RE: Shed of the Week: Ford Mondeo 2.5 Ghia X

[Fastdruid]

BFleming said:

njw1 said:

Also, there's no such thing as a 1.8 tdci mk3....

For us non-initiated Dagenham Dustbin Dodgers, what are the various mk's? Mk1 was obviously the 1993 first gen Mondeo. But is the facelift of that the Mk2? Is this shed the Mk2 or the Mk3? Even wikipedia calls this shed the Second Generation (Mk3) which confuses the hell out of me!

Someone on wikipedia decided that the Mk1 and Mk2 were the same generation as the Mk2 was the facelift. I blame the Americans.

There was then a Mk2.5 which was was a bunch of updates in 1998 (and the pick of the Mk2's).

Then the Mk3 came out in ~2001.

This is a Mk3 or in Wikipedia terms "Gen 2".

[daveco]

tomic said:

mrbarnett said:

daveco said:

mrbarnett said:

Hmm, whilst this engine had been knocking around for a while by the time this car was produced, it was actually on-point with the market not long before.

Vauxhall got 170 hp our of their 2.5 V6, BMW also mustered 170 from their 2.5 i6. Subaru were putting out 165 hp from their 2.5 i4 and Hyundai just 165 hp from their 2.7 V6. Audi and Mercedes managed 170 hp from their 2.4 (or was it 2.6??) V6's.

...this is all from memory; I was a proper car geek in my teens.

Mid 90's vectra pushing out 190+ hp no?
BMW were getting 192 hp out of their 2.5 unit as early as the E30

Vauxhall did a limited edition Super-Touring, which I think was tuned out to that sort of hp, but the run-of-the-mill Ecotec that you got in the CDX, for instance, was 170 hp. You're probably right on the E30 BMW, but I think 1990's emissions regs and the like caught a lot of manufacturers napping as hp / litre seemed to drop as the decade progressed. The 1999 323i was definitely a 2.5 with ~170 hp.

Note the M52TUB25 here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M52

E30 325i was 170hp - the early E36 325i was 190hp.There was a German tax law in the 90's around engines with 192bhp, so the later 328i had the same power as the early 325i but more torque and the 323i was detuned to 170bhp differentiate it from the 328i.

Yep you're both correct. I'm thinking of the SA special model E30 which I think was a 2.7

[AC43]

Back in the day on a company car list the choice would have been

(1) The Mondeo with a decent engine and all the toys known to man
(2) A BMW 318i on steelies, no kit and a pea shooter exhaust
(3) An Audi A4 with no spec, sproingy contols and a bouncy castle ride

I'd have been very tempted by the Mondeo myself. Never saw the point of having a povvo-spec 3 series or whatever.

[P-Jay]

njw1 said:

, yes, the interior is a bit plasticky but I don't think it's any worse than a Vauxhall or (dare I say it) a VW of a similar age, compared to something from the 80's like a Sierra it doesn't even compare. Also, there's no such thing as a 1.8 tdci mk3....

Nah, My Dad still has a 2001 Passat in his 'collection', it's been used and abused by the whole family as some point, but the interior is still rock solid and Phantom-like when compared to my old Mondeo.

Sorry, my mistake, I wrote all the finance deals for them more than 10 years ago, but my point is Ford could sell them for a profit for a lot, lot less then what the 'sticker price'.

[Limpet]

I always preferred the mk1 and mk2 as they drove better. Pound shop interior plastics aside, they are nicer cars than the mk3 in every way.

A fit example of either with a fresh four wheel alignment is an absolute delight to drive, even in lower powered guise. Very sweet handling, supple riding, and with well weighted and very accurate steering.

[Fastdruid]

AC43 said:

Back in the day on a company car list the choice would have been

(1) The Mondeo with a decent engine and all the toys known to man
(2) A BMW 318i on steelies, no kit and a pea shooter exhaust
(3) An Audi A4 with no spec, sproingy contols and a bouncy castle ride

I'd have been very tempted by the Mondeo myself. Never saw the point of having a povvo-spec 3 series or whatever.

Indeed and while I would very much like a top spec BMW with all the toys and it would be a far better car...it's going to be much more expensive car.

So for the same money I'd rather a decent Mondeo than a boggo BMW. Of course if money is no object or it *has* to be RWD it's the BMW.

[Lotusgone]

Where did I put my bargepole? Actually, I can't be bothered.

[cerb4.5lee]

[redacted]

[cerb4.5lee]

Fastdruid said:

AC43 said:

Back in the day on a company car list the choice would have been

(1) The Mondeo with a decent engine and all the toys known to man
(2) A BMW 318i on steelies, no kit and a pea shooter exhaust
(3) An Audi A4 with no spec, sproingy contols and a bouncy castle ride

I'd have been very tempted by the Mondeo myself. Never saw the point of having a povvo-spec 3 series or whatever.

Indeed and while I would very much like a top spec BMW with all the toys and it would be a far better car...it's going to be much more expensive car.

So for the same money I'd rather a decent Mondeo than a boggo BMW. Of course if money is no object or it *has* to be RWD it's the BMW.

I've always preferred a high spec Mondeo to a low spec 3 series as well.

[sdiggle]

SOLD. Well done shed!

[Alex P]

I am sorry, but the more I read the comments section on here, the more it confirms my suspicion that some of you are arrogant badge snobs who produce sweeping statements about vehicles and their owners.

Regarding this particular car, given that the cost new of a similarly specified vehicle from the German big 3 (5 series or A6 because the 3 series etc. were smaller) would have been much more, TBH, you would really hope they were better, otherwise you would have been a complete div for paying the 'German badge' premium.

Regarding the engine, yes 168 bhp is not a lot from a 2.5 litre 6, but in the Jaguar state of tune it produced circa 190 bhp and the 3.0 version in the S type produced 240, which is more than the 3.0 BMW straight six of the time, which, using Pistonheads logic, makes the BMW 3.0 straight six a piece of crap, which it clearly isn't.

I am not a big Mondeo fan, but their is nothing wrong with them in the grand scheme of things and the engine (if not gearbox) and mileage make this car slightly interesting. TBH, that is the same as any old largish car where a low mileage multi-cylinder engine is a good option, but a high mileage or 4 cyclinder version is really a bit meh and simply serves a purpose.

Also, it always pays to remember that, with a few exceptions, today's new car is tomorrow's banger.

Edited by Alex P on Friday 26th January 12:42

[anonymous-user]

mrbarnett said:

Audi..... managed 170 hp from their 2.4 (or was it 2.6??) V6's.

2.8 V6

I always thought they could have got more.

[GTEYE]

Limpet said:

I always preferred the mk1 and mk2 as they drove better. Pound shop interior plastics aside, they are nicer cars than the mk3 in every way.

A fit example of either with a fresh four wheel alignment is an absolute delight to drive, even in lower powered guise. Very sweet handling, supple riding, and with well weighted and very accurate steering.

You're right there - the Mk1/2 (same chassis) were a peach to drive, the Mk3 lost a bit of edge, more of a motorway cruiser.

Of the Mk3's I've driven, they were okay when new, but they didn't wear their miles that well, they quickly seemed to feel "baggy"

But that was reflected in the price....so I'd forgive it that.

[WCZ]

one of the worst sheds here

[Steven_RW]

I drive a well maintained owned from (nearly.. 5k? iirc) new 52 plate red Ghia X V6 as my daily driver. On just under 150k miles. Great car for what it is designed for. Massive room in the boot for the dog and just a relaxed lazy car.

We have had an R-plate that did 240k miles, a Y plate that did the same mileage, we had this current red one and we have two ST220 one at 245k and one much less.

The Ghia X is the lazy version compared to the ST220 but it fills that job very well. We regularly maintain the vehicles and get very good running out of them. In all that mileage including another N reg 24v V6 Mondeo, we have not had piston slap.

Combined mileage must be getting on for a million in V6 mondeos for us lot.

The weakest point in these cars in terms of performance when all working well is the brakes. They are never any good for any hard hussle. The Mk2 Mondeo had a different system by Girling (iirc, it has been a while..) and that system was much better but the Mk3 from regular to V6 to ST220 never really gave or give any confidence on hard braking more than one big press.

RW

[s m]

daveco said:

Why so little hp when other manufacturers such as Honda and Toyota were making the same from 1.6 NA units??

If i were looking for a non ST220 model, i'd go for the 3-litre 200bhp version of the Ghia rather than the 2.5 170bhp type here.

They're noticeably quicker

[qube_TA]

I had one of these, put 160k miles at ~ 300/week on it without any hassle. Thought it was a great car, decent power and comfy plus the boot was big enough to move in. It was quite on the road and would chew up the miles without you being unable to walk at the other end. Yeah it might not be the most exciting of cars in the world but they suited me and my tall 2.0m frame. I find that most cars aren't great if you're tall with long legs and big feet (size 15) so it's always welcome when you can just get into a car and there's still room for 3 other people.

[paulmaurice99]

I was reading the comments and thinking much the same thing as Alex P.

I also get rather annoyed when people rubbish certain cars because of the badge. I had never run a Ford until I bought a 2005 1.8 LX as a stop-gap winter commuter. It was a 'part-ex to clear' at the garage I'd visited to view what turned out to be a disappointing V70. It seemed a good buy and I needed something quickly, so that was that.

Over 3 years later I still have it, during which time I've put another 70k miles on it.
Do I boast about it to friends? Nope.
Do I get envious glances at the traffic lights? Very funny.
Did I buy it to make people think I'd 'made it' in life? Err, definitely not! (What the hell was that comment about?!).

Does it do exactly what you would want from a car of its type extremely well? Yes. It's a comfortable, reliable, spacious daily driver. It will cruise motorways at 75-90mph all day long, totally stable - it was designed to do that. The Ford chassis and steering also mean it's enjoyable to drive on any decent road. The 1.8 is not exciting, but it's quick enough, does 40mpg, seems durable (mine has 145k on it) and is ideal for the car, partly because these are daily drivers. With the exception of the (non-) heated front screen, everything works. The only other cars I've owned to match this level of durability have been Hondas. The interior on mine is utterly solid, incidentally. I never seem to have a full complement of working headlight/tail-light bulbs though...

Is it my favourite car of all time? Of course not. Does it mean all Fords are good? No. But I have a real soft spot for it because it's served me incredibly well, and I still genuinely enjoy driving it.

Would a 1.8 LX feature as SOTW? I somehow doubt it - even though it's this sort of hard-working do-it-all car that costs nothing to buy that lets many of us justify something else tucked away in the garage. The only reason this one is here is because it's a 2.5 and it's got low mileage, and Shed could attach some sort of narrative to it.

So a bit of a poor showing, Shed, but that doesn't make the Mondeo a bad car.

[BugLebowski]

sgtBerbatov said:

Birmingham.

Go to Solihull's Land Rover plant, have a walk around the car park. The place is swimming in these ST's because the workers get them for cheap and they rag them around the roads thinking they're God's gift to sports cars.

So they get a choice of different discounted cars and they choose a hot hatch? Seems fair enough, would you prefer them to be driving SUVs?

sgtBerbatov said:

Plus, look at Facebook on the barn finds/cars for sale groups. All those old boys stratching their pants looking at all the Escorts, Cortina's, Capri's etc on there. All wishing they could have the blue oval tax on their driveways.

I'll agree with this, I really don't understand the price old Fords go for, it must be a generational thing.

[justinio]

HardMiles said:

Because Ford make non-aspirational, cheap, under-developed motors for the type of mr Mondeo. He sits in the third lane, because that's easy for him, regardless of travelling at 51mph to conserve fuel.

They're utter bks. You could buy an e38 / e39 that's been to the sun and back that'd be 1000 x better than this utter bag of wk.

C'mon Shed! You can do better than that! I'd rather tread in dog turd!

If you're comparing Mondeo's to old bimmers, there really is no comparison.

I had a Mondeo 2.0 Ghia X and it was better in every single way than the E46 325ci that I had a couple of years later.