Ford Kuga thoughts?

dbagman

So im thinking of changing my jeep. More a downgrade to be fair coming from a 08 landcruiser. It's more mpg I'm looking to cut down on. Iv always liked Ford's and had a focus and Mondeo before my LC. Mileage is starting to creep up on her and while it's still worth decent money I might make the jump now. Been looking at a 2 litre diesel ford kuga commercial. I don't do any towing and only really need a van so the LC is wasted on me driving up and down the m50 everyday.
Are the kuga a good yolk? Mpg/reliability and comfort? I could probs come up to about a 2012 or 13 for near enough the same as my own yolk is worth looking at done deal. I know I'll notice a big difference power wise but as I said I don't do much off road or any towing.

I'm driving a 140bhp front wheel drive kuga at the moment.... 6.5l/100kms over the last 1100kms... I'm not driving hard.

I did Salzburg to Bratislava return in it over the May BH weekend, driven sedately it returned 6.0l/100km.

The consumption readout is accurate to about 3/4% from my own calculations. The real mpg a tad less than indicated.

Drive it hard and I'd say low 30s would be seen in old mpg money.

The kuga feels bigger than it is to drive IMO so maybe not too much a come down... feather light steering etc too.... very comfy.

I'd sooner an outlander TBH.

dbagman

Augeo wrote:

I did Salzburg to Bratislava return in it over the May BH weekend, driven sedately it returned 6.0l/100km.

About 36 mpg if Google's ain't telling me lies. I clocked my jeep once. About 23 mpg if my memory serves me right. Even that increase would make a huge difference.

dbagman

dbagman wrote: »

About 36 mpg if Google's ain't telling me lies. I clocked my jeep once. About 23 mpg if my memory serves me right. Even that increase would make a huge difference.

6.0l/100km is 47mpg
6.5l/100km is 43mpg

Vote 4 Pedro

I bought a Ford Kuga new in 2011, 2.0l diesel with the Powershift gearbox.
I found it nice as a car and enjoyed owning it, was a comfy place to be but I thought it was heavy on fuel,
Changed it in 2013 to an Audi A3 1.6 Tdi Auto and the fuel saving was huge on my 35k a year driving.
I know it's a completely different car so you can't really compare.

Vote 4 Pedro

Vote 4 Pedro wrote: »

I bought a Ford Kuga new in 2011, 2.0l diesel with the Powershift gearbox.
I found it nice as a car and enjoyed owning it, was a comfy place to be but I thought it was heavy on fuel,
Changed it in 2013 to an Audi A3 1.6 Tdi Auto and the fuel saving was huge on my 35k a year driving.
I know it's a completely different car so you can't really compare.

An SUV will of course be heavier on fuel than a saloon, aerodynamics & weight etc etc etc

dbagman

Augeo wrote:

6.0l/100km is 47mpg 6.5l/100km is 43mpg

You reckon they're doing 47 mpg??? Id buy one in the morning if thats true!!

Augeo

Augeo wrote: »

I'm driving a 140bhp front wheel drive kuga at the moment.... 6.5l/100kms over the last 1100kms... I'm not driving hard.

I did Salzburg to Bratislava return in it over the May BH weekend, driven sedately it returned 6.0l/100km.

The consumption readout is accurate to about 3/4% from my own calculations. The real mpg a tad less than indicated.

dbagman wrote: »

You reckon they're doing 47 mpg??? Id buy one in the morning if thats true!!

Well that was over 500 miles on the motorway at 60mph in 6th enjoying the view on a bank holiday spin

In the 3 weeks since than I'm seeing 6.5l/100km over 1200kms... that's over 40mpg. Most if that is 10/15km spins on a dual carriageway and some daily city use. There's very little traffic around here compared to Dublin

Also, the thing I'm in is two wheel drive.

colm_mcm

If you're getting 23mpg from the Cruiser, you're not taking it handy, so don't go on best case scenario figures for the Kuga, 30mog is doable in a Land Cruiser 6 speed taking it handy.

TrailerBob

I'll offer an opinion based on having both of these in the house. As said above, 30mpg is very achievable from a cruiser even with the older 5 speed box, so perhaps earlier gear changes and 10km/h less on the motorway would be of benefit regardless. I do big miles and 30mpg is the norm

As for the Kuga, the other half has a 09 one since 2014, and it's been a fairly good machine for the most part. Very comfortable to drive, only buy titanium spec for the half leather.. It's very stable on the road, and quiet on motorway cruises. We have had to replace the alternator, and a leaky steering rack, but other than that it's been good - 200,000km on it now, and running well. I reckon it's running about 40-45mpg in old money, on mostly national roads

dbagman

colm_mcm wrote:

If you're getting 23mpg from the Cruiser, you're not taking it handy, so don't go on best case scenario figures for the Kuga, 30mog is doable in a Land Cruiser 6 speed taking it handy.

Well I don't hang around. That's fair to say.

But I can expect in the region of 40mpg even with a (semi) heavy foot??

colm_mcm

I would certainly think late 30s would be doable.

_Brian

How's the boot space in them ??

I downgraded from an Older XTrail to a VW Tiguan and after nearly a year I'm still finding the boot space tight, from memory looking at Kugas it's also a bit tight.
Tiguan is ok on diesel, 6.5l/100km, but that's a 4Motion version.

TrailerBob

The boot is not big to be fair.. although of you let down the back seats there's quite a bit of space.

As for spirited driving, the mpg will drop noticeably, and the 'problem' is the Kuga handles exceptionally well for such a tall car.. typical Ford wizardry... which can encourage more use of the go pedal.

_Brian

_Brian wrote: »

How's the boot space in them ??
.

Thought it OK.
Can take snaps of a large suitcase in various orientation on Friday for you if that's any help

I don't think the handling is great, better than a land cruise r no doubt but still not great. Lurches like feck when pushed IMO.

TrailerBob

Wonder if tyres and steering settings cause the difference, but I have found it good, comparing it to a Passat.. which I suppose isn't a great benchmark

TrailerBob

TrailerBob wrote: »

Wonder if tyres and steering settings cause the difference, but I have found it good, comparing it to a Passat.. which I suppose isn't a great benchmark

Mine is on winter tyres and it was 30 deg during the week :pac:

D0NNELLY

Bought a new one last year, just services and diesel so far, and two recalls for fuel line clips. My commute is swords to Westport twice a week then short trips around swords four days a week.

After 50000kms, Dash says 6.5l/100km

AMKC

I see Ssangyong have a great deal on the Rexton. I know its been around for a while but 7000euro scappage is a great deal. They start at just over 29k so 22k for a Rexton is very good.

dbagman

One thing I have to say though is the interior looks muck. I had a 06 transit with that same dash. And I'm looking at 2013 yolks here.

dbagman

One other thing. Is the 2 litre diesel engine in the kuga a ford or Peugeot engine? I know the 1.6 newer diesel engines in the focus are all Peugeot and can give trouble but someone said to me recently their 2 litre engines at also Peugeot engines.

bazz26

In the Mk1 Kuga it is a PSA unit.

dbagman

bazz26 wrote:

In the Mk1 Kuga it is a PSA unit.

Meaning??

bazz26

PSA = Peugeot - Citroen Group.

dbagman

bazz26 wrote:

PSA = Peugeot - Citroen Group.

Cheers. So the mark 2 being 2015 onwards are a ford engine is It?

kirving

AMKC wrote: »

I see Ssangyong have a great deal on the Rexton. I know its been around for a while but 7000euro scappage is a great deal. They start at just over 29k so 22k for a Rexton is very good.

That's for the commercial is it. New models on Carzone starts 50K. :eek::eek::eek: No wonder EuroNCAP didnt bother crash testing it.

I have a better interior on my mountain bike, and it's probably safer too.

colm_mcm

dbagman wrote: »

Cheers. So the mark 2 being 2015 onwards are a ford engine is It?

Don't think so, think it's still the Ford/PSA engine. The 1.5 is ford ford alright.

dbagman

colm_mcm wrote:

Don't think so, think it's still the Ford/PSA engine. The 1.5 is ford ford alright.

Hmmm. Might change my mind a bit. Was all sold on them. But hearing theyre reliable yolks. As it's a commercial I'm going for they all appear to be 2 litre

colm_mcm

Sure everything is rubbish nowadays. You can't win.

_Brian

colm_mcm wrote: »

Sure everything is rubbish nowadays. You can't win.

I think this is a great point.
One of the nicest most reliable cars we recently owned was a Citroen C4 GP, 1.6 Diesel.

Very comfortable, economic to run, and bar one **** up I made myself it was just regular servicing
But people say they're muck, price wise they are the cheapest of the 7 seater mpv around.

Modern cars give an amount of bother, from time to time you'll have electrical gremlins, dual mass fly wheels are expected to go before 100k kms in most cases.

dbagman

_Brian wrote:

Very comfortable, economic to run, and bar one **** up I made myself it was just regular servicing But people say they're muck, price wise they are the cheapest of the 7 seater mpv around.

I guess like anything once they get any sort of a bad name for whatever reason it's hard to shake it. Overall there seems to be far more positives regarding the kuga. Might go test driving this weekend

dbagman

Sorry to bump this again but would you notice much of a difference in mpg between the car and commercial? I'm assuming so given the extra weight the back seats would add. All the boys posted here are cars I assume? Meaning I could expect a slightly better mpg again in a van kuga?

grogi

dbagman wrote: »

One other thing. Is the 2 litre diesel engine in the kuga a ford or Peugeot engine? I know the 1.6 newer diesel engines in the focus are all Peugeot and can give trouble but someone said to me recently their 2 litre engines at also Peugeot engines.

Recently? They are there for last ten years...

2.0 is a solid offering in every incarnation, 1.6 is much better in the 8v versions, from around 2013.

What's even more interesting, the 1.6 gave much more trouble in Fords than in French cars, Ford messed with the cooling somehow...

1.5 is a minor modification of the 1.6 engine, I would not call it Ford engine. It is used only in Fords, but its design goes way back to the DV6. If anyone was saying veto to 1.6 because it was designed by Ford/PSA engineers, they should avoid 1.5 TDCi too.

colm_mcm

dbagman wrote: »

Sorry to bump this again but would you notice much of a difference in mpg between the car and commercial? I'm assuming so given the extra weight the back seats would add. All the boys posted here are cars I assume? Meaning I could expect a slightly better mpg again in a van kuga?

It would be marginal tbh.

duploelabs

colm_mcm wrote: »

It would be marginal tbh.

There's a utility kuga that is classed as a commercial but has back seats. It only has two of the three usual seat-belts in the back

colm_mcm

There's also a 2 seat commercial version though.

R.O.R

colm_mcm wrote: »

There's also a 2 seat commercial version though.

Not new there isn't. Hasn't been sold for about 18 months at this stage.

colm_mcm

Absolutely but the OP is looking at spending €12k