New Falcon engines - which would you buy?

[Brent]

I like to think I'm fairly open-minded with these things. Have owned a few Ford straight sixes, have a BOSS 290 now, and also a Subaru Forester XT (turbo 2.5 litre boxer for those who don't know Subies). Try as I might though, I just can't come to grips with a 2 litre engine in a full sized Aussie sedan.

I realise that there's some pretty handy technology contained in the EcoBoost engine, but I have a feeling that real world driving conditions will yield smaller efficiency gains than what many would be hoping for. When a small capacity engine is lugging around an 1,800kg+ vehicle, it'll be working hard. That engine will spend the majority of its time on boost. Will those efficiency gains really eventuate when that little turbo is constantly huffing and puffing away? I'm not so sure.

I know from driving our Subaru Forester XT around, it leans on the turbo boost quite a bit. That's not fanging it in any respect, just going with the cut & thrust of suburban driving. Now that's a car that's between 200-300kg lighter than a Falcon equivalent, and yet the EcoBoost would be giving away a further 500cc engine displacement. Maybe its using a bit of poor science, but when I think of driving our Forester with another 250kg added and 500cc less capacity, all I can think of is one very hot & busy little turbo arrangement.

Yeah I know, its probably the future etc and after Ecoboost has been a raging success in the market 5 years later I'll no doubt be eating my words. That's fine, and it won't be the first or the last time LOL! At the minute though, I don't think its quite an open and shut case.

[GK]

Li6 Fwt!

Gk

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Brent

I like to think I'm fairly open-minded with these things. Have owned a few Ford straight sixes, have a BOSS 290 now, and also a Subaru Forester XT (turbo 2.5 litre boxer for those who don't know Subies). Try as I might though, I just can't come to grips with a 2 litre engine in a full sized Aussie sedan.

I realise that there's some pretty handy technology contained in the EcoBoost engine, but I have a feeling that real world driving conditions will yield smaller efficiency gains than what many would be hoping for. When a small capacity engine is lugging around an 1,800kg+ vehicle, it'll be working hard. That engine will spend the majority of its time on boost. Will those efficiency gains really eventuate when that little turbo is constantly huffing and puffing away? I'm not so sure.

I know from driving our Subaru Forester XT around, it leans on the turbo boost quite a bit. That's not fanging it in any respect, just going with the cut & thrust of suburban driving. Now that's a car that's between 200-300kg lighter than a Falcon equivalent, and yet the EcoBoost would be giving away a further 500cc engine displacement. Maybe its using a bit of poor science, but when I think of driving our Forester with another 250kg added and 500cc less capacity, all I can think of is one very hot & busy little turbo arrangement.

Yeah I know, its probably the future etc and after Ecoboost has been a raging success in the market 5 years later I'll no doubt be eating my words. That's fine, and it won't be the first or the last time LOL! At the minute though, I don't think its quite an open and shut case.

Ecoboost Falcon will only weigh about 1600-1650 kg approx, not 1800. Only about 100kg heavier than a Forester turbo, with a lot more power and torque. It will pull economy in the 8's no problem, maybe even the high 7's. The Ford S Max which will weigh close to the Falcon already does those numbers with the ecoboost engine.

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Ecoboost Falcon will only weigh about 1600-1650 kg approx, not 1800. Only about 100kg heavier than a Forester turbo, with a lot more power and torque. It will pull economy in the 8's no problem, maybe even the high 7's. The Ford S Max which will weigh close to the Falcon already does those numbers with the ecoboost engine.

Yep, the S-Max gets 8.1L/100km for a less aero efficient people mover bodied vehicle that weighs 1650kg. It also accelerates 0-100kmh in 7.9s.

It is entirely reasonable to expect Falcon Ecoboost which will weigh 1650kg and be a more aero shape to get 8L/100km or better economy. Maybe as good as mid 7s.

[Resurrection]

Now the details of the new EcoLPI and EcoBoost engines have been released to the public, has anybody changed their opinion on which of the two engines they would choose? I'm still for the EcoLPI because:

EcoLPI: 12.5 L/100km with LPG at $0.65/L = $8.13 fuel cost for 100km
EcoBoost: 8.1 L/100km with 95 RON at $1.50/L = $12.15 fuel cost per 100km
Standard I6: 9.9 L/100km with 91 RON at $1.40/L = $13.86 fuel cost per 100km

Real world costs will be higher but the relative difference between them would remain about the same.

EcoLPI has running cost and straight line performance advantage.
EcoBoost has spare tyre/boot space and handling advantage.

[Resurrection]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

Lots of money is being spent to offer new engine variants which will be cheaper to run. Which one will be successul?

It has been 18 months since I posed this question. Both new engines have been on sale for a while. EcoLPI for more than one year, EcoBoost for more than six months.

I do not have the exact figures but it appears FG EcoLPI is clearly outselling FG EcoBoost. The poll on AFF shows a 3 to 1 in favour of the LPG engine. In reality the margin is closer to 10 to 1. Not many EcoBoosts sold to date (which is not surprising).

One thing can be said for certain - neither engine has proven to be the saviour for Ford Australia as they have not stopped the continual erosion of sales (nor loss of jobs).

It is a shame considering the amount of money has been spent on these programs. This was the last throw of the dice.

[superfly]

I voted the 4 cylinder as rego in Qld is cheaper for a 4 cyl car. But I'd love it to be a XR.

edit Sorry I didn't realise this was an old thread.

[4DBOSS]

LPG would be better, but prices of tht per litre has gone up through the roof..

[Chrisosicko]

I chose the 6cyl it makes sense for australia. With our massive gas supplies and the fact its the most advanced engine made in australia

[NX74205]

I'd personally choose the EcoBoost four, because I've driven one and they're bloody good, and also because, as a personal preference, I don't want a car powered by LPG. I'd choose petrol over diesel and LPG any day of the week.

[RAPID_BA]

Don't want LPG, it's for taxis. 4 cyl turbo for me. Tune only and bye bye LPG i6

Petrol only i6 different story.

[warpsp33d]

Originally Posted by NX74205

I'd personally choose the EcoBoost four, because I've driven one and they're bloody good, and also because, as a personal preference, I don't want a car powered by LPG. I'd choose petrol over diesel and LPG any day of the week.

and I chose the LPG for the very same reasons. Having driven one, it's a bloody good drive. I was so impressed, I ordered one for myself.

Why would you chose petrol over LPG? What's wrong with LPG? Go take an EcoLPI for a drive and try it out.

[NX74205]

Originally Posted by warpsp33d

Why would you chose petrol over LPG? What's wrong with LPG? Go take an EcoLPI for a drive and try it out.

Oh, I'm sure the EcoLPI is a good drive. But so is the EcoBoost. So is any new Falcon for that matter ...

But the compromise on boot space isn't something that I can live with, nor the lack of availability of LPG in some remote areas. In addition, most petrol stations here only has one pump with LPG on it, which makes queuing up for fuel all the more time consuming ....

Minor niggles, for sure, but enough to get me to choose petrol over LPG or diesel.

[Buntz]

LPG all the way.

[barra240t]

Do yourself a favour and go drive an Ecoboost, awesome engine in a Falcon. I also chose it because of the cheaper rego.

[tezxr8man]

Originally Posted by Resurrection

V8 are only for FPV models as XR8 is dead.

XR8 Will live forever, like the GT was. Its having a sleep for a little bit