March 14, 2012, 1:54 pm
I have a Jan. 2012 Mondeo Estate 2.0 TDCI 160 powershift and can not seem to better 36 MPG, the car has done 2500 miles now and still no improvement. I’m concerned as I bought this car under the impression that it should average 50MPG, as Ford states, the last diesel I had was a VW Passat 1.9 TDI and I averaged 58MPG in summer and 55 in winter. I know the on board computer may not be exact, so I filled the tank, zeroed every thing, did 400 of my normal miles and I still only averaged 36MPG. My question is, should I be getting better MPG or does the car still need to be run in, and if so for how many more miles, or is 50 MPG average just a Ford marketing dream?
March 14, 2012, 8:33 pm
the official figures are as follows so if you have only done local runs your not far off
Urban 39mpg Extra Urban 60mpg Combined 50mpg
March 15, 2012, 3:38 pm
The problem is I'm doing exactly the same trips as I did in the Passat, about 2 miles urban and 12 dual carriage way. This morning, with the engine up to temp., I tried zeroing at the start of the dual carriage way, gentle accelerated, drove at 50mph and at the end of the dual carriage way I still only managed 38mpg, I was hoping to get at least nearer the 50mpg that Ford claim I should get for the combined figure never mind the 60mpg they claim for extra urban. So can it be that the car still need to be run in, and if so, for how many miles?
March 15, 2012, 10:30 pm
Similar story here with my latest 140 PS TDCI. I was previously driving an 07 plate 140 PS engined mondeo estate and getting about 47 mpg on a 700 mile run cruising at 130 km/hr - more or less consisent with the claimed 47.9 mpg combined, so no complaints there. In December 2011 I took delivery of my new Mondeo with the lower CO2 and Euro5 emissions comliant. According to the brochure it is supposed to have a better fuel comsumption of 53.3 combined. After 6000 miles I am only getting [u]41 mpg[/u] (indicated) on the same 700 mile journey, and I am using the same driving style which is to always use the cuise when up to 130 km/hr. On the basis that this seems inconsistent with the published figures I returned the car to Ford for investigation. They found no defects and reported back that the fuel consumption is within spec. Ford also stated that 'the new engine configuration may use more fuel to acheive a better DPF regeneration ie. fuel vaporiser valve now installed'. They also stated that 'using cruise control is not always the best way to acheive good fuel economy'. So in summary no explanation for the worse fuel consumption compared to the previous model whereas according to the Ford published figures it should have been better. I suspect that there is nothing wrong with our cars - only that the sales literature is highly misleading. As you say ' its a Ford marketing dream'.
March 16, 2012, 4:46 pm
Sorry to hear that you have had the same experience as myself.
Today, with the engine up to temp., I again tried zeroing at the start of the dual carriage way, normal acceleration, drove at 70mph with cruise control on and at the end of the dual carriage way I managed 36mpg. So very little difference, I think Ford need to come clean and advertise the real mpg to be expected out of these cars under real conditions. I can assure Ford that I will tell anyone that will listen to me how disappointed I am with Fords stories about what mpg their cars can really achieve; I should have bought another Passat.
August 28, 2012, 8:03 pm
Hello all new mondeo owners, I took delivery of my new 163 powershift estate in January and after a very short time it became very obvious that I would not get near the fuel figures. I took the car back to ford who said there was nothing wrong it was driving style etc etc etc. oh and after you have done 10k it will achieve the figures!
I am not a fool so I took the rubbish for what it was, I love the car and really enjoy driving it but I like all of you have been cheated by the sales literature fuel data.
Today the car went for its first service having completed in excess of the 12500 miles my fuel consumption average over the last 3k was 42.7 that is as good as it gets. I asked the Ford agent to look at the economy and they refused saying they could nothing about it !
it is such ashame that the data is false because this is such a great car, over the 85,000 miles I expect to put on it the poor economy verses the published figures will cost me a fortune --- we should join together and put in a compensation claim to ford.
As a footnote I have had several brand new cars over the last 20 years and this is the only one I have failed to achieve the claimed economy figures even my last car a freelander always got a couple of miles more per gallon than claimed by land rover.
Enjoy your fords
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here