WingBender Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/reviews/2...eo-ghia-review/ A positive Ford review from them. I don't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 That's the kind of interior design we're supposed to go ga-ga about? A ton of fake wood placed in exceptionally odd spots? The reviewer would, apparently, end up with the Mondeo with the hideous faux wood package. The interior looks better on other iterations.... That... Awful... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igor Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) it's from Europe, they can use it to bash Ford -... oh yeah - lets invent 6th start category .. Igor Edited January 25, 2008 by igor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
focus05 Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 If Ford of NA produced this exact vehicle without it existing in Europe, it would have received probably 3 or 4 stars. Perception is everything. TTAC's glasses are no less colored than they believe Mulally's are. It's sort of sad that they look for failure and invent it when it isn't there (see their most recent deathwatch where they question Ford's fleet sales numbers). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcsario Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) Yeah, we're better off with fake wood on shit like this: I agree with you RJ, it's amazing someone would prefer the Mondeo over that. Edited January 25, 2008 by pcsario Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/reviews/2...eo-ghia-review/ A positive Ford review from them. I don't get it. TTAC must be wrong then. They are always wrong about all of their other reviews...this one must be no different. Same for the five stars they gave to the F-150 right below it. /sarcasm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Didja all catch this nugget? Mondeo’s 10.6 second zero to sixty time And TTAC still sucks. It has no journalistic integrity, and I'm NOT going to go through this review excising the crap, because I think I've done that ENOUGH with their other reporting to render it unnecessary at this point. BTW, the F150 review was penned by Sajeev Mehta, who used to come 'round this site. Article needs some editing, but since -that- is not a strong point of TTAC, he's not going to get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 Didja all catch this nugget?Mondeo’s 10.6 second zero to sixty time You mean this paragraph; My tester holstered Ford's 2.0-liter, 140hp diesel. The oil burner is an extremely refined unit, significantly smoother than the highly respected Volkswagen TDI. On paper, the diesel Mondeo’s 10.6 second zero to sixty sprint time seems, as the French are wont to say, insupportable. But the Mondeo serves-up a wave of torquey thrust from 1800 - 4500 rpm that helps Mondeo man maintain momentum. Using the standard light-action six-speed manual, I never ran out of gears. No matter how hard I thrashed the powerplant, I never saw less than 29 mpg. At a more sedate pace, I averaged 35 mpg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcsario Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 What? RJ trolling in another FOE topic? Will his hypocrisy ever end? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25, 2008 Share Posted January 25, 2008 (edited) From a 2.0 TDI: On a quiet Autobahn morning, I found myself passing other cars as if they were standing still. I peeked at the odometer and saw an indicated 135 mph. Bliss. Edited January 25, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 People say they want diesels. People say they want the Mondeo here. Do they realize that a 10.6 second 0-60 time comes along with the deal? The US and European markets are very different. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Didja all catch this nugget? Mondeo’s 10.6 second zero to sixty time People say they want diesels. People say they want the Mondeo here. Do they realize that a 10.6 second 0-60 time comes along with the deal? The US and European markets are very different. Wow...the hypocrisy is flowing thick tonight. Did you also forget that the Mondeo has a COMPLETE engine line up...4 cylinders, 6 cylinders and diesels. Plus, with how not shitty (read FORD NA), the Mondeo is, I wouldn't care how slow it was. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admiral Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Wow...the hypocrisy is flowing thick tonight. Did you also forget that the Mondeo has a COMPLETE engine line up...4 cylinders, 6 cylinders and diesels. Plus, with how not shitty (read FORD NA), the Mondeo is, I wouldn't care how slow it was. There's no six cylinder engine offered on the current Mondeo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcsario Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Most likely a typo. Anyway the ST will use Volvo's I6, so his point remains. It's a full lineup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 There's no six cylinder engine offered on the current Mondeo. Your right, I meant 5 cylinders ...so his point remains. Yes it does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Dont they have some V6 Diesel shared with Citroen or Renault (a 2.7 or 3.0L ?), or maybe use Volvo's D5? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 No room for a v engine in Mondeo/S-Max/Galaxy/LR2 EUCD. It's one of the things that needs to be addressed by the global CD team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Wow...the hypocrisy is flowing thick tonight. You know what buddy? I -love- the Mondeo's design. As far a cohesion goes, it exceeds anything to come out of Ford NA AND Ford Europe lo these many years. Fact is, the '96 Taurus was probably the last vehicle that spoke one singular language from front to back. Regardless----it remains a fact that diesels and the Mondeo demand certain sacrifices. Sacrifices that it would be hard pressed to assert the American public is prepared to make when push comes to shove. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 Fact is, the '96 Taurus was probably the last vehicle that spoke one singular language from front to back. And look at how Ford NA screwed that up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 And look at how Ford NA screwed that up. Only thing wrong they did styling wise with that car is take the oval shape a little bit too far... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 (edited) Only thing wrong they did styling wise with that car is take the oval shape a little bit too far... Yeah...that was the WHOLE DAMN CAR! From every angle it looked like ass. And not to mention how they completely fucked over the 20K SHO owners from 1996-1999. Edited January 26, 2008 by P71_CrownVic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 And look at how Ford NA screwed that up. You were 11 years old when that thing hit the market. On what authority do you have your opinions about anything that happened with it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 You were 11 years old when that thing hit the market. On what authority do you have your opinions about anything that happened with it? About the same as you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 About the same as you do. Oh, that's real mature. What-seriously-is your qualification to speak with any knowledge of what went wrong with the Taurus? I mean sure, you can look at what happened and say, "oo, that stank", but can you say WHY it happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 26, 2008 Share Posted January 26, 2008 (edited) You know what buddy? I -love- the Mondeo's design. As far a cohesion goes, it exceeds anything to come out of Ford NA AND Ford Europe lo these many years. Fact is, the '96 Taurus was probably the last vehicle that spoke one singular language from front to back. Regardless----it remains a fact that diesels and the Mondeo demand certain sacrifices. Sacrifices that it would be hard pressed to assert the American public is prepared to make when push comes to shove. The Mondeo and Taurus have similar internal dimensions but are worlds apart on the outside. That is no mistake on the part of the respective Ford divisions. Ford knows Americans would not accept Mondeo's compact design as a full sized car, even if it had a V6! Edited January 26, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.