Major Ford announcement....

[barbarian]

FORD F-150 has a curb weight of 2+ ton...

by 2009 onwards US buyers will have the option to buy these pick up trucks with I4 Ecoboost engines...

Now if a i4 Ecoboost can haul a 2+ ton truck in ease, it sure as can move Falcon on any day

[HSE2]

Originally Posted by mik

i don`t think you can compare an old 4cyl commy with a starfire 4 engine to a modern falcon 4, the the 4 cylander commy was hugely powerfull (sarcasm)....... with a massive 58 fwkw`s and 140nm of (`RAW POWER')....attempt at humor , lest we not throw the fruit away with out first tasting it.

I completely agree. Thing is I didn't do that.

[SSVPom]

Boosted 4 cylinders are the way forward, and are becoming more 'socially acceptable' in large cars as the manufacturers strive for heightened fuel economy figures and have to jump through tighter hoops... just look at what Europe is serving up with 2.0 litre 200kw/450NM+ boosted 4 cylinders in E Class Mercs !

Bring on the new Falcon range with 4, 6 and 8 cylinder engine options I say !

[HSE2]

Originally Posted by auslandau

In 3 to 4 years ... because of this decision ... I can only see things with a more secure future .... I cannot see it any other way? 100's of million dollars of investment is not a small amount to throw at something that will be gone in 4years.

Not every one who buys cars care about KW's. 70% wouldn't know what a KW is! Thats why they still and will continue to build Camry's. Alot of decisions on what to buy from people come from perception.

I would not bag the Ecoboost 4 in a Falcon until its done, tried and tested. And for anyone to compare this to a C'dore 4 from nearly 30 years ago :

The choices now have seemed to have increased 4, 6, 8, Diesel, LPG and a few turbos thrown in for good measure. Sorry if thats disappointing for some. Makes it harder to decide

What "things"? Did someone suggest that Ford was withdrawing from the Australian market altogether and I missed it?



If memory serves me correctly the Focus program was never a MTB.
Essentially it was a kit car assembly line. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

The IN6 is not an easy product to knock off when it comes to its installation in the current Ford product in either performance or economy, especially so if you give it the same opportunity as competing products, in terms of technology.

It’s been proven time and time again that driver education will return the biggest fuel saving. Doesn’t matter if it’s in the 70s or Top Gear putting
a Prius up against an M3 in the 00s. If you don’t drive a product that is designed for fuel efficiency to its strengths, the real world return won’t
be justifiable. DOD / cylinder deactivation, it’s the same thing. It works when you detune the engine in the first place.

People seem to be forgetting that this engine, in its current tune can return 9s and in some case high 8s in the real world. It should have come
as no surprise when Ford was able to reduce its official number. It’s not an easy target to better when the car weighs as much as it does. Without
hybrid technology what is the best a small light weight four can do- 6s or 7s with four adults and headed for the hills? Ford made the same statement when we were getting the V6. That was going to be more refined and fuel efficient as well.

We threw the BS flag the instant such a thought was presented then too. Any product that employs DI technology compared to a product that doesn't is
going to be up against it regardless of a cylinder count.
There are some wishful GVMs flying around here too.

Simple business practise dictates that if your competition is in the market with a product then you should be there with a competing product. This
announcement is excellent in that it delivers competition on all the key fronts. As Ford consumers we won’t be lacking in anything.

But we would have got this anyway> the green car fund has just been utilised.

All that matters is that the Ford 4 cylinder product beats the Holden Four cylinder product. That the LPG product from Ford is better than the
equivalent from Holden, and so on. These are all developments that would have come, needed to come, if Ford were to remain competitive in this
market even just for four short years.

The economy of a four, with the performance of a six. We have that now. Technology for technology, pound for pound we have it pretty good right
now. If there is a suggestion that the T4 will be the saving grace for either Holden or Ford then that’s a pretty extravagant assumption.

In Fords own words, the focus sized car is a growth market and the Falcon size car is not. That’s black and white in multiple publications across
the country. .

The part that is a surprise is that we couldn’t even make a knock up project viable. If Ford can't make a kit car economically viable, even with
Government assistance, how can Holden get the Cruze into price sensitive regions viably? It’s saying something when we can't even get a kit car up.

What is disappointing from my perspective is that while the inline 6 continues to receive mention in terms of making emissions compliance there is no word on what could be done to make it more fuel efficient. That is truly a disappointment. DI on our engine and tuned for pure economy based on other results could conceivable reduce its effective capacity to around three litres with no turbo due to its torque characteristics. In some cases engines being introduced with DI are seeing the equivalent of low boost forced induction with zero penalties in efficiency or emissions.

[GTP-814]

My biggest fear is that with a T 4cl falcon & no weight reduction will result in a lemon. I can recal the 4 cyl cortinas & Capris which paled in comparision with 6 cyl versions. I acknowledge the technology change & that it will be a boosted but at the time the direct comparision between these were chalk & cheese. The weight reduction of a 4cyl falcon cant just be delivered from engine weight loss as the entire balance of the car will be out plus they will have to engineer for heavier engines (v6 & v8) or are these going full alloy?

Interesting times & I am sure there is more to come

[Cheese3]

Product Development (Geelong) is working around the clock

[bathurst77]

Still cant quite work out where this leaves Mondeo.
Two big bodied cars with 4 cyl engines?

[greenfoam]

Is a 4cyl Falcon as good a car as a Mondeo. Ford have so many good cars for sale without really wanting to sell any of them make you wonder why they don't put the engine money into advertising.

I think Ford will know very well that the Commodore is getting new engines really soon now (diesel or injected lpg or both) and they will be in a hurry to change theirs also and that's the reason for all this

[prydey]

i'm still struggling to work out why people keep comparing the proposed new 4cyl to past era's :

in this critical financial period, do people really think that ford would jeapodise teh product without doing substantial research first. as mentioned many times already, small 4cy turbo's these days are coming out with more than impressive numbers. too many people are focused on the 'numbers' as well. the peak kw number is normally produced way up high in the rev range so means very little in day to day driving. torque is what you need and even though the next gen turbo 4 may not have the same peak torque of the 'barra' i would hazzard a guess that down low it would more than equal, if not better the I6.

my egas is 'only' 156kw! people bag it but it gets the job done with enough performance to still outdo yesterday's cars. seriously, forget about the numbers. (the peak ones anyway).

[XRFutura]

I think really every one getting worried for little reason. put this into perspective this ecoboost engine can produce 205kw and 380Nm of torque. Most likely we'll have slightly detuned version of 170kw. It was only 10 - 12 years ago the XR8 and XR6 falcon were producing the same amount of power.

I'm really looking forward to see what this car is like to drive. Lets just hope the ford marketing department can do good job of promoting these new engines.

[ehast13]

Anybody who's driven a larger (1600ish kg+) car with a small capacity turbo knows that they drive well enough for the average driver.

4 Cylinder ECOboost sounds good. It will entice some buyers. If it can get a slice of the camry fleet sales, then so be it.

The major work has been done overseas. Ford can spend its money on NVH, Installation and callibration.

I reckon it'll be fleet sales that benefit. Ford really needs to sell it as a upmarket model aswell (not just a base model).

Hopefully, the cylinder count will give it more cred among the masses than the conformodore 3.0 litre V6.

G4ET or G4T or just G-Ecoboost. I wish they still had traditional names like fairmont and futura.

A Fairmont ECOboost has a nicer ring to it than G6T.

I wonder if they'll offer it with a manual?

[XD 351 Ute]

Originally Posted by ZA-289

A 2011 multi valve 4cyl turbo will be vastly different from a 1978 push rod carby 6cyl with 2 cyl lopped off!!!! :

It's good news! we can't have the I6 forever....

Yep, I realise things have to change, for Ford Australia and their workers, I hope the change will be for the better.
Especially after reading this morning's Courier Mail about all the Chinese (cheap) cars coming over here.

Ed

[Road_Warrior]

Government and corporate fleets who aren't allowed to have large cars anymore by virtue of them being 6 cylinder, are going to fall over themselves to buy this car.

Ford is going to rebuild it's fleet cred, and give private buyers the option of a large car with a shopping trolley motor, and STILL have it's premium private sales sorted with the XR6T and G series. All I'll say is I hope the plants at Broady and Geelong have the capacity to deal with it

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Government and corporate fleets who aren't allowed to have large cars anymore by virtue of them being 6 cylinder, are going to fall over themselves to buy this car.

Ford is going to rebuild it's fleet cred, and give private buyers the option of a large car with a shopping trolley motor, and STILL have it's premium private sales sorted with the XR6T and G series. All I'll say is I hope the plants at Broady and Geelong have the capacity to deal with it

The more I think about this, the more I think that this 'strategic' move is the right one.

Something needs to change to give the Falcon brand more appeal, this may well be the answer :

[naddis01]

So is the the 4cyl the same as the what was used in the 2008 Explorer America concept? Or is that a 'special' motor only?

http://media.ford.com/article_displa...ticle_id=27455

Originally Posted by Ford Media

....
Explorer America – A Sustainable Showcase
To help explain its vehicle sustainability strategy, Ford has created the Explorer America concept for the 2008 North American International Auto Show.

The Explorer America concept delivers an approximately 20 to 30 percent fuel-economy improvement – depending on engine selection – while providing room for six and their gear, along with moderate towing and off-roading capabilities.

The concept aims to highlight for customers and auto show attendees a number of innovations tied to Ford’s systems approach, including:

•A powertrain lineup that includes a 4-cylinder 2-liter engine with EcoBoost technology delivering 275 hp (205kW) and 280 lb.-ft (380Nm). of torque or, as a premium engine, a 3.5-liter V-6 delivering about 340 hp. Depending on engine selection, fuel-efficiency will improve by 20 to 30 percent versus today’s V-6 Explorer
•Migration from current body-on-frame to unibody construction, reducing weight and delivering superior driving dynamics
•A fuel-efficient 6-speed transmission with auto shift control, allowing the driver to select and hold a lower gear with just the turn of a dial when conditions warrant it
•A weight reduction of 150 pounds for the V-6 version thanks to its downsized – yet superior performing – engine, as well as more lightweight materials, suspension and chassis components
•Fuel-saving electric power assisted steering (EPAS) and other engine actions that deliver a fuel savings benefit of about 5 percent. Between 80 to 90 percent of Ford, Lincoln and Mercury vehicles will have EPAS by 2012
•Aerodynamic and other parasitic improvements that add up to a 5 percent fuel economy gain
.....

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Such as?

C Car platform derivatives.

[whales]

This is the start of the front wheel drive falcon just like the camry.
RWD are becoming dinosaurs in the modern world.
it will want to be a great 4 cyl to lug a falcon around at a reasonable pace.

Perhaps a decent advertising program might help but on going on Fords recent advertising it aint going to happen

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by whales

This is the start of the front wheel drive falcon just like the camry.
RWD are becoming dinosaurs in the modern world.
it will want to be a great 4 cyl to lug a falcon around at a reasonable pace.

Perhaps a decent advertising program might help but on going on Fords recent advertising it aint going to happen

I seem to be seeing Ford ads all over TV.

[naddis01]

I found this article quite interesting.

http://ninemsn.carpoint.com.au/news/...onrunner-15971

Originally Posted by Carpoint

Falcon four a non-runner

Ford has based the future of the Falcon on computer simulations

Ford Asia-Pacific's chief vehicle engineer, Rob Connor, today admitted that Falcon's future is still based on computer simulations.

Where most would assume the Australian arm of the Blue Oval would have tested four-cylinder-engined mules of Falcon, the decision to add a four-cylinder line to the Aussie large rear-wheel drive icon, has been based purely on unreal-world calculations.

"It's all computer simulations, so pretty much every aspect of how the car's going to drive, what the acceleration's going to be like, fuel economy... How loud it's going to be... is all simulated up front..." said Connor.

Ford in the US has published figures of 205kW of power and 380Nm of torque for the new engine, so it appears that the new engine has the legs -- on paper.

"We're about two weeks away from being able to have a drive… I'm looking forward to that…" said Connor, when asked what progress had been made with real-world testing.

Whilst it's common now to undertake extensive virtual testing of crash structures and the like, it is nonetheless still unusual that such a ground-breaking decision would be announced ahead of engineering evaluation vehicles even turning a wheel

However if those power figures are anywhere near correct, it may actually give the I6 a scare...

[Gobes32]

That is strange that Carpoint are being so negative.......... (insert sarcasm)

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Gobes32

That is strange that Carpoint are being so negative.......... (insert sarcasm)

Yep, a great way for them to bag Ford in their opening line.

"The Falcon Four is a non runner."

For many that is an off putting headline. For those that know manufacturing, they know that most design is done on the computer first with heaps of simulation. Then the actual fitment etc.

Still, a crap story apart from the point about it being unusual to not have a motor fitted before it's announced. But realistically, there isn't many recent precedents of going from 6 to 4.

[phillyc]

Wondering aloud at the likely outputs. So we've seen the highest outputs which are 205kW/380Nm. The other is 170kW/320Nm.

I actually wonder if they will just look at the base 3.0L V6 GMH Commodore and match it for outputs. Which would be a really nice one-upmanship. ie our Ford i4T makes more than your v6!

I also think outputs will be kept in check to allow for better fuel economy?!

[Crazed]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Yep, a great way for them to bag Ford in their opening line.

"The Falcon Four is a non runner."

For many that is an off putting headline. For those that know manufacturing, they know that most design is done on the computer first with heaps of simulation. Then the actual fitment etc.

Still, a crap story apart from the point about it being unusual to not have a motor fitted before it's announced. But realistically, there isn't many recent precedents of going from 6 to 4.

I think Carpoint are being pretty practical on this one.

There is no rear wheel drive ecoboost anywhere in the Ford line-up.
There are no north-south mounted applications of the ecoboost engine at all.
There is no DSG transmission currently used in the Falcon.
The current assembly line is designed to handle the I6 and V8.

Yet they are planning on overcoming all of this for your local dealer to have a 4 cylinder DSG Falcon sitting in its yard within 18 months - without having a single protoype even put together yet?

And all this is going to happen while the Territory and Falcon are getting ready for new generation I6 LPG and diesel powerplants. It sounds like a challenge! But im sure they are capable.

Im just curious that with the announcement they didnt have a prototype for journalists to look at, to shut all the naysayers up. It would reduce the chance of people thinking that this 4 cylinder was announced just to take the heat off the Focus decision.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Wondering aloud at the likely outputs. So we've seen the highest outputs which are 205kW/380Nm. The other is 170kW/320Nm.

I actually wonder if they will just look at the base 3.0L V6 GMH Commodore and match it for outputs. Which would be a really nice one-upmanship. ie our Ford i4T makes more than your v6!

I also think outputs will be kept in check to allow for better fuel economy?!

I think its all a bit early to say. The engine hasn't been run/tested in anger yet to my understanding, let alone put in a falcon mule. Fact is anywhere in that range would be effective if tuned right. I reckon 205/380 is pushing it for a 2.0 but that is based on my gut instinct, it woudl probably get to that number but on 95 RON and it would be revving a fair bit.

The aim i would assume is to run the engine as either a 'base' engine, or 'econetic' set up. Burela mentioned at the launch of the Fiesta econetic that while customers cared about the environment, and wanted low fuel consumption, they didn't want to 'give up the other things, the convenience'. i.e. you still have to be on par. There is no use putting in an engine that burns 1 l/100km less fuel but ends up 3 seconds slower to 100km/h and is totally undrivable.

So basically get it to be 8 seconds or less to 100 (i.e. slower than a I6 at 7 seconds approx, but not too slow) but burn 8-8.5 L/100km (so a good litre less than I6). A econetic version would be just as driveable but lacking the top end kick and grunt of the I6. Remember this also gives Ford free range to take the I6 right up there. At the moment it is limited by the fuel economy Ford is trying to get out of it and of course the fact that a base falcon really doesn't need more than 200kw (anyone who says it does clearly can't drive properly).

I'd say 180-190 kw at 6500rpm and 350-360nm at 2000-4500rpm would do nicely. Put that with a 6speed ZF with a 4.17 launch gear, 50-70kg less weight, and bobs your uncle. You'd get 8.5 L/100km out of that easy, probably less. Of course they could go for 170 kw, 380 nm and burn even less, all depends on what they go for RE performance versus economy. As long as it is driveable i wouldn't mind going the second route, hell the I6 is there for those wanting performance. I'd say an I6 woud be making 210-215 kw and 410 nm by that stage anyway.

[ehast13]

With a kerg weight of 1600 ish kg (it should be lighter than a six), a 170 kw/320 nm 2.0turbo would provide more than adequate shove when combined with suitable gearing.

A 1580kg e200k mercedes drives surprisingly well with a 135kw s/charged 1.8. That is a pretty industrial engine compared to a more modern 2.0 turbo.

Really, the kw's don't matter as much as a decent bit of shove down low. Ford is claiming max torque from 1500rpm to 5000rpm.

If that is the case, it will be more than a match for commie exec. Even a 200kw 3.0litre DI HFV6 is still gonna feel a bit peaky next to the strong surge of a turbo engine.

Compare a low boost 118kw turbo 2.0 litre saab 9000 to the (allegedly) more powerful 3.0 saab Griffin. No comparison. The little turbo eats it every time (even in auto, except that first half second until boost builds up)

The ecoboost four has to drive like a big, torquey car. It will flog a camry or accord 2.4 and probably use similar or less fuel.

The six will be over 200kw/400nm (maybe over 210kw) by then

The turbo will benefit but will stay near where it is but with improved economy.

[JPFS1]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Yep, a great way for them to bag Ford in their opening line.

"The Falcon Four is a non runner."

For many that is an off putting headline. For those that know manufacturing, they know that most design is done on the computer first with heaps of simulation. Then the actual fitment etc.

Still, a crap story apart from the point about it being unusual to not have a motor fitted before it's announced. But realistically, there isn't many recent precedents of going from 6 to 4.

I can tell you that is not correct, and i'm unsure of the logic and reasoning behind the statement that a mule doesn't exist.

[Road_Warrior]

I see.

Well, no one has been able to answer my question yet: is the E4 motor alloy block, cast iron or CGI? Answer this question and you'll be able to definitively answer the question of the 4cyl Falcon's weight.

[MAD]

I hope the 4 is good, but underpowered.
I dont want to see the I6 replaced with an I4T.

[Nikked]

it is nonetheless still unusual that such a ground-breaking decision would be announced ahead of engineering evaluation vehicles even turning a wheel

But isn't that where all the good holden stories come from?

[Windsor220]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

I see.

Well, no one has been able to answer my question yet: is the E4 motor alloy block, cast iron or CGI? Answer this question and you'll be able to definitively answer the question of the 4cyl Falcon's weight.

According to wikipedia its alloy. Not the most reliable source though.