Mondeo LX 2.3 petrol - Mazda L3 motor - engine whine

[WagonWheel]

I've test driven two Mondeo LX MC wagons, both 2.3 petrol versions which use the Mazda L3/Ford Duratec motor, and noticed an engine whine in both, one more prominent than the other (making it way more noticeable). The noise sort of sounds like a car reversing and identical to the whine in this video of a 2004 Mazda 6 in drive (same 2.3 motor): https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TmVbQoDTZIg

Now, I don't know if this is just a normal sound for this motor or whether something is wrong e.g. transmission pump?. Anyone experienced this in the petrol LX or Zetec or know what causes it?

Apart from the noise, the cars felt fine and drove well.

[NZ XR6]

I drove a MA 2.3 wagon for 2 years and it never made a noise like that - it was a very quiet drivetrain. Did it go away when the cars were stationary?

[cobrin]

Well it sounds more transmission related as it changes with gear changes than engine rpm, it's not normal for that noise to happen in any case. If you were in neutral and revved it would it follow the rpm. I'd be cautious in deciding to buy any one of them.

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by NZ XR6

I drove a MA 2.3 wagon for 2 years and it never made a noise like that - it was a very quiet drivetrain. Did it go away when the cars were stationary?

Thanks for replying, yeah, I'm pretty sure it stopped when stationary. In one I noticed that it also took a while to shift into reverse and back again and I think that can sometimes indicate transmission problems. Well, I'll be wary of another like them until I can find exactly what causes the noise. I wonder if a RACQ pre-purchase inspection would show the reason?

[.:4:.]

To me it sounds like the trans pump is on the way out. I had that happen years ago and it sounded the same for a while before it gave up. On the other hand, my wife had a 2.3l mazda 6 years ago and (whilst not being a rocket ship) it was a good motor for the size of the car and we never had any mechanical issues. Only sold it to up size

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by cobrin

Well it sounds more transmission related as it changes with gear changes than engine rpm, it's not normal for that noise to happen in any case. If you were in neutral and revved it would it follow the rpm. I'd be cautious in deciding to buy any one of them.

Yeah, it's a weird noise. I'm pretty sure the sound intensified with the rpm. Didn't seem to affect the way it drove though, it had plenty of zip. I'm reluctant to buy one until I can be sure of the cause. From what I've read a lot of older Mazda 6s had the same noise because it's the same engine and people had difficulty working out the cause e.g., some would say water pump or power steering or transmission pump.

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

To me it sounds like the trans pump is on the way out. I had that happen years ago and it sounded the same for a while before it gave up. On the other hand, my wife had a 2.3l mazda 6 years ago and (whilst not being a rocket ship) it was a good motor for the size of the car and we never had any mechanical issues. Only sold it to up size

Is it costly to replace a trans pump?

The Mazda 6 2.3 only went up to 2007 or thereabouts, not sure of the exact date.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

Is it costly to replace a trans pump?

The Mazda 6 2.3 only went up to 2007 or thereabouts, not sure of the exact date.

The mazda my wife had was an 03 model. When the pump went on my old car (not a ford or mazda) it shagged the whole box, so I cant tell you how much a pump fitted is, but a rebuilt box costs a couple grand (for a FWD 4spd zf)

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

The mazda my wife had was an 03 model. When the pump went on my old car (not a ford or mazda) it shagged the whole box, so I cant tell you how much a pump fitted is, but a rebuilt box costs a couple grand (for a FWD 4spd zf)

Ouch!

[NZ XR6]

The Mondeo has a different auto to the Mazda 6.

Sent from somewhere using Tapatalk

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by NZ XR6

The Mondeo has a different auto to the Mazda 6.

Sent from somewhere using Tapatalk

Ah ha! That is interesting. Thanks, that helps narrow it down.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

Ouch!

It didn't hurt that bad. The car was gifted to me by my dad, and I was 17 and gave it heaps, when the box failed he paid the 3600 for the rebuild with a shift kit. On pickup I got maybe half a kilometer down the road and it started ****ing out white smoke and not shifting, so I went straight back. They "fixed it" and a few months later it failed completely due to the use of non rated bolts in important places I was told. If I'm allowed I will name and shame, as I couldn't take the car back in the warrenty period as the nrma approved repairer had folded. $800 later with a second hand box that got me from 80k to 250k without missing a beat. When the second hand auto was fitted I was told the original was dropped. I asked "dropped?". They showed me the pan and it had the ugliest dodgy weld up the middle, worse then the scar on my uncle who removed his own appendix on station as the doctor in Antarctica. What grubs.

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

It didn't hurt that bad. The car was gifted to me by my dad, and I was 17 and gave it heaps, when the box failed he paid the 3600 for the rebuild with a shift kit. On pickup I got maybe half a kilometer down the road and it started ****ing out white smoke and not shifting, so I went straight back. They "fixed it" and a few months later it failed completely due to the use of non rated bolts in important places I was told. If I'm allowed I will name and shame, as I couldn't take the car back in the warrenty period as the nrma approved repairer had folded. $800 later with a second hand box that got me from 80k to 250k without missing a beat. When the second hand auto was fitted I was told the original was dropped. I asked "dropped?". They showed me the pan and it had the ugliest dodgy weld up the middle, worse then the scar on my uncle who removed his own appendix on station as the doctor in Antarctica. What grubs.

Every car has a story and that's a good one.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

Every car has a story and that's a good one.

Like anything, it's all fun if someone else.pays for it. If you are anything like myself you won't want to pay for something that will cost you money due to either abuse or lack of maintenance from the previous owner

[kevino]

These 2.3 litre Mondeos are cheap cars heap for sale in Brisbane 2014 models 45-55000 kms around 13k. Not bad for a 2 year old car.
The fuel consumption looks pretty heavy for a four cylinder.

What are the real world fuel consumption figures for a 2.3 litre Mondeo?

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by .:4:.

Like anything, it's all fun if someone else.pays for it. If you are anything like myself you won't want to pay for something that will cost you money due to either abuse or lack of maintenance from the previous owner

I agree, that's why I try to find out about problems I notice 'before' I consider getting a RACQ inspection. Even after an inspection, I pick the brains of the inspector if they're willing to talk. Not all inspectors are though, but I can ask a mechanic about the report. The best reports are when they don't find much. The car I have now had a great report and turned out to be a good purchase. Sure, some things can be overlooked and I guess that's where warranty can come in handy for those things warranty covers. Buying a car is a risk though and sometimes you can end up with a lemon no matter what you do.

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by kevino

These 2.3 litre Mondeos are cheap cars heap for sale in Brisbane 2014 models 45-55000 kms around 13k. Not bad for a 2 year old car.

The sedans and hatches tend to be a lot cheaper than the wagons for some reason.

Originally Posted by kevino

The fuel consumption looks pretty heavy for a four cylinder.

What are the real world fuel consumption figures for a 2.3 litre Mondeo?

Not sure, but Redbook lists 6.8 L/100km highway and 14.1 L/100km city. Combined is 9.5L/100km.

It could be the weight of the car with a smaller motor that causes the higher fuel consumption. The big selling point for the wagon I think is the large cargo area - both length and height.

[.:4:.]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

I agree, that's why I try to find out about problems I notice 'before' I consider getting a RACQ inspection. Even after an inspection, I pick the brains of the inspector if they're willing to talk. Not all inspectors are though, but I can ask a mechanic about the report. The best reports are when they don't find much. The car I have now had a great report and turned out to be a good purchase. Sure, some things can be overlooked and I guess that's where warranty can come in handy for those things warranty covers. Buying a car is a risk though and sometimes you can end up with a lemon no matter what you do.

Mate, if the car is apples, nice purchase. If there was any major issue the inspector would have picked it in an instant. You can't beat a wagon for usable space

[NZ XR6]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

The sedans and hatches tend to be a lot cheaper than the wagons for some reason.



Not sure, but Redbook lists 6.8 L/100km highway and 14.1 L/100km city. Combined is 9.5L/100km.

It could be the weight of the car with a smaller motor that causes the higher fuel consumption. The big selling point for the wagon I think is the large cargo area - both length and height.

Good luck trying to get 6.8 l/100 km!!! Best I ever managed was 8, and I had to try hard to achieve that. 9 is probably more realistic.

They can be thirsty in urban driving, but not too bad if you take it easy. Certainly better than a BA Falcon!

The diesel is a much nicer car to drive. But if you want a big, comfortable car and don't mind the slightly leisurely performance, a good 2.3 is a bargain. Don't try towing anything heavy though.

Sent from somewhere using Tapatalk

[sailaway]

Originally Posted by NZ XR6

Good luck trying to get 6.8 l/100 km!!! Best I ever managed was 8, and I had to try hard to achieve that. 9 is probably more realistic.

The diesel is a much nicer car to drive. But if you want a big, comfortable car and don't mind the slightly leisurely performance, a good 2.3 is a bargain. Don't try towing anything heavy though.

I couldn't go back to a petrol guzzler after the Mondy diesel's speed and economy.

It would be also a ripper towing vehicle I reckon had I the need and a towbar.

[cobrin]

Originally Posted by sailaway

I couldn't go back to a petrol guzzler after the Mondy diesel's speed and economy.

It would be also a ripper towing vehicle I reckon had I the need and a towbar.

sure is nice on the fuel usage....ditto for towing

[Omega-T]

I tried to pay attention to my 2.3 today. It makes a noise that's pretty similar, sort of a whir/whine. In comparison to the Mazda video though, the noise in my Mondeo is a lot quieter, more consistent, lower pitched and "smoother" if that makes sense. To me that Mazda sounds unhealthy in a way my car doesn't. My car's been to the mechanic a couple of times and he's not mentioned anything and it hasn't worried me at all.

If it helps, in a quiet area with no traffic, the noise in my Mondeo is only really audible below 40 km/hr when the engine is cold, dropping to 20km/hr when it warms up. It's present at cold-startup and varies with engine speed.

[Omega-T]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

Not sure, but Redbook lists 6.8 L/100km highway and 14.1 L/100km city. Combined is 9.5L/100km.

My 2.3 tends to use 8.4-8.9L/100km depending on what I'm doing. I haven't seen 9's since I started using 95 octane. It depends a lot on what you do though, driving where I do I nearly always use less than the combined ratings.

It's not brilliant, but I'm not unhappy with the economy - compared to the other four-cylinder petrol wagons that some friends and family have, it's a decent bit heavier, is a visibly larger car and has a lot more interior space for not much more consumption.

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by Omega-T

I tried to pay attention to my 2.3 today. It makes a noise that's pretty similar, sort of a whir/whine. In comparison to the Mazda video though, the noise in my Mondeo is a lot quieter, more consistent, lower pitched and "smoother" if that makes sense. To me that Mazda sounds unhealthy in a way my car doesn't. My car's been to the mechanic a couple of times and he's not mentioned anything and it hasn't worried me at all.

If it helps, in a quiet area with no traffic, the noise in my Mondeo is only really audible below 40 km/hr when the engine is cold, dropping to 20km/hr when it warms up. It's present at cold-startup and varies with engine speed.

That makes a lot of sense because the two I drove were very different in loudness. One was really noticeable and sounded sick. The other was quieter and more noticeable at lower speeds even though it was still there at higher speeds but less noticeable. The sound seemed to change to a higher revolution pitch but yes less noticeable. I'm hoping that if there is anything wrong with one I eventually buy, a RACQ inspection will pick it up. I mainly included the Mazda example as it was the closest to the sounds I heard. It may have been like a whir/whine as you said.

[WagonWheel]

Originally Posted by Omega-T

My 2.3 tends to use 8.4-8.9L/100km depending on what I'm doing. I haven't seen 9's since I started using 95 octane. It depends a lot on what you do though, driving where I do I nearly always use less than the combined ratings.

It's not brilliant, but I'm not unhappy with the economy - compared to the other four-cylinder petrol wagons that some friends and family have, it's a decent bit heavier, is a visibly larger car and has a lot more interior space for not much more consumption.

So let's say you travelled 10,000 kms per year and only achieved the 9.5L/100km Redbook figure, you would buy at most 950 litres at say $1.40 a litre = $1330. Whereas for a competing Mazda 6 wagon which might get 8.9L/100km (similar to your figures) - you would save a grand total of $84. I'd gladly pay the extra fuel cost to get what I wanted too. Cargo space outweighs fuel cost for me. (Hope my calculations are correct ... )

[sailaway]

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

So let's say you travelled 10,000 kms per year and only achieved the 9.5L/100km Redbook figure, you would buy at most 950 litres at say $1.40 a litre = $1330. Whereas for a competing Mazda 6 wagon which might get 8.9L/100km (similar to your figures) - you would save a grand total of $84. I'd gladly pay the extra fuel cost to get what I wanted too.

Do the figures using a Mondeo diesel that averages about 6L/100km for city and country driving. Not to mention the longevity of diesel engines and knowing 1200kms is possible on a full tank.

Originally Posted by WagonWheel

Cargo space outweighs fuel cost for me. (Hope my calculations are correct ... )

The Mondeo wagon's capacity seems on par with what else is available and obviously meets your needs. Do checkout the hatch as it to is deceptive on how much space is available with the rear seats down. If suitable it broadens the range of Mondys you can choose from. Petrol and Diesel.

[cobrin]

indeed sailaway, I seem to do 24K kms a year and average 6.8L/100km more often than not, the worst had been 7.8, the best HWY use typically 6.1L/100km. ('09 MB - 2L TDCI)

*diesel priced at ~$1.19 (@ 6.8L/100km) I'd have spent $1,942.08
*petrol priced at ~$1.40 (@ 9.0L/100km) I'd have spent $3024

We (wife and I) use to average 15K kms a year in our old vehicle petrol, as we go further on diesel we've been driving more and not worried as we use to be, which has seen to the shot up in the K's driven. Bought it with 120K kms now has 180K kms, or 60K kms in 2.5yrs that's huge for us. Happy we bought it when we did cause an added bonus has been diesel had a decline in price at the time and has been lower than Petrol since.

Margins get tighter the less you drive, asme again with Dealership/Workshop Servicing. I'm glad to do my own and self maintain it.

*there's some give an take on fuel costs it's not always at those levels for either type fuels but it averages out close enough to review.

[Mondaveo]

You do pay some of that back at services though. According to the published prices on the official website it looks like the diesel is +$50 more for a typical 'A' service ($345 vs $290 for the 2.3) and +$330 for a 'B' ($770 vs $445). Advantage diesel, as long as you drive it enough.

I expected the Ecoboost to be middling, and it is for 'A' services ($310) but surprised to see it tops them all at $835 for a 'B'...

[rondeo]

Looking at the customer service guide it looks to me:
apart from having to cast one's eyes over a different engine the 'A' service items are identical, just takes six minutes longer (p.38).