Old Mondeo mpg?

Hi all,

Sorta following on from my recent stolen Belmont post I've been offered a 77k 93, silver, 1.6, 16v Mondeo saloon.

It's available via the family cheap, has been with the last owner for

7 years and been pampered and garaged etc.

I think it's recently had a clutch and cambelt (not that it needed the clutch apparently but he just thought it might ) so I just wondered what sort of mpg you would realistically expect from it if driven reasonably and is it the sort of thing one would feel happy to drive a distance in (daughter is currently in Scotland, and given the alternatives of a Ka or 200K 218SD Rover?). ;-)

I might pop round and have a look at it tonight, see what the Mrs thinks of it.

I'm thinking the Rover /is/ getting a bit ragged now and assuming the Belmont doesn't come back we could have the Mondeo as our 'family' car and the Ka for her for work or us running about daughter learning etc?

If it's the saloon I guess it might be less 'useful' then the 5dr Rover and I really like the idea of an estate again ..

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m
Loading thread data ...

I used to get 33MPG out of a 2L, 36MPG out of a 1.8L. No idea about the

1.6 but I suspect around the same as the 2L.

Driving distance? My wife had a M reg until about 3 years ago. We'd just jump in it and put petrol in it and think nothing of doing a 500+ mile round trip in a day. I used it for work briefly and was doing 160 miles a day, four days a week.

Reply to
Conor

Not 'bad' I suppose considering etc. Funny isn't it, for each vehicle there's often a sweet spot engine. When I had the Sierra I think it was the 2L (the 1.6 Pinto worse mpg on average and the 1.3 ...!)

Those are pretty good runs.

Any particular things to look out for would you say?

Upon reflection I think the deal breaker for me would be if this one /is/ an actual saloon (rather than a 5 door I mean). I've used the hatchback function on the old Rover loads of times and that seemed restricted compared with the estate (boot lip, non-flat load bay floor, no split and flat etc). We have used the load through function on the Belmont a few times and whilst a 'boot' is good for keeping stuff out of sight it's not a hatch.

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 18:56:32 +0100, T i m spouted forth:

I had a 1.8 MK1, got about 36mpg out of it. I'd expect the 1.6 to be slightly less as it's a pretty big motor. Comfy, quiet, smooth. Cheap to maintain unless the clutch goes. One that old should have had all the niggles they can have sorted out too:-)

If it's a good one, it'd be exactly what you want. Great cars.

Mike P

Reply to
Mike P

Ok.

Not had any of them for a while. ;-)

Clutch recently done apparently.

I think if this one is a hatchback I'll be looking at it very closely.

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

Spark plug leads need changing every 40,000. Front bottom arms last

30,000 or so.

Heater blower only working on number 4 position. Fault is thermal fuse blowing on heater resistor pack in fresh air intake caused by pollen filter not being changed.

Apart from that, they're pretty reliable.

Reply to
Conor

Lovely cars. I regret getting rid of mine. It's one of the few cars I've had where you could step out after 200 miles feeling comfortable and refreshed, not crippled and angry.

Reply to
Neil

Neil gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

I had a Mk1 1.8 as a short-term co.car back in the day.

Bloody awful. Dog slow - I had to check that it wasn't a 1.6 - and uncomfortable. I just couldn't find a driving position where my legs (not exactly tree-trunks) could fit beneath the steering wheel. In the week I had it before I got to throw it back at the rental company because of an oil leak, I wore shiny patches on both legs of a suit.

Reply to
Adrian

Hehe.

Maybe I've been luck (both with my cars and not having to regularly do long distances for a while) but years and years ago I drove to Barnstable (~450 miles) and back (from Sth Herts) for the Co in the Sierra Estate with no ill effect and last Xmas we went up to Scotland (360 miles) in the old Rover 218SD with only a couple of 'rest / fuel stops' and were still ok at the end.

Maybe some of that is down to the fact that we are (all) also motorcyclists and haven't ever had anything more luxurious?

Even the Messerschmitt KR200 was a treat compared with the Lambretta SX150 at the time as at least you were in the warm and dry in the Schmitt. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

Looks like it's a "Marmite' thing then?

Again that could be comparative? The Rover 218SD felt 'dog slow' compared with the 2L Sierra and whilst it is slower it's something you get used to (like rarely bothering to overtake and noting the ETA on the GPS hardly changes.

I think that can be down to luck, like finding a crash helmet that fits your head shape (I'm a Shoie shaped head).

I can get that problem if I can't get the seat back far enough. When I was looking to replace the Co MkV Cortina I sat in a fair few cars and many I couldn't actually get in, mainly down to the lack of head room. That doesn't seem to be the case any more and I can't think of the last time where my head touched a roof lining.

Not good.

Anyway, thanks for the feedback, it's good to get it warts n all.

T i m

Reply to
T i m

In article , T i m writes

Work colleague has an M plate, they've had it from new I think, and regularly drive long distances in it (all over the uk). Mileage is stratospheric. It's passed all MoTs up to now with only minor repairs needed but the last one needed 200 quid's worth of welding; you might want to bear that in mind as the one you're looking at is a similar age.

He and his wife love the car, it just soldiers on and on. Not to my taste (I don't like the soft seats and high gear lever, but that's very subjective of course)

He also made the mistake of fitting non-Ford headlight bulbs; he didn't know they needed to be UV filtered, and had to replace the headlamps when the plastic lenses became too yellowed to pass MOT.

I'll ask him what sort of mileage it gets.

Reply to
Mike Tomlinson

Oh, I wasn't aware of that, something to consider on the Ka then.

Please and thanks for the feedback.

T i m

Reply to
T i m

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember Mike Tomlinson saying something like:

"French, innit mate?"

Reply to
Grimly Curmudgeon

1.8 is pick of the bunch for MPG as its got the torque to pull the relatively high gearing with ease- think 40mpg+ on a run. The 1.6 is lower geared and less torquey, so real life mpg will be similar to the 2.0; i.e low to mid 30's.

Tim.

Reply to
Tim..

Thanks for that.

Thinking out loud etc ... whilst that probably isn't much worse than the Belmont I'm not sure we now would replace the Belmont with it or another saloon (given the choice). If the Mondy was a 5dr I think I'd have had it here by now and not be bothering with the (now stolen >

recovered) Belmont.

However the Ka has it for ease (we already had it) and economy stakes but isn't really big / good enough for long trips. That and the small boot, inability to tow (anything) and no real roof for a roof rack (I have some 16' canoes), it isn't even good as 'our alternative car' (working on the basis my 200K 218SD could go bang any day now).

We were sorta working on the idea that if either were to die for something major (or be stolen > destroyed etc) we would get something newer, practical but cheaper to tax and hopefully as cheap to run ... like the 1.4TD Fusion?

With all things considered (and in the light of the Belmont being on the scene again) I'm not sure the 77k, 1.6 Mondy Sal we have been offered at £500 is one of those 'too good to miss' jobs (especially as we have the Ka).

I think they made a diesel Mondeo but was that engine any good, did it last or have the economy of the 1.9 Pug lump I have in this Rover?

Cheers, T i m

Reply to
T i m

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.