-
Do you know 'owt about the heritage of the 1.8 16v petrol in the V50? I think I read somewhere that it's a Mazda engine? Mine's from 2009. It's fairly weak and, although the claimed 38mpg isn't exactly amazing, it does genuinely do that after 74k. Think it might be this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_L_engine
J0nathan-
Yeah likely mazda, ford caused all sort of cross vehicle contamination lol.
Tbh I've never found a 1.6-2.0 petrol in a regular car that is any good on fuel, all gutless. Did well with a vag 1.4 tfsi, and the mote recent eco boost engines that ford have. Weirdly used to have a 2.0 ecotec era turbo saab 93 with some mods that was more economical (almost all of the time) than any 1.6/2.0 na I've used.
But! Often simple engines that for purpose of chugging around towns are reliable as such, yes they use more fuel, but could be argued cost less overall.
BrickMan
Urgh, with a side helping of double bland.
They are secretly a mitsubishi charisma I think. The 1.8 direct injection petrol engine is tye mitsubishi one and I think the one to avoid (gutless and loves fuel!), the other petrols are volvos own engines and are a bit better.
Diesels Im noy sure, I thought they were maybe old Renault engines, Def not vw in that one.
As ar runabout car they do well, way better finished than the carimsa, drive like a slightly more modern car but nothing special. Although would say the older v40/s40 prob do better than the Ford focus based ones from 2005 onwards when the milage gets high