RE: Ford Mondeo ST TDCI | Shed of the Week
Discussion
Deranged Rover said:
Ironically, the worst bit of the ownership was trying to sell it, which took me nearly 5 months. It quickly became apparent that anyone who wants a 3.0V6 Mondeo only wants the ST, and anyone who just wants a Mk3 Mondeo, doesn't want a 3.0 engine under the bonnet.
I remember the days when almost all manufacturers offered a nice petrol V6 engine in their family/reps cars. They were the good days I thought. It is tiny petrol or diesel engines...or even electric now for sure. I had a Mondeo Ghia TDCi on an 02 plate, clogged Delphi Injectors DMF and clutch issues, and that familiar Transit exhaust note. Comfy car with lots of kit, but not that reliable which was a shame... Sold it for an E46 320d in the end. Was tired of having to shut the engine off and re start each time the Injectors started to play up...
I've just realised that this era of Mondeo is probably what got me into big estates.
In the early noughties I used to regularly get hire cars for work and trek from Merseyside to Glasgow or Cardiff or somewhere, usually four up and with a few days of luggage each plus a load of audio visual gear. At the time I was driving a Rover 200, so no chance of doing it in that.
The Friday evening drop-off was always a lottery as you never knew what you were getting. A particular lowlight was the Peugeot 306 with pedals so badly arranged they nearly ruined my knees in one journey.
The best cars that turned up were these. Awesome long distance comfort and space, enough grunt on the motorway when full (at least compared to a 1.6 k series, these days I might be less impressed), ludicrous boot space.
It hadn't previously occurred to me that this is where the do-anything estate urge almost certainly came from. I've tried living with saloons since but it just isn't the same if you can't go and hire a cement mixer on a whim.
In the early noughties I used to regularly get hire cars for work and trek from Merseyside to Glasgow or Cardiff or somewhere, usually four up and with a few days of luggage each plus a load of audio visual gear. At the time I was driving a Rover 200, so no chance of doing it in that.
The Friday evening drop-off was always a lottery as you never knew what you were getting. A particular lowlight was the Peugeot 306 with pedals so badly arranged they nearly ruined my knees in one journey.
The best cars that turned up were these. Awesome long distance comfort and space, enough grunt on the motorway when full (at least compared to a 1.6 k series, these days I might be less impressed), ludicrous boot space.
It hadn't previously occurred to me that this is where the do-anything estate urge almost certainly came from. I've tried living with saloons since but it just isn't the same if you can't go and hire a cement mixer on a whim.
I understand that these don't suffer as many problems as the 2.0-litre TDCi. Those things were a bit of a nightmare, but these don't seem so bad. I don't understand why people are complaining about DMFs on them, as everything has a DMF and they all cost a lot to replace. That's jut a fact of life with more modern cars.
I had an ST220 hatch for a year. Bought it off a mate with about 115k on it, put about 30k on it, then sold it. In that time, it had tyres, discs and pads and an ABS sensor. Probably the best used car I've ever owned tbh, and it drove really well. More recently, I had a MK4 2.5T, but I never really gelled with it. Didn't look as good, seats were crap, and just felt less connected. Such a shame they never did an ST version in the MK4.
I had an ST220 hatch for a year. Bought it off a mate with about 115k on it, put about 30k on it, then sold it. In that time, it had tyres, discs and pads and an ABS sensor. Probably the best used car I've ever owned tbh, and it drove really well. More recently, I had a MK4 2.5T, but I never really gelled with it. Didn't look as good, seats were crap, and just felt less connected. Such a shame they never did an ST version in the MK4.
my father had the hatch from new, it was a pre reg cost £17k with delivery miles as opposed to £23k.
The only issue in 12 years and 120,000 miles were bushes, leaky door cards (Very prone to this) and the saggy rear bumper. It was a great car, and still going strong with its new owner.
The only issue in 12 years and 120,000 miles were bushes, leaky door cards (Very prone to this) and the saggy rear bumper. It was a great car, and still going strong with its new owner.
Ah the Mondeo STd. About as desirable as an std as well.
Slow, rattly, unreliable and basically just the normal diesel with an ST body kit and interior. The very definition of all mouth and no trousers.
t, didn't really like to rev and utterly slow in comparison to the older engines. Decent mpg though.
At the time as they had the Mk3's I had a (non-company) 2.0i Mk2 Estate and that would manage 40+mpg (highest I think I ever saw was 44mpg) on a run while the Mk3 1.8i would (with the same driving style) hit mid to high 40's. I thought 47mpg wasn't bad from a petrol for a big sensible family car.
Never thought the Mk3's handled as well as the Mk2's though. I may be misjudging them though as it could have been the examples I drove were the "lesser" LX etc models while my Mk2 was a Ghia X or could have been the cheap missmatched tyres the company put on the "pool" versions!
Slow, rattly, unreliable and basically just the normal diesel with an ST body kit and interior. The very definition of all mouth and no trousers.
Roboticarm said:
Awesome shed, for those of us with a family a good looking, sporty estate which won't break the bank makes an excellent choice.
Never driven the st but did drive a same shape 1.8lx a number of times when they were new including s few trips for Yorkshire to wales, lovely car and very comfortable but that 1.8 petrol had about 3 bhp and 2 lb ft of torque. Always thought the more powerful versions of these would be a good car
Many years ago now the place I used to work all had Mondeos as company cars, I drove plenty of Mk1/2 and Mk3's. The 1.8i in the Mk1 was a peach, revvy and fun, although you did need to rev it. The 1.8i in the Mk3 though was sNever driven the st but did drive a same shape 1.8lx a number of times when they were new including s few trips for Yorkshire to wales, lovely car and very comfortable but that 1.8 petrol had about 3 bhp and 2 lb ft of torque. Always thought the more powerful versions of these would be a good car
t, didn't really like to rev and utterly slow in comparison to the older engines. Decent mpg though. At the time as they had the Mk3's I had a (non-company) 2.0i Mk2 Estate and that would manage 40+mpg (highest I think I ever saw was 44mpg) on a run while the Mk3 1.8i would (with the same driving style) hit mid to high 40's. I thought 47mpg wasn't bad from a petrol for a big sensible family car.
Never thought the Mk3's handled as well as the Mk2's though. I may be misjudging them though as it could have been the examples I drove were the "lesser" LX etc models while my Mk2 was a Ghia X or could have been the cheap missmatched tyres the company put on the "pool" versions!
MC Bodge said:
agreed. I had a Mk3 2.0 130 and then a Mk4 2.0 140. The "140" was vastly better and drove and performed much better than it should have done. On the autobahn the difference was substantial for a supposed 10bhp increase.
The Mk3 TDCi130 must have been utterly dire. I drove a Galaxy TDCi140 for a couple of weeks and that was horrific. Like a Mk3
Prob impossible to find now as I think they only did them in early cars but the best Mk3 diesel is the TDDI, slower but has a more basic fuel / fixed vane turbo set up that doesn't go wrong.
Old man had one with about 150K on it and it drove wonderfully ( felt like a missile compared to the 55hp Astra I had inflicted on me passing my test!).
Was great till he drove it through a 3ft ford.
1.8 petrol he had after was a mazda engine and was a bit crap, ate its piston rings at about 80k.
Like these St's but they always look absolutely shagged.
Prob impossible to find now as I think they only did them in early cars but the best Mk3 diesel is the TDDI, slower but has a more basic fuel / fixed vane turbo set up that doesn't go wrong.
Old man had one with about 150K on it and it drove wonderfully ( felt like a missile compared to the 55hp Astra I had inflicted on me passing my test!).
Was great till he drove it through a 3ft ford.
1.8 petrol he had after was a mazda engine and was a bit crap, ate its piston rings at about 80k.
Like these St's but they always look absolutely shagged.
Fastdruid said:
Ah the Mondeo STd. About as desirable as an std as well.
Slow, rattly, unreliable and basically just the normal diesel with an ST body kit and interior. The very definition of all mouth and no trousers.
You are very much mistaken haha, I have driven plenty of fast cars and would certainly not describe the Mondeo ST TDCI as "slow". At the speeds you spend most of the time, say 30-70mph it's genuinely quick, if you're going to judge it on 0-60 times of course it's slow, it's a big diesel estate car but I've tried to find anything more modern that feels as quick and does the MPG the ST does and have come up short every time. Diesel engines after this era are sSlow, rattly, unreliable and basically just the normal diesel with an ST body kit and interior. The very definition of all mouth and no trousers.
te because of DPF and a whole load of regulations, they state higher BHP figures but they don't feel anywhere near as quick in real life. It drives extremely well, cracking gearbox, great steering feel and loads of torque it's the ultimate motorway wagon. In a different league to say an extremely dull and lesser equipped E46 320D or anything else from that era! Fastdruid said:
The Mk3 TDCi130 must have been utterly dire. I drove a Galaxy TDCi140 for a couple of weeks and that was horrific.
As you always mention. Many people thought otherwise about them in the earlier Mk4s, I've no idea if later ones were different.I kept mine for 7 years...
We bought one of these when our first child was born (albeit a hatchback).
Still to this day one of the best cars I've ever had in terms of just doing car "stuff". Massively comfy, seemed to do 50mpg regardless of how hard I drove it, did 35k miles in a year in it commuting and the only thing that went wrong was an alternator which left me stranded by the side of the M62 in the dark.
I was looking at ST220s the other day - a performance blue hatchback or estate would be great. Would definitely have one on my list if I needed another cheap barge.
Still to this day one of the best cars I've ever had in terms of just doing car "stuff". Massively comfy, seemed to do 50mpg regardless of how hard I drove it, did 35k miles in a year in it commuting and the only thing that went wrong was an alternator which left me stranded by the side of the M62 in the dark.
I was looking at ST220s the other day - a performance blue hatchback or estate would be great. Would definitely have one on my list if I needed another cheap barge.
nipsips said:
The best thing Ford ever did was shelve the ‘Puma’ TDCi engine as fitted to the MK3 Mondeo and replace it in the MK4 with a PSA sourced engine.
These things were dire. Sounded like a Transit. Fuel pumps, rails, injectors were all common. Head gaskets and timing chains were a regular occurrence. Clutches and DMF’s and if you were really unlucky the gearbox as well. That’s without the usual MK3 Mondeo usual issues with the rear subframe bushes, rear calipers, bonnet locks where you have to smash the grill out to open the bonnet etc etc.
Save your money and invest in a MK4 2.0 Titanium X. Much better car and nearly as quick.
These things were dire. Sounded like a Transit. Fuel pumps, rails, injectors were all common. Head gaskets and timing chains were a regular occurrence. Clutches and DMF’s and if you were really unlucky the gearbox as well. That’s without the usual MK3 Mondeo usual issues with the rear subframe bushes, rear calipers, bonnet locks where you have to smash the grill out to open the bonnet etc etc.
Save your money and invest in a MK4 2.0 Titanium X. Much better car and nearly as quick.
In my last job I must have covered nearly half a million miles in Transits with the puma engine and on the whole they were hugely reliable, the problem is that you hear about all the horror stories but you don't hear about all the engines that just work and do huge miles without an issue, my ST TDCi on the other hand....
.....I must have bought at precisely the age and mileage when everything wore out, in the few years I had it I replaced in no particular order; Various suspension components, wheel bearings, driveshafts, steering rack, power steering pump, water pump, aux belt tensioner, both thermostats, clutch, bottom pulley, turbo actuator and probably more stuff I've forgotten about. And after that I still enjoyed my ownership of it as they drive and handle brilliantly as well as being very practical, I'd have a another but it'd have to be a 3.0 petrol, I wouldn't have another diesel.
Howard- said:
greenarrow said:
For shed money I would probably prefer a 2 litre petrol as far less to go wrong, but you can't get an ST with that engine. .
You could get a Zetec S. Stick the ST wheels on and it'd be basically the same - the ST TDCI doesn't have the "sports" suspension that the ST220 has. The 220 suspension was optional on the TDCi, I don't think many people ticked that box but my TDCi was originally fitted with it, I had a 2.2 Titanium X before my ST TDCi and the difference in handling was night and day.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff