wibble Posted August 30, 2007 Report Posted August 30, 2007 Hi Folks, I currently have a P reg Galaxy Ghia X and am thinking it's about time I updated/upgraded it. Unfortunately Ford don't really want to sell it. At least that's how it feels like when you check their web site(s) for detail. I'm expecting to keep the car for quite a few years so I want to make sure I get the spec right & have everything factory fitted. There are several engine options available with auto/manual transmission but that's all I can find.1) Why is the 2.3 litre automatic cheaper than the 2.0 litre automatic. Which is beter and why2) How reliable are the automatics these days?3) What is this "sports mode" on the automatic? OK, it says the gears can be manually selected but that isn't really very informative. I could do that 20 odd years ago on a Ford Cortina Automatic but what it really meant was locking it into 1,2,3 or park! You couldn't change from 2 to 1 even at less than 5 miles an hour! 4) Sunroof / panoramic roof. I like my electric sunroof and the fact that I can slide the shutter over it to give some shade. Is there a version of the new Galaxy that has a sun roof / double sunroof / panoramic roof that can be opened. 5) Are the centre panel roof boxes actually useful or just a gimmick? 6) I'm puzzled by the lights that track with cornering. Is this a gimmick or useful? Worth the extra cost? I also ride a motorcycle and over the years have had fixed forward lights and attached to handlebar lights and it never really bothered me which type I had. 7) Boot cover / tonneau cover. I'm not sure which make & model it was but a mate of mine had a cover that stretched over BOTH rows of rear seats to hide the contents. On my current Galaxy if I remove the middle row people can see into the boot space which is no gppd for security. Does the new Galaxy have an option to fully cover? 8) With all 3 rows of seats in use which has more space in the boot? MK1 or MK3? 9) What is DVD about the DVD sat nav / audio system? I can get a satnav for Quote
seatkid Posted August 30, 2007 Report Posted August 30, 2007 Who do you think we are? Ford's sales and marketing dept? The dealer always told me (each time they forgot to clear it as part of the service) they had to connect it to a computer to reset it and had to have the car for an hour but I've just done it in less than 5 minutes, including walking out to the car! Ah....but you work on earth minutes, they are from another Galaxy........ :16: p.p.s. It's a little demeaning for a computer support technician with over 25 years experience to be classed as a "trainee". Any chance of a rapid upgrade?No chance glasshopper...... :unsure: Quote
mumof4 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Posted August 31, 2007 Welcome wibble, i am assumeing you are on about the MKIII...if so i will move this to the MKIII section.There is there a post which if you follow the link will give you the specs for 15 different MKIII models As for a rapid upgrade, you can do that yourself by making a couple more posts :P ... we all have to start somewhere and rules are rules im afraid!...Even if the top man at Frauds himself joined hed have to stay a trainee till hed made the appropiate number of posts which is either 3 or 5..cant remember which right now..mind..i think after his first post hed run for the hills if he let on who he was :16: :unsure: :16: 8) With all 3 rows of seats in use which has more space in the boot? MK1 or MK3? Why arent you considering the MKII???..Much better looking than the MKIII.. :48: Plus we know all the faults on them and the MKIIIs faults are just beginning to appear. Quote
gregers Posted August 31, 2007 Report Posted August 31, 2007 p.p.s. It's a little demeaning for a computer support technician with over 25 years experience to be classed as a "trainee". Any chance of a rapid upgrade?No chance glasshopper...... :48: :16: :unsure: :16: welcome from me also wibble. Quote
wibble Posted August 31, 2007 Author Report Posted August 31, 2007 Welcome wibble, i am assumeing you are on about the MKIII...if so i will move this to the MKIII section.There is there a post which if you follow the link will give you the specs for 15 different MKIII models Yes I'm looking at the MKIII 8) With all 3 rows of seats in use which has more space in the boot? MK1 or MK3? Why arent you considering the MKII???..Much better looking than the MKIII.. :lol: Plus we know all the faults on them and the MKIIIs faults are just beginning to appear. I have the MKI (I assume - P reg) & it's been pretty reliable but is getting a bit long on the tooth. I want to ensure there is at least the same amount of space I currently have.I'm looking at buying new and I'm fed up of the often spare two seats filling my hall hence the MKIII. I need space in the back (removing the 3rd row of seats) for an electric wheelchair for an occasional passenger but want the flexibility of 7 seats without having to remember to put them back in. Of course if the seats are rubbish then I'll be looking at other options. 3 of the 4 of my nearest Ford Dealers are owned by the same company. They have an MKIII Ghia but their boss has it & twice now has been off that day. Great sales pitch - don't have anything to show the customer :44: Quote
wibble Posted August 31, 2007 Author Report Posted August 31, 2007 Welcome wibble, i am assumeing you are on about the MKIII...if so i will move this to the MKIII section.There is there a post which if you follow the link will give you the specs for 15 different MKIII models I've just had a look. The 2.3 option isn't mentioned :lol: Quote
mumof4 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Posted August 31, 2007 Not my fault :44: ....i just searched the net and found that site.. :lol: Quote
wibble Posted August 31, 2007 Author Report Posted August 31, 2007 Not my fault :44: ....i just searched the net and found that site.. :lol: I think it must be a new option as a couple of other sites don't show it either. That doesn't answer my question though. Why is the 2.3 auto cheaper than the 2.0? Quote
mumof4 Posted August 31, 2007 Report Posted August 31, 2007 Coz its crap????..sorry...was the first thought that came into my head when reading your question. :lol: I know..im not helping..ignore me. Quote
big_kev Posted September 1, 2007 Report Posted September 1, 2007 Why is the 2.3 auto cheaper than the 2.0? Probably because it isn't :rolleyes: Price list below galaxy_retail_pl_010707.pdf Quote
wibble Posted September 1, 2007 Author Report Posted September 1, 2007 Why is the 2.3 auto cheaper than the 2.0? Probably because it isn't :rolleyes: Price list below galaxy_retail_pl_010707.pdf Oh yes it is..... "Ghia 2.0 Duratorq TDCi (130PS) Durashift Automatic F3 21,034.04 3,680.96 24,715.00 24,995.00""Ghia 2.3i Duratec (161PS) Durashift Automatic G2 20,102.13 3,517.87 23,620.00 23,995.00" so the bigger engine is cheaper by Quote
ndcd Posted September 5, 2007 Report Posted September 5, 2007 Oh yes it is..... "Ghia 2.0 Duratorq TDCi (130PS) Durashift Automatic F3 21,034.04 3,680.96 24,715.00 24,995.00""Ghia 2.3i Duratec (161PS) Durashift Automatic G2 20,102.13 3,517.87 23,620.00 23,995.00" so the bigger engine is cheaper by Quote
insider Posted September 6, 2007 Report Posted September 6, 2007 "Ghia 2.0 Duratorq TDCi (130PS) Durashift Automatic F3 21,034.04 3,680.96 24,715.00 24,995.00""Ghia 2.3i Duratec (161PS) Durashift Automatic G2 20,102.13 3,517.87 23,620.00 23,995.00" I think the 2.3 is petrol and the 2.0 is diesel.Correct Duratorq TDCi = DIESEL, Duratec = PETROLThe 2.3 is a recent (mid-2007) addition to provide a petrol automatic model. The 2.0 Duratec (petrol) would not have been man enough for the job. Quote
big_kev Posted September 6, 2007 Report Posted September 6, 2007 Oh yes it is..... "Ghia 2.0 Duratorq TDCi (130PS) Durashift Automatic F3 21,034.04 3,680.96 24,715.00 24,995.00""Ghia 2.3i Duratec (161PS) Durashift Automatic G2 20,102.13 3,517.87 23,620.00 23,995.00" so the bigger engine is cheaper by Quote
tim-spam Posted September 6, 2007 Report Posted September 6, 2007 why is the 2.0l diesel more expensive than the 2.3l petrolBecause it's better - that's why. If you find you don't like the Mk.3 and would prefer a Mk.2, you could always consider a new Sharan or Alhambra - it may be worth a test drive anyway. Quote
insider Posted September 6, 2007 Report Posted September 6, 2007 ... but you can't get a 2.0 petrol automatic which I think is where the issue is. All the information you need should be in here though - http://www.ford.co.uk/ie/galaxy/-/sbe_glx06_ebro/-/-/-/404# (Download PDF) Quote
big_kev Posted September 6, 2007 Report Posted September 6, 2007 ... but you can't get a 2.0 petrol automatic which I think is where the issue is. Well spotted....I guess I should read the posts more thoroughly ;) I assume the MK3 2.0l petrol is as crap as the previous 2.0l petrols. Quote
insider Posted September 6, 2007 Report Posted September 6, 2007 Perhaps not quite as bad because it's the Mazda-designed all alloy 16v engine whereas the old 2.0l was an 8v unit. The new engine develops 145PS (same as old 2.3) and 190Nm of torque but you'd still have to work it hard in a car of this weight. Quote
wibble Posted September 8, 2007 Author Report Posted September 8, 2007 Oh yes it is..... "Ghia 2.0 Duratorq TDCi (130PS) Durashift Automatic F3 21,034.04 3,680.96 24,715.00 24,995.00""Ghia 2.3i Duratec (161PS) Durashift Automatic G2 20,102.13 3,517.87 23,620.00 23,995.00" so the bigger engine is cheaper by Quote
mumof4 Posted September 8, 2007 Report Posted September 8, 2007 Have a search and all will be revealed wibble :( Quote
big_kev Posted September 8, 2007 Report Posted September 8, 2007 Hi Hinny, your back from your travels then ? GT says you pulled ! Quote
wibble Posted October 9, 2007 Author Report Posted October 9, 2007 Have a search and all will be revealed wibble :lol: Well I had a search and all got more confusing. You see, I 've never had a diesel & the nearest I got to a modern diesel was driving a company van for a while (transit) which was new about 14 years ago.Someone said that a diesel pulls better so can accelerate better but may have a lower top speed whereas people fron the old school reckon that all diesels are sluggish when compared to petrol. I went digging into the spec and found that a 1.8 diesel had a higher hp than a 2.0 diesel?! I was inclined to go for either the 2.0 or 2.3 automatics but if the 1.8 is more powerful that the 2.0 and the diesel 2.0 is "better" than the petrol 2.3 then I hope you see why I'm puzzled. Quote
mumof4 Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 Now you got me confused! A diesel will be quicker off the mark,petrol slower.Diesel quicker to accelerate, petrol quicker on a straight...but the diesel will eventually overtake said petrol when it goes in to refuel Diesel sluggish??..My old MKII def was not sluggish (when i was driving it anyway :lol: ) I dont know about the MKIII. Quote
insider Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 Well I had a search and all got more confusing. You see, I 've never had a diesel & the nearest I got to a modern diesel was driving a company van for a while (transit) which was new about 14 years ago.Someone said that a diesel pulls better so can accelerate better but may have a lower top speed whereas people fron the old school reckon that all diesels are sluggish when compared to petrol. I went digging into the spec and found that a 1.8 diesel had a higher hp than a 2.0 diesel?! I was inclined to go for either the 2.0 or 2.3 automatics but if the 1.8 is more powerful that the 2.0 and the diesel 2.0 is "better" than the petrol 2.3 then I hope you see why I'm puzzled. There are 2 1.8 diesel models (100PS and 125PS) and 2 2.0 diesels (130PS for the auto and 140PS for the manual).The petrol models are 2.0 (145PS) and 2.3 (161PS). If you want an automatic then it's either 2.3 petrol or 2.0 diesel.Top speed is 118mph and 116mph respectively.0-60 acceleration is 11.1s and 11.8s respectively.However, neither of these is indicative of everyday driving. Where the diesel beats the petrol is the additional torque. This makes it much more responsive and easier to drive. The petrol will probably be quicker off the mark but once you're cruising the mid-range acceleration in the diesel will outperform the petrol. And obviously the fuel economy is much greater for the diesel. An interesting comparison is the manual 2.0 petrol and 2.0 diesels:Top speed 121mph and 120mph0-60 acceleration 10.7s and 9.9s30-60 acceleration 15.5s and 9.6s! (demonstrates the mid-range torque of the diesel) Quote
Smilge Posted October 9, 2007 Report Posted October 9, 2007 An interesting comparison is the manual 2.0 petrol and 2.0 diesels:Top speed 121mph and 120mph0-60 acceleration 10.7s and 9.9s30-60 acceleration 15.5s and 9.6s! (demonstrates the mid-range torque of the diesel) So -0.3 seconds to to get from 30 to 60 ......... wow that is fast!!! :blink: :lol: :D Quote
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.