Euro 5 for Ford's inline six?

[jpd80]

Does it make economic sense to spend a substantial sum of money improving the engine that powers it for a new emissions standard due 12 months before the projected end of life for the car? No, to put it quite simply, but Ford needs to have a contingency plan in place nonetheless.

Ford Australia Communications Manager Sinead McAlary provided perhaps the clearest hint to date that the local manufacturer could and would commit to upgrading the big six to Euro 5 compliance -- in the right circumstances, presumably.

"It's an extremely complex engineering program which requires resources and funding and time -- but we've been able to determine that it is possible to do it," She told the Carsales Network during the announcement today that Ford's casting plant in Geelong had picked up brake rotor-supply business from Bosch.

"All the discussion papers had to be filed by the middle of March, which we've done."
Full article here...

So, it is more than possible to upgrade the I-6 to Euro 5 and Euro 6 but the big question is whether Ford is
prepared to continue the Falcon and its I-6 or whether they are looking at using a corporate platform.

The federal government tipped in $13 million of the $21 million needed to upgrade the Falcon I-6 to Euro 4,
maybe Ford is looking at two things here,
- What is the actual timing of Euro 5 and Euro 6 implementation?
- Will the federal government give Ford more money for I-6 engine upgrades?

It looks like Ford is continually weighing up the economies of a corporate FWD/AWD platform
versus how much money they can get from the government to keep the local RWD platform
and work force going. It's a complex question and probably why the 2015 Falcon's business
case won't become clearer until 2011 or 2012.

[GK]

Originally Posted by jpd80

It looks like Ford is continually weighing up the economies of a corporate FWD/AWD platform versus how much money they can get from the government to keep the local RWD platform and work force going. It's a complex question and probably why the 2015 Falcon's business case won't become clearer until 2011 or 2012.

That makes the most sense for sure. What they lock in place now, could easily change if the market picks up, slows down, or government offer more or less moula. So why lock anything in place until it's absolutely neccessary?

Also, we've seen before the business case for Focus was good, then bad, the case for V6 imports was good, then the I6 was kept.

It's a fluid situation.

I'm looking forward to FG sales picking up as a result of the recent announcement on upgrades. Also the recent investment of the investment in Geelong should hopefully keep the pro-Holden media from screaming about Ford's demise for a little while.

Hopefully....

GK

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by GK

That makes the most sense for sure. What they lock in place now, could easily change if the market picks up, slows down, or government offer more or less moula. So why lock anything in place until it's absolutely neccessary?

Also, we've seen before the business case for Focus was good, then bad, the case for V6 imports was good, then the I6 was kept.

It's a fluid situation.

I'm looking forward to FG sales picking up as a result of the recent announcement on upgrades. Also the recent investment of the investment in Geelong should hopefully keep the pro-Holden media from screaming about Ford's demise for a little while.

Hopefully....

GK

I was interested in Burela's forecast that as the annual sales of Australian
vehicles climbs from 1 million today to roughly 1.2 million in 2015 that local
vehicles like Falcon and Territory could see a 20% increase in numbers.

While the announcement of the Bosch (PBR) contract for the Geelong casting
plant is welcome news, Ford could now sell the plant for a much higher price
and still continue the production of the I-6 until any change of plan occurs.

Is Burela about keeping Ford Australia's infrastructure or moving it into "One Ford"?

[mik]

what is required for Euro 5/6?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by mik

what is required for Euro 5/6?

Although the jump in Emissions levels is not as great, the time that Ford
have to guarantee compliance jumps from 100,000 klms to 160,000 klms.

I saw a recent article mentioning that sulphur levels in petrol has to reduce
from the low sulphur 150 ppm to 10 ppm, I think it has to do with lean cycle
modes on Direct Injection cars and some ECU calibration changes....

My best guess is that Euro 5 will be pushed back to 2014 and our Euro 6 may
then align with European Euro 6 diesel timing of 2016....

If that happens, Ford could seek concession to run the Euro 4 version of
the I-6 until the end of the product cycle, maybe mid 2015....

[Nikked]

The I6 is going to die anyway, design, and crash regulations/safety will make sure of that.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Nikked

The I6 is going to die anyway, design, and crash regulations/safety will make sure of that.

Funny enough, the inline six configuration does very well on frontal collision
test scores but eventually the length of the 4.0 inline six will weigh against it.

An up side to that is if the the V8 was to becomes the longest engine then
the nose of the Falcon can be shortened about 100 mm reducing weight.

That I-6 is a hard engine to walk away from....

[Stoney!]

Thats where VW's VR6 packaging is so great Because it's exactly what it's called, a V Inline 6 (VR6).

It's not to wide so can package into FWD bays and not too long, which is great for FWD and RWD.

It has the same firing order as an inline 6 also so it's really a best of both worlds engine. Chuck into the mix that it's a N/A direct injection 3.6 with 220kw and 350nm with an amazing spread of 2400-5300rpm, and then you will see why it can rocket a 1747kg Passat wagon to 100 in only 5.8 seconds.

A picture I'm sure a few of you here would find interesting.



Stoney!

[Bossxr8]

I think the I6 is dead come 2015 anyway, solely because it can't be used for FWD and a global RWD platform will be designed to suit V6 and V8 engines, it would need to many design compromises to fit an I6, too much extra length and bonnet height is required, something Ford would be loath to do when a V6 would be so much cheaper.

The Bosch brake rotor contract may have been a way to make the casting plant viable if it no longer casts blocks and cranks for the I6.

Ford seem to be spending a bare minimum on the engine plant too, no new mega dollar equipment has been implimented for years, just basic maintenance to keep the plant running.

Just my 2c.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Stoney!

A picture I'm sure a few of you here would find interesting.

Stoney!

Thanks Stoney, I had a good discussion with a retired Ford engineer in the USA regarding
use of narrow V engines versus V6, apparently the topic came up several times in Ford's
engineering discussions but ultimately the V6 won out only because it's seen as an industry standard.

I have a picture of the head that goes with that block:

[Stoney!]

Cheers for that, that itself being an interesting setup because one cam does inlet for both sides and the other exhaust for both side with loooong fingers on the valves for the opposing side lol.

Stoney!

[boris]

totally agree with the narrow v6, it is the best of both worlds, only need single turbo etc. shame they didn't go with the idea at ford, would have been nice to convert the 4.0i6 to this config.