Mondeo LX 2.3 petrol - Mazda L3 motor - engine whine

[kevino]

These 2.3 litre Mondeos are cheap cars heap for sale in Brisbane 2014 models 45-55000 kms around 13k. Not bad for a 2 year old car.
The fuel consumption looks pretty heavy for a four cylinder.

What are the real world fuel consumption figures for a 2.3 litre Mondeo?

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by kevino

These 2.3 litre Mondeos are cheap cars heap for sale in Brisbane 2014 models 45-55000 kms around 13k. Not bad for a 2 year old car.

The sedans and hatches tend to be a lot cheaper than the wagons for some reason.

Originally Posted by kevino

The fuel consumption looks pretty heavy for a four cylinder.

What are the real world fuel consumption figures for a 2.3 litre Mondeo?

Not sure, but Redbook lists 6.8 L/100km highway and 14.1 L/100km city. Combined is 9.5L/100km.

It could be the weight of the car with a smaller motor that causes the higher fuel consumption. The big selling point for the wagon I think is the large cargo area - both length and height.

[NZ XR6]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

The sedans and hatches tend to be a lot cheaper than the wagons for some reason.



Not sure, but Redbook lists 6.8 L/100km highway and 14.1 L/100km city. Combined is 9.5L/100km.

It could be the weight of the car with a smaller motor that causes the higher fuel consumption. The big selling point for the wagon I think is the large cargo area - both length and height.

Good luck trying to get 6.8 l/100 km!!! Best I ever managed was 8, and I had to try hard to achieve that. 9 is probably more realistic.

They can be thirsty in urban driving, but not too bad if you take it easy. Certainly better than a BA Falcon!

The diesel is a much nicer car to drive. But if you want a big, comfortable car and don't mind the slightly leisurely performance, a good 2.3 is a bargain. Don't try towing anything heavy though.

Sent from somewhere using Tapatalk

[sailaway]

Originally Posted by NZ XR6

Good luck trying to get 6.8 l/100 km!!! Best I ever managed was 8, and I had to try hard to achieve that. 9 is probably more realistic.

The diesel is a much nicer car to drive. But if you want a big, comfortable car and don't mind the slightly leisurely performance, a good 2.3 is a bargain. Don't try towing anything heavy though.

I couldn't go back to a petrol guzzler after the Mondy diesel's speed and economy.

It would be also a ripper towing vehicle I reckon had I the need and a towbar.

[cobrin]

Originally Posted by sailaway

I couldn't go back to a petrol guzzler after the Mondy diesel's speed and economy.

It would be also a ripper towing vehicle I reckon had I the need and a towbar.

sure is nice on the fuel usage....ditto for towing

[Omega-T]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

Not sure, but Redbook lists 6.8 L/100km highway and 14.1 L/100km city. Combined is 9.5L/100km.

My 2.3 tends to use 8.4-8.9L/100km depending on what I'm doing. I haven't seen 9's since I started using 95 octane. It depends a lot on what you do though, driving where I do I nearly always use less than the combined ratings.

It's not brilliant, but I'm not unhappy with the economy - compared to the other four-cylinder petrol wagons that some friends and family have, it's a decent bit heavier, is a visibly larger car and has a lot more interior space for not much more consumption.

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by Omega-T

My 2.3 tends to use 8.4-8.9L/100km depending on what I'm doing. I haven't seen 9's since I started using 95 octane. It depends a lot on what you do though, driving where I do I nearly always use less than the combined ratings.

It's not brilliant, but I'm not unhappy with the economy - compared to the other four-cylinder petrol wagons that some friends and family have, it's a decent bit heavier, is a visibly larger car and has a lot more interior space for not much more consumption.

So let's say you travelled 10,000 kms per year and only achieved the 9.5L/100km Redbook figure, you would buy at most 950 litres at say $1.40 a litre = $1330. Whereas for a competing Mazda 6 wagon which might get 8.9L/100km (similar to your figures) - you would save a grand total of $84. I'd gladly pay the extra fuel cost to get what I wanted too. Cargo space outweighs fuel cost for me. (Hope my calculations are correct ... )

[sailaway]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

So let's say you travelled 10,000 kms per year and only achieved the 9.5L/100km Redbook figure, you would buy at most 950 litres at say $1.40 a litre = $1330. Whereas for a competing Mazda 6 wagon which might get 8.9L/100km (similar to your figures) - you would save a grand total of $84. I'd gladly pay the extra fuel cost to get what I wanted too.

Do the figures using a Mondeo diesel that averages about 6L/100km for city and country driving. Not to mention the longevity of diesel engines and knowing 1200kms is possible on a full tank.

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

Cargo space outweighs fuel cost for me. (Hope my calculations are correct ... )

The Mondeo wagon's capacity seems on par with what else is available and obviously meets your needs. Do checkout the hatch as it to is deceptive on how much space is available with the rear seats down. If suitable it broadens the range of Mondys you can choose from. Petrol and Diesel.