What I know about them:
...but I don't know what those Achilles heels are.
What makes these things crash, burn or die? Why wouldn't I want one with under 70,000 miles for under $5000?
We need Dean in here, he had one he liked a lot before it was totaled, and I think did a transfer case repair?
Mondeos are really good cars.
Make that look like a Jag- win.
What's the "AWD-sort of" thing?
I had the hots for BTCC-influenced Mondeos badly at one point.
alfadriver wrote: Mondeos are really good cars. Make that look like a Jag- win.
I know. That's why I'm wondering why these things have semi-abysmal resale value.
Thought the x-type shared the same flaws as the Lincoln LS.
I had one. It was a 2002 I think. 2.5L with a 5 speed manual. It had just under 100k when I bought it for $4000 in 2009 maybe. Common problems seemed to be coils dying (can get the same one from a toyota) rear lower control arm bushings died at around 100k and then you ate rear tires fast. Headlight adjusters also got brittle and broke, but there is a workaround to that. Nothing else seemed out of the ordinary as far as maintenance or reliability. I liked mine a whole lot and got it to a rather worry free 170k before I started having problems and had to give it up (I also busted it up a bit hooning about and using it as a city commuter.)
Be aware that if your really going for the AWD snow prowess you want one of the early ones. Later ones lost the viscous coupling in the center diff and became comparatively useless.
TR7 wrote: Be aware that if your really going for the AWD snow prowess you want one of the early ones. Later ones lost the viscous coupling in the center diff and became comparatively useless.
Hence my "sort of" comment. Any idea when that changeover occurred?
We live in a midatlantic state so serious snow isn't a real concern. I assume given the Mondeo platform they are front-biased?
yupididit wrote: Thought the x-type shared the same flaws as the Lincoln LS.
You're thinking of the S-Type, which shared the LS platform.
I can add alot to this but I will get back to you later on this as I am t work. so here is the Q&D
The short of it is they are great cars with some know and well docments quirks that any DIY GRM person can deal with. The issue is that for the most part these were not purchese by car people and as such got a bad rep.
Early cars up to 03 and a viscous transfer case that was more fun to drive but was more prone to fail. they were under designed for the cars weight. hte 04+ ones are direct gear drive units that are more robust but still dont like being hammered on (no neutral to drive drops) And they are a NLA part so you will have to get a used one if you want a replacement.
Get the newest lowest millage one you can find and then do a complete fluid change using Amesoil products. the driveline fluids are suposed to be for "the life of the car" what that means is that when they wear out and should have been surviced the car is instead scrapped as something brakes. So ya they last the life of the car or in many cases the car lasts the life of the fluids in the driveline.
The shop manual calls for fluid changes every 30-40K (for severe duty) meaning if you actually drive the car you should change them every 30-40K. This is for the dif, the transfer case and the transmission.
When purchasing one look at the rear seal of the transfer case and make sure it is dry. If it is wet move on. They only hold about 3/4 of a quart in them and when they start leaking they go dry and fail fast. It is good to keep an eyen on these. Inspect with every oil change.
There is a nown issue with these cars going in to safe mode. I have found that it is 99.9% of the time caused by either the sensor on the throtal going bad or the sensor on the throtal plate going bad. It is a drive by wire system with redundency but it only takes one part to fail to kick it in to dafe mode. Many actually wrongly atribute this to a transmission failuer. It is not. the trans goes in to safe mode and will not come out untill the fault in the fly by wrire trottle system is fixed.
These cars are VERY sensitive to alignment and will eat tires if it is out.
Ware items include tie rod ends ball joints rear upper link bushings
All should be looked at and serviced BEFORE you start going through tires in an alarming rate.
the rear camber is adjusted by moving the whole rear subframe. Closely inspect any car you are considering for the rear having excessive rear camber. this could indicate a rear hit of some sort. In some cars I have seen it just developing excessive camber and I really don't know why. There is a simple fix that involves swapping out an adjustable arm from a Volvo (V50??) that allows for easy rear camber adjustment. I actually had resigned a replacement in 3d Autocad hat I was going to get made but with my car getting totalled it became a moot point.
All this is easy stuff that can allbe handeled in your driveway. They are relaxing comfortalbe cars that do a great job of eating up the miles. They also handel very well for wha they are. I like to say they are not as soft as a Merc but not as sporty as a BMW.
I will post more if I think about it,
Ohya the headlight adjusters are a known failure point the plastic screws dry and brake causing you head lights to loo everywhere but down the road. I just took bailing wire and wired them in pace inside the housing and then put the covers back on. There are repair kits out there but I never tried them.
Oh you want a 3.0l version the 2.5's are gutless the 3.0 is a great motor!!!
TR7 wrote: Be aware that if your really going for the AWD snow prowess you want one of the early ones. Later ones lost the viscous coupling in the center diff and became comparatively useless.
Not useless just meant you actually got AWD as you had a direct geared connection. Not good for hooning but better at being a AWD. Also as noed the early viscous ones were marginal for the 2.5l motors. the 3.0 motors needed the more robust gear based one. I drove both and actaully liked the later one for winter stuff. The early one was much better at taking off ramps at great speed. 
Duke wrote:TR7 wrote: Be aware that if your really going for the AWD snow prowess you want one of the early ones. Later ones lost the viscous coupling in the center diff and became comparatively useless.Hence my "sort of" comment. Any idea when that changeover occurred? We live in a midatlantic state so serious snow isn't a real concern. I assume given the Mondeo platform they are front-biased?
I think the viscous ones were front bias the later one was a true AWD. It was fun to have the car on the lift and turning one wheel and seeing the other three turn. (you have to have it in neutral to do this)
dean: EXCELLENT! That's the stuff I was hoping for. Thanks for the detailed infor.
I miss my car :(
The day I got it.
dean1484 wrote:TR7 wrote: Be aware that if your really going for the AWD snow prowess you want one of the early ones. Later ones lost the viscous coupling in the center diff and became comparatively useless.Not useless just meant you actually got AWD as you had a direct geared connection. Not good for hooning but better at being a AWD. Also as noed the early viscous ones were marginal for the 2.5l motors. the 3.0 motors needed the more robust gear based one. I drove both and actaully liked the later one for winter stuff. The early one was much better at taking off ramps at great speed.
I was under the impression the later ones were open and relied on traction control to "work"
Basil Exposition wrote:yupididit wrote: Thought the x-type shared the same flaws as the Lincoln LS.You're thinking of the S-Type, which shared the LS platform.
Thanks
In reply to TR7:
Nope they are direct gear drive. Have you driven one?
dean1484 wrote: In reply to TR7: Nope they are direct gear drive. Have you driven one?
I had an early one. But I remember there being a lot of bitching on the forums that the later ones would lose traction in the rear and the front tires would never move. The explanation was that later cars lost the viscous coupling and hence the ability to transfer power effectively. The transfer case is supposedly the same between the early and late cars minus the coupling. What is direct gear drive? It can't be locked, that would impractical and make low speed maneuvers a bitch. There must be slip somewhere and I didn't think they were torsen.
They work amazingly well in the snow. Our is an 02 and yes it needed a xfer/centerdiff fix, but my bride put 150k on that car and the only other items needed were the aforementioned ignition coils. Lotsa platic bits in the cabin, some of which seem to like to fall off. Not that big a deal really. it's still here with a quarter million miles on it and it still works.
In reply to dean1484 and TR7:
It sounds like the later version is basically the front and rear are driven by an open center differential? Hence the idea that TC needed to kick in to restrain the spinning wheels and send power to the ones that hadn't broken loose? The amount of torque sent to the other end would be proportional to the brake torque on the spinning wheels; an open diff allows different speeds, but sends the same torque to both ends (including zero if one's one a frictionless surface).
As opposed to the viscous version, which if it's like the Syncro setup as I understand it, always drives the fronts, and if there's a certain amount of relative motion (fronts going faster than rears), starts sending power to the rear as the viscous goo does its thing.
Ransom wrote: In reply to dean1484 and TR7: It sounds like the later version is basically the front and rear are driven by an open center differential? Hence the idea that TC needed to kick in to restrain the spinning wheels and send power to the ones that hadn't broken loose? The amount of torque sent to the other end would be proportional to the brake torque on the spinning wheels; an open diff allows different speeds, but sends the same torque to both ends (including zero if one's one a frictionless surface). As opposed to the viscous version, which if it's like the Syncro setup as I understand it, always drives the fronts, and if there's a certain amount of relative motion (fronts going faster than rears), starts sending power to the rear as the viscous goo does its thing.
That makes sense. Got it.
That I know about how my car worked. Power was always 50/50 front and rear. The difs were down stream of the transfer case. My car had traction control so if one tire slipped power went to the one with grip. It felt like it had LSD both front and rear but I never looked in to it to verify. It is a really good system that worked really well for me. It inspires confidences when driving. Probably a bit more than it should.
This doing nothing to make me stop wanting one of these. Nor does remembering that there's a wagon version. Though the only one of those on local CL doesn't seem to have gotten the depreciation memo.
I'll just leavethis here
You'll need to log in to post.
