Life expectancy of Octavia TDI v 525d

I've owned nothing but Fords since 1983, but a diesel Mondeo of that age is definitely one I would avoid.

Older Mondies are fine; later ones are terrific, but the Mk3 has a greater number of weaknesses than is acceptable.

My stepson ran one for about four years. His woes included injectors going out of sync with the ECU frequently. This puts the car into LOS until the injector is recoded. It's a common fault; some owners have paid for a set of injectors, and a new ECU, without it being fixed. Ford (as in the company, not a dealer), have no fix.

Another common fault he had is a build up of sludge in the fuel tank, clogging the injection system. It needs the tank removing for steam cleaning, and as much of the fuel system purging as possible.

He also had the crankshaft pulley dampener fail, the starter motor fail, the crankshaft sensor fail, and when he finally gave up on the car the DMF was on its last legs.

If it wasn't for the fact that he is a dealer-trained mechanic, that car would have bankrupted him!

Chris

My experience is mainly with Volvo and VW over the last 10 years or so. I currently have a 2004 Volvo V70 D5 on 215,000 miles and a 1998 V40 on

150,000 miles.

The diesel V70 is still on it's original Dual Mass Flywheel, battery, exhaust, wheel bearings etc and generally seems to have no side effects of it's star-ship mileage. I plan to keep running it for the foreseeable future (I've had it since 120,000 miles). It's not using any oil, still does over 50mpg (mainly motorway driving) and does everything I need it to.

The V40 has had a battery recently and belt idlers a few years ago, but no other mileage issues, and passed it's MOT yesterday with no preparation beforehand.

The VWs haven't been so good. A friends 2.0 2002 Passat on 104k seems to fail the MOT every year with some new fault, and has been less than reliable with coil pack issues, alternator problems and odd engine management issues. A family member's 1998 1.8 Passat was reasonably better when sold at

170,000 miles. It was replaced with a 2004 2.0 diesel, which has had a failed water pump but otherwise has been OK so far, with only minor faults here and there.

Bloody hell! Well, I'll be avoiding them. I looked up the different generations on the venerable Wikipedia, and the one I was looking at the other day was the Mk4.

There's an S80 for sale near me - what are they like? I know nowt about Volvos, really. Seems nice & roomy, but for some reasons Volvos immediately conjure up distressing images of large and frequent bills, be it services or repair. But they can't actually be a nightmare, surely?

I think a good few petrols have a DMF now, DSG or not.

Weights not anywhere near accurate - if my Golf is 1.1 tonnes, then I'll suck my own hairy ball sack.

The TDI-170 lump in the Passat is barely more thirsty than the 140, too.

For the purposes of a real world comparison, it's close enough - and a f*ck load closer than the works of fiction that are the official figures.

I don't give a f*ck, as it's not mine to worry about :)

Very good cars - I didn't like the pre-facelift models, but the facelift examples have much improved interiors and spec. for your money.

The Zetec I had was just missing heated seats and a rear view camera - but seemed to have just about everything else.

A 5 year old valued at only a few thousand? If someone was to steal a car by towing so therefore for re-sale or breaking for spares, surely they'd choose a new one?

There's an S80 for sale near me - what are they like? I know nowt about Volvos, really. Seems nice & roomy, but for some reasons Volvos immediately conjure up distressing images of large and frequent bills, be it services or repair. But they can't actually be a nightmare, surely?

If it's a D5 and there is no funny faults showing on the dash, then it'd be ok ! Burst intercoolers are a service item too.

Tim..

Depends which engine it is. The older 2.5L 5 cylinder diesel is an Audi unit (as fitted to mid 90's A6) - it's OK, but a bit noisy and not great economy. The 2.4L D5 is a cracking engine, 168BHP (if I remember right) and ~50 MPG if driven nicely (my V70 has that lump). Goes well enough when required. The 2.4L T5 petrol is *very* quick, but a bit thirsty, and eats front tyres if driven hard. I've a little experience of the 2.4L non turbo in a friends car - OK, but nothing exciting (140BHP).

They are big cars but generally very good. My FIL had an S80 and recently sold it to a mate of mine. Only real issue he had was worn swivel joints in the front suspension - shows as a knocking noise going over small bumps in the road. The S80 is a great motorway cruiser, very comfortable and well spec'd usually.

The trick to running any Volvo on a sensible budget is to avoid Volvo dealers. Use a local independent garage for any servicing work, or do it yourself. Everything is straight forward enough to get to. Parts are cheap from German Swedish & French.

Another poster mentioned the intercooler - i'd forgotten about that one. When I first got my V70 it started smoking a bit a few days in, turned out to be a split intercooler. I took it up with the seller (small trader) who covered the cost of the replacement (about £140 IIRC)

Over the last 10 or so years I've had a 940, 850 T5, V70, S40 and V40 T4 between my wife and I, and various friends / family 2 more V70's, another S40, S80 and a few others. No scary bills or issues on any of them.

I tend to buy will decent history to ensure things like cam belts have been done, and then just service when required.

Quite the contrary, it's not old tech at all. When it came out in 2003 it was the first of the new breed of CDTi (common rail injection) diesel engines. The same 1686cc engine is used in the current model Astra now, albeit with a larger turbo & intercooler and different ECU mapping for more power and torque. The newer cars also have a DPF but the basic engine tech is exactly the same. The economy is almost identical too, thanks in part to a six speed box on the newer cars - the current model 1.7 CDTi official figure is 62mpg and my 2003 is 61mpg.

It depends on the car. There are plenty of diesels that will run to high mileages with very low likelihood of any such problems.

An engine released to production in 2003 would have been designed around

2000; that's a fair time ago in modern engine terms.

AFAIK, Alfa's JTD was the first production common rail diesel. This was first sold in 1997, following parent company Fiat's development of them.

Nonetheless, the OP's requirement for a car that will be doing less than

20k/year may well be met more cheaply with a petrol vehicle.

Chris

So you are quoting official figures rather than real world ones?

One thing I have noticed with diesel-heads is that they quote some ridiculous figures in order to justify running a soot-belching tractor.

As do those with hybrids - for other reasons.

Real world over 19,500 miles in my 2.0 Xantia HDI 110 - average 54mpg.

Max achieved on a single tank, 63mpg

Min achieved over a single tank, 34 mpg

Yes, they try and justify the huge outlay for little savings IME. A friend has a 2009 Prius. It's averaging 47mpg. Not great given the manufacturer's claims..

Mike P

That's a bit better (by 9mpg) than I got from the B6 Passat.

But still decent for a large petrol automatic.... and that doesn't vary too much between driving briskly and driving it like a rental. But you'll get a lot more if you drive like a granny. As you would with any car.

Which 'large automatic' has such a pathetic performance at the same cost?

And you get horrifying figures if you push it on the open road.