Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Ford Mondeo 2003 fuel consumption

Ford Mondeo from 2003 to 2005 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 13% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 12% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 14% higher. Since 2003 the Ford Mondeo average difference between owner-reported real-world fuel consumption and declared fuel economy has been similar to average.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersFord MondeoAll carmakersFord Mondeo
2003+6%+7% +8%+9%
Show all years
2004+7%+6% +9%+9%
2005+8%+6% +10%+9%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Ford Mondeo.

2003 - 2005

Ford Mondeo 2003 hatchback fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines24.6 MPG
9.6 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+7%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines36.7 MPG
6.4 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines33.9 MPG
6.9 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+9%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Ford Mondeo 2003 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.4 liters per 100 km or 22% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Ford Mondeo with automatic transmission consumes around 1.2 litres per 100 km or 15% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars of other manufacturers, the Ford Mondeo advertised fuel economy is average, but according to available user reports on actual consumption, real fuel economy is slightly worse than average.
The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.0 petrol engine and manual transmission (Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 16V 145 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Ford Mondeo with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 SCi 16V 130 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 16V 110 Hp 110 HP manual 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km+8%
Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 16V 125 Hp 125 HP manual 30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km
28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km+8%
Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 SCi 16V 130 HP manual 32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km+21%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 16V 145 HP manual 29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km
27.7 MPG
8.5 l/100km+6%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 16V Automatic 145 HP automatic 25.0 MPG
9.4 l/100km
23.5 MPG
10.0 l/100km+6%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDdi 90 HP manual 39.9 MPG
5.9 l/100km
35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km+14%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 115 Hp 115 HP manual 41.3 MPG
5.7 l/100km
36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km+14%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 115 Hp Automatic 115 HP automatic 31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km+4%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 130 Hp 130 HP manual 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km+12%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 130 Hp Automatic 130 HP automatic 31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km0%
2.2 liter diesel engine
Ford Mondeo 2004 2.2 TDCi 155 HP manual 38.6 MPG
6.1 l/100km
35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km+8%
2.5 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.5 V6 24V 170 HP manual 23.8 MPG
9.9 l/100km
23.5 MPG
10.0 l/100km+1%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.5 V6 24V Automatic 170 HP automatic 22.0 MPG
10.7 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+1%
3.0 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2004 3.0 V6 24V 204 HP manual 22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km
22.2 MPG
10.6 l/100km+3%
Ford Mondeo 2003 3.0 V6 24V ST 226 HP manual 23.1 MPG
10.2 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+6%
2003 - 2005

Ford Mondeo 2003 wagon fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines25.8 MPG
9.1 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines24.6 MPG
9.6 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+6%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines35.7 MPG
6.6 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines33.9 MPG
6.9 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+6%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Ford Mondeo 2003 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.3 liters per 100 km or 19% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Ford Mondeo with automatic transmission consumes around 1.1 litres per 100 km or 15% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Ford Mondeo fuel economy is slightly worse than average. The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.0 petrol engine and manual transmission (Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 16V 145 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Ford Mondeo with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 1.8 SCi 16V 130 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 1.8 16V 110 Hp 110 HP manual 30.5 MPG
7.7 l/100km
28.3 MPG
8.3 l/100km+8%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 1.8 16V 125 Hp 125 HP manual 29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km
28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km+6%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 1.8 SCi 16V 130 HP manual 31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km
27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km+18%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 16V 145 HP manual 29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km
27.7 MPG
8.5 l/100km+5%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 16V Automatic 145 HP automatic 25.3 MPG
9.3 l/100km
23.5 MPG
10.0 l/100km+8%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 TDdi 90 HP manual 39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km+12%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 TDCi 115 Hp 115 HP manual 39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km+8%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 TDCi 115 Hp Automatic 115 HP automatic 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km+3%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 TDCi 130 Hp 130 HP manual 39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km+8%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.0 TDCi 130 Hp Automatic 130 HP automatic 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km-1%
2.2 liter diesel engine
Ford Mondeo 2004 Wagon 2.2 TDCi 155 HP manual 37.3 MPG
6.3 l/100km
35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km+5%
2.5 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.5 V6 24V 170 HP manual 23.5 MPG
10.0 l/100km
23.3 MPG
10.1 l/100km+1%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 2.5 V6 24V Automatic 170 HP automatic 22.0 MPG
10.7 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+1%
3.0 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2004 Wagon 3.0 V6 204 HP manual 22.4 MPG
10.5 l/100km
22.2 MPG
10.6 l/100km+1%
Ford Mondeo 2003 Wagon 3.0 V6 24V ST 226 HP manual 22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+5%
2003 - 2005

Ford Mondeo 2003 sedan fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines26.1 MPG
9.0 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines24.6 MPG
9.6 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+7%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines36.7 MPG
6.4 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines33.9 MPG
6.9 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+9%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Ford Mondeo 2003 with automatic transmission consumes on average 1.4 liters per 100 km or 22% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Ford Mondeo with automatic transmission consumes around 1.1 litres per 100 km or 15% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars of other manufacturers, the Ford Mondeo advertised fuel economy is average, but according to available user reports on actual consumption, real fuel economy is slightly worse than average.
The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.0 petrol engine and manual transmission (Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 16V 145 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Ford Mondeo with 1.8 petrol engine and manual transmission (Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 SCi 16V 130 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.8 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 16V 110 Hp 110 HP manual 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
28.3 MPG
8.3 l/100km+9%
Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 16V 125 Hp 125 HP manual 30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km
28.0 MPG
8.4 l/100km+8%
Ford Mondeo 2003 1.8 SCi 16V 130 HP manual 32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
27.0 MPG
8.7 l/100km+21%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 16V 145 HP manual 29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km
27.7 MPG
8.5 l/100km+6%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 16V Automatic 145 HP automatic 25.0 MPG
9.4 l/100km
23.5 MPG
10.0 l/100km+6%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDdi 90 HP manual 39.9 MPG
5.9 l/100km
35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km+14%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 115 Hp 115 HP manual 41.3 MPG
5.7 l/100km
36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km+14%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 115 Hp Automatic 115 HP automatic 31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
30.2 MPG
7.8 l/100km+4%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 130 Hp 130 HP manual 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
36.2 MPG
6.5 l/100km+12%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.0 TDCi 130 Hp Automatic 130 HP automatic 31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km
31.4 MPG
7.5 l/100km0%
2.2 liter diesel engine
Ford Mondeo 2004 2.2 TDCi 155 HP manual 38.6 MPG
6.1 l/100km
35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km+8%
2.5 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.5 V6 24V 170 HP manual 23.8 MPG
9.9 l/100km
23.3 MPG
10.1 l/100km+2%
Ford Mondeo 2003 2.5 V6 24V Automatic 170 HP automatic 22.0 MPG
10.7 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+1%
3.0 liter petrol engine
Ford Mondeo 2004 3.0 V6 24V 204 HP manual 22.8 MPG
10.3 l/100km
22.2 MPG
10.6 l/100km+3%
Ford Mondeo 2003 3.0 V6 24V ST 226 HP manual 23.1 MPG
10.2 l/100km
21.8 MPG
10.8 l/100km+6%

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.