Mondeo 2.2 TDCI ST or Vectra 1.9 CDTI SRI

Soldato
Joined
4 Apr 2003
Posts
7,964
Ok, having had a good long look at my vehicle situation, i have narrowed down my search to these two cars. I need a low mileage car as I will be doing 30k per year, mostly motorway so although for the money i could look at a higer mileage BMW 330D the running costs are higher enough to put me off.

Both seem nice and capeable on paper and although the Mondeo is quicker it is 2k more than a Vectra.

I am back to work in 6 weeks and I really don't want to catch the train as it means my day is about 1 1/2 hours longer due to extra travel time and it costs £14 per day.

Thoughts, opinions and experiences would be appreciated. I am going for a good test drive tomorrow in both which I will add to a review here.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
159,534
Mondeo - if not becuase its a nicer car, then becuase (seriously) the residuals are considerably better (Hence why it already costs £2k more for a used one).

You can get them brand new for £16300, by the way.

It also looks different to the regular LX's out there with its full ST220 bodykit and 18's - the Vectra looks like a regular Vectra, had a look around a GSi the other day and was shocked how... normal it looked.

Consider also a 320d - cheaper than 330d.
 
Permabanned
Joined
17 Jan 2006
Posts
1,971
Location
Haskins
for the budget you mentioned to me, you'd get a mint sensible mileage 330d saloon probably with full history and no more than 75k on the clock.

The serviceing of such a car would be no more (over its service period) than a Mondeo or Vectra (believe it or not). In addition, if you are looking at these, then surely a 320d is now an option!
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
4 Apr 2003
Posts
7,964
Oracle said:
for the budget you mentioned to me, you'd get a mint sensible mileage 330d saloon probably with full history and no more than 75k on the clock.

The serviceing of such a car would be no more (over its service period) than a Mondeo or Vectra (believe it or not). In addition, if you are looking at these, then surely a 320d is now an option!

Problem is I see me putting 100k miles on this car so although the BMWs are good the end mileage would be greater than I would want.
 
Associate
Joined
4 Jan 2005
Posts
407
I've got a '54 plate SRi CDTi, as have several of my colleagues. It replaced a Y plate Mondeo Zetec 2.0 petrol. I've never driven a (current model) diesel Mondeo.

I'm very impressed with the Vectra. It seems quicker than the petrol Mondeo. It's very relaxing to drive, less wind noise than the Mondeo, and bags of torque, as long as the revs are kept above 1500rpm. It will pull away without using the accelerator - great in traffic jams.

The fuel economy is outstanding. I drive the car in my job as a field service engineer, usually 5 or 6 journeys of 10 to 20 miles each day. The boot and back seat are full of spares and tools. My average is 52mpg. On a long run 60mpg is easily achieveable, as long as I keep to 65mph.
One of my colleagues drives his car hard, and still averages 45mpg.

If you get an SRi, avoid the 19" wheels, as they make the ride very harsh.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
4 Apr 2003
Posts
7,964
[TW]Fox said:
Mondeo - if not becuase its a nicer car, then becuase (seriously) the residuals are considerably better (Hence why it already costs £2k more for a used one).

You can get them brand new for £16300, by the way.

It also looks different to the regular LX's out there with its full ST220 bodykit and 18's - the Vectra looks like a regular Vectra, had a look around a GSi the other day and was shocked how... normal it looked.

Consider also a 320d - cheaper than 330d.

Yea, I like the look of the STs. How easy os it on the tyres though as they must cost a fair bit per corner, are we talking 10k miles for fronts or more
 
Soldato
Joined
27 Sep 2004
Posts
11,188
Location
The Ledge Beyond The Edge
Oracle said:
for the budget you mentioned to me, you'd get a mint sensible mileage 330d saloon probably with full history and no more than 75k on the clock.

The serviceing of such a car would be no more (over its service period) than a Mondeo or Vectra (believe it or not). In addition, if you are looking at these, then surely a 320d is now an option!

75k on the clock though, after a year its still a car with 105k i know people say these engines will do bags more than that, but why bother when a vectra or mondeo would be just as suitable. i know what i'd rather be in

I dunno i would be surprised if a BMW service is the same as a Ford/Vauxhall Service and doing 30k a year its going to be serviced every 6 months, so it could add up.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Aug 2004
Posts
6,324
Location
New Jersey, USA
The ST TDCI is one of the only Mondeos that makes sense as a new buy, if you pay £16k for it...

Even the earliest ones up for sale now (on an 04 plate, so 2 years old now) are selling for £12,500-13,000. The depreciation is huge, but only if you pay list price, which is nearly £23,000.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
7,765
if iwas putting 100k on a car i wouldent even considor the sport models, i want seats like armchairs and soft suspension. How about a pug 607 hdi. Big, cheap second hand and very comfy.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Aug 2004
Posts
6,324
Location
New Jersey, USA
You can get a Passat 2.0 TDI S (bottom of the range) for £16,252 (from Broadspeed), or a Mondeo ST TDCI for £16,684. You could have a Ghia X with the same engine for £15,737, too.

Look at the depreciation graph:

mondeovspassat.png


You'll lose LESS on the Mondeo than you will on the Passat, and you get to drive around in something which is top of the range with bags of kit... I know what I'd choose.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
6,705
Location
Cambs
OllyM said:
You'll lose LESS on the Mondeo than you will on the Passat, .

How'd you work that out. the mondeo costs more and ends up pretty much the same so net loss is largely the difference in purchase costs which is quite a lot albeit no one would pay 23k for a mondeo.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
159,534
pinkaardvark said:
How'd you work that out. the mondeo costs more and ends up pretty much the same so net loss is largely the difference in purchase costs which is quite a lot albeit no one would pay 23k for a mondeo.

As he stated, he is taking Broadspeed.com price NOT list price - so £16600 for the Mondeo and £16200 for the Passat.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Aug 2004
Posts
6,324
Location
New Jersey, USA
pinkaardvark said:
How'd you work that out. the mondeo costs more and ends up pretty much the same so net loss is largely the difference in purchase costs which is quite a lot albeit no one would pay 23k for a mondeo.

Read my post again, I stated the Broadspeed discounted prices, there's about £500 between them because of the huge discount on the Mondeo.
 
Permabanned
Joined
24 Jul 2003
Posts
2,584
JUMPURS said:
Not if you buy it at 18 months to 2 years old though

Er, so if you buy a top of the range passat at 18 months will you also have the same saving? But if you're spending £16k and buying 2 years old, why on earth would you buy an old mondeo or a passat?

This is a pointless argument. Comparing residuals of a top of the range mondeo to a bottom of the range passat proves nothing.
If you pick a mondeo and passat of the same new value, the same graph will result in a graph showing that mondeo losing much more than the passat.
 
Back
Top Bottom