FG II Economy

[mcnews]

[Luke Plaizier]

Huh? So the FGII EcoLPI gets a 0.2 L/100km improvement compared to the FG EcoLPI released just a few months ago?

What the heck happened there?


Lukeyson

[Road_Warrior]

There must have been some FGII specific calibration done.

Come to think of it, doesnt the FGII have an all new corporate ECU?

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

There must have been some FGII specific calibration done.

Come to think of it, doesnt the FGII have an all new corporate ECU?

Indeed it does. Importantly the CO2 for the LPi is now under 200g at 199g/km.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Indeed it does. Importantly the CO2 for the LPi is now under 200g at 199g/km.

ooh good point!

[madmelon]

Originally Posted by phillyc

Indeed it does. Importantly the CO2 for the LPi is now under 200g at 199g/km.

...is this new ECU capable of controlling 4 VCT cams as opposed the the FG computer only being capable of 2?

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by madmelon

...is this new ECU capable of controlling 4 VCT cams as opposed the the FG computer only being capable of 2?

Yes 4 cam phasors. Which is why it was introduced on the Territory as it was required for the diesel. Probably also needed for the Ecoboost to translate the base tune and myriad of parameters some of which may not be available in the previous ECU. Will allow transferral of info about matching the ZF. to an Ecoboost which might even transfer to the Ford corporate box which is a ZF made under licence. Previous applications have been FWD double clutch ala Focus and Mondeo.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

There must have been some FGII specific calibration done.

Come to think of it, doesnt the FGII have an all new corporate ECU?

I think the LPi engine already had the new ECU, as the wiring loom didn't change from FG to FGII like it did for the petrol motors.

Just a bit of fine tuning to the calibration it seems.

[vztrt]

http://www.caradvice.com.au/151387/f...cy-limit-ford/

Ford Falcon inline six engine hasn’t reached fuel efficiency limit: Ford
By Tim Beissmann | December 14th, 2011

Ford Australia insists the inline six-cylinder petrol engine in the Falcon has not reached its fuel efficiency limit despite the powerplant not benefitting from any economy improvements as part of the FG MkII upgrade.

Ford today revealed the official fuel consumption data for the updated model. The LPG-powered Falcon EcoLPi sedans enjoy economy improvements of 0.2 litres/100km, while the petrol-powered XR6 Turbo ute is now 0.1 litres/100km more economical. Ford Australia’s Justin Lacy said the small efficiency gains were achieved through engine recalibration work and software changes, and were the result of retesting of the Falcon range.

The Ford FG MkII Falcon range is in production now and will filter through to showrooms between the end of December and the end of January.

The most economical models in the range (XT, G6, G6E, XR6 sedans) continue to use 9.9 litres/100km on the combined cycle, 11.2 per cent more than the most economical Holden Commodore models (Omega, Berlina sedans), which use 8.9 litres/100km. The four-cylinder Falcon EcoBoost is expected to achieve official consumption of around 8.0-8.5 litres/100km when it goes on sale around April next year.

Despite the apparent stagnancy of the naturally aspirated six-cylinder engine’s fuel figures, Lacy said work was “constantly being done” to improve efficiency and insisted the engine’s potential had not been reached.

“There’s never a final point where there’s a limit,” Lacy said, promising that consumers would continue to see “incremental improvements” as Ford’s engineers worked on the vehicles.

Lacy said the next wave of improvements to the Falcon’s economy may not come in the form of engine upgrades, but could come about through reductions in overall vehicle weight, improved transmission efficiency and improved vehicle aerodynamics, which are three key focuses of Ford internationally.

Any improvements may still be some way off however, as Lacy admitted the current numbers “will probably stand for some time to come”.

He said Ford Australia’s engineers had “a lot more work to do” to meet the upcoming Euro 5 emissions standards, which will be phased in progressively from November 2013 to November 2016. Euro 5 requires a 25 per cent reduction in NOx emissions and introduces maximum limits on particulate matter and non-methane hydrocarbon emissions.

Ford upgraded the Falcon range in June last year to make it compliant with Euro 4 emissions regulations, improving fuel consumption between 5.7 and 8.5 per cent across most models.

[Silver Ghia]

If there are improvements to the fuel ecoomy, the tables in the first post are wrong.

Improvement values should show a '+' sign, not a '-' sign. The way its presented shows there has been a decrease in fuel economy, ie. higher fuel consumption.

The lt/100km figures quoted appear to be very realistic values that are easily achievable. For example, for an XR6 manual they are quoting 11.1lt/100km. I've been averaging 9.48 lt/100km actual economy with my FG1 XR50 manual since new, calculated from fuel pump readings, for combined highway and some peakhour stop start driving. If I quote the computer average reading, its even better at 9.0 lt/100km.

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by Silver Ghia

If there are improvements to the fuel ecoomy, the tables in the first post are wrong.

Improvement values should show a '+' sign, not a '-' sign. The way its presented shows there has been a decrease in fuel economy, ie. higher fuel consumption.

The tables are correct.

The figures are in litres used per 100km. If theres an improvement in economy, the number decreases, hence the '-' sign. An improvement of g/km co2 means the number is LESS, again, '-'

Only if you measure fuel economy in MPG, would the '+' sign be used to refer to an improvement.

[PoweredByCNG]

All I can say is this.

There's NO WAY IN HELL that GM Holden will be able to match the fuel consumption figures of the EcoLPi I6 engine with their upcoming dedicated LPG 3.6L V6 engine. More importantly, there's NO WAY IN HELL that GM Holden will be able to produce a dedicated LPG engine with anywhere near the torque output of the EcoLPi I6 while consuming less than the official 12.3L/100km.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by PoweredByCNG

All I can say is this.

There's NO WAY IN HELL that GM Holden will be able to match the fuel consumption figures of the EcoLPi I6 engine with their upcoming dedicated LPG 3.6L V6 engine. More importantly, there's NO WAY IN HELL that GM Holden will be able to produce a dedicated LPG engine with anywhere near the torque output of the EcoLPi I6 while consuming less than the official 12.3L/100km.

I saw what you did there, you put, "no way in hell" and " Holden" in one sentence...

[sprint347dave]

who has a calculator,,how much does it cost to travel 100ks in a petrol and a gas falcon,,,

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by sprint347dave

who has a calculator,,how much does it cost to travel 100ks in a petrol and a gas falcon,,,

There is a calcuator on the Ford wetsite that does that!!

http://www.ford.com.au/servlet/Satel...apper&site=FOA

[Mr Hardware]

Wow dave, for a holden guy you're looking awfully blue blooded these days

[PoweredByCNG]

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

Wow dave, for a holden guy you're looking awfully blue blooded these days

I don't sway in any particular direction these days. Holden have a good V8 platform but that's about it - their global V6 platform is *****. They won't be able to do anything with an engine that was designed to be ***** in the first place.

[mik]

i would have thought there would be other avenues to pursue more economy in the big six, partial cylinder shutdown or engine stop at traffic lights?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by mik

i would have thought there would be other avenues to pursue more economy in the big six, partial cylinder shutdown or engine stop at traffic lights?

cylinder cut out was explored and dismissed over NVH issues.

[mik]

can`t say they are`nt trying .

[PoweredByCNG]

Also, in real-life average Aussie suburban conditions, cylinder deactivation / engine stop at idle wouldn't make a huge difference in consumption anyway.

[Luke Plaizier]

So why have cylinder deactivation on the 'good V8 platform' that you love?


Lukeyson

[FPV GTHO]

Because it was already developed in America?

[PoweredByCNG]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Because it was already developed in America?

This.

The I6 is only developed in Australia. The L76/L98 V8 engines are part of a global V8 platform.

[Bossxr8]

AFM doesn't work for sheet anyway, and it makes less power than the manual version that doesn't use it.

Active Fail Management.

[Road_Warrior]

I think EPAS and an electric water pump or aircon compressor would achieve more.

[Bobman]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

I think EPAS and an electric water pump or aircon compressor would achieve more.

Reducing 100-200kgs would be the way to go and would result in better handling too.

Real world economy figures is the one to keep an eye out for.

[Mechan1k]

Interesting that there is a massive difference in ute and sedan economy for the ECOLPI .... seeing as there is literally no difference in weight between the 2 either.

Wonder if there is a diff ratio difference to affect this or what.

[PoweredByCNG]

Notice that the petrol utes are also thirstier than the sedans too...

[noisytim]

Aerodynamics would make all the difference in fuel consumption for utes compared to sedans, even if utes are lighter the air doesn't flow over them as well as a sedan. You need to have nice smooth laminar airflow like air flowing over an airfoil, utes would have turbulent airflow over the back and create lots of drag and increase fuel consumption.