Ford's local six could live on

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Airport tug plan never got off the ground.

Reading between the lines of that article I think the engineer is really implying that Ford have developed the LPi technology, and it wouldn't be too hard to fit the system to another engine ie V6. Thats what they were planning on doing pre 2010 anyway, at least initially, I have been told they dropped the idea of an LPG V6 further down the track before they started working on V6 FG, but with the LPi technology developed now it wouldn't be too much work to get it going on the Duratec.

Yeah. They've also banged on a fair bit about direct injection too. The current spec Duratec 35 is DI - wonder if the skunkworks is fiddling with an LPi system for a direct injection motor?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Yeah. They've also banged on a fair bit about direct injection too. The current spec Duratec 35 is DI

Only DI on Ecoboost V6, D35 and D37 are both port port injected and lead their GM counterparts by a Loooooong way.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Only DI on Ecoboost V6, D35 and D37 are both port port injected and lead their GM counterparts by a Loooooong way.

O rly

Going forward though, you can see the D35 and D37 getting DI eventually. Natural progression of upgrades.

So that airport tug thing, was that just another one of Burela's fairy tales or something else?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

O rly

Going forward though, you can see the D35 and D37 getting DI eventually. Natural progression of upgrades.

I disagree, I see the V6 PFI in large vehicle as becoming the base engine and the 2.0 EB / 3.5 EB as options.
The Focus only got 2.0 DI because the engine had to meet specific power performance parameters,
the brake specific power and torque are now equivalent to PFI V6 and PFI V8.


Umm, on second thoughts,
If FoA adopts the V6, they would probably specify DI heads for a unique combination, so yes I guess it is possible...

[drew`SEVNT5]

Originally Posted by z80

LPG might produce less CO2 per litre of fuel, but because you need 30% more of it to go the same distance it actually isn't as green as the claims suggest.


All the claims for LPG usually focus on kg/Litre instead of Kg/kilometre.


LPG is all about the lack of taxes to make it viable.
Put more tax on it, as the Govt has said it would, and it soon loses it's main attraction...savings versus petrol.

Ford, Holden and everyone else know that the govt could sabotage a lot of their LPG investment overnight by putting the same taxes on it as petrol.

HERESY! How dare you, sir, how dare you! The impunity to question our savior, that wonderful gas-come-liquid!! All praise be to the little red sticker!

[falconnut]

I love my 4.0 Intech, quiet powerful fun motor and plenty of torque.

Not to meantion super economical.

Reliable and cheap for parts, best motor i have ever seen price wise too.

[Resurrection]

I have my finger's crossed.

[kpcart]

its not a great engine by world standards, what it is, it is a great engine for an Aussie large car.

But to be feasible, and to be applicable to other cars, it would need to become a v6. the inline 6 is just too long for modern cars. and it is too thirsty - but that could be overcome by making it a smaller capacity (3.5l) and adding direct injection, but then that is too much of an investment risk, when Ford already has a great v6 that will probably make better performance numbers then an equivalent inline motor and will fit more cars because of its compact nature, as the i6 would still be too long.
also the v6 will no doubt be more fun to many people, as it would spin up easier then the slow lazy i6 and work in a higher rev range, making it feel more racier.

v6 is the way of the future it seems with most maufacturers. They are using it in LeMans racing now, next year it will be used in IndyCars, and in 2014 V6 will be used by Formula One.
In terms of road cars, we have seen Nissan dtich the strait 6 of the skyline for a v6, and Ferrari are investing a lot of money for there road cars with v6 engines. Mercedes have already been doing so, and possibly BMW next, afterall they are soon going front wheel drive.

Lets let the dinosaur rest, we can still appreciate the i6 as a classic and it will help many boring falcon base model cars one day become classics, but lets not stop technology, the falcon will be better for it.

[falconnut]

BLASPHEMY!

Shun the non believer!

For the greater GOOD

[EgoFG]

Originally Posted by kpcart

its not a great engine ... and it is too thirsty ... V6 ... make better performance numbers then an equivalent inline motor ...
also the v6 ... would spin up easier then the slow lazy i6 ... and in 2014 V6 will be used by Formula one

there is some fair opinion in there

the primary reason (which you stated but I did not quote) for chosing to build a v6 over an i6 is packaging.

The revy and more efficient claims I believe would actually favour inline if other variables were held constant. But for packaging reasons there are less companies investing in inline 6 engines - making a fair comparison harder.

F1 choosing v6 is really a red herring. If the instructors could choose any engine the wanted none would likely choose a v6. You could equally say that smaller rear spoilers are better ... Except the reason they were reduced in size is because they were not better.

[mcnews]

A mate of mine knows a fella etc. pull willy etc. etc.
Apparently the new diesel Falcon has 50kg less than the I6 up front and handles stupendously well as a result according to the test dummies.

[LeadFoot81]

If the LPG utes sell well (and a new gen Falcon ute isnt possible/desirable/cost effective) could Ford Oz consider keeping them around after the FG sedan is retired (ala XG/XH utes and BF3 wagon)?
If so the LPi engine could make it easier/cheaper for the FG3 ute to be Euro5 compliant?

I know Ranger makes more sense than Falcon ute, but if there's more money to be wrung out of a platform? Just thinking out loud/making conversation. I know what OneFord means for the Oz market.

[boris]

Originally Posted by EgoFG

there is some fair opinion in there

the primary reason (which you stated but I did not quote) for chosing to build a v6 over an i6 is packaging.

The revy and more efficient claims I believe would actually favour inline if other variables were held constant. But for packaging reasons there are less companies investing in inline 6 engines - making a fair comparison harder.

F1 choosing v6 is really a red herring. If the instructors could choose any engine the wanted none would likely choose a v6. You could equally say that smaller rear spoilers are better ... Except the reason they were reduced in size is because they were not better.

agreed, an i6 has better balance than a v6 and the lazy power thing has more to do with the ford i6 being undersquare, and I find it more enjoyable having instant torque on hand rather than having to rev the hell out of an engine to get it to move. The i6 does pretty good economy wise too when you compare apples with apples, considering it could be tuned a lot more.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by LeadFoot81

If the LPG utes sell well (and a new gen Falcon ute isnt possible/desirable/cost effective) could Ford Oz consider keeping them around after the FG sedan is retired (ala XG/XH utes and BF3 wagon)?
If so the LPi engine could make it easier/cheaper for the FG3 ute to be Euro5 compliant?

I know Ranger makes more sense than Falcon ute, but if there's more money to be wrung out of a platform? Just thinking out loud/making conversation. I know what OneFord means for the Oz market.

The ute would have to sell very well for Ford to keep churning them out and it would also mean additional complexity at the assembly plant assuming that the next gen "large" car and a soft roader will be built here as well.

But South Africa can still have their 'bakkie' pick up after all this time, so why can't we? Sales will determine the answer to that question but I think you'll find the FG ute barely scraped over the line as it is when it was in the design phase.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

O rly

Going forward though, you can see the D35 and D37 getting DI eventually. Natural progression of upgrades.

So that airport tug thing, was that just another one of Burela's fairy tales or something else?

The airport tug plan was around before Burela. Ford US were supplying the old pushrod 3.8 V6's to the airports, but they were going out of production and the contract was up for grabs. I think it was only a few hundred units per year. They musn't have got the contract, as I never heard anything about it after I was told they were trying to get the extra business.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by mcnews

A mate of mine knows a fella etc. pull willy etc. etc.
Apparently the new diesel Falcon has 50kg less than the I6 up front and handles stupendously well as a result according to the test dummies.

Diesel Falcon?

Don't you mean Ecoboost?

[z80]

Originally Posted by PoweredByCNG

Get your facts straight before posting your dribble on this forum.

Yes, litre-for-litre LPG has less energy than petrol so you do use more of it (between 20% and 30% more on average), but at the end of the day, you're consuming the SAME amount of energy while producing LESS CO2, CONSIDERABLY LESS particulate matter, LESS unregulated emissions components, and most importantly, relying LESS on imported fuel sources.

You check your own dribble mega mouth.

Carbon monoxide emissions from LPG are significantly more than petrol or diesel.

Especially with the primitive mixer ring delivery systems.

[Elks]

mmm I6, in FWD chassis should work great, so long as you dont mind a car that's 2.5m wide

LPG Injection on a V6 is the only thing that makes sense. Hopefully it will remain RWD.

[Jim5_0]

Originally Posted by Elks

mmm I6, in FWD chassis should work great, so long as you dont mind a car that's 2.5m wide

Ala Daewoo Tosca err sorry Holden Epica?

Inline sixes are inherently smoother than V6's & the twin cam Falcon engine is still one of the worlds great engines especially when you add the development dollars up (which by world standards have been very little)

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by kpcart

its not a great engine by world standards, what it is, it is a great engine for an Aussie large car.

How many naturally aspirated motors do you know of that are capable of producing more than 100Nm per litre? Globally, anywhere.

By the time you find the answer to this question you will realise that you've picked on the wrong motor.

Originally Posted by kpcart

and it is too thirsty -

According to real world tests it's more economical than both 3.0 and 3.6 litre versions of the sisi V6. And now with LPi it totally smashes everything for economy vs power. Happy to be corrected.

Originally Posted by kpcart

but that could be overcome by making it a smaller capacity (3.5l) and adding direct injection,

It could. Too bad it didn't work for Holden. In the 950km I travelled in the SISI 3.6 two weeks ago, at an average speed of, wait for it, 72km/h!!! it struggled to get below 10l/100km. To be fair though I had about 15kg of catalogues in the boot so that would have made it labour hard up those hills

Originally Posted by kpcart

also the v6 will no doubt be more fun to many people, as it would spin up easier then the slow lazy i6 and work in a higher rev range, making it feel more racier.

Wrong.

Originally Posted by kpcart

Lets let the dinosaur rest, we can still appreciate the i6 as a classic and it will help many boring falcon base model cars one day become classics, but lets not stop technology, the falcon will be better for it.

How is it a dinosaur when it's got better economy and efficiency than the direct injected sisi V6, without having direction injection itself?

The ONLY advantage a V6 has over an I6 is weight and packaging. Absolutely nothing else. And that is the ONLY reason it won't survive. As for it's performance, it wasn't called "Barra" for no reason. Barra means "high flying bird" (in Aboriginal), and it **** on everything.

[nasss92]

falc'man hits the nail on the head... for an under-developed engine(reference to global standards for cost of R&D), it already shows great performance like class leading torque and good fuel economy for a large engine

i just made a thread on the development of the I6.. http://fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11338099
it would seem that with a little bit of money thrown at it, the engine has signficant potential to be improved tenfold in relation to both performance and economy

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by z80

You check your own dribble mega mouth.

Carbon monoxide emissions from LPG are significantly more than petrol or diesel.

Especially with the primitive mixer ring delivery systems.

EcoLPI doesn't have mixer ring, the CO2 is less than petrol version.
There's less carbon atoms and more hydrogen in LPG compared to petrol.

[z80]

Originally Posted by jpd80

EcoLPI doesn't have mixer ring, the CO2 is less than petrol version..

yes...I know that, but all his povvo cars are mixer ring.

Originally Posted by jpd80

There's less carbon atoms and more hydrogen in LPG compared to petrol.

Sure...just use 30% more and produce more CO

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by z80

yes...I know that, but all his povvo cars are mixer ring.



Sure...just use 30% more and produce more CO

Even with the 30% extra fuel, the LPG is still less CO2 than the petrol version,
was the same situation a decade ago when both had 4-speed autos.

[kpcart]

[QUOTE=Falc'man]How many naturally aspirated motors do you know of that are capable of producing more than 100Nm per litre? Globally, anywhere.

QUOTE]

not the falcon - its about 99nm per litre! most DI v6s are similar, which is also quite impressive as they are made in smaller capacity, and they have better economy and fit better in cars that will sell.

[kpcart]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

And now with LPi it totally smashes everything for economy vs power. Happy to be corrected.

ill correct you then, with LPi it is only "smashes" anything because of cheap price of lpg (for the moment). Lpi could be fitted to a direct injection multi cam v6 and be even better economocially then in the old i6. the i6 has it over power usually over v6s because it is 4.0 litres while most v6s are smaller, so it is the capacity that gives it an advantage. but even then, look at most DI v6 engines of 3.5 litre capacity, they produce more power then the i6. ie, holdens 3.6 does 210kw, and even in non DI makes the same power as the i6. if it was 4.0 litres it could do even more. look at other european v6s, which are much better engines then holdens, they also make more the 200kw, often 220kw, and have superb economy.


And the old belief that i6s are so much smoother is a load of crap in todays modern cars. yes in the 80s and into the 90s (when holden was usings a 1960s v6 in their car) that may have been true. but modern v6s are superbly smooth motors.

[kpcart]

Originally Posted by jpd80

EcoLPI doesn't have mixer ring, the CO2 is less than petrol version.
There's less carbon atoms and more hydrogen in LPG compared to petrol.

are we talking carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide? carbon monoxide is bad, but carbon dioxide is not even bad for humans, we need it to live. you know our atmosphere consists of about only 0.27% carbon dioxide, and apparently we need a carbon tax in a country that has about 0.3% of the population of the world. :P

[boris]

Originally Posted by kpcart

ill correct you then, with LPi it is only "smashes" anything because of cheap price of lpg (for the moment). Lpi could be fitted to a direct injection multi cam v6 and be even better economocially then in the old i6. the i6 has it over power usually over v6s because it is 4.0 litres while most v6s are smaller, so it is the capacity that gives it an advantage. but even then, look at most DI v6 engines of 3.5 litre capacity, they produce more power then the i6. ie, holdens 3.6 does 210kw, and even in non DI makes the same power as the i6. if it was 4.0 litres it could do even more. look at other european v6s, which are much better engines then holdens, they also make more the 200kw, often 220kw, and have superb economy.


And the old belief that i6s are so much smoother is a load of crap in todays modern cars. yes in the 80s and into the 90s (when holden was usings a 1960s v6 in their car) that may have been true. but modern v6s are superbly smooth motors.

an i6 is naturally smoother because from an engineering point of view it is a naturally balanced engine, v6 need counter balance shafts to smooth them out which use up energy, hence if you built two engines one v6 one i6 to the same specs bore x stroke, and the same head design, with the same tech etc. the i6 would be more efficient. Remember the ford i6 is under square with lends itself to torque, some other v6s may out power the 4.0 i6 but it will out torque them and torque tends to give you good fuel economy i.e diesel engines.

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by z80

yes...I know that, but all his povvo cars are mixer ring.



Sure...just use 30% more and produce more CO

Are you dumb or just playing dumb??

How many times do you need to be told, EciLpi uses less CO2 PER KM than the petrol & does not use that much more than a Madaz 3 PER KM!!! You keep going on about 30% more fuel, but the CO2 is measured PER KM!!

[Gobes32]

I think z80 is actually Julia Gillard...........?