S60 vs Ford Mondeo 2015

[AlexSong1990]

my instantaneous fuel efficiency on the highway is typically between 12km/l (less if on a upward slope) to 16km/l, 99km/l if I let go of the pedal for long enough... hahahahaha

 

I believe if you really having lots and lots of highway time then the 1.5 EcoBoost should get you much better fuel efficiency than I get. I think averages of 14km/l or more is possible. As it is Lucille spends lots of time on the highway and recorded 12km/l at least. I only get such poor figures because I'm frequently driving in start-stop conditions.

 

Personally I don't feel any reason to not trust trip computer calculation. The car's onboard computer itself is what controls fuel injection and is the one that records the distance on the odometer. I find that at most for many people the difference between trip computer and self-calculate is +/- 0.4km/l.

Considering the car is the one that is able to track both fuel injection quantities and distance travelled, it is probably the most accurate we can get.

 

 

 

Volvo may still have a reputation of safety first, but that's not saying that their cars are lightyears safer than anything else. Crash test results of the Mondeo are all quite good apart from the roof crumple test which seems a bit poorer than expected. And there are safety features that Volvo uses that are present in the Mondeo, likely coming from the time that Ford owned Volvo.

 

And for me the 2.0L Mondeo was one of the safest options I could choose because of a raft of active safety features - adaptive car-sensing headlamps, pre-collision assist, lane-keeping aid, radar-based adaptive cruise, blind spot monitoring and front+rear parking sensors with dynamic guideline reverse cam.

Got much knowledge,thanks!

[teomingern]

Oh Lucille gets 12 km / L on highways... that's pretty ok lar... 14 km / L would be a dream. But then again it depends on how fast you like to drive and how hard you accelerate... for my type of driving, I doubt I'll ever get very good fuel consumption. That's where I would be pretty satisfied with 12 km /L. 120 kmh is really pretty bad for consumption for my Impreza... might be ok for the Mondeo with the 6th gear though... let's see how... can't wait to get into the market... just that my finances doesn't permit me at this point... hopefully in a few month's time I can report in with a new Mondeo 1.5 L...

[WeiYangMok]

Hello all. My family have owned 4 fords since 2008. 

 

Bought mondeo 2.3 2008 (1st hand) [sold due to upgrading]

focus st reg 2006 (used) [sold cos upgraded to RS]

smax diesel 2014 (management car) 

focus rs 2010 (used) 

 

Just let me share my 2 cents for the benefit of all

 

To me, you have to own a ford to let it show what it can do. the test drive routes really dont do it justice. fords and jap equivalents can be compared on sg roads but once u get on the highway that's where the difference really comes in. 

we take the mondeo very often up to malaysia and having tried the camry as well, the mondeo gives so much more juice at >130km/h than the camry. of cos the subject matter is a 2.3 mondeo so the 2.0 is alot better. 

maintenance wise none of our 4 fords have any issues at all other than engine mounting changed once at 5 y.o. mark. fords are just confidence inspiring but i believe that many singaporeans are still sketchy about buying fords because of the bad reputation it has from many many years back, such as drink fuel like drink water and maintenance issues. 

 

maintenance wise many guys in the fordclub will recommend a mechanic in sinming (used to work in ford servicing centre) 

 

anyway to compare with volvo, i would say that interior finishing on the new mondeo mk5 is a huge leap from the mk4 mondeo and really comparable to volvo already. I would say both are very similar cars but for the price difference is really kind of paying for the badge and brand already. as for now, the 2.0 mondeo is no longer going to be brought in but the 1.5 is quite impressive for a 1.5 turbo engine. the pedal shift are also very exciting for spirited driving! 

then again really got to see your budget and whether u looking for safety alone or safety + driving pleasure

Oh Lucille gets 12 km / L on highways... that's pretty ok lar... 14 km / L would be a dream. But then again it depends on how fast you like to drive and how hard you accelerate... for my type of driving, I doubt I'll ever get very good fuel consumption. That's where I would be pretty satisfied with 12 km /L. 120 kmh is really pretty bad for consumption for my Impreza... might be ok for the Mondeo with the 6th gear though... let's see how... can't wait to get into the market... just that my finances doesn't permit me at this point... hopefully in a few month's time I can report in with a new Mondeo 1.5 L...

 

teomingern, do join us on fordclubsg! 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/FordClubSingapore/

 

this is the less active forum

http://www.fordclubsg.com/smf/index.php

[teomingern]

Thanks bro... but I don't use Facebook... heh heh... I'll lurk around till I get my car lar... thanks for the feedback. Very helpful. Puts my mind at peace since your experience with Ford goes back ten years. So I guess the reliability is there.

[7hm]

Oh Lucille gets 12 km / L on highways... that's pretty ok lar... 14 km / L would be a dream. But then again it depends on how fast you like to drive and how hard you accelerate... for my type of driving, I doubt I'll ever get very good fuel consumption. That's where I would be pretty satisfied with 12 km /L. 120 kmh is really pretty bad for consumption for my Impreza... might be ok for the Mondeo with the 6th gear though... let's see how... can't wait to get into the market... just that my finances doesn't permit me at this point... hopefully in a few month's time I can report in with a new Mondeo 1.5 L...

 

I believe his 12km/l is combined, but Lucille does a lot more highway time than I ever do.

i believe that many singaporeans are still sketchy about buying fords because of the bad reputation it has from many many years back, such as drink fuel like drink water and maintenance issues.

 

Last time the Mazda-derived Laser in the early 2000s was fairly common. But that was a Japanese based model, so that could have been why.

 

I myself think the brand has just fallen out of public eye due to weak marketing and the fact that Ford is seen as American (which is neither German engineering or Japanese reliability) and also not as a premium brand.

Which is ironic as current global Fords such as Mondeo are engineered primarily by Ford Eu which has a lot of German engineers.

[WeiYangMok]

I believe his 12km/l is combined, but Lucille does a lot more highway time than I ever do.

 

Last time the Mazda-derived Laser in the early 2000s was fairly common. But that was a Japanese based model, so that could have been why.

 

I myself think the brand has just fallen out of public eye due to weak marketing and the fact that Ford is seen as American (which is neither German engineering or Japanese reliability) and also not as a premium brand.

Which is ironic as current global Fords such as Mondeo are engineered primarily by Ford Eu which has a lot of German engineers.

yes agree. in my honest opinion, i feel the regent motor did the wrong move of stopping the 2l mondeo and replacing it with the 1.5l. 

 

with the trim level i would really think the car compares to the E class kind of range. but since its a 1.5l now u gotta compare it to a c180 or something around that sort. so being wedged between makes it hard for people to choose because people seldom go in between. its like ppl either have budget <120k or above 160k. so now its a 1.5l at about 140k its hard to find the buyers in between since people would rather pay abit more premium for a car >160k with better brand and slightly better engine (probably) 

[teomingern]

yes agree. in my honest opinion, i feel the regent motor did the wrong move of stopping the 2l mondeo and replacing it with the 1.5l. 

 

with the trim level i would really think the car compares to the E class kind of range. but since its a 1.5l now u gotta compare it to a c180 or something around that sort. so being wedged between makes it hard for people to choose because people seldom go in between. its like ppl either have budget <120k or above 160k. so now its a 1.5l at about 140k its hard to find the buyers in between since people would rather pay abit more premium for a car >160k with better brand and slightly better engine (probably) 

 

I guess they need to move cars... they have been really selling very few cars... I think they are going with both the 1.5 L and the 2.0 L. The salesman told me the 2.0 L will come in around Apr/May period. The 2.0 L being the fully loaded E-class competitor while the 1.5 L will be the C-class competitor. The 1.5 L thrashes any of the Jap 2.0 L class sedans.

[Lucille]

Some minor minor correction.

 

I am averaging about 11.2 to 11.5km/l. Abt 70% highway. I don't consider myself light footed but neither do I drive like a racer boy. The usual I suppose. Time to floor it n I will n does.

 

I have been comparing the on board FC n manual calculation for the past 18 full tank that I pumped so far. It's within 0.4km/l difference with the on board calculation being more optimistic all the time. I guess it's fair enough to say it's pretty accurate.

[X09a_justice]

am on a s60 T5, with polestar tune recently bumping it up to 253 hp 400nm torque, a medium footer (likes the G force when the turbo pulls hard), also same as you 70% highway. 

 

this tank got me around 735km when the lights came on and pumped at 745km, manual calcuations at 12.76km/l. 

 

 

 

Some minor minor correction.

I am averaging about 11.2 to 11.5km/l. Abt 70% highway. I don't consider myself light footed but neither do I drive like a racer boy. The usual I suppose. Time to floor it n I will n does.

I have been comparing the on board FC n manual calculation for the past 18 full tank that I pumped so far. It's within 0.4km/l difference with the on board calculation being more optimistic all the time. I guess it's fair enough to say it's pretty accurate.

 

[7hm]

I have little doubt that the Drive engines in the latest Volvo T5s are more efficient than the EcoBoosts. Volvo has designed their engines with ideal ratio ~500cc cylinders and have a lower RPM for max torque, as well as having just a bit more hp.

 

The Volvo engines are also of a newer generation and it shows.

[alkapone]

Hi guys,

 

What do you say about this car??

 

According to this article, it will be presented at 2016 Detroit Auto Show.

 

 

http://20152016releasedate.com/2017-volvo-s90-release-date-interior-price/

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Letov]

I saw a guy keep posting in Ford Facebook saying engine EOL. After reading some articles, knowing that Ford going to renew their 2L ecoboost engine. I believe that might be the reason why RM not promoting the 2L now. Taiwan selling the 2L hybrid, unfortunately RM no plan to bring in.

[Reo]

There's some resemblance to an old Jaguar to me - must be the grille.

 

Hi guys,

 

What do you say about this car??

 

According to this article, it will be presented at 2016 Detroit Auto Show.

 

 

http://20152016releasedate.com/2017-volvo-s90-release-date-interior-price/

 

 

[Columbian78]

Sorry, i meant to share but i realise my tone was like aggresive.

 

I was thinking not all trip computers are accurate or has the same accuracy. Hence in comparison thread like this or elsewhere, a same ref method would make figures comparable. If fc is important to a carbuyer, I am sure a diff of 1 to 2 km/L is not insignificant. In the bread and butter cars that I had, they could be as much as 2-3 km/L off. Consistency rather than accuracy, still useful within one's own info consumption.

 

We are using the same method to calculate fc. When I got my first car as a newbie, I was keeping hardcopy records of every tank pump. After a year I stopped as I lost interest. Now with an app, i found it alot more fun and I had been doing it on my 1 year plus sylphy. Theres a lot of info presentation and I could see trends. For example, my worst ever tank is 9km/L while best is 14km/L. I could see trends through the months in graphs. An app is not a requirement for the job as you had correctly pointed out. It only makes the job easier and fun, for me. I suspect if fc-oriented people try, they could be addicted like me. 

 

My comment on highway is because I feel fc of cars while cruising on highway, or any instantaneous fc is not that useful. We know an engine is most efficient when it is doing the same thing over a period of time. A real world fc has to take into account all the diff jobs the engine does like accelerating, decelerating, idling. Maybe I had mixed up with some observations elsewhere, many postings of instantaneous fc (on highways) with photos which are obviously peak values and then claiming their fc is very good. 

 

Common for all manufacturers to overclaim their fc. Nissan claimed about 12km/L for my car. I achieved about 11km/L. Quite close and I am satisfied, base on my driving patterns. Note that mine is 1.6t. What are the manufacturer claimed figures and user achievable figures for S60 and Mondeo?

 

We are actually talking about real world fuel consumption. That is what the trip computer in your car is supposed to do. Although I don't own a car in Singapore with a trip computer, I have driven many cars overseas with the trip computer and I can say that the trip computer is actually pretty accurate. I mean I rely on it to decide when I should refuel in a foreign unfamiliar country.

 

In any case, my fuel consumption posted is real world fuel consumption as well. Since I don't have the benefit of a trip computer, I just reset my odometer every time I top the tank to max and note the mileage when the fuel warning light comes on. Based on the fuel pump meter, I know how many litres I pumped and with this, it consistently tells me that I get about 11+ km / L. How's that different from what you do using an app? It's just simple arithemtic. Don't need an app to tell me how to do long division, neither do I need an app to tell me that I am getting consistent fuel consumption when my mileage doesn't change much with every tank I pump.

 

If you look at the other Mondeo thread comparing the Mondeo to the Mazda 6, you will see the full detail of my travel log and the amount of time I spend on highways versus non-highways. I don't understand the comment about living on highways??? Your travel pattern may differ from mine, but it does not invalidate my fuel consumption figure.

 

On another note... how old is your Sylphy now? 11.3 km / L is way below what Nissan claims right? I remember when the Sylphy first came out, it was touted to have excellent consumption. But 11.3 is pretty poor?

 

[Heman75]

Hi guys,

 

What do you say about this car??

 

According to this article, it will be presented at 2016 Detroit Auto Show.

 

 

http://20152016releasedate.com/2017-volvo-s90-release-date-interior-price/

 

very nice look but the back side looks bad to my view.. the V90 is nicer.

[Lucille]

The published combined FC for the 2.0 Mondeo is 12.5km/l.

 

My 11plus km/l is not super far off so I think it is still acceptable.

 

Yup, it's pretty well researched n verified by independent parties that manufacturer's FC claim are never achievable in a typical real world. Simply because their test parameters are fixed n dated assumptions on the super optimistic side of things. It's just by how much off they are.

 

Sorry, i meant to share but i realise my tone was like aggresive.

 

I was thinking not all trip computers are accurate or has the same accuracy. Hence in comparison thread like this or elsewhere, a same ref method would make figures comparable. If fc is important to a carbuyer, I am sure a diff of 1 to 2 km/L is not insignificant. In the bread and butter cars that I had, they could be as much as 2-3 km/L off. Consistency rather than accuracy, still useful within one's own info consumption.

 

We are using the same method to calculate fc. When I got my first car as a newbie, I was keeping hardcopy records of every tank pump. After a year I stopped as I lost interest. Now with an app, i found it alot more fun and I had been doing it on my 1 year plus sylphy. Theres a lot of info presentation and I could see trends. For example, my worst ever tank is 9km/L while best is 14km/L. I could see trends through the months in graphs. An app is not a requirement for the job as you had correctly pointed out. It only makes the job easier and fun, for me. I suspect if fc-oriented people try, they could be addicted like me.

 

My comment on highway is because I feel fc of cars while cruising on highway, or any instantaneous fc is not that useful. We know an engine is most efficient when it is doing the same thing over a period of time. A real world fc has to take into account all the diff jobs the engine does like accelerating, decelerating, idling. Maybe I had mixed up with some observations elsewhere, many postings of instantaneous fc (on highways) with photos which are obviously peak values and then claiming their fc is very good.

 

Common for all manufacturers to overclaim their fc. Nissan claimed about 12km/L for my car. I achieved about 11km/L. Quite close and I am satisfied, base on my driving patterns. Note that mine is 1.6t. What are the manufacturer claimed figures and user achievable figures for S60 and Mondeo?

[LoverofCar]

my instantaneous fuel efficiency on the highway is typically between 12km/l (less if on a upward slope) to 16km/l, 99km/l if I let go of the pedal for long enough... hahahahaha

 

I believe if you really having lots and lots of highway time then the 1.5 EcoBoost should get you much better fuel efficiency than I get. I think averages of 14km/l or more is possible. As it is Lucille spends lots of time on the highway and recorded 12km/l at least. I only get such poor figures because I'm frequently driving in start-stop conditions.

 

Personally I don't feel any reason to not trust trip computer calculation. The car's onboard computer itself is what controls fuel injection and is the one that records the distance on the odometer. I find that at most for many people the difference between trip computer and self-calculate is +/- 0.4km/l.

Considering the car is the one that is able to track both fuel injection quantities and distance travelled, it is probably the most accurate we can get.

 

 

 

Volvo may still have a reputation of safety first, but that's not saying that their cars are lightyears safer than anything else. Crash test results of the Mondeo are all quite good apart from the roof crumple test which seems a bit poorer than expected. And there are safety features that Volvo uses that are present in the Mondeo, likely coming from the time that Ford owned Volvo.

 

And for me the 2.0L Mondeo was one of the safest options I could choose because of a raft of active safety features - adaptive car-sensing headlamps, pre-collision assist, lane-keeping aid, radar-based adaptive cruise, blind spot monitoring and front+rear parking sensors with dynamic guideline reverse cam.

Perhaps the correct statement about Volvo being the safest should be linked to the facts that they are the pioneer in most safety features in automotive. They develop safety features for the industry to follow.

[teomingern]

Sorry, i meant to share but i realise my tone was like aggresive.

 

I was thinking not all trip computers are accurate or has the same accuracy. Hence in comparison thread like this or elsewhere, a same ref method would make figures comparable. If fc is important to a carbuyer, I am sure a diff of 1 to 2 km/L is not insignificant. In the bread and butter cars that I had, they could be as much as 2-3 km/L off. Consistency rather than accuracy, still useful within one's own info consumption.

 

We are using the same method to calculate fc. When I got my first car as a newbie, I was keeping hardcopy records of every tank pump. After a year I stopped as I lost interest. Now with an app, i found it alot more fun and I had been doing it on my 1 year plus sylphy. Theres a lot of info presentation and I could see trends. For example, my worst ever tank is 9km/L while best is 14km/L. I could see trends through the months in graphs. An app is not a requirement for the job as you had correctly pointed out. It only makes the job easier and fun, for me. I suspect if fc-oriented people try, they could be addicted like me. 

 

My comment on highway is because I feel fc of cars while cruising on highway, or any instantaneous fc is not that useful. We know an engine is most efficient when it is doing the same thing over a period of time. A real world fc has to take into account all the diff jobs the engine does like accelerating, decelerating, idling. Maybe I had mixed up with some observations elsewhere, many postings of instantaneous fc (on highways) with photos which are obviously peak values and then claiming their fc is very good. 

 

Common for all manufacturers to overclaim their fc. Nissan claimed about 12km/L for my car. I achieved about 11km/L. Quite close and I am satisfied, base on my driving patterns. Note that mine is 1.6t. What are the manufacturer claimed figures and user achievable figures for S60 and Mondeo?

 

To be fair, I think the Jap manufacturers tend to be quite conservative with their fuel consumption reports. Whereas it would seem that the European manufacturers tend to be a lot more optimistic. As would the Korean manufacturers as well. I guess different methodologies in obtaining their fuel consumption figures also play a part. The US uses the EPA method which I have seen many people say that it's totally unrealistic. Also I guess for a country as large as the US, the driving patterns may vary really sharply, whereas in Singapore, the variation may not be as large since we're so small and we also don't kind of drive long road trips on a regular basis unlike in the US.