Drive: Ford to give Falcon a heart start - Page 3

4Vman · 15-06-2009, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

And yet whenever someone suggests Ford make an FG Falcon wagon on here they are directed to the Territory. Not everyone that wants a wagon wants an SUV style wagon.

Fine, let them buy a BF wagon then... Ford still make them too....
I seriously doubt many of those calling for a FG wagon would actually buy one... i think Ford know that too...
Ford need to make money first and foremost before increasing their range with "niche" market vehicles....

Road_Warrior · 15-06-2009, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phillyc

DI and stop/start together could get the Falcon into the 8's L/km.

Clearly Burela believes that the 9.9L is a great start, but clearly wants better for both Ford and the customer!

Before they start fiddling with DI, I'd like to see them try an electric water pump and electro-hydraulic power steering on the I6 to lower fuel consumption through reducing accessory load on the engine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickster2

Ford has been asleep at the wheel with the Territory watching the sales wither. The diesel has been so long awaited and a significant face-lift well overdue to keep competitive with competition. It was a great look for 2004-2007 but it's now in need of a major refresh! Time to take the segment lead back from the bulbous Clugger!

They know this. They know they have let the Territory wither on the vine and are working to bring a heavily revised version to the market. Through pure dumb luck, it will probably be ready for the market just as the economic storm clouds that have engulfed Australia, start to recede.

phillyc · 15-06-2009, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Before they start fiddling with DI, I'd like to see them try an electric water pump and electro-hydraulic power steering on the I6 to lower fuel consumption through reducing accessory load on the engine.

Yep, both electric water pump and electro-hydraulic power steering are worthy causes. Each is worth 0.1-0.2L/100km. The more you look, the more to find!

vztrt · 16-06-2009, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phillyc

Yep, both electric water pump and electro-hydraulic power steering are worthy causes. Each is worth 0.1-0.2L/100km. The more you look, the more to find!

Weight reduction would be a better start. That's where the best fuel savings can be made.

747jet · 16-06-2009, 01:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joshvee

It was? hmmm ok well put it this way. In the last Top Gear Australia or the one before, they showed the HSV, or was it the SS wagon, to be faster round the track than its sedan brother.

If FPV made a FG FPV F6, 4WD or not, and it was as fast at least as the sedan, I'd definitely have bought one.

I think Ford models fail due to lack of marketing. You know until I bought my F6 and joined this forum, I had never heard of FPV, Typhoon and Super Pursuit etc.
But I knew all about Holden’s HSV range and SS/SSV range. I don't understand why such a large company forgoes adequate marketing. If Ford doesn’t understand that marketing is the number 1 priority of any company, they don't deserve to survive.

110% right mate ford need to a good kick in the back side

naddis01 · 16-06-2009, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Fine, let them buy a BF wagon then... Ford still make them too....
I seriously doubt many of those calling for a FG wagon would actually buy one... i think Ford know that too...
Ford need to make money first and foremost before increasing their range with "niche" market vehicles....

No private buyer is interested in BF wagon because it looks like poo.

I am currently waiting for my Mazda dealer to get a demo 6 wagon in, but I would be more interested in an FG wagon if there was one.

zetec · 16-06-2009, 08:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

No private buyer is interested in BF wagon because it looks like poo.

I am currently waiting for my Mazda dealer to get a demo 6 wagon in, but I would be more interested in an FG wagon if there was one.

What about a Mondeo Zetec Wagon? Makes a Mazda 6 Wagon look anorexic for features and is a Ford!

Joshvee · 16-06-2009, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zetec

What about a Mondeo Zetec Wagon? Makes a Mazda 6 Wagon look anorexic for features and is a Ford!

When they were installing the DVD player in my F6 they lent me a Ford Mondeo for the day. Lets just say, I wouldn't by a Mondeo sedan let alone a wagon.

phillyc · 16-06-2009, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phillyc

Yep, both electric water pump and electro-hydraulic power steering are worthy causes. Each is worth 0.1-0.2L/100km. The more you look, the more to find!

Actually appears electric power steering (EPS) can give 3.5% economy gains according to Ford. Which could be 0.3-0.4L/100km.

http://www.prdomain.com/companies/F/...0084155433.htm

Quote:

In contrast, EPS systems do not require engine power to operate and draw electric power only as needed, improving efficiency and extending component life; are reasonably compact and offer some weight savings, equating to packaging flexibility and easier vehicle assembly; are quiet since there is no need for an engine-mounted pump; and eliminates the need for hydraulic fluid in the first place. In addition, EPS systems represent a CO2 emissions savings of approximately 3.5 percent since they operate on demand.

Road_Warrior · 16-06-2009, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

Weight reduction would be a better start. That's where the best fuel savings can be made.

But there is only so much weight reduction you can do to the car before it starts to become dangerous. The car already has aluminium crossmembers and suspension uprights, Burela has ruled out using aluminium panels because of cost, and the car's frame needs the high-strength steel for critical structural reasons. What else can they cut weight from? Not much I would imagine.

EDIT: perhaps the engine block

:

GK · 16-06-2009, 09:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

No private buyer is interested in BF wagon because it looks like poo.

I've seen many a BA/BF wagon lowered that looks nice.

If I bought one, I'd get a Futura, go an XR front and lower it a little. It'd look nice I reckon.

GK

GK · 16-06-2009, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

The BFIII wagon is a tradie's and fleet rep's vehicle and is built to order only, meaning that piles of wagons aren't sitting around on dealer lots unsold. They sell every single one they build.

Great that this is happening for at least one vehicle they build! LOL!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

And they sell because it has 2 things that no other vehicle on sale in Australia has (in that class): load capacity and internal volume.

Agreed, but there's a third thing. Dedicated LPG.

GK

vztrt · 16-06-2009, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

But there is only so much weight reduction you can do to the car before it starts to become dangerous. The car already has aluminium crossmembers and suspension uprights, Burela has ruled out using aluminium panels because of cost, and the car's frame needs the high-strength steel for critical structural reasons. What else can they cut weight from? Not much I would imagine.

EDIT: perhaps the engine block

:

Weather they're willing to spend it or not is a different story. But the best fuel savings you'll get is weight reduction.

naddis01 · 16-06-2009, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zetec

What about a Mondeo Zetec Wagon? Makes a Mazda 6 Wagon look anorexic for features and is a Ford!

Not really a fan of the Mondeo. Plus 118kw and 208Nm lugging around 1600kg doesnt sound too exciting. I am looking at the 6 diesel wagon. 136kw and 400Nm sounds a bit better. However I would prefer to pay a little more for a hypothetical FG XR6 Turbo wagon.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GK

I've seen many a BA/BF wagon lowered that looks nice.

If I bought one, I'd get a Futura, go an XR front and lower it a little. It'd look nice I reckon.

GK

Tha vast majority of people arent interested in modifying their brand new car. Plus it will still look like a 12 year old lowered piece of poo.

MONSOON · 16-06-2009, 10:30 PM

I wonder if they made a limited edition BF3 XR6 wagon, if they would sell, surely the devolopment cost would be minimal, most parts would already exist. Too little too late I guess

Road_Warrior · 16-06-2009, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

Weather they're willing to spend it or not is a different story. But the best fuel savings you'll get is weight reduction.

Of course. But hazard to guess, the tech for electrrric water pumps and electro-hydraulic power steering already exists in the Ford world and FoA could simply headhunt it for the next Falcon...

4Vman · 16-06-2009, 11:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

Weather they're willing to spend it or not is a different story. But the best fuel savings you'll get is weight reduction.

Unfortunately its far more expensive to make cars lighter than it is to develop more efficient engines...

phillyc · 16-06-2009, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Of course. But hazard to guess, the tech for electric water pumps and electro-hydraulic power steering already exists in the Ford world and FoA could simply headhunt it for the next Falcon...

Yes, it exists on more and more Fords. It is also an aim to have it on 90% of Ford's produced by 2012.

Considering that EPS is on the Mazda2 and Fiesta, which are both 15k cars, it surely cant be that expensive. Also EWP and their controllers aren't that expensive to buy aftermarket. I'd also say, that you could possibly get the ECU to control it too.

You also need to look at what these new modules replace, ie existing hydraulics, pump, shorter belts, idler pulleys etc This means the mass at the front of the engine (not good for balance/handling) is reduced & or moved to within the wheelbase.

vztrt · 17-06-2009, 02:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Unfortunately its far more expensive to make cars lighter than it is to develop more efficient engines...

Yeah I know, but the gains would me much better. Too bad the Falcon doesn't sell more units.

phillyc · 18-06-2009, 08:36 PM

Wonder if they could go to an alloy IRS? They already have alloy front suspension which saved 14kg compared to a steel version.

Watto_Cobra · 19-06-2009, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phillyc

Wonder if they could go to an alloy IRS? They already have alloy front suspension which saved 14kg compared to a steel version.

I heard 22kg and another 4kg with the composite intake manifold on the N/A I6's.

phillyc · 19-06-2009, 09:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Watto_Cobra

I heard 22kg and another 4kg with the composite intake manifold on the N/A I6's.

Correct. My bad!

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...257426007D01ED

Quote:

Originally Posted by Go Auto

Apart from all-new Territory-style alloy front suspension that is claimed to reduce weight by 22kg...

I think i got it confused with a 14kg overall weight increase for FG versus BF2. Oops.

Which then leads to, how much could they say by going to alloy IRS? Similar amount? 25kg is 1.5% of bodyweight. 70% of consumption is due to weight. So, that could mean 1% (0.1L/100km) improved economy.

chief · 19-06-2009, 10:17 PM

Everyone who is crying out for a FG wagon would buy one second hand at $12,000 not a brand new one at $30,000 + and Ford know that. Hence no FG wagon.

Ask yourself what is the purpose of a wagon compared to a sedan. They are essentially the same car from the c pillar forward. The only difference is the boot: how much can fit in and how much weight it can carry. So why do you want the current shape car when a still current design is just as useful. The engineering, design, accreditation, testing is much much more than just a new boot.

naddis01 · 20-06-2009, 11:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief

Everyone who is crying out for a FG wagon would buy one second hand at $12,000 not a brand new one at $30,000 + and Ford know that. Hence no FG wagon..

With that argument no one would buy the sedan either....

Quote:

Originally Posted by chief

Ask yourself what is the purpose of a wagon compared to a sedan. They are essentially the same car from the c pillar forward. The only difference is the boot: how much can fit in and how much weight it can carry. So why do you want the current shape car when a still current design is just as useful. The engineering, design, accreditation, testing is much much more than just a new boot.

Should have just kept the BA/BF sedan then as well. It was still useful.

Bossxr8 · 21-06-2009, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Last week i read a split for FG: approx 33% XR, 33% Base XT, 33% Luxury G6...

Up until the end of the 1st quarter this year, the total split for FG sales has been around 4.5% XT, 45% G series and around 50% XR. Since the fleets have got on board over the last month those figures will have probably gone more towards the XT but overall total FG sales would still be similar to the above numbers.

BFII sales were 52% XT, approx 20% Futura/Fairmont/Ghia and around 30% XR.

Official figures.

Bossxr8 · 21-06-2009, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...2&pg=2&IsPgd=0

Interesting comments about the I6...maybe DI is not out of the question after all..

The original Drive article is wrong. Ford are signing off on their future powertrain plan 5 years or so in advance. It has nothing to do with the Euro 4 engine upgrade coming next year which was signed off a long time ago.

The future plan will require a Euro 5 compliant engine, possibly around 2015. They need to sign off on it now to work on it for it to be ready by then.

The Euro 4 I6 does not have DI.

As Ford have said it will be nothing more than exhaust mods and calibration refinements to get it to pass Euro 4. It will still be essentially nearly identicle to the FG engine.

vztrt · 21-06-2009, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The original Drive article is wrong. Ford are signing off on their future powertrain plan 5 years or so in advance. It has nothing to do with the Euro 4 engine upgrade coming next year which was signed off a long time ago.

The future plan will require a Euro 5 compliant engine, possibly around 2015. They need to sign off on it now to work on it for it to be ready by then.

This sign off will be by the end of July. If I remember reading correctly.

Road_Warrior · 21-06-2009, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The Euro 4 I6 does not have DI.

As Ford have said it will be nothing more than exhaust mods and calibration refinements to get it to pass Euro 4. It will still be essentially nearly identicle to the FG engine.

Would I be almost correct in saying that the recent (March '09) updates to the I6 have been part of this Euro 4 update?

Bossxr8 · 21-06-2009, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Would I be almost correct in saying that the recent (March '09) updates to the I6 have been part of this Euro 4 update?

I reckon the new catalytic convertors they have been fitting to the 9.9 L XT's will be part of the Euro 4 upgrade, they may just bring them closer to the engine to decrease start up emmisions by reducing the time it takes them to heat up and start working.

Gobes32 · 21-06-2009, 06:34 PM

So the decision at the end of July is whether Ford go ahead with making the I6 euro 5 compliant?