The Heart of the 2011 Falcon

[R-Design]

Ford’s recent engine announcements have seen the likelihood of six different engine variants being available in the Falcon. Within the current economic climate this level of variation is likely to add complexity and cost to an already struggling product. As such, which engine has earned its place in the 2011 Falcon range? You’ve only got one choice, use it wisely.

Here’s a brief rundown of the choices:

2.0 I4T – Mandated by Ford Corporate, the I4T is seen as a way for Falcon to make gains into the 4-Cylinder only ‘Fleet’ market. As per the Ecoboost marketing claim this engine will provide, 6-Cylinder performance with 4-Cylinder fuel economy.

4.0 I6 – A Falcon mainstay since the beginning of time I6 has been green lighted for EURO IV compliance after previously being on the chopping block. While loved by all, does the old girl have any new tricks to combat GMH’s V6 DI engines?

4.0 I6 LI LPG – A long overdue Liquid Injection system should see the I6 LPG return to favour. Is it a case of too little, too late?

4.0 I6T – Performance, economy, and no equal have made the I6T a modern day classic. Will the current performance weapon of choice be relegated to the scrap heap come Coyote?

5.0 V8 ‘Coyote’ – A competitive crate engine from Ford US could see an entry level V8 outstrip General for street credibility, economy, and performance. Is there still a market for cheap Ford V8 thrills?

5.0 V8 SC ‘Coyote’ – Bigger than Ben-Hur a Supercharged Coyote V8 has been touted as providing the heart to the ultimate Falcon GT. This Halo engine provides the prospect of rewriting muscle car history, and putting Ford/FPV back on top. Does Australia still want a fire breathing monster?

[Paxton]

I can see one that will have to be discounted almost straight away.

[Mr Hardware]

G. All of the above.

[Fev]

Im gonna say LI LPG. Similar performance, if not the same as a petrol I6 will sell big time me thinks.

How about a performance E85 motor?

[Polyal]

Ah man I just posted in the other thread that didn't have the poll. Noted the other one did say 2010 unless its a typo.

What Ford needs is more revenue, now that can had either by more volume or greater profit.

The cars fitted with a s/c V8 should yield more profit, but 50% goes to FPV (I assume, having the 50/50 split). Having Ford/FPV with a class leading V8 helps image, gets more sales and typically has a halo effect on the rest of the brand.

But from a numbers point of view, the I4T is hard to go past, and then id follow that very closely by the LI I6. But will the cars fitted with the I4T have much margin as they are aimed at fleets? I cant answer that, but hopefully the I4T is an option across the falcon range.

As I mentioned before, the i6 and all its variations surely can coexist as its just an adaptation of a similar base; that makes more economic sense to me. If it wasn't for Ford corporate pushing the I4T id say dont bother and produce a fantastic LI I6 that costs the same to run, who cares how many cylinders it has, but in this case you will have more functionality with the LI I6.

[flappist]

Too many barrows that will be pushed here.

Turbo 4, BIG winner except with the narrow minded who cannot accept change unless it is a bigger V8 or new stripes.

I6, why would you buy one if the T4 has similar (or better) capability unless you are a traditionalist. I suspect the T4 will do to the I6 what the T6 did to the V8.

LPG, yeh yeh, the messiah, the way the truth and the light.....unless of course you live in the 90% of Australia that does not have an LPG bowser close.

T6, the performance engine for those who want the go without the show.

V8, the performance engine for those who want the go WITH the show.

Everyone has their favorite which of course is the BEST option that everyone else should choose as well and their hated options which of course will have to be discounted and banned because they are the ultimate evil and make baby Jesus cry....

Fortunately all will be available and sales will be the final decider of what will survive..

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by flappist

LPG, yeh yeh, the messiah, the way the truth and the light.....unless of course you live in the 90% of Australia that does not have an LPG bowser close.

..

Is that 90% of geographical australia or 5% of australians that do not have access to LPG?

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Is that 90% of geographical australia or 5% of australians that do not have access to LPG?

Not that it really matters, if you dont have access to LPG then im tipping that it was never on your radar anyway, and that most of your vehicles run on diesel.

LPG is best suited for city conditions, stop start where economy is hurt most. Obviously its good on long distances aswell but jeez all modern cars should excel on the highway regardless of fuel system. My cruddy AU average 6-7l/100 on the highway.

Sorry to go off topic, but I dont buy the lack of access as a reason for not providing LI LPG to 90% of the population (based on the majority of the population being coastal). Not singling you out Flappist but I believe its a myth (not the lack of access, but it a reason not to provide it in the first place).

[irlewy86]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Is that 90% of geographical australia or 5% of australians that do not have access to LPG?

What good is a car that cant cross the country?

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by irlewy86

What good is a car that cant cross the country?

This shouldn't turn into a LPG debate but to answer your question it still has a petrol tank, LI needs petrol to start up and come to op temp.

[irlewy86]

Originally Posted by Polyal

This shouldn't turn into a LPG debate but to answer your question it still has a petrol tank, LI needs petrol to start up and come to op temp.

My bad.

Just that there are some customers who would not have an LPG engine. Then again the same could be said for the rest. Ford would definately have to ease the market into a narrow choice of engines. Maybe 1 fleet (I4T/LPG) and one private engine (v8/I6t)

[Mr Hardware]

Originally Posted by Polyal

This shouldn't turn into a LPG debate but to answer your question it still has a petrol tank, LI needs petrol to start up and come to op temp.

Yeah im pretty sure it's gonna be gas-only hey

[Berzerkerr]

Originally Posted by flappist

LPG, yeh yeh, the messiah, the way the truth and the light.....unless of course you live in the 90% of Australia that does not have an LPG bowser close.

Dont forget 90% of Australians live in that 10% thats left

[FPV GTHO]

If you had to have only one, then the option isnt even listed there - dual fuel LPG I6T.

Build the one basic specification and tune it for multiple applications, keeping it dual fuel for country wide use.

The only other option for a single engine would be the I4T as the others cant compete on performance and efficiency.

[Mr Hardware]

I6, why would you buy one if the T4 has similar (or better) capability unless you are a traditionalist.

Insurance costs, turbo lag, spare parts cost, spare parts availability, mechanical knowledge, untested in aus etc etc etc.
Other than that, no idea.

[Luke Plaizier]

Drop the LiLPG as a separate engine - just add LiLPG as a tick box option to ALL motors and make them factory dual fuel irrespective of cylinder count or induction method.

So there's one down in the book of 'Falcon Engines According to Luke'.

The LPG tank has to fit into the spare wheel well anyway, so the existing petrol tank can remain, and LI LPG can now coexist without compromise with Petrol - unlike the LPG systems up until recently which couldn't coexist because of traction and stability control incompatibility. All that varies between each vehicle is the number of injectors and the loom - and the Instrument Cluster programming. Existing Factory PCM's don't even require any changing. All the benefits of LPG without the compromise required of dedicated fuel versions. And double the range.....

I'd consider dropping the NA Coyote as well if another block needed chopping (see what I did there?). The I6T becomes the Ecoboost replacement for NA V8 - a Direct Injected I6T would be ideal. For Diehard V8 fans add a simulated V8 soundtrack generated via the ICC. Come to think of it, this might also be an option for those stepping down from a V10, V12 or W16....

Just make sure the S/C Coyote is an absolute ball tearer.


Lukeyson

[outback_ute]

Petrol 4.0 has its place - surely the long term cost of ownership would be lower than a turbo. If they could do a DI version (big if of course) then all the better, if not then things get tougher in a few years when presumably a lot of competition will have DI.

Flappist I dare say the LPG coverage is like mobile phone coverage. Luke the current LPG tanks replace both the spare wheel well and petrol tank - all the underfloor space behind the rear axle between the chassis rails. It is possible to drive around Australia on LPG, just needs some planning in the more remote places. Mind you it does if you have a petrol car and get into some places on a Sunday night or after 7-9-10pm-midnight etc.

I wonder if the 4T Ecoboost engine might create the possibility of exports, given the 6cyl is an orphan. Also a diesel is surely only a green-light away.

[ltd]

Maybe some of the geelong boys could shed some light as to what the forecasts are considering all these new engines would be replacing the I6's they produce.
Has ford hinted at any kind of downsizing for the I6 plant?

[FPV8U]

The 2.0L I4T will be great for Fleet, but the I6 & I6 LPG will be great for those of us that have work cars that don't feature a rear seat, rather a large alloy tray...

LPG I6 with the Performance and economy of I6 Petrol will be gold to the "Working Class Man" and hopefully steer a few more Tradsman into Falcons rather than Hilux's as is the norm at the moment.

Honestly don't think a T/Diesel option would be a bad thing either.

Hoping the 4 Speed Auto is finally laid to rest even in the Falcon Ute range this time around.

[Seduce XR6]

Why not just make the I6 a direct injection engine as it is or reduce capacity to around 3.5 litres, with the direct injection & smaller capacity it would be a contender to beat the new direct injection holden engines in performance & economy.

[Chilliman]

In a model Vs model line-up between Falcon and Commodore - I see the 2.0Litre Ecoboost lining up against the 3.0Litre SIDI, the 4.0Litre straight-six will become the premium motor to counter Holdens direct-injected 3.6Litre V6, while the Holden V8's would be countered by a 4.0Litre Turbo/5.0Litre Coyote V8 tag-team (sales ultimately deciding who stay's or goes). The same would go for FPV Vs HSV with the HSV 6.2Litre V8 tag teamed by again the 4.0Litre Turbo and the 5.0Litre Coyote (force-fed or not).

[Yellow_Festiva]

I think ALL of those engines are worthy in a Falcon.

Don't see any problems with all of those engines, based on current and predicted outputs.

The only setback I see is the output of the I4. 147kw for a 2L turbo 4 is the same as the outputs from similar engines 10 years old.

Perhaps this engine is tuned wholly for efficiency and low down torque rather than a high output / higher consumption figure.

160ish kw would have been a nicer figure, and probably worth the extra .2L per 100km extra it may have consumed.

The future I4 and base 6 should also run on regular 91 or E10, keeping with the 'low running cost' theme.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by Yellow_Festiva

I think ALL of those engines are worthy in a Falcon.

Don't see any problems with all of those engines, based on current and predicted outputs.

The only setback I see is the output of the I4. 147kw for a 2L turbo 4 is the same as the outputs from similar engines 10 years old.

Perhaps this engine is tuned wholly for efficiency and low down torque rather than a high output / higher consumption figure.

160ish kw would have been a nicer figure, and probably worth the extra .2L per 100km extra it may have consumed.

The future I4 and base 6 should also run on regular 91 or E10, keeping with the 'low running cost' theme.

All the US websites were saying 205kw/380Nm - a figure that Ford had put on the 2011 Explorer concept - I believe it was at one of the Chicago Auto Shows. That was also on regular 85/87 Octane in the US. I just hope Ford doesn't detune it solely for the purpose of not jeopardizing sales of the 4.0L 6 cyl.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by chevypower

All the US websites were saying 205kw/380Nm - a figure that Ford had put on the 2011 Explorer concept - I believe it was at one of the Chicago Auto Shows. That was also on regular 85/87 Octane in the US. I just hope Ford doesn't detune it solely for the purpose of not jeopardizing sales of the 4.0L 6 cyl.

That is actually a very valid point. On the one hand, Ford Aus are notorious (but not as notorious as holden) for adding tiny increments in power and torque with each successive model e.g. I6 130-195kw over 20 years.
On the other hand they also have some history of leap frogging e.g. BA 220kw V8 240kw T6 etc.

All will be revealed soon and I suspect to many the only REALLY important bit is the that T4 is better than the V6 Holden

[Chilliman]

Post 2015, I see possibly only 3-engine options:

2.0 Ecoboost for Most Falcon Models in different states of tune depending on application

3.5 Ecoboost for High Performance Falcon Applications

5.0 Coyote for FPV Falcons

The 4.0 Inline may live on as a LNG/LPG powered engine for industrial applications (there already has been some interest in this).

[Iggypoppin']

I'm intrigued as to why we only get one choice? Surely there is more to be gained by ford having more than on motor? For instance: LI I6 for fleets, 4t and 6t for private buyers, V8 because it would SUCK if ford repeated the late 80's fit of madness and didn't have one. That scenario is for illustrative purpose only, my actual "one" choice is made from an economic point of view. I4T. Fuel economy, power, and as they say, a change is as good as a holiday. I would hate to see the 6 dropped though, it must live on in some way if ford did start making only 4cyl falcs..

[R-Design]

Originally Posted by 76txcoupe

I'm intrigued as to why we only get one choice? Surely there is more to be gained by ford having more than on motor?

I think if you could choose them all you would, I guess the idea is about finding out which engine is most important in securing Falcons future.

Originally Posted by Chilliman

In a model Vs model line-up between Falcon and Commodore - I see the 2.0Litre Ecoboost lining up against the 3.0Litre SIDI, the 4.0Litre straight-six will become the premium motor to counter Holdens direct-injected 3.6Litre V6, while the Holden V8's would be countered by a 4.0Litre Turbo/5.0Litre Coyote V8 tag-team (sales ultimately deciding who stay's or goes). The same would go for FPV Vs HSV with the HSV 6.2Litre V8 tag teamed by again the 4.0Litre Turbo and the 5.0Litre Coyote (force-fed or not).

I agree with this logic, but I also feel that Toyota's Camry/Aurion twins sell in comparable numbers to Falcon with only two engine variations. From an R&D, production and stock cost perspective surely having less model variants would be more efficient.

[5.4 GT]

2.0 I4T for the Ford Falcon range.
4.0 I6 LI LPG to keep the Cabs happy.
5.0 V8/SC "Coyote" for the FPV models (entry level GS has the N/A, going up to top spec GT-P [still don't like the name GT-H] being S/C).

[Joe5619]

I'm surprised the LPG one is as high as it is.. Wonder if it will translate to move sales for the LPG when it is introduced.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

I'm surprised the LPG one is as high as it is.. Wonder if it will translate to move sales for the LPG when it is introduced.

Don't be surprised, there are a huge number of LPG enthusiests in the forum but as you have stated, wallets speak louder than keyboards so sales may or may not reflect the poll.