This new Mondeo is this going to be like the last peice of #@$%! from ford....Contour/Mondeo....I had a 1999 Contour...Furst and last FORD I will ever own...a total piece of #@$%!...
Ford: Quality equal to Toyota
- Thread starter LouDawg
- Start date
- Status
It certainly wasn't a car suited for American tastes in automobiles. It did much better in Europe than it ever did here, and in fact the Mondeo is still sold in Europe. I have no idea what you mean by "new Mondeo", is Ford planning to bring the Mondeo here and sell it?
Don't forget the 2.5L Duratec V6. I met Terry Haines, a powertrain engineer from Ford who worked on the CDW27 project (Contour/Mystique/Mondeo) and I believe the engine was first sold in 1993 or 1994, depending on when the Mondeo first came to the market in Europe.
Many Contour enthusiasts ended up fitting the 2.5L heads on 3L engine blocks to build higher compression 3L engines.
I believe the Duratec V6 saw many variants, used by Mazda, Jaguar, Ford and even provided some parts for Aston Martins V12 some believe. I believe the 3.0L DAMB V6 in the Lincoln LS and was based on the Duratec as well.
The British supercar maker Nobel uses the Duratec, with IIRC twin turbos to make some serious power out of 2.5L and later 3L powerplants.
But I agree, I would have liked to see the 3.5L variant 3-5 years ago, and not just now.
Many Contour enthusiasts ended up fitting the 2.5L heads on 3L engine blocks to build higher compression 3L engines.
I believe the Duratec V6 saw many variants, used by Mazda, Jaguar, Ford and even provided some parts for Aston Martins V12 some believe. I believe the 3.0L DAMB V6 in the Lincoln LS and was based on the Duratec as well.
The British supercar maker Nobel uses the Duratec, with IIRC twin turbos to make some serious power out of 2.5L and later 3L powerplants.
But I agree, I would have liked to see the 3.5L variant 3-5 years ago, and not just now.
My 1997 Toyota Avalon has 200HP and it was one of the first OBD2 engines at that time. I think 1996 was 190hp.
^^^ In 1996 everything was OBD-2.
Indeed. My year of the Integra for example was the last year of OBD1 Integras.
I meant to say that the Toyota V6 was the first OBD2 compliant engine.
"THE" first OBD2 complaint engines? I think it's more accurate to say "ONE OF THE" first OBD2 compliant engines.
List of OBD2 compliant engines in the 1994 model year (there are none for 1993 model year):
1994 Audi 100 2.8
1994 Ford Mustang 3.8
1994 Ford Cougar,Thunderbird 4.6
1994 Mercedes C220 2.2
1994 Mercedes C280,S320,SL320 3.2
1994 Nissan G20 2.0
1994 Toyota Camry,ES300 3.0
1994 Toyota T100 2.7
1994 Toyota Previa 2.4
1994 Volkswagen Corrado 2.8
1994 Volvo 850 Turbo 2.3
List of OBD2 compliant engines in the 1994 model year (there are none for 1993 model year):
1994 Audi 100 2.8
1994 Ford Mustang 3.8
1994 Ford Cougar,Thunderbird 4.6
1994 Mercedes C220 2.2
1994 Mercedes C280,S320,SL320 3.2
1994 Nissan G20 2.0
1994 Toyota Camry,ES300 3.0
1994 Toyota T100 2.7
1994 Toyota Previa 2.4
1994 Volkswagen Corrado 2.8
1994 Volvo 850 Turbo 2.3
Anyhow, OBD-II compliance really isn't a function of the engine per se, it is a function of the sensors and the PCM attached to the engine.
I could, if I wanted to, make my 1988 Ford Mustang GT OBD-II compliant by adding a post-cat oxygen sensor, a purge-flow sensor (for evaporative emisssions monitoring), and changing the PCM to one out of a 1996 Ford E150 van with a 5.0L engine (the only OBD-II application of the 5.0L engine that still has a distributor. All others are distributorless) Of course this would necessitate a lot of rewiring, sine the PCM has a different connector, but it could be done and serves to illustrate what the differences really are:
Some additional sensors and different PCM programming.
I could, if I wanted to, make my 1988 Ford Mustang GT OBD-II compliant by adding a post-cat oxygen sensor, a purge-flow sensor (for evaporative emisssions monitoring), and changing the PCM to one out of a 1996 Ford E150 van with a 5.0L engine (the only OBD-II application of the 5.0L engine that still has a distributor. All others are distributorless) Of course this would necessitate a lot of rewiring, sine the PCM has a different connector, but it could be done and serves to illustrate what the differences really are:
Some additional sensors and different PCM programming.
The 2.5L Duratec was 'heavily inspired' by the 2.5L Mazda KL which went into production in '91. The KL is split-block, internally balanced, all alloy block with cast-in iron cylinder liners, and cast-in iron 4bolt mains, 60degree short stroke V6 with cloverleafed chamber. When the KL was released, Ford had NOTHING close to it, they still used the cast iron, push rod Cologne V6 from decades earlier. Shortly after, guess who comes out with a KL-clone called the Duratec? The Mazda KL was also co-developed with Porsche (surprise surprise) and has been said to be as bulletproof as the Toyota V8s by an oil company who ran tests on it. About 95'ish, Ford has requested Mazda stop developing V6's (a crying shame) and they agreed to develop only 4cylinder engines for both Ford and Mazdas use (Mazda MZR). Being designed after the KL, the Duratec is indeed a great engine. Now, I strongly believe "Ford's quality is equal to Brand X" strictly because of all the Japanese/British chassis' and technology that they use. How else does a doodoo manufacturer become top-rated overnight? If anyone remmebers the reliability report from about 3 months ago that said among 5yr old vehicles, Mazda was the most reliable manufacturer with Honda a close second! (yes thats right) Currently, Ford is definately laughing from it's joint ventures! Too bad they can't manage their company for [clip]!
JTK
$100 Site Donor 2025
Comparing interior quality, feel and fitment, I'm not impressed at all with my brother's 2007 Camry LE as compared to my lowly basic 2001 Windstar LX. I realize they are a different class of vehicle, I'm just talking panel, upolstry and switchgear feel/fitment. FMC has always had the better interiors IMO.
Joel
Joel
I'm with you, I never could understand why people think Japanese cars have quality interiors. I've always found them to be absolutely atrocious. IMO, for many years American cars have had much better, more comfortable to be in, more simplistic interiors. Granted, this is just a matter of opinion, but I could just never understand the allure of the utilitarian, sharp, ugly interiors of Japanese cars. The newest Accord is, IMO, probably one of the worst; however, there are exceptions, like the G35 (particularly the new one).
Granted, I have to admit, most European cars are so far ahead of the Japanese and Americans they don't stand a chance. Audi, IMO, has always had some of the best.
Granted, I have to admit, most European cars are so far ahead of the Japanese and Americans they don't stand a chance. Audi, IMO, has always had some of the best.
I really agree with what you say conceptually. But I disagree with the interior of the newest Accord (if you're talking 7th generation). I think it is one of the most beautiful interior designs I've ever seen. In fact, this latest design has actually received very high marks from numerous sources I've read. However, execution has been iffy, with lots of complaints of rattling. Fortunately mine hasn't had a problem, but I'm listening.
Overall though, I think you're right. Many of the Japanese interiors have traditionally been "understated" and, as you said, utilitarian, even spartan. I guess for some people, that's part of the appeal...they like the "simpler is better" look. Seems that the more the Japanese have tried to make it sophisticated, the more problems they have. I don't know...just my opinion.
Are you talking about them being ahead in the quality of their interior design or its execution/performance? Because the Europeans, in general, have a long history of electrical problems, including with interior devices, gadgets, and gizmos. Love their designs, technology, innovation...not always that good at making it work right long term.
Many electrical problems are caused by connection problems. There's a testimonial on the Caig Labs Dexoit site about a Mercedes owner who used the stuff on all of the connections on an old Mercedes in the process of fixing it. After he was done, everything that hadn't worked did work.
I believe it, too. Many of these older cars don't have waterproof underhood connections. The terminals are open for water to get into.
Ever drive through a puddle after a recent snowstorm? Think that might be salt water? Wonder what it does when it gets in those open underhood connections?
The thing that I've noticed is that the quality of the electrical harness connectors found in vehicles just keeps getting better. That should result in much better electrical reliability compared to older vehicles.
I believe it, too. Many of these older cars don't have waterproof underhood connections. The terminals are open for water to get into.
Ever drive through a puddle after a recent snowstorm? Think that might be salt water? Wonder what it does when it gets in those open underhood connections?
The thing that I've noticed is that the quality of the electrical harness connectors found in vehicles just keeps getting better. That should result in much better electrical reliability compared to older vehicles.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Owning a Wrangler did it for me ..and to a certain extent, having my minivan last so long. I just don't see the point of any "worship" of the automobile. Now the jeep purchases can be hard pressed for utility, at least in a practical sense, ..but the lackluster acceleration ..the less then boulevard ride ..etc..etc ..just seemed to sap all the "bling" out of automobiles for me. They're reduced to appliances and I could care less about most of the aesthetic attributes of a vehicle. If and when my daughter gives up her 91 Taurus, I'll gladly use it as my beater daily driver. I hope to never purchase a new vehicle (or any other vehicles). Even my wife is committed to this way of thinking. She just sees no point in investing so much into something that does no more than its appointed task. You pay large for showing your ego/personality on 4 wheels. I like the simple approach.
I had to have my trans in my minivan rebuilt about 10 years ago. The owner, a nice personable guy, was talking about how he found an Isuzu pickup at a Chevy dealer. Bare bones (he commented, "it didn't even have a radio"). Now I truly appreciate the attraction this pickup had for him. He'd made a very good living on complex automobiles. The last thing he wanted to do was to be subject to the same liabilities in his own vehicle purchases. It was all he needed.
FWIW: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070426/bs_nm/ford_earns_dc_4
"Ford results beat estimates"
I liked the part about "lower warranty costs bolstered Ford's North American results by about $400 million during the quarter and helped the automaker beat Wall Street expectations."
Sounds like good news.
"Ford results beat estimates"
I liked the part about "lower warranty costs bolstered Ford's North American results by about $400 million during the quarter and helped the automaker beat Wall Street expectations."
Sounds like good news.
Yes. We just got a brand new one at work (Grand Caravan SXT). What a POS....
- Status
Similar threads
