3L - 195kw, 620nm, 6.1L/100km - Build a bloody Turbo Diesel Falcon already!

[Supercharged]

[QUOTE=flappist]
A few years ago I did the sums on the difference between a diesel landcruiser and petrol landcruiser while sitting at a Toyota dealer waiting for some server updates to finish.

It worked out at the time that it would have taken 450,000km before the difference in the cost of fuel squared up the cost of the vehicles and that was not taking into account the horrendously expensive diesel services.
QUOTE]

Very true. Look at what happened 3 years ago with the price of petrol getting to about $1.70 per litre, heaps of people traded in their larger vehicles for smaller and cheaper to run cars. They got lower trade in values but the reality is they will take years of running to break even but each time they purchased fuel it made them feed better but forgetting about the car re-payments being way higher. Also with the above quote the increased service and repair costs of diesel powered vehicles.

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by kpcart

What impresses me most about diesel is the technological advances of the engines in the past 20 years, the engine spec numbers suggest there has been much more advance in diesel engines then petrol engines. for that reason they are becoming desirable, they are actually seen as cutting edge technology by many people now.
in the last 30 years fords I6 has increased torque from about 300nm to about 400nm, and power from about 110kw to 195kw. while in the same time many car companies that offered diesels that made 45kw and 200nm now make 125kw and 400nm with the same capacity. AND offer better low end torque and better economy then petrol equivalents. (the I6 / TD comparison is just based on commuter cars, not things like XR6Turbo as most TD cars dont offer performance versions, but they might soon).

But the diesels have gained turbos so it is unfair not to use the petrol turbo as a comparison. Thus in its latest guise the petrol turbo makes 310kw, and as for more bottom end torque the latest six makes 565Nm of torque under 2000rpm and keeps it over a 3000rpm spread.... And easily gets 9 litres per 100km on the highway and 12.5 to 13.5 on combined cycle. And my last one as far as servicing goes cost me under $1200 over 3.5 years and 71,000km of ownership...

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by vztrt

I could see a Diesel Falcon ute more popular then the sedan.

This.

LPG is the way for a Falcon with low running costs and we're yet to sample the Ecoboost version so we don't know. But I would like to think Ford could at least have a bet either way with a diesel Falcon so they have the product depth to meet market needs/desires - which can change quite rapidly these days.

[outback_ute]

Just a thought, if they built a 2.7TD-spec engine on the 3.0 bottom end - ie just a capacity increase using the same hardware not more expensive newer setup or twin turbos the 140kW/440Nm would theoretically go to 155kW/490Nm. Surely that would have to be an interesting proposition for no real change in costs?

My opinion is that many diesel buyers get them for more than just pure economic/ROI reasons, eg extra range, more relaxed driving experience etc. "Trouble" is the Falcon 4.0 is already so good on the second point.

[Joe5619]

Here is the trouble, the falcon is lucky to sell 2,000 units these days & we want all the following engines!!

1) I6 Petrol
2) I6 Gas
3) I6 Turbo
4) I4
5) V8 (for xr8???)
6) V8 SC
7) Diesel

That is 7 engines for 2000 sales & it just does not added up!! Even without the Diesel it is still too many engines if you ask me.. Then, if we do get the 2.7 Disesel, people are still going to be whinging & say we should have the option of both 2.7 & 3.0 (like they have done with the territ)!! So lets move that to 8 engines!!

[eb2fairmont]

Originally Posted by arm79

I know its off topic here, but I think the Falcons we drive now are far too advanced and techy compared to what the average buyer wants. ZF 6 speeds are awesome, but I wonder if the average buyer knows its costs $1000 to service and flush the oil when they buy the car. Or that spark plugs are $20 each. Or if you chip/scratch the alloy lower control arm, its unservicable and dangerous and needs to be replaed at the cost of $500 per side. Or the offset of their pretty alloy wheels allows them to buckle easily. Or the front discs on an XR6T/G6ET are something like $280 a side. It's the kind of expense i'd expect in something BMW or Merc.

Actually I think you hit it right on the head. I'm one of the td crowd and own a golf. Service wise it's cheap 400 bucks or so per year. Dsg service is 750, front rotors 110 ea, 140 for pads, 18 bucks for an oil filter.

I like how it drives, similar to a falcon very torquey.

As we know buying a car is about fashion, and ATM that's tdi and small turbo engines. ford has this sorted with ecoboost. For those who know how to use a calculator there's ecolpi. So the latter will appeal to fleets.

For private buyers ford needs to focus on servicing costs (viz. The parts prices) and the customer experience. That's where there loosing.

Oh and a decent marketing department. How about Poaching the Holden marketing team.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

Here is the trouble, the falcon is lucky to sell 2,000 units these days & we want all the following engines!!

1) I6 Petrol
2) I6 Gas
3) I6 Turbo
4) I4
5) V8 (for xr8???)
6) V8 SC
7) Diesel

That is 7 engines for 2000 sales & it just does not added up!! Even without the Diesel it is still too many engines if you ask me.. Then, if we do get the 2.7 Disesel, people are still going to be whinging & say we should have the option of both 2.7 & 3.0 (like they have done with the territ)!! So lets move that to 8 engines!!

Euro IV version of I-6 and I-6 turbo were subsidized by the government giving $13 million of the $21 million needed.
The V8 S/C cost FPV $40 million to develop while V6 TDI, EcoLPI and I-4 Ecoboost were all paid for by the government.
The cost of expanding the above engines to the rest of the fleet is minimal compared to initial outlay...

IMO, if an XR8 returns it will basically be what the GS is now, both GS & GT would then go up a level in specification.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by mcnews

But the diesels have gained turbos so it is unfair not to use the petrol turbo as a comparison. Thus in its latest guise the petrol turbo makes 310kw, and as for more bottom end torque the latest six makes 565Nm of torque under 2000rpm and keeps it over a 3000rpm spread.... And easily gets 9 litres per 100km on the highway and 12.5 to 13.5 on combined cycle. And my last one as far as servicing goes cost me under $1200 over 3.5 years and 71,000km of ownership...

Fair call but if you want to compare apples to apples at least make it a 4.0TD, in which case the I6T wouldn't stand a chance on torque figures or fuel economy. We all know the TTG was(n't) a huge success especially with urban fuel figures nearing the 20s.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by smoo

Fair call but if you want to compare apples to apples at least make it a 4.0TD, in which case the I6T wouldn't stand a chance on torque figures or fuel economy. We all know the TTG was(n't) a huge success especially with urban fuel figures nearing the 20s.

Forget hypotheticals, just compare the 2.0 TDCI against the 2.0 Ecoboost,
both give 320 nm but the Ecoboost puts out 179 Kw to the diesel's 120 Kw.

[vztrt]

I wonder how well a Falcon diesel would go in NZ?

[jpd80]

I wonder how long it's going to take to sell those 3,000 Falcons hanging around Broadmeadows....

[ebxr8240]

As far as I'm concerned the diesel should be there now !!
I have work supplied light truck .. Going from petrol to turbo 2.5 diesel
is WAY more economical with more torque, from memory around 400nm..
With 131Kw...
I can't see this not being a benefit to the Ford range...

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Euro IV version of I-6 and I-6 turbo were subsidized by the government giving $13 million of the $21 million needed.
The V8 S/C cost FPV $40 million to develop while V6 TDI, EcoLPI and I-4 Ecoboost were all paid for by the government.
The cost of expanding the above engines to the rest of the fleet is minimal compared to initial outlay...

IMO, if an XR8 returns it will basically be what the GS is now, both GS & GT would then go up a level in specification.

I'm not talking about development costs.... Lets talk about stock mangament, marketing, the sales men, the repair men!!! And please tell me one other model that has 8 different engines in the one exact car & that car also only being one shape in Seden!!

[SteveJH]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

I'm not talking about development costs.... Lets talk about stock mangament, marketing, the sales men, the repair men!!! And please tell me one other model that has 8 different engines in the one exact car & that car also only being one shape in Seden!!

Two shapes.

[Kryton]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

Here is the trouble, the falcon is lucky to sell 2,000 units these days & we want all the following engines!!

1) I6 Petrol
2) I6 Gas
3) I6 Turbo
4) I4
5) V8 (for xr8???)
6) V8 SC
7) Diesel

That is 7 engines for 2000 sales & it just does not added up!! Even without the Diesel it is still too many engines if you ask me.. Then, if we do get the 2.7 Disesel, people are still going to be whinging & say we should have the option of both 2.7 & 3.0 (like they have done with the territ)!! So lets move that to 8 engines!!

They are lucky to sell 2000 units a month because they dont offer what people want.
Dont know where you think they supply 7 engines for the Falcon either - they dont.
Ford dont offer a V8, V8SC, I4 or Diesel.
So of those 7 supposed engines, Ford actully only offer just 3 engines, all of which are the big 6 cylinders.
You need to have your eyes shut if you cant see that Joe Public is moving more towards Diesel in this country.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

I'm not talking about development costs.... Lets talk about stock mangament, marketing, the sales men, the repair men!!! And please tell me one other model that has 8 different engines in the one exact car & that car also only being one shape in Seden!!

It's not exactly 8 different engines, it's an I-6, an I-4 Turbo and a V8,
it's just the added hardware around them that changes.

And before you get your panties in a bunch, go back a step.

That 2,000/month figure is based on basically sedans with very few I-6T and V8 S/C and absolutely no LPG sales.

Now if you were to add the 700 odd a month I-6 sales over on Ute and a handful of I-6 t engines
and then the I-6s in the 700/mth Territory,

you're actually talking about 3 engines across 3,400/mth vehicle.

When V6 Diesel arrives, Ford expects that to jump another 700/ month
so we're up to around 4,000/mth with 4 engines.

Now when ecoLPI arrives Ford expects sales of sedans and Utes to increase 20% so that's another 540/month
so now, we're 4,500 odd/mth with 5 engines.

Ecoboost arrives next year and is expected to sell around 500/month,
so now, we're up to 5,000/mth with 6 engines.....

Ford can justify all of its engines without the extension of diesel into sedan and Ute,

But, if they got an extra 500/mth for those diesel sales then we're up to 5,500/mth sales.

[sudszy]

In regards to my earlier post,http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...2&postcount=54, I misread the statement as lpg causes "heaps more emissions than petrol, rather than diesel.

Does that change the message, not really.

I hadn't really looked at it before, but people talk about how much more efficient diesel is in terms of fuel use, but aren't aware that diesel itself is 16% more dense than petrol, so unless the consumption is 16% better than petrol, its not actually burning less fuel.

Yes we measure and buy fuel by the liter, not the kg, but measure co2 emissions by grams per km and that is more directly related to the mass of fuel burnt.

Another thing to consider in the favor of lpg is that for every liter of diesel or petrol, almost the same energy again is used in getting it here, refining it etc, whereas lpg collected in aus doesnt have nearly the same carbon footprint to get it to the pumps.

[2011G6E]

It should have existed long ago, absolutely no excuse. development money being poured into V8's should have been diverted into a diesel program.

There are of course people who whinge on about "but they need a V8 in the lineup!!!", and stuff about people "towing big boats and horse floats".
I would lay money on the fact that 90% of people who say Ford needs V8's have never and will never own one...they just like the idea of a V8 existing somewhere.
I would also like to know the last time anyone saw, say, a new GT or FPV towing that massive horse float or big boat. People who tow big heavy trailers buy a four wheel drive.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

It should have existed long ago, absolutely no excuse. development money being poured into V8's should have been diverted into a diesel program.

There are of course people who whinge on about "but they need a V8 in the lineup!!!", and stuff about people "towing big boats and horse floats".
I would lay money on the fact that 90% of people who say Ford needs V8's have never and will never own one...they just like the idea of a V8 existing somewhere.
I would also like to know the last time anyone saw, say, a new GT or FPV towing that massive horse float or big boat. People who tow big heavy trailers buy a four wheel drive.

Seeing as the V8 was developed by the performance arm and not solely by Ford would be a bit hard to divert money that is not Fords.

[mcnews]

Originally Posted by smoo

Fair call but if you want to compare apples to apples at least make it a 4.0TD, in which case the I6T wouldn't stand a chance on torque figures or fuel economy. We all know the TTG was(n't) a huge success especially with urban fuel figures nearing the 20s.

TTG has 2003 era engine spec. The TTG with the new FG XR6T donk would have been a winner, and used less fuel than the N/A Territory I am willing to guess, would never need to spin over 2000rpm for great performance.

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by davway

They are lucky to sell 2000 units a month because they dont offer what people want.
Dont know where you think they supply 7 engines for the Falcon either - they dont.
Ford dont offer a V8, V8SC, I4 or Diesel.
So of those 7 supposed engines, Ford actully only offer just 3 engines, all of which are the big 6 cylinders.
You need to have your eyes shut if you cant see that Joe Public is moving more towards Diesel in this country.

They actually currently offer 4!! FPV falcons are still Australian build Ford products (I don’t care what anyone says on this topic) & I4 is already on the way, that is 5 & you want diesel so that is 6!! I'll take one off, just for you.. That is still too many engine types for dealers to sell, stock & deal with!

You want diesel other engines have to go... Personally I think Ford are in the ***** with all these engines. Customers will just get confused & we’ll get wrong stock at the wrong time at the wrong place. This kind of engine complexity is not even done in massive markets overseas, yet people want little Australia to do it??

[Kryton]

FPV is NOT ford.
Any engine combo that FPV offer is no way related to what the average Falcon buyer is looking at.
So, Ford do not currently offer anything at all bar the 6cyl in 3 configurations, (4 if you count the upcoming I4), in the Falcon range.

BTW, of those 2000 units sold a month, most of it is fleet.
That right there tells you exactly what Joe Public think about the Falcon - not very much.

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by jpd80

It's not exactly 8 different engines, it's an I-6, an I-4 Turbo and a V8,
it's just the added hardware around them that changes.

Well, the local dealer has a black XR6, with luxury pack in stock, customer walks in, wants a black XR6T, with luxury pack.. That said dealer can't just add a turbo to that XR6!! Said customer is now in for a 6-7 week wait (who may or may not wait).. And that is a 6-7 week wait even now when Ford is stuggle to sell Falcons.. And I know this as a friend is currently waiting 6 weeks for his XR6T, when there is thousands of XR6's sitting around collecting rust!!...

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by davway

FPV is NOT ford.
Any engine combo that FPV offer is no way related to what the average Falcon buyer is looking at.

It is still the same buyers & same dealers!! A falcon is a falcon.. I dont care if it has a Ford or an FPV oval at the front!!

[delete94]

Personaly, I'm not one of the diesel fans and whilst some may believe that diesel’s may appear to offer all the answers, what worries me is in 10 years time when these cars are on to their 3rd , or more, owners.

By this time they won’t be being maintained properly any more and things like emission controls and particulate filters could be long past there use by date.

Then we’ll all be driving around behind even more vehicles belching out even more stinking black soot. Not sure how that will be better for our health or the environment.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

Well, the local dealer has a black XR6, with luxury pack in stock, customer walks in, wants a black XR6T, with luxury pack.. That said dealer can't just add a turbo to that XR6!! Said customer is now in for a 6-7 week wait (who may or may not wait).. And that is a 6-7 week wait even now when Ford is stuggle to sell Falcons.. And I know this as a friend is currently waiting 6 weeks for his XR6T, when there is thousands of XR6's sitting around collecting rust!!...

Thanks for proving my point.
That has more to do with building the wrong product mix which is what
we are all on about, Ford not building the vehicles types customers want.

And that's why 3,000 basic XR6s are sitting there like stale bottles and
just like your mate, a lot of buyers want versions Ford hasn't made.

But no we can't discuss completely different engine options because
Falcon is a sacred cow and must never be changed lest it fails.....

[Struggo]

Originally Posted by delete94

Personaly, I'm not one of the diesel fans and whilst some may believe that diesel’s may appear to offer all the answers, what worries me is in 10 years time when these cars are on to their 3rd , or more, owners.

By this time they won’t be being maintained properly any more and things like emission controls and particulate filters could be long past there use by date.

Then we’ll all be driving around behind even more vehicles belching out even more stinking black soot. Not sure how that will be better for our health or the environment.

Could not agree more,

Diesel is and always will be a dirty fuel

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by delete94

Personaly, I'm not one of the diesel fans and whilst some may believe that diesel’s may appear to offer all the answers, what worries me is in 10 years time when these cars are on to their 3rd , or more, owners.

By this time they won’t be being maintained properly any more and things like emission controls and particulate filters could be long past there use by date.

Then we’ll all be driving around behind even more vehicles belching out even more stinking black soot. Not sure how that will be better for our health or the environment.

Until you realise that 12 monthly emission and roadworthy inspections may become a part of our life,
just imagine the ramifications if your vehicle is put off the road because the emission gear hasn't been
maintained properly or worse goes into limp mode until you fix it.....

[Mitch89]

Originally Posted by banarcus

What is the point of releasing a diesel Falcon when the Mondeo diesel is already here? Nearly the same dimensions as the Falcon, more tech than the Falcon. Ford Aust. could build it here and slap Falcon badges on it...

Exactly, I think most people would be more than happy with a Mondeo instead of a Falcon, even in petrol spec. If you're looking at a diesel family sedan, I doubt the FWD vs RWD matters too much to you.

Having driven some of the Euro diesels, they are very impressive. Not noisy, torque delivery is brilliant, and the economy is great. Kia's new diesel is fantastic, they deserve to sell a lot of them. The torque makes them much better to drive than the petrol models too.

[4.0i_SiX]

Originally Posted by delete94

Personaly, I'm not one of the diesel fans and whilst some may believe that diesel’s may appear to offer all the answers, what worries me is in 10 years time when these cars are on to their 3rd , or more, owners.

By this time they won’t be being maintained properly any more and things like emission controls and particulate filters could be long past there use by date.

Then we’ll all be driving around behind even more vehicles belching out even more stinking black soot. Not sure how that will be better for our health or the environment.

80% or more of the petrol powered cars on the road more than likely have a catalytic converter that is well passed its used by date spewing toxic emissions into the air.