I am convinced there is something wrong with warm-up time and running temperature of my car. It takes about 15minutes to get warm air through the heater and 20 minutes+ for the temperature gauge to reach about 83=B0C (definitely doesn't reach the 90=B0C marking on the gauge). I've only had the car three weeks so I don't know what happens when the exterior temperature is higher. My local dealer tells me that diesels take longer to warm up than petrol engines - wow! that's helpful. Does anybody out there have this engine under their bonnet and does it take an age to warm up?
Sounds about normal. Modern diesels can be pretty efficient, and take a long time to warm up. That's why many are fitted with auxiliary diesel powered heaters, to reduce the warm up time.
In message , snipped-for-privacy@btinternet.com writes
I've got the 2.0 TDCi Focus and it does take a long time to warm up. I've owned several diesels going back to the late 80's and they are all pretty much the same. Your dealer is right. Diesels are more thermally efficient than petrol engines....... they waste less heat. Your car utilises waste heat to keep you warm.
If you are really bothered about it, you might be able to fit a pre-heater such as those made by Kenlowe:-
formatting link
These devices electrically heat the coolant to operating temperature prior to you getting in the car. You plug the car in at night and you set the timer to start the heater about 20 minutes before you plan to drive the car.
I wouldn't bother with the heater, you need to pay for it, then for it to be fitted to the car, then expect huge electric bills with it running 2KW for
20mins or more every morning. It also invalidates the warranty. Get one of the £10 heaters that plug in to the cigarette lighter instead. This provides instant heat inside the car, just don't put it near the windscreen or it might crack it. My petrol car always runs lower than 90degrees and it makes no difference. If the car works why are you so bothered. If you could see oil temperature you might fall over in shock.
Thats about normal for the 1.6 TDCI especially if its being driven at lowish speeds and lowish load. - they're so effiicient, there isnt alot of heat wasted.
Ford in their wisdom dont fit the electric coolant heater to these motors.
If you can alter your route or driven to work the engine harder, it'll warm up alot faster.
Very interesting, I've owned my 1.8 TDCI diesel since September and when I first had it the engine seemed to warm up in a reasonable amount of time, however since the colder weather like the OPs it appears to take several miles of driving before it eventually settles down to the halfway mark on the temperature gauge.
I assumed that this was due to faulty thermostat, and have been quoted around £80 plus Vat for doing the job, but if this is normal and the general consensus is that it will not damage the engine, then I'm more than happy to leave things as they are.
If the engine eventually reaches full temperature and it doesnt drop off especially when at high speed (lots of air through radiator) then the thermostat is fine.
Many thanks Tim, you've probably just saved me the best part of 100 quid :o)
When the needle does get to the halfway mark on the temperature gauge it then remains pretty static, whatever the driving conditions.
Just one other query, I was always under the impression that if an engine didn't warm-up to its correct operating temperature fairly quickly, not only was this bad for fuel consumption but it was also not good for the longevity of the engine.
"Ivan" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@mid.individual.net:
All this discussion of long warm-up times and the need of an occasional long-ish run for cars with a DPF fitted has aroused some concern with me...
I'm intending to buy a new car in the not-too-distant future, and was planning to opt for a common-rail diesel for optimum economy, due to the situation regarding fuel price trends ( I intend to keep the car long- term).
In view of the warm-up times etc, perhaps a common rail wouldn't be the best choice for my intended usage. Basically, I do a 15 mile (each way) commute, varying between 2 and 5 times per week, punctuated by short local runs to shops/gym/relatives. I do longer trips, but only occasionaly. So my annual mileage is slightly below average (estimate 8-
10k).
In view of the above, does the panel think I would be better off sacrificing some economy for a cheaper petrol model of similar performance, in order to preserve the car better?
"Duncan Wood" wrote in news:op.tnpdjbn8yuobwl@lucy:
occasional
Even over several years? Assuming fuel prices remain static, I would agree. But surely the saving gained from the extra 10-15mpg will become greater as time goes on and fuel prices rise?
I was pleasantly surprised to find that my road fund licence for a 1.8 turbo diesel is only £110, whereas the last time I taxed my old 1.7 non-turbo diesel Astra it was £175 .
"Tim.." wrote in news:1L-dnadoYMoaqk snipped-for-privacy@bt.com:
1.4.....uuugggh!
To me, it doesn't matter much which I choose, because the slightly higher purchase price of the diesel is balanced out by the better economy. It just comes down to which I prefer to drive. What I was more concerned about was the potential maintenance issues associated with low mileage usage of a modern diesel, and whether I need to consider this or not. Any views on that point specifically?
In the meantime, I'll continue to enjoy my much more powerful Volvo, until something major gives up the ghost. It may be thirsty, but due to it's age, the fuel expense if offset by virtually nil depriciation :-)
BTW, I definitely made the right decision swapping the MAF for an OEM one. It goes so much better now :-)
"Tim.." wrote in news:VKCdnfGH78h8c0 snipped-for-privacy@bt.com:
Quite so. Any change is gonna be a come down ;-)
The engine and body are A1, but there are a couple of 'sleeeping giant' issues that have the potential to turn it into a money pit:
- I don't anticipate much more life out of the clutch. It bites low to the floor, is very grabby and judders badly unless engaged at low (near idle) revs. I suspect that both pressure and driven plates are getting rather worn out, and it possibly has a broken cushioning spring. As you know, this is a dear job on a 70, due to the labour time and the need to skim/replace the flywheel.
- Gearbox has a notchy 2nd & 4th. I'd like to believe this is due to the worn clutch, but as other gears are unaffected, it seems more likely that the synchros are tired. How long it will be before this situation becomes more serious is another unknown quantity to me.
-PAS rack has a very slight weep from the steering column seal. I noticed this a year ago and since this I have topped it up once, using a small amount of fluid, maybe 100ml. It's another thing that isn't an immediate cause for concern, but could cost £££s to sort if it develops; this time because of the part price rather than the labour.
None of these are jobs that I can undertake myself - even the PAS rack is a bit tricky for me because the sub has to be dropped. So
*potentially*, I'm looking at repair bills amounting to more than the car's value. Still think I should stick with it, rather than get rid at the first sign of trouble?
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.