Ford Falcon four-cylinder..(My CommentHere We Go AGAIN!! This the last Falcon in OZ!!

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by TMC

Yes I agree. That is an inaccurate belief though of course, but the average Joe wouldn't know.

Let's see, the Commodore hasn't had an Australian V8 since the 304 was dropped when the LS motors came out back in the mid 90's. It hasn't had an Australian 6 since the VN was introduced in 1988 and the Buick V6 was taken up. On the other hand Ford still has a truly all Aussie 6 which the yanks would love to get there hands on.


Holden, as Australian as grid iron, baseball and the Statue of Liberty.

And it's surprising how Aussie people forget that Ford Aust haven't built a V8 since 1983. It wasn't until 1992 -3 that Ford bought back the V8 and I wonder which country it came from?

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

The Holden six was, along with the Ford six, an outstanding motor. It was an old "in and out on the one side" head design instead of a cross-flow which hindered outright power and efficiencies, but internally it was anything but fragile. Early ones were plagued with a fibre timing gear on the cam, but that was no big deal, as many modified engines went on nicely with the standard gear. The 12 port blue motor was a massive improvement in efficiency and power, and the fnal black motor was the pinnacle...alloy timing gear, EFI, stainless steel extractors, well ported head and bigger valves, tough rods. It was an amazing engine.
What it couldn't do was be easily re-engineered for unleaded, not cheaply anyway, so Holden went with the easy route of a Nissan six off the shelf while the V6 was designed.
Ford found it easier, already having a cross-flow head, which just had to be done in alloy, but even then it was plagued with a bad stroke-to-rod-length ratio that limited revs to about 4700...they just didn't make any more power past that level.

Ford and Holden both had excellent engines that were hammered by a changing world of unleaded fuel requirements, pollution laws, and increasing expectations of fuel economy. Ford was pretty lucky to be able to keep the six as long as it has by pouring money into it. Holden went the easier route and used off-the-shelf engines for the Commodore from other sources in the GM family.

I love the straight six Ford engine...but I'm also realistic enough and have seen enough well-loved engines from various makers come and go that I know it won't be around forever...

Hit the nail on the head. At the time Holden stuffed the Nissan 6 into the Commodore, Nissan were still "in bed" with Ford, which made it even more surprising. (Patrol/Maverick and the Ford/Nissan ute)

Whilst the Ford inline 6 has been a terrific motor, meeting all the required emission tests for so long, I can see it's time being up really soon.

I very much doubt Ford would be silly enough to slot a 4 cyl into a large family car. More than likely it'll end up being a V6.

My 2c +GST

[TMC]

OK, seeing that we are talking about 70, 80's inline sixes, the best inline six IMHO was not a Ford or a Holden. It was the Chrysler Hemi 6, another aussie designed and built engine first seen in 1970 as the 245, then in 71 came out as the 265 and small economy pack 215. The standard 265 was a 203BHP engine and would drag off a Holden 308 Monaro. In fully tuned form in 1972 was the 302BHP E49 6pack, the most powerful production 6 cylinder in the world at the time. It had a hemi head which wasn't seen in a Ford until the EA, and never seen in a Holden 6. Those motors had torque and power and revability (Wheels magazine tested a bog stock 245 Hemi ranger and revved the thing to 7000 rpm in first in their test.) and for their day were unbeatable sixes. Pity Chrysler and Mitsubishi stuffed the whole aussie thing up.

Ford came into their own with the alloy head X flows in the early 80's while Holden were just putting a 12 port head on their six!!!!!! You know Chrysler and Ford had 12 port six cylinder heads back in the 60's 20 years before Holden.

This is my recollection of the Holden 6 cylinders. You could fix them with a hammer and fencing wire. They were very much loved by the Holden faithful. The red motor had a harmonic balancer which flew to pieces. In fact the pulley to drive the fan belt which ran the alternator and water pump was mounted directly onto the outer ring of the harmonic balancer by a press fit ring of rubber. Often the timing mark would slip around and you had no idea how to time the damn thing with a light.

The 202 was actually stretched too far in capacity because when they lengthened the stroke from the 179 they just whacked in shorter pistons meaning the piston skirt was too short for the piston to stay true in the bore, so they often rattled and then cracked the top off the piston. This was a common fault. They had oil prime problems with an external oil pump and quite often seized journals and threw rods out the side of the block. They were bad on fuel and made about 140BHP in the HQ. In the HX when emission controls came out they were even worse.

The blue motor introduced the 12 port head in the early 80's and yes this was a better engine. But a 12 port engine should have come out in the 60's, but Holden were still running the grey motor then, an engine from 1930's GM design.

The black motor was plagued with rings that wore out after 100000km requiring a full engine rebuild. To be honest you don't see too many VB, VC Commodores on the road anymore, but there are still a lot of XF's out there still.

Of course this is merely my opinion, others would forgive the faults I mentioned above and love those engines anyway, which is fine, but I didn't love them. Somehow though the Holden faithful did love them. No crime in that though, we are all entitled to our own opinions, but they were my least favourite 6 cylinders.

The Ford offerings were far from perfect back in the 80's, but if I wanted a torquey six to tow a boat, I'd choose a Ford 6, or a Ford V8.

[TMC]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

And it's surprising how Aussie people forget that Ford Aust haven't built a V8 since 1983. It wasn't until 1992 -3 that Ford bought back the V8 and I wonder which country it came from?

I don't think Ford really said that they had an all Aussie V8 like Holden did. In fact the 302C was an Australian modification to the Cleveland engine. The Cleveland had legendary status here in Oz, but not so much in the states where the Windsor was king. I must agree though that Ford Australia have not built a V8 since the XE Falcon. Interestingly the late model XE Cleveland blocks were a thick wall casting that were sort after for a while in the states for circle track racing.

But when we look at the current engine lineup in the Ford Falcon and Holden Commodore, Ford is the only one with a locally built and developed 6 and a great one at that.

[jpd80]

There's still a lot of support for larger capacity six cylinder engines, their ease of performance
especially when coupled to a good six speed auto transmission so rather than mes up that
combination, Ford has wisely chosen to do something completely different, yeah people are really
going to stop and ask the hard questions about a DI Turbo I-4 in such a large car but honestly,
60 Kg lighter than Holden Omega, more torque where it matters and superior fuel economy.

One drive is all it will take..........I-6 owners will probably say yeah not bad but gimme the I-6
while I-4 buyers will say, heeeyyyy, I really like this and the fuel economy is still good.
Fingers crossed..

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

I very much doubt Ford would be silly enough to slot a 4 cyl into a large family car. More than likely it'll end up being a V6.

My 2c +GST

Why would you doubt they'd slot it in, when it's already in?

[AC]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Why would you doubt they'd slot it in, when it's already in?

Yes, that's what they said in the article in the other thread, that you posted

I did post on the first page about my FG/Camry experiance, but to compare the two, with both running four cylinder engines.
They are pretty similar and by all reports the Ecoboost will have more power than the Camry, so it'll make up for its extra weight.

2011 Camry
- Length (mm) 4815
- Width (mm) 1820
- Height (mm) 1470
- Wheelbase (mm) 2775
- Kerb weight (kg) 1535
- Capacity (cc) 2362 - 4Cylinder
- Maximum power kW 117
- Maximum torque Nm 218

FG Falcon
- Length (mm) 4970
- Width (mm) 1868
- Height (mm) 1433
- Wheelbase (mm) 2838
- 6-Cylinder EcoLPi 1757(kg) less 60kg(1687) for EcoBoost4.

I dont know what everyones worried about, as it said in the other article "The biggest hurdle for the Ecoboost Falcon will be a cultural one, not an actual product limitation"

[Struggo]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

Hit the nail on the head. At the time Holden stuffed the Nissan 6 into the Commodore, Nissan were still "in bed" with Ford, which made it even more surprising. (Patrol/Maverick and the Ford/Nissan ute)

Sorry to say SVO, but you ar incorrect re Ford/Nissan. Holden had the Nissan 3.0L six in the VL from 1986 to 1988. Then under the Button plan Holdan/Toyota formed the UAAI in early 88, whilst Nissan/Ford model shared from late 1988-1991.

That aside the 3.0L Nissan was a gem

[blk6t]

What a stupid article!

The article didn't tell us anything new...
1) Ecoboost Falcon is coming with I6 comparable performance...well we know this already...
2) The long term outlook of the Falcon has not yet been confirmed...again we already know this...

What the idiot did was contradict himself, firstly noted that this ecoboost motor may be the last chance Ford Aus has to keep local production of the Falcon alive, but then noted that Ford may announce at the Detroit Motor Show their decision on the Falcon 2-3 months before the ecoboost is released to public...which is it???

This guy has no idea, he took the facts on the ecoboost Falcon, threw in doom / gloom comments and posted it online.

I think Ford should ask for comments on the Falcon and other Fords on forums such as these and use the comments in their advertising, I think people on here are much more constructive.

[outback_ute]

Originally Posted by AC

- 6-Cylinder EcoLPi 1757(kg) less 60kg(1687) for EcoBoost4.

The petrol 6cyl is 1704kg or so, so the Ecoboost should be approx 1640kg

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by AC

I dont know what everyones worried about, as it said in the other article "The biggest hurdle for the Ecoboost Falcon will be a cultural one, not an actual product limitation"

Actually the EcoLPi is heavier than the petrol.
EcoLPi = 1757kg with 198kW/409Nm
Petrol = 1704kg with 195kW/395Nm
Sidi 3.0 = 1685kg with 190kW/290Nm
EcoBoost = 1644kg with 177kW/339Nm
2012 Camry = 1505kg with 135kW/235Nm
2011 Camry = 1535kg with 117kW/218Nm

[T-Pak Addict]

Originally Posted by TMC

This is my recollection of the Holden 6 cylinders. You could fix them with a hammer and fencing wire. They were very much loved by the Holden faithful. The red motor had a harmonic balancer which flew to pieces. In fact the pulley to drive the fan belt which ran the alternator and water pump was mounted directly onto the outer ring of the harmonic balancer by a press fit ring of rubber. Often the timing mark would slip around and you had no idea how to time the damn thing with a light. .

Being a young lad and driving an array of the much loved Red 6's in various guises, they were a great engine for the mechanically inept like myself at the tender age of 17......

They were pretty reliable, easy to work on and parts were cheap and they were simple. The much loved 186 could be thrashed, bash and still come back for more. They went pretty dam good when you threw on a 161 head, 1/4 race cam, 350 holley and set of extractors (yes fond memories).....

The pre crossflows were a right pain cos you really couldnt do much with them unless you had a 2V...... The Xflows were a big step in the right direction as you now could run different manifold etc.

Will be intersting to see how the new Ford line up goes when they finally get here..... Might have to get off my bum and go test driving.....

[TMC]

Originally Posted by T-Pak Addict

Being a young lad and driving an array of the much loved Red 6's in various guises, they were a great engine for the mechanically inept like myself at the tender age of 17......

They were pretty reliable, easy to work on and parts were cheap and they were simple. The much loved 186 could be thrashed, bash and still come back for more. They went pretty dam good when you threw on a 161 head, 1/4 race cam, 350 holley and set of extractors (yes fond memories).....

The pre crossflows were a right pain cos you really couldnt do much with them unless you had a 2V...... The Xflows were a big step in the right direction as you now could run different manifold etc.

Will be intersting to see how the new Ford line up goes when they finally get here..... Might have to get off my bum and go test driving.....

I was probably a bit harsh on the old Holden 6's. Their charm was in their brutal simplicity. The 186 engine was the pick of the crop and probably doesn't fit in the same category as the 179, 202 etc. That motor was balanced right and went well with good reliability.

But my choice of 6 cylinders back then was the Chrysler Hemi 265. Ahh those were the days.

[Chilliman]

Originally Posted by TMC

I was probably a bit harsh on the old Holden 6's. Their charm was in their brutal simplicity. The 186 engine was the pick of the crop and probably doesn't fit in the same category as the 179, 202 etc. That motor was balanced right and went well with good reliability.

But my choice of 6 cylinders back then was the Chrysler Hemi 265. Ahh those were the days.

I have fond memories of the 186 - I had a HZ ute, with a 186 Red motor donated from an earlier Holden (HQ I think). With a 3-on-the-tree manual you just couldn't kill that thing - and believe me I tried!

[Brazen]

When I see some of these threads sometimes I feel like I am watching the band playing on the Titanic as it sinks. These articles arnt negative or biased, they are telling it like it is.

I think there is a reluctance to actually accept the current situation the Falcon is in. 1446 sales last month.. They could start selling 3,000 a month and still be in a very precarious place. Ive done my bit, I have ordered a FGII EcoLPI ute, but Im not a fool. There has to be serious changes made to local manufacturing to make it viable.

The Ecoboost will not be the savior, in fact I can see it just subsituting buyers who would bought an I6 instead - putting the local engine plant in trouble.

The problem is Ford are trying to pitch a product which is irrelevant as an overall package.

They should of built Focus locally
They should of put diesel in Falcon
And they should of kept the wagon ticking along or developed a new full-range FG wagon.

With its emphasis on fleets Falcon is forced to be a volume car when large sedans are no longer volume players. Falcon should of been pushed up-market with features and performance, and into private buyers with diesel, with cheap-to-make Focus taking over the volume and fleet duties - keeping Broadmeadows sustainable.

I dont care if people call me a Holden supporter or Ford basher - Ive spent well over quarter of a million dollars on new Fords over the years. I have an emotional and financial investment in their products. Frankly I agree with the author that it is too late, I am hoping Falcon moves to the Taurus platform - if it stays an orphan its days are numbered.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Brazen

When I see some of these threads sometimes I feel like I am watching the band playing on the Titanic as it sinks. These articles arnt negative or biased, they are telling it like it is.

I think there is a reluctance to actually accept the current situation the Falcon is in. 1446 sales last month.. They could start selling 3,000 a month and still be in a very precarious place. Ive done my bit, I have ordered a FGII EcoLPI ute, but Im not a fool. There has to be serious changes made to local manufacturing to make it viable.

The Ecoboost will not be the savior, in fact I can see it just subsituting buyers who would bought an I6 instead - putting the local engine plant in trouble.

The problem is Ford are trying to pitch a product which is irrelevant as an overall package.

They should of built Focus locally
They should of put diesel in Falcon
And they should of kept the wagon ticking along or developed a new full-range FG wagon.

With its emphasis on fleets Falcon is forced to be a volume car when large sedans are no longer volume players. Falcon should of been pushed up-market with features and performance, and into private buyers with diesel, with cheap-to-make Focus taking over the volume and fleet duties - keeping Broadmeadows sustainable.

I dont care if people call me a Holden supporter or Ford basher - Ive spent well over quarter of a million dollars on new Fords over the years. I have an emotional and financial investment in their products. Frankly I agree with the author that it is too late, I am hoping Falcon moves to the Taurus platform - if it stays an orphan its days are numbered.

Theres a few issues with what your saying though.. 1446 units is not a good thing I agree but theres a few reasons why.... FG2 for example, Ford have been building FG2 for over a month now, but they are not retailing any to dealers yet, just like Territory they have to build up stock. Therefore they have had nothing leave the plant in Falcon guise for over a month, except FPV stock thats gone over the road or FG1's that have been sitting on the grass.

Next issue is LPI, they only built a handful of LPI FG MK1's for media / dealer demo purposes, they only filled a small number of fleet / customer orders. LPI has not had a full run on sale atm, plus most fleet managers knew FG2 was coming, therefore they have held off, and probably will till early next year now as 2011 production has nearly finished.

Then theres the issue of stock mix... Since June Ford has only been building XR6's in big numbers, with stockos and XR6 SE being the main blend... Try getting a G6, G6E or G6ET FG1 out of Melbourne stock, there are none. They have been smart in the fact that theres not hundreds of high end models laying around, like they had with Euro 3 runout which cost them a fair amount to move on, this has cost them sales though as they have not had G series models available.

I think 2012 will see Falcon figures back around 2500 mark a month, it will never do better then that simply because they do not build enough units.... Its not like the BA days where they were building 7000 Falcons a month!! With 2500 Sedans, 800 utes and 1700 Territorys that will get them nearing their maximum production anyhow at 5000 a month.

I agree what you say about diesel though... Its probably the dumbest thing they have done in the last 2 years... A diesel G6E would be a hell of a car!!

[2011G6E]

Phht...none of them hold a light to an early 265 Hemi (2BBL engine)...shave the head 35 thou, clean up the ports a touch, an E49-grind cam, extractors with twin system, and either a 500 Holley or a 465 4BBL on a proper manifold, and you're looking at an easy 300hp...

I'll be really interested to see what tuners come up with when the Ecoboost Falcon has been around a year or two. Going by Jap cars like RX8's, S2000's, and 200SX's, it doesn't take them long to find easy power out of a new engine on the market...

[b0son]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

I very much doubt Ford would be silly enough to slot a 4 cyl into a large family car.

Given everyone is moving toward 4's, I dont think its silly at all.

Put the Falcon on a modest diet (eg. aluminium or plastic panels, etc), and the four would be perfectly acceptable as the base engine spec. Especially if EcoLPi doesnt win enough people over.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Brazen

They should of built Focus locally

yeah, cos thats working out pretty well for holden

Originally Posted by Brazen

They should of put diesel in Falcon

no evidence to suggest buyers would flock to a large diesel sedan. if you look at sales by fuel type, it suggests otherwise. petrol is still king.

Originally Posted by Brazen

And they should of kept the wagon ticking along or developed a new full-range FG wagon.

been done to death. seriously.

[BFZ Wagon]

Typical motoring press. They just had to bring up the Starfire engine of 30 years ago. There's absolutely no need to make any reference it and bring up old news. It was 30 years ago for &%$ sake. :mad

Did they bring up the Camira when Holden announced the Cruze was going to be built here?? nooo.. Oh that's right, coz it was a Holden.. The reason say that is because even though they are both front wheel drive, that's where the similarities lie and it would be just as 'irrelevant'.
They do whatever they can (It's like they go out of their way) to deliberately hurt Ford and it's reputation... that seems to be their goal. anyway

I'd love to see how much all these guys get paid to rubbish Ford product.. I wouldn't be surprised if it was by 'a certain company' or their 'PR mob'.

I really do hope this new Ecoboost Falcon sells really well. It will certainly be cheaper to rego here in QLD. and I look forward to eventually having a drive of one (I'm still yet to have a drive of ANY model FG Falcon.)

Hope my post makes some sort of sense.

[jpd80]

It kills journalists that Ford has a secret that they won't share,
this is all about trying to provoke an answer..

Did it ever occur to these Einsteins that Ford has been tipping its hand all along?
Why would you continue spending money on a supposedly dead end car like Falcon?

Short answer: you wouldn't....


But here we are with FG II, EcoLPI, Ecoboost and a diesel Territory...What's that tell you?

[Chilliman]

Originally Posted by jpd80

It kills journalists that Ford has a secret that they won't share,
this is all about trying to provoke an answer..

Did it ever occur to these Einsteins that Ford has been tipping its hand all along?
Why would you continue spending money on a supposedly dead end car like Falcon?

Short answer: you wouldn't....


But here we are with FG II, EcoLPI, Ecoboost and a diesel Territory...What's that tell you?

I've got that same feeling - that theres going to be a huge announcement soon and its not what the media in this country have been predicting

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by TMC

OK, seeing that we are talking about 70, 80's inline sixes, the best inline six IMHO was not a Ford or a Holden. It was the Chrysler Hemi 6, another aussie designed and built engine first seen in 1970 as the 245, then in 71 came out as the 265 and small economy pack 215. The standard 265 was a 203BHP engine and would drag off a Holden 308 Monaro. In fully tuned form in 1972 was the 302BHP E49 6pack, the most powerful production 6 cylinder in the world at the time. It had a hemi head which wasn't seen in a Ford until the EA, and never seen in a Holden 6. Those motors had torque and power and revability (Wheels magazine tested a bog stock 245 Hemi ranger and revved the thing to 7000 rpm in first in their test.) and for their day were unbeatable sixes. Pity Chrysler and Mitsubishi stuffed the whole aussie thing up.




.

The first 245 hemi was fitted in 1969 to 2 VF's. In 1971, the 265 and 215 were born. Same strokes, just different bore sizes.

Yes, the hemi 6's are still legendary to this day. CAL did try and reduce fuel consumption and emission figures in 1978 or 79 with the introduction of the ELB system, but unfortunately the oil crisis of the era practically killed off the hemis. Of course there were other factors involved, but that's the crux of it.

[AC]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Actually the EcoLPi is heavier than the petrol.
EcoLPi = 1757kg with 198kW/409Nm
Petrol = 1704kg with 195kW/395Nm
Sidi 3.0 = 1685kg with 190kW/290Nm
EcoBoost = 1644kg with 177kW/339Nm
2012 Camry = 1505kg with 135kW/235Nm
2011 Camry = 1535kg with 117kW/218Nm

Originally Posted by outback_ute

The petrol 6cyl is 1704kg or so, so the Ecoboost should be approx 1640kg

I figured I'd be out a little, But close enough, gives you a rough idea anyway

[svo supporter]

Originally Posted by TMC

I don't think Ford really said that they had an all Aussie V8 like Holden did. In fact the 302C was an Australian modification to the Cleveland engine. The Cleveland had legendary status here in Oz, but not so much in the states where the Windsor was king. I must agree though that Ford Australia have not built a V8 since the XE Falcon. Interestingly the late model XE Cleveland blocks were a thick wall casting that were sort after for a while in the states for circle track racing.

But when we look at the current engine lineup in the Ford Falcon and Holden Commodore, Ford is the only one with a locally built and developed 6 and a great one at that.

I'm refering to people on this forum sprooking that Holden don't have an Aussie built V8, yet they seem to miss Ford stopped producing (or modifying in the factory) V8's 15 years before Holden did, in this country.

I'm not denying the Ford inline 6 isn't a terrific engine. For Ford to develop that engine they way they have over the years they have, I tip my hat to them.

Hopefully that clarifies my comments a little better

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by svo supporter

And it's surprising how Aussie people forget that Ford Aust haven't built a V8 since 1983. It wasn't until 1992 -3 that Ford bought back the V8 and I wonder which country it came from?

5.6L AU motor was built here, as was the Boss 5.4 and so is the Miami 5.0L.
The fact that neither of them was available elsewhere but Australia, makes them Australian.

[jpd80]

I have no problem with good coroprate based engines, they make good sense in controlling costs
and as much as I'll hate the day the I-6 is no more, I;m sure that Ford has some great engines
in store to fill the gaps, engines that don't break the budget and allow funds to be spent on
other nice high tech options prevent our Aussie car from looking like poor cousins...

( fingers crossed the I-6 stays and gets more love lavished on it)

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by jpd80

fingers crossed the I-6 stays and gets more love lavished on it

I think losing the I6 really will be make or break on the post 2016 future. I think having to accomodate those 2 extra cylinders in the length of the motor will require too much extra funding and compromises.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

5.6L AU motor was built here, as was the Boss 5.4 and so is the Miami 5.0L.
The fact that neither of them was available elsewhere but Australia, makes them Australian.

Shhhhh ..... don't spoil his fun.

How much investment was made towards the 'Miami' project? I call it very Australian.

Just read the title of the thread ........... Where did it take a left hand turn?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

I think losing the I6 really will be make or break on the post 2016 future. I think having to accomodate those 2 extra cylinders in the length of the motor will require too much extra funding and compromises.

Raise the bonnet on the FG Falcon and you'll see that the radiator support panel
actually dog legs forward by about 100-125mm to allow sufficient room for the long I-6.
I have a feeling that if the I-6 is dropped, that front panel becomes straight and the nose
of the Falcon shortens by an equivalent amount...

Either way, FoA have a design that reserves space for the I-6
for however long they see fit to keep it...