New Falcons and Commodores too low to the ground?

[Brazen]

Snap, Crunch, Grinnnnnnnd. Another day in the life of a rental Falcon, this time a silver G6 as I gently cross a median to get a job site. Working in road design, I do a bit of driving to places which arnt stellar smooth, but bloody hell I am having to resort more and more to work Hiluxes or the awful dual cabs for places 10 years ago I would have no problem with in a Falcon or Commodore. Maybe Im just imagining it, but I swear every year these large Aussie cars are getting closer and closer to terra firma (and all the obstacles that come with it!).

This has got me thinking, as well as a modern Commodore or Falcon are to drive nowadays I am finding them a real pain in the @rse to live with. To get in or out, you have to fall into them and then scramble back out. Each new model is bigger, bulkier, with higher window sills and thicker pillars, and with such poor visablility and having such a low ride height in these kind of cars is just annoying in 99% of driving. Every time I pull into a driveway or a carpark, reverse out of a loading bay or cross a spoon drain, or parellel park in a modern Falcon or Commodore I am having to use intuition to what is going on - with the vehicles sitting so low to the ground there is no margin for error. In my old XE, never worried about gutters or parking spot stops - not so anymore!

I am starting to see the appeal in cars like Outlanders, Captivas, sitting up high, not having to worry about kerbs, gutters, seeing ahead in traffic, easier to enter and exit. It would make day-to-day driving a lot more easier.

With more and more SUVs on the road ,the funny thing is I dont think peoples tastes have changed over the years. I was behind an 82 Corolla at the traffic lights and it had just as much ground clearance as the CRV next to it. Likewise I have seen an XD wagon behind a Territory and the Falcon was just as high off the ground. So maybe instead of people buying more and more SUVs because its a new trend, they are buying them instead as modern cars are becoming too low to the ground. Maybe there is a certain ride-height people want in their cars which sedans and wagons dont provide anymore? Instead of car-makers scratching their heads why people arnt buying large sedans and wagons as much as they used to, isnt the answer obvious?

On a few other forums I frequent, a few potential Holden Sportwagon buyers have mentioned that they havnt bought one as they are too low to the ground, people get nervous about buying a car like that. For me a Calais Sportwagon with an extra inch of ground clearance would make the car twice as good to live with in day-to-day life.

I am usually way out of touch with what people want, but curious as to anyone whoever gets into their Falcon ever want a bit more height under their car?


You could mount Uluru with that approach angle





Careful of that speed hump

[irlewy86]

Lower to the ground = fuel ecconomy

I remember around the realease of the VE you could option a 'country pack" which raised the ride height.

[vztrt]

I noticed with the FG XR6 was lower then the B-series model. But it was due to the extra lip on the side. Car seemed the same height.

[makattkd]

I am with you this one, I was quite shocked when my standard ride height car was scraping on parking stops, and pulling out of an under ground hotel car park the middle of the car bottomed out!

[WASP]

Almost every Falcon that I have ever owned (over 20) I had felt the need to lower the suspension and firm up the road handling characterises in order to provide a more compliant and enjoyable ride. Now I'm not talking about lowering to a point of causing a significant comprise in the vehicles travel, clearance or comfort, just enough to remove that floating, somewhat vague sensation that many Falcons’ over the years have been known for.

The FG XR6T was the first Falcon that I have owned that I didn’t instantly feel needed lowering. In fact I only ended up lowering it slightly for aesthetics more than anything. Despite this, I have very few issues with speed humps and parking, but I do admit to being cautious when doing so.

I believe there is a lot of market pressure on manufactures to ensure that any of their mass market vehicles remain aesthetically appealing with deeper under bites and more imposing, bolder styling. I think the market as proven that the better the vehicle looks to its target audience, the better it will sell and practicality alone rarely wins out. There is also the aero dynamic, and thus fuel efficiency benefits from keeping the vehicle lower to the ground. In years gone by this was less of a concern.

[Citric GT]

From the VT/AU era onwards, Falcadores have become less practical with each model. All the proportions have been stuffed up. My EL was so easy to drive daily and see out of and NEVER scraped!

I drove a VL recently and it reminded me how badly designed my VE is in comparison.

Grab and older model falcodore design, modernise the suspension & drivetrain a bit and you have a much better car.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by Citric GT

From the VT/AU era onwards, Falcadores have become less practical with each model. All the proportions have been stuffed up. My EL was so easy to drive daily and see out of and NEVER scraped!

I drove a VL recently and it reminded me how badly designed my VE is in comparison.

Grab and older model falcodore design, modernise the suspension & drivetrain a bit and you have a much better car.

Until you crash

[big_landau]

thats not part of the plan.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by Citric GT

Grab and older model falcodore design, modernise the suspension & drivetrain a bit and you have a much better car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgjtSilW8yM

Much better until you realise that thick A pillars are there for a reason.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgjtSilW8yM

Much better until you realise that thick A pillars are there for a reason.

You do realise that was a test to validate the test rig, not the car.

The Commodore was loaded with sand bags to validate that the propulsion gear
could send vehicles of a projected maximum weight into the wall at the right speed.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by BadMax

It's far more visualy appealing to have a car sit at a nice height, who'd want their XR sitting two inches higher to accomodate a handfull of drivers.
Yes, my FG XR has a few scrapes on the bottom of the front bar, yes they **** me but I wouldn't raise it.
One thing of interest, both my VZ Lumina with FE2, VE Berlina used to scrape the centre mufflers at the local shops and my brothers driveway, the FG XR doesn't.

Alot of people I've spoken to actually think that FG XRs sit too high. The rear of mine is way too high in my opinion.

Originally Posted by jpd80

You do realise that was a test to validate the test rig, not the car.

The Commodore was loaded with sand bags to validate that the propulsion gear
could send vehicles of a projected maximum weight into the wall at the right speed.

Yeah I've read something along those lines before, however, load a current Falcon or Commodore with sandbags and I'm sure it wont disintegrate like that.

[tranquilized]

Most cars, but especially Falcons and Commodores, undergo a massive aesthetic improvement when they're closer to the ground, (more to the point, when the tyres hug the wheel arches) albeit at some expense to practicality. Years ago when I had an EB Fairmont, my neighbour asked me if I'd had it painted - all I'd done was lower it. In 98' a workmate transformed his AU Forte from the hidious bubble it was to a sleek sports sedan that turned heads everywhere it went - just by lowering it.

I do agree with what your saying of older Falcons and Commodores though - they were definitely higher from the factory. But to suggest the current models lower ride height is contributing to their falling sales is drawing a long bow. Surely they would sell even less if they were jacked up - most people buy on aesthetics first, practicality second. Ford even lowered AU's to use in advertisements!

It all comes down to the simple fact that absolutely no car can have any hope of looking even half way good if it has even one spare inch between the tyre and the wheel arch.

[Dezza]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Ford even lowered AU's to use in advertisements!

Ford have been doing it for years. This is the owners manual that came with my EA.

This is the real ride height

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by Dezza

Ford have been doing it for years. This is the owners manual that came with my EA.

This is the real ride height

Haha thats a classic, the one on the owners manual is sitting right down on its tyres! Ford did raise the ride height of the EA mid way through the series one model run due to suspension issues, but I doubt it would explain that big a discrepancy...

[prydey]

brazen - you're having a laugh, surely! too low?? you can't cross a median strip in a car designed for the road, and its the car's fault?

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by prydey

brazen - you're having a laugh, surely! too low?? you can't cross a median strip in a car designed for the road, and its the car's fault?

Well they are designed to have emergency vehicles like police cars, ambulances etc to cross. If people like they way the Falcon is then thats a good thing - lowest sales in 50 years with a population now approaching 23million means that Ford is reading the market right - nah just having a dig

The great thing is there are plenty of vehicles out there to satisfy everyone.

[stang65]

what they need to do is have the front part of the bottom of the bumper angled higher so that as it goes towards the wheel it gets lower therefore beeing the same height as the door skirting and the opposite with the rear bumper.

They prob do as they know they will scrape and will fund spare parts.

[Grippy]

It seems to me that the overhang forward of the front wheels is what has changed, not so much ride height. My Fathers new FG XR6 is no lower than his old EF XR6 was, there just seems to be much more bumper bar forward of the front wheels these days.

[pauljh74]

Originally Posted by Grippy

It seems to me that the overhang forward of the front wheels is what has changed, not so much ride height. My Fathers new FG XR6 is no lower than his old EF XR6 was, there just seems to be much more bumper bar forward of the front wheels these days.

Yes, the whole front bumper section is getting deeper and this creates the problem. My EL XR6 - the underside of the bumper is completely white, but the car is red. I just added another scrape on the underside that is actually visible front on from an attempt to beat oncoming traffic while turning into my driveway - a little too fast. I'm happy with the factory suspension setup and haven't lowered it any further, I wouldn't want it lower or stiffer.

[ZA-289]

Aussie cars used to be Aussie cars built for Aussie conditions, ie. Rough roads, kerbs etc. Every new model seems to have more "European styling" Which means lower to the ground.

The new models are definatly getting lower, but if you are the kind of person that does need to mount kerbs sometimes, you WOULD buy a territory or similar SUV.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by ZA-289

Aussie cars used to be Aussie cars built for Aussie conditions, ie. Rough roads, kerbs etc. Every new model seems to have more "European styling" Which means lower to the ground.

The new models are definatly getting lower, but if you are the kind of person that does need to mount kerbs sometimes, you WOULD buy a territory or similar SUV.

Exactly...our G6E was a week old before it graunched on the front lower corners of the bumper and scraped once on the back leaving a normal driveway.

Style is nice...but designers have to realise that the real world isn't a glass smooth racetrack surface and that roads other than city freeways do exist...

It's not "being spastic"...it's expecting to be able to drive an Australian designed car on Australian designed roads and driveways without damaging the damn thing...

[Smoke Pursuit]

The FG XT's arent too bad, its just the rest of the range with 17 inch alloys / luxury suspension..

My XR6 is nearly 2 years old and ive only scraped the front bumper once, not bad me thinks!! Its just a matter of being careful and actually thinking about what you're doing. I will always go the longer way if theres an easier option as far as driveways / speed bumps go.

[brismike]

My FG has got scrape marks under the front Bumper/air dam. You have to be really carefull parking it anywhere these days. Those shopping centre carpark parking spot bump stops are the worst. They look like they will fit under the bumper so you can get your wheels right up to them .. But they nearly always scrape under the front of the car.

Plus some of the speed bumps they build centres these days are shocking. Way too high and you can very easily scrape the underneath middle of your car on them.

[AussieAV]

Could it also be that they are getting lower for safety and handling. Surely a lower centre of gravity would contribute to how well these cars handle nowadays. Not to mention that they will respond better to sudden changes in direction in emergency situations.

By all means buy a car that suits your needs and driving style, as you mentioned there are many, many options out there. But why knock the improvements in safety, handling, fuel efficiency etc. that the rest of us can benefit from.

Progess means change, we can't have safer, better handling cars without changing something from the way they were designed 20 years ago.

Personally if its a choice between transporting my family in a car with a 5 star safety rating, or one that won't scrape on the occassional higher speed bump, its no contest!

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by AussieAV

Could it also be that they are getting lower for safety and handling. Surely a lower centre of gravity would contribute to how well these cars handle nowadays. Not to mention that they will respond better to sudden changes in direction in emergency situations.

By all means buy a car that suits your needs and driving style, as you mentioned there are many, many options out there. But why knock the improvements in safety, handling, fuel efficiency etc. that the rest of us can benefit from.

Progess means change, we can't have safer, better handling cars without changing something from the way they were designed 20 years ago.

Personally if its a choice between transporting my family in a car with a 5 star safety rating, or one that won't scrape on the occassional higher speed bump, its no contest!

Totally understand people may prefer the lower car. There are fuel economy, and handling improvements which result and a lot may prefer the looks. The problem is these are kind of wasted if people end up buying SUVs instead.

Definately agree that we should all buy cars appropriate to our uses. The problem is that is exactly what people are doing!! 30 odd thousand Falcons sold in a market of 1million shows that its not appealing as much as it used to.

A lot of higher stanced cars are 5 star rated, I cant think of many SUVs that arnt.

Also tests have shown that all things being equal a car higher up will perform better in a crash. I believe there was a crash test with two Mondeos, the one sitting 25mm higher performed a lot better in the head on.

I guess it comes down to personal preference. In a perfect world I would want a Falcon which drove as well as a new one, but was as practical as an older one. For me a modern Falcon with about 20mm more ground clearance would make the car a much more usable and desirable car - yet still handle multiples better than many SUVs which people end up buying as the Falcon dosnt appeal. Obviously Ford know what they are doing though, or they wouldnt have made them as low as they are. Just curious if I was the only one which felt they way I did.

[irlewy86]

The flip side to the question is, "Are speed bumps getting higher because more people drive high chairs."

[ebxr8240]

Without sounding like an old codger.. I was talking to my son just the other day..
You see all his 4 cyl cars have all been lowered etc...
I said one of my best cars was fitted with rally springs,shocks and sway bars all round.. The car handled great and never had issues with speed bumps..
In most cases I could out handle most cars on bumpy street due to better pump control which is lost to a point when car is lowered..
Rally suspension usually has 80% stronger shock compared to std fitment..

[Franco Cozzo]

My Fiesta is too low for the conditions it drives in, it struggles to get into my local IGA's driveway, it will scrape under the front bar, getting up my great grandma's driveway, it scrapes, going over speedhumps at Westfield shopping centre, it scrapes behind the front wheels.

I reckon if I went into the massive pothole Mum's Festiva (that thing is like 4WD height) went into, i'd have no front bar and sump left.

[mickyyyy]

Have u guyz noticed euro cars have good height from ground even when lowered like the Audi A4 B6

[cedric]

wack a coyote in a new rtv and i will sign up tommorow. cannot work out why they stopped the rtv