick blast, would be good to see a longer term drive and comparison to Mazda 6 and Hyundai.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by new2ford

If you're looking at interior space, features and excellent fuel economy, the alternative is not Subaru but Skoda Superb or even Octavia.

A couple of disappointing comments in those reviews but overall I think everybody will find Mondeo is an excellent car - if Ford pulls everything off right, which is an unknown quantity!

Yes I've checked out the Octavia, Skodas are such good value here the wagon starts at under 24k. They have a new AWD Octavia Scout which I've only sat in but very impressed. They allow a lot of options across the range including a $1690 bargain full panoramic sunroof. The Octavia gets rave reviews and I know someone who owns the petrol is averaging mid 5s in mixed driving. I prefer the larger size of the Mondeo though.

The bigger current Superb is getting on a bit but the new one looks very nice.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

To be a success how many do you guys think they will have to sell a month?

enough to make a profit. end of.

[Brazen]

They will definitely would want an uptick in volume, ford dealers desperately need it.

I think they will pursue the Telstra contract with it. They have petrol in the base Ambiente and Ford Aus has specified self levelling rear suspensions on the wagons. I believe there was an issue with rear squat with the old Mondeo wagons in fleet trials.

[Adamz Ghia]

Originally Posted by prydey

enough to make a profit. end of.

Bit simplistic. Profits are a factor, but if Ford have the potential to sell 1000 a month but only sell 500, even if they profit from that that is not a success. I wouldn't say Mondeo will beat Camry but it needs to improve from where it is now. The point of business is to make as much profit as you can, there is no point where a company goes 'we've made enough profit this month, we're successful', especially if there is more money to be made.

[Sprintey]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

To be a success how many do you guys think they will have to sell a month?

More than the 59 sold Australia-wide last month. More than the Malibu. Even the Car Advice review says the aim of it is not about volume but I'd reckon they'd love to top the 400-500 the Mazda 6 gets a month on release. For ride/handling/image/resale the Mazda 6 is the car to top. The Outback is re-invigorated as well.

Good to see it has torque converter auto on the petrols.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by Brazen

I'm not really a diesel person but it is pretty compelling in the Mondeo with 400nm of torque, a higher tow rating and 5.1litre combined fuel consumption. Has there been a lot of issues with the dual clutch? Is it a wet or dry clutch?

The fuel economy is a good, but just how well will the diesel perform in the real world with 400 Nm compared to the 345 Nm petrol engined Mondeo's?
Using Fords claimed figures (132 kW @ 3500 & 400 Nm 2000-2500 rpm) lets look at how much power the diesel apparently has at 2000 rpm (57.14% of max power revs).
400 Nm X 2000/9549.3 = 83.77 killowatts.

Now using Fords figures for the Ecotec engines (177 kW @ 5400 & 345 Nm 2300-4900 rpm & 149 kW @ 5400/345 Nm 2700-3500 rpm) lets see how much power that amounts to at 57.14% of their maximum power revs (3085.56 rpm).

345 Nm X 3085.56 rpm/9549.3 = 111.47 kW which is a considerable 33% more power at the same 57.14% of their higher maximum power revs.

I think the point to keep in mind is that a high revving motor needs less torque than a low revving motor to do the same job, because it can use lower gearing for the same road speed, and with lower gearing you get more torque multiplication.
So if both petrol and diesel engines were geared to deliver the same road speed at 57% of their maximum power revs (with the same tyres and wheels fitted), then the petrol engines would have 33% more torque at the wheels. Well maybe not exactly 33%, because in the real world both would suffer frictional losses and who knows exactly how much, but I trust you see the point that I'm trying to make.

[Brazen]

The market is definitely trending back towards petrol as they become much more efficient - especially with the tech in something like the Ecoboost. Diesel in passenger vehicles sales fell 17.8% last year and there double digit declines the year before. I wouldn't be surprised if diesel will be a lower proportion of overall Mondeo sales than they were expecting - which isn't good for the wagon as Ford Australia is only importing diesel in Trend and Titanium.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Adamz Ghia

Bit simplistic. Profits are a factor, but if Ford have the potential to sell 1000 a month but only sell 500, even if they profit from that that is not a success. I wouldn't say Mondeo will beat Camry but it needs to improve from where it is now. The point of business is to make as much profit as you can, there is no point where a company goes 'we've made enough profit this month, we're successful', especially if there is more money to be made.

of course they will try to sell as many as they can. no company has a target, that once reached, they rest easy. thats not what i was saying.

experts on here will judge its success by its volume compared to the competition. ford won't. no doubt they will be keen to see it do well, but at the end of the day, the bottom line is what matters.

[Binny]

Originally Posted by 2242100

The fuel economy is a good, but just how well will the diesel perform in the real world with 400 Nm compared to the 345 Nm petrol engined Mondeo's?
Using Fords claimed figures (132 kW @ 3500 & 400 Nm 2000-2500 rpm) lets look at how much power the diesel apparently has at 2000 rpm (57.14% of max power revs).
400 Nm X 2000/9549.3 = 83.77 killowatts.

Now using Fords figures for the Ecotec engines (177 kW @ 5400 & 345 Nm 2300-4900 rpm & 149 kW @ 5400/345 Nm 2700-3500 rpm) lets see how much power that amounts to at 57.14% of their maximum power revs (3085.56 rpm).

345 Nm X 3085.56 rpm/9549.3 = 111.47 kW which is a considerable 33% more power at the same 57.14% of their higher maximum power revs.

I think the point to keep in mind is that a high revving motor needs less torque than a low revving motor to do the same job, because it can use lower gearing for the same road speed, and with lower gearing you get more torque multiplication.
So if both petrol and diesel engines were geared to deliver the same road speed at 57% of their maximum power revs (with the same tyres and wheels fitted), then the petrol engines would have 33% more torque at the wheels. Well maybe not exactly 33%, because in the real world both would suffer frictional losses and who knows exactly how much, but I trust you see the point that I'm trying to make.

CA and TMR both think the diesel performs very well in the real world.

CA
"Perhaps a more pleasant option — and, for full disclosure, I rarely recommend diesels — is the 2.0-litre TDCi oiler, which makes 132kW and 400Nm (from 2000-2500rpm). It’s beautifully refined and free of clatter and oozing punch. It’s too expensive over the petrol to be easily justified, however.
"

TMR
"Not unsurprisingly, we came away impressed most with the TDCI diesel.

Once warm, it is a very smooth and responsive unit, will effortlessly power over hills (and will, undoubtedly, be untroubled by the weight of a family-sized load) and has no trouble getting quickly ‘out and around' when overtaking."

When I was deciding between petrol and diesel the choice was easy because the 2.3 petrol wasn't much chop. I honestly don't know which I would choose between the diesel and ecoboost. I would drive them both and decide if the extra for the diesel is worth it.
I usually buy 2-3 year old cars though so not such a price difference by then.

[DFB FGXR6]

In terms of volume, its going to take a few years before the Mondeo's success can be measured.

Once the Camry becomes a import like the rest of the market, fleets and governments will be less compelled to buy the "local". Once Falcon is finished, those sales will migrate to the Mondeo.

Ford have a chance to build some momentum with the Mondeo over the next couple of years. Build its reputation and pitch the Wagon to fleets. The Diesel wagon will give Ford a strong point of difference to fleet, something that Toyota and Holden will fail to match.

So over the next two years, I can sales of Mondeo slowly increasing as the above factors play out.

[brismike]

IMHO they should have changed the name to Fusion. Mondeo is such a ghey sounding name. Not that I will ever buy one. Sorry Ford.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by Binny

CA and TMR both think the diesel performs very well in the real world.

CA
"Perhaps a more pleasant option — and, for full disclosure, I rarely recommend diesels — is the 2.0-litre TDCi oiler, which makes 132kW and 400Nm (from 2000-2500rpm). It’s beautifully refined and free of clatter and oozing punch. It’s too expensive over the petrol to be easily justified, however.
"

TMR
"Not unsurprisingly, we came away impressed most with the TDCI diesel.

Once warm, it is a very smooth and responsive unit, will effortlessly power over hills (and will, undoubtedly, be untroubled by the weight of a family-sized load) and has no trouble getting quickly ‘out and around' when overtaking."

When I was deciding between petrol and diesel the choice was easy because the 2.3 petrol wasn't much chop. I honestly don't know which I would choose between the diesel and ecoboost. I would drive them both and decide if the extra for the diesel is worth it.
I usually buy 2-3 year old cars though so not such a price difference by then.

I'm certainly not knocking the diesel, I'd expect a lot of owners to be quite happy with it's performance, but I was highlighting the problem that can arise when torque numbers are compared. If the diesel had double the revs and half the torque, it would have exactly the same power and should be able to perform equally to the current engine in the real world (assuming equal transmission losses for both).
So for example if the gearing on the current engine reduces the engines flywheel speed from 2000 rpm to 500 rpm at the wheels, which is a quarter of the flywheel revs, then the engines 400 Nm of flywheel torque (ie turning force) multiplies to 1600 Nm at the wheels (4 X 400) less transmission losses. If the engine had half the torque and double the revs and it was geared to still have the same 500 rpm wheel speed, then it would still end up with the same 1600 Nm at the wheels (less transmission losses). That's because the wheel speed is reduced to one eighth of the flywheel revs and engine torque is multiplied by 8. ie. 200 Nm X 8 = 1600 Nm at the wheels at the same 500 wheel rpm.
All very basic I know, but I think a lot of people just don't think it through.
IMO torque comparisons between engines can be pretty useless, unless the engines have similar maximum revs. Where possible I use the torque data to work out how much power engines produce at the same percentage point of their maximum revs, to me power is the measure of an engines working ability.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by Brazen

The bigger current Superb is getting on a bit but the new one looks very nice.

The Superb is the direct equivalent of the Mondeo so it will be interesting to see the comparative specs of the new Superb.

[Sprintey]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

Once Falcon is finished, those sales will migrate to the Mondeo.

I'm not so sure of that. The mid size premium/premium SUV market is going gangbusters at present and how many of these are former top end Falcon, Territory and Commodore buyers? Think Mercedes, Audi, BMW and C Class (sales records), A4 (doing well) and 3 / 4 Series... X3, X5 are the only place you will get Territory ride and handling in an SUV.

Sales may just as easily migrate to Commodore, as the 5:1 selling ratio may also show. Those that support Australian and RWD have little choice, and luckily the VF is a very good car, particularly in 6 cylinder Calais form.

And then, for a Falcon buyer, what's to say they will buy Ford's mid size FWD when Mazda has a great mid size FWD; Subaru has a very well equipped and priced midsize AWD wagon in the Outback that's up 2000+ units on this time last year, a Liberty mid size AWD sedan doing strongly too; Toyota has the all-conquering mid size FWD at a cheaper price, Skoda have a selection of wagons, the Passat mid size FWD also exists and VW is increasing sales and image in the market despite their transmissions. New Passat on the way too. The Malibu and Accord exist in this market as does the slightly smaller Kizashi - it's very crowded.

Any Falcon buyers left who will trade in on an SUV like everyone else has, won't look at a mid size FWD anyway.

For Falcon buyers there's a lot more choice out there than Mondeo - and for private buyers that were skewed to the turbo 6 and V8, there's Mustang, SS, HSV, performance Germans, Jaguar. I can't see the Falcon ute buyers plumbing for a Mondeo.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by 2242100

I'm certainly not knocking the diesel, I'd expect a lot of owners to be quite happy with it's performance, but I was highlighting the problem that can arise when torque numbers are compared. If the diesel had double the revs and half the torque, it would have exactly the same power and should be able to perform equally in the real world (assuming equal transmission losses for both).
So for example if the gearing on the current engine reduces the engines flywheel speed from 2000 rpm to 500 rpm at the wheels, which is a quarter of the flywheel revs, then the engines 400 Nm of flywheel torque multiplies to 1600 Nm at the wheels (4 X 400) less transmission losses.
Half the torque at double the revs still ends up 1600 Nm at the wheels (less transmission losses) because the wheel speed is reduced to one eighth of the flywheel revs and we have 200 Nm X 8 = 1600 Nm at the wheels at the same road speed.
All very basic I know, but a lot of people don't think it through I think.
IMO torque comparisons between engines can be pretty useless unless the engines have similar rev ranges. Where possible I use the torque data to work out how much power engines produce at the same percent of their maximum revs, to me power is the measure of an engines working ability.

i'm assuming the diesel and petrol, since they are using the same transmission, will be geared the same?

[eb2fairmont]

Originally Posted by CyberWasp

To be a success how many do you guys think they will have to sell a month?

More than falcon, but I think the falcon might still have the legs on it for the foreseeable future.

[2242100]

Originally Posted by prydey

i'm assuming the diesel and petrol, since they are using the same transmission, will be geared the same?

I looked at the specs on the Ford website and I didn't see any gearing data, also I don't know the maximum revs of the engines, but I'd be surprised if the maximum revs of the petrol engines weren't a lot higher.
Max power at 5300 & 5400 rpm for the petrol engines and 3500 rpm for the diesel.

With that in mind, I'm thinking that at least the final drive ratios might be different.

[Top_Ghia]

Originally Posted by prydey

i'm assuming the diesel and petrol, since they are using the same transmission, will be geared the same?

Wrong. Different transmissions. Petrol is standard torque converter auto, diesel is wet duel clutch auto. Very different.

[1TUFFUTE]

I had a bit of a look and can't find anything on problems with the new powershift in the mondeos. Unlike early on with them and even the vw version.

But certainly agree with the sentiments about diesels slowly loosing their appeal. From memory Mazda(6) had an even lowwer projected diesel market split then what ford quoted above.

[NX74205]

Originally Posted by kevino

Are Ford liable in an accident if ''lane departure warning'' system fails.

Now that's just silly. Irrespective of whatever driver aids are available, the driver has ultimate responsibility, and thus liability, for any accidents that they cause.

I welcome these driver aids, I think they're a great addition and much needed in this day and age to fix or prevent drivers' ****-ups which, believe it or not, happens. No driver is perfect. If there is a system that can help prevent or minimise collisions due to driver error, then there's no reason not to include them because some people like to live in the past.

Originally Posted by Sprintey

For Falcon buyers there's a lot more choice out there than Mondeo - and for private buyers that were skewed to the turbo 6 and V8, there's Mustang, SS, HSV, performance Germans, Jaguar. I can't see the Falcon ute buyers plumbing for a Mondeo.

It's quite true that the Mondeo doesn't totally replace the Falcon - there are some Falcons (such as the ute, EcoLPi and XR8) that are simply irreplaceable with anything else in the Ford range anywhere in the world. But outside of all of that, I don't see why the Mondeo can't win over Falcon sales, such as it is at the moment.

What you say is quite right: that there is a lot of choice out there. But that would stand true today even while the Falcon still exists - there are a lot of choices out there that are cheaper and more feature packed than the Falcon for people that buy cars dispassionately. Toyota Camry, Mazda 6, Hyundai Sonata, Subaru Liberty etc are just as much competitors of the Falcon and Commodore as they are of the Mondeo.

But just as there are people that will buy Falcon because it's a Falcon, so will there be people, like myself, who will buy Mondeo over its competitors simply because it's a Ford.

[new2ford]

Caradvice review:

http://www.caradvice.com.au/347430/2...tch-and-wagon/

Caradvice has quietly snuck up over recent years to be imho pretty much the best car review site (or mags) around. It also helps not having some egotistical pumped up journalists trying to big note themselves! These guys obviously know a lot about cars, but in a quiet, impartial way without bias.

[DJM83]

Originally Posted by csv8

fourI6: Poms don't need rear air conditioning!!!!!!!

Not many euros do. My old focus and my ST doesn't have it. It's never bothered me at all.

[new2ford]

Originally Posted by DJM83

Not many euros do. My old focus and my ST doesn't have it. It's never bothered me at all.

From direct experience, VAG group cars and BMW, comprising a large proportion of the European car fleet, have rear a/c outlets.

In central Europe it gets very hot in summer and in winter there's a rather significant need for the heating! I'm surprised that such a feature might be omitted from a Europe-spec Mondeo. It would put them at a competitive disadvantage for one thing.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by DJM83

Not many euros do. My old focus and my ST doesn't have it. It's never bothered me at all.

Having kids in the rear seat they are long way from the air vents - and with the front driver and passenger seats in the way there is little air flow. Got to remember toddlers and babies and tucked up inside capsules and thick child seats - so can be very warm. Coupled with a big interior and cargo area the air just bakes in the sun. Once a car is travelling its probably ok, but the more air flow the better really.