Has the Falcon become too narrowly focussed?

[XR6Uteman]

Originally Posted by Blue Oval Mopar Man

Im just saying that the way the Auto Manufacturing industry was handled was the death of the Falcon not the actual design of the Falcon product ! I want a quality product , not a throw away item . They are trying to drive the public into buying a new car every so many years but I will never buy a brand new car , they are Pieces of @#*^ . But thats just my opinion !

And when there cheap & second hand the difference IS ?

[prydey]

2016 can't come quick enough. its the same stuff rehashed over and over.

build a bridge. accept the falcon isn't all things to all people and with the amount of choice on the market.... well like i said, the same things, over and over...

[mik]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Kicking the hornets nest here...but hey, something to think about...

Has the Falcon become too narrow focussed for what is seen as "a big Australian sedan" in the mold of the Falcons of days gone by?

I would say the rot started to set in during the change to BA. They got lower, they got fragile front lips and less ground clearance, they started to get bigger wheels and lower profile tyres on even lower end models, etc.
Remember the "good old days" when every man and his dog in the country had a Falcon...they'd be everywhere. Before the Commodore, it was Kingswoods as well, but even Commodores up until the late 1990's to early 2000's were seen as perfectly capable "country cars. Back then, the ADR's still stated a minimum, a minimum, of 100mm ground clearance between the ground and the lowest part of the vehicle underneath...but Falcons, standard, were much higher than that underneath. Now they seem to use the "minimum" as something to aim for to get the car as low as possible.

One of Fords extremely memorable adverts was for that guy who owned a huge station somewhere in the middle of the continent (Wilpena Pound I believe), and he had always bought Fairlanes, as they handled the rough roads easily, and were comfortable mile eaters on the highway. He did the adverts for years in the 1980's.

Now, I admit there's a wider range of vehicles...especially twin cab utes with canopies (got one, guilty as charged) which are far more suited to outback areas and even coastal and inland areas away from the capital cities.
Our G6E on 19" factory wheels was an amazing, smooth, quiet car...on the few times we ventured down to Brisbane and the Gold Coast at least...however once you started to head north on Highway 1 away from the comfortable south east corner and then back inland on the Capricorn Highway, it was shocking...lots of road noise, rough ride, afraid of bitumen drop offs at the edge of the road and swerving to avoid every pothole. It just wasn't suited to real world roads and country areas, as Falcons and Fairmonts of the past were.

I know plenty of people out here with lease cars that are Falcons...mostly XR6 and XR6T's, a couple of XR8's, and a smattering of FPV's...however they either regret getting one and can't wait for the lease to be up, or they have it as a "weekender" and have a four wheel drive or twin cab for normal everyday use. A few of them have binned the 18 and 19" wheels and fitted smaller 17" wheels with decent sidewalls on the tyres to try and smooth out the ride a bit. It helps, bur every one of them is scarred front and sometimes back from gutters and normal driveways that wouldn't have been a problem for Falcons of over a decade ago.


So, is part of the sales problem with Falcons that they have become too narrow focussed...trying to be a low-slung huge-tyred Euro sedan, when what they actually needed to be was something with a bit of ground clearance and normal wheels with sidewalls, something that faces the reality of the country they are built for, and which they had a long tradition of being the "normal" choice for country people?



Flame suit on...

Perhaps to a small degree these things may not have helped the falcon with some sales, but i still think most of it is just people are being much more discerning with their money these days , much like motor companies getting the most from their buck(Ford leaving for thailand),
after the recession we had to have, followed by the gfc, after the Carbon Tax, the mining tax, the price of energy in well off countries doubling, the world is going to flood oh the global warming ! kim jong is going to start ww3 with nukes!................................. the never ending we'll all be doomed scenarios in the media,
a lot of people are looking at how much they want to spend and ticking every box they can trying to be frugal, not to mention imo a fair wack of the populous has less disposable income these days, people doing it tuff will buy the cheaper option every time.
average Person x for example doesnt want to spend a long time paying a loan off in these troubled times even if it means buying a smaller car to make do , big cars with big prices are now a luxury for more of the population !
Cheaper models like focus /I30/ fiesta, etc ,etc are taking over, no amount of country pack will save big cars imo.

[UberKnee]

They evolved with the times. Lowly slung Falcons still sold really well when the large car market was still going strong. People wanted sporty cars, Small towns became cities and there was less need for the humble family taxi to go out bush.

[FNQracing]

Many years ago, Falcon and Commodore set the pace of modern traffic. You had to go to expensive imports to get something that was faster off the line, generally speaking.

Technology improved and soon, cheap and cheerful hatchbacks were giving the big boys a run for their money.

Smaller cars then got bigger, so that also eroded the Falcon and Commodores advantage.

Quality improved no end, as did features. Falcon and Commodore started to lag behind.

4WD's became hip and were quite nicely styled, whilst Falcon and Commodore were starting to look quite boring.

Society started to get a little more upmarket in their taste, again where Falcon and Commodore were seen as bogan mobiles mostly.

Before you knew it,the main reasons for buying Falcon and Commodore just weren't there any more.

Add the quality issues, the poor dealer and after service experience....

It all adds up to a market that has moved on, with heaps more choice, better quality and an overall better ownership experience.

You want space , get a 4WD
You want to tow, get a 4WD
You want performance and handling, get a 4 pot turbo or hot hatch.
You want quality, get a Jap
You want status, get a Euro
You want cheap, get a Korean
You want lifestyle, get a SUV

Oh yeah, but Falcon and Commodore are great for eating up the long distances in Oz!... yeah sure they are, but everyone flies now.

Just some of my theories.

[Agile]

What Mic said x 2.

[Franco Cozzo]

The best thing about my EL Fairmont Ghia, I lifted the front by about 10mm, and the rear is running the factory springs with new shocks all round, ditched the crappy 17" aftermarket wheels it had when I bought it, chucked on a set of factory 15" wheels with the big *** sidewall.

I jump gutters in it and drive across paddocks, across local no roads which are rutted like anything.

It has awesome ground clearance.

[Cuyper]

As a life long buyer of large rwd sedans, I'll tell you why I only own fwd hatchbacks now.

As the years have passed large cars have gained about 500 kilos in weight on average, you can not blame this on safety laws alone as small cars have the same side intrusion bars sand the same number or more airbags and they have only gained 1 or 200 kilos over the same time, its mostly been lack of effort due to being able to easily poke large enough motors in therm to tow the fat around.

As a result of both these, they use far to much fuel to be competitive in the market, their power to weight ratio is no better than the average 1.6 litre hatch. They are not much bigger inside than the average hatch despite being a metre or so longer, so long as you only have 2 or three people in the car you can actually carry more in a small hatch.

The lighter small cars handle much better, are more competent in adverse conditions. There's effectively no advantages to a large rwd car other than being faster in a straight line in the upper end sport models, do you spend an extra 30 grand on a car to go 2 seconds faster over a 1/4 mile? Doubt it.

The only future for large cars is fwd or awd wagons and only diesels. Holden could if they wanted to extend the sportswagons lifespan if they choose to go in that direction but I can't see the sedan continuing much longer and then even with a wagon you have to compete with the Skoda and Hyundai etc, even with the sedan how can you possibly compete against a Mondeo with a Falcon or Commodore, the Mondeo is just so much better. The utes could go the same way in awd if they build them taller and stronger. Other than that I can't see the point.

[Gothefalcon]

My Falcon is a great all round car ! I've raised it up, so ground clearance is no real issue... it runs on 17's with 55 profile tyres... so rim damage & rough road comfort is no real issue... it's got dual injected fuel (petrol/LPG) running mainly on LPG, so range and running cost is no real issue... it's a Wagon, so 5 passengers and a large load carrying capacity is no real issue... it's got a full High Series interior, so passenger comfort is no real issue... it's got a heavy duty tow hitch, so towing good loads is no real issue... but above all else, it's still a Falcon, so it's as rugged, reliable and fairly cheap to maintain... just as much as any of my previous Falcons (going back to my first XB) ever were !

OK... I've modified it to suit me.... but I'm sure if similarly speced Falcons were available... they would be popular ! Once people I know have riden/driven my Falcon... they all say they want one !

For me... it's a shame the Falcon wasn't produced to be more things to more people anymore :(

D

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Cuyper

As a life long buyer of large rwd sedans, I'll tell you why I only own fwd hatchbacks now.

As the years have passed large cars have gained about 500 kilos in weight on average, you can not blame this on safety laws alone as small cars have the same side intrusion bars sand the same number or more airbags and they have only gained 1 or 200 kilos over the same time, its mostly been lack of effort due to being able to easily poke large enough motors in therm to tow the fat around.

As a result of both these, they use far to much fuel to be competitive in the market, their power to weight ratio is no better than the average 1.6 litre hatch. They are not much bigger inside than the average hatch despite being a metre or so longer, so long as you only have 2 or three people in the car you can actually carry more in a small hatch.

The lighter small cars handle much better, are more competent in adverse conditions. There's effectively no advantages to a large rwd car other than being faster in a straight line in the upper end sport models, do you spend an extra 30 grand on a car to go 2 seconds faster over a 1/4 mile? Doubt it.

The only future for large cars is fwd or awd wagons and only diesels. Holden could if they wanted to extend the sportswagons lifespan if they choose to go in that direction but I can't see the sedan continuing much longer and then even with a wagon you have to compete with the Skoda and Hyundai etc, even with the sedan how can you possibly compete against a Mondeo with a Falcon or Commodore, the Mondeo is just so much better. The utes could go the same way in awd if they build them taller and stronger. Other than that I can't see the point.

firstly, what cars do you own?

when did you last drive a new falcon (or commodore)?

If you ever had a serious crash, you would be very grateful of the extra few 100kg and the extra size of the vehicle. ANCAP ratings are only comparable across the same category of car, so a 5 star small car does not equal a 5 star large car.

fuel economy in a large car would only be about 3-5L/100km worse than most popular cars on the market. thats less than $3 on a 60L fill!!! the fuel economy is one of the most common used reasons why people avoid the falcon (or large cars) and yet the facts are very different.

to say they are no bigger on the inside clearly indicates that you either don't actually need a car bigger than what you have, or you don't have a family or both. how many child seats can you fit across the rear seat in a smaller car??

as for handling, thats pretty much irrelevant for 90% of the buying public. i know which one i'd rather be in, esp out on the open road with b doubles and road trains etc.

as for the wagon, how's the mondeo sales? falcon has smashed mondeo every month in sales and it no longer has a wagon. mondeo supposedly kills the falcon for features, quality etc, has petrol and diesel variants as well as hatch and wagon, and yet only a few buy them.

so well done for your situation, where you have found that a small hatch does the job just as well, but i respectfully disagree.

[mr smith]

I agree, my current XR ute has 18's and was the first time I moved from XL's to an XR and while it looks ace I wish I had of stuck with the XL.
Scrapes its guts in dirt roads I go down, front spats always hit the deck (surprised I haven't lost one yet) and the rear alloys look like they have been hit with a shottie. A country pack on the XR would now be my choice if it existed. I may now go a VF.

[mik]

Originally Posted by mr smith

I agree, my current XR ute has 18's and was the first time I moved from XL's to an XR and while it looks ace I wish I had of stuck with the XL.
Scrapes its guts in dirt roads I go down, front spats always hit the deck (surprised I haven't lost one yet) and the rear alloys look like they have been hit with a shottie. A country pack on the XR would now be my choice if it existed. I may now go a VF.

I think a lot of the time a better wheel and tyre cobination would aleviate a lot of clearace woes among other things, I have an old lexus limo with real smooth air bag suspension, the previous owner put supra wheels on it, with the little bit of lost clearance on occasion I get a scape going down driveways on occasion,
and its taken the edge off the nice limousine ride, the wheels/ tyres will be getting the bullet first opportunity for some higher profile tyres with cushier ride and a bigger rolling diameter.
The lower profiles have good points for sure, but on our crappy roads, every time I hit one of those nasty expansion joints or a pot hole in the road it puts .me in a bad mood thinking about the wear and tear the suspension is copping, or the chance I'll be changing a tyre soon because of a stuffed sidewall.

[pottery beige]

I'm a narrowly focussed owner that enjoys driving my narrowly focussed car everyday amongst all the bubblecars....

[Cuyper]

Originally Posted by prydey

firstly, what cars do you own?

when did you last drive a new falcon (or commodore)?

If you ever had a serious crash, you would be very grateful of the extra few 100kg and the extra size of the vehicle. ANCAP ratings are only comparable across the same category of car, so a 5 star small car does not equal a 5 star large car.

fuel economy in a large car would only be about 3-5L/100km worse than most popular cars on the market. thats less than $3 on a 60L fill!!! the fuel economy is one of the most common used reasons why people avoid the falcon (or large cars) and yet the facts are very different.

to say they are no bigger on the inside clearly indicates that you either don't actually need a car bigger than what you have, or you don't have a family or both. how many child seats can you fit across the rear seat in a smaller car??

as for handling, thats pretty much irrelevant for 90% of the buying public. i know which one i'd rather be in, esp out on the open road with b doubles and road trains etc.

as for the wagon, how's the mondeo sales? falcon has smashed mondeo every month in sales and it no longer has a wagon. mondeo supposedly kills the falcon for features, quality etc, has petrol and diesel variants as well as hatch and wagon, and yet only a few buy them.

so well done for your situation, where you have found that a small hatch does the job just as well, but i respectfully disagree.

Have had a BF company car for 3 years a VY before that and driven VEs, currently owning a Fiesta and soon buying a second. Have one kid, I'm not out to overpopulate the world so doubt will ever be more than two.

Haven't been in a serious crash however have seen enough wreaks to know small cars versus large cars is a false rumour, I'm sure you've seen the episode of 5th gear where the conducted a head on between a pretty strengthened steel large car and a current small car and seen the small car cut straight through the large car and still have the front door open easily. The older large car was stuffed. Its not about size its about strength and even the BF and VE are weak, cheap steel. FG maybe better I don't know. I do know if rather be in a crash in the fiesta than the BF that's for sure.

Drive a VE that's done a few ks and the things twist just as badly as a VN with the same miles on it. The difference in real world fuel economy is more like 4-5l/100, more if you're talking diesels and that's a ton of money per year if you actually drive the car. But your right I've never run out of room in the fiesta and don't need anything larger, have looked at focus's but they are not noticeably bigger inside.

ANCAP ratings are all done at the same speeds, small cars don't get any more damage than large cars, often they suffer less because they aren't hitting the wall/pole with much force/weight. Get on YouTube and watch the fiesta side impact, I know I did before I bought it. I know the Mondeo doesnt sell here but its because of non educated buyers rather than the car, it sells fine in Europe, it takes time for people to realise what's out there and how good it is. BTW handling is more important than anything, its far better to avoid a crash than be in one even with all the high strength steel and air bags in the world.. If you can drive around it, its a much better day. Avoiding accidents at 110 in a fiesta is effortless, you can throw it anywhere at that speed with as much steering lock as you want and it'll take you where you need to go. I appreciate that. I had to do it a few times already.

[prydey]

you don't understand physics very well going by how you look at crash data.

i have seen the utube clip of new small car v old large car. how is that relevant? i'm comparing new small 5star v new large 5 star.

a car crashing into a solid fixed object is the same as hitting something of the same mass. it doesn't simulate a small object hitting a larger heavier object moving in the opposite direction.

i would suggest even though bf is 4 star, it would fare better than the fiesta.

fuel economy? i said 3-5L difference. you say 4-5L difference. either way, at 5L difference per 100km, its $3 extra per 60L fill. its nothing. people that say otherwise can seem to easily afford an extra carton of beer or pack of smokes etc. i'd rather drive a larger car knowing my family is just that little bit safer.

FG falcon is one of the safest cars on the road.

[Silver Ghia]

To exaggerate what prydey is saying, just imagine a small car hitting a truck. Obviously the small car will be far worse off regardless of what safety rating it has, with the truck maybe getting a few scratches.

The FG, which has a five star safety rating, is designed to absorb energy from the impact with the other object. Yes it will crumple, but in a controlled fashion as its meant to do, to absorb the energy. The passenger cell, by design, is relatively much stronger, so to remain intact with the passengers restrained by their seatbelts therefore having the best chance for survival.

[prydey]

visual demonstration

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QXunnaaYtz0

[kevino]

Agree with you that FG is very very safe much safer than a Fiesta.

But disagree on your fuel cost.

Lets take an FG that does 600kms at 10 litres per km at $1.40 per litre that's 60 litres equalling $84.
Fiesta auto on a bad day does 600kms at 7 litres per km at $1.40 per litre that's 42 litres equalling $58.80

That's a difference of $26.80 not $3 if my maths are right.


So I do 800 kms a week , I,m $1500 a year better off in fuel and $20000 better off in purchase price in a Fiesta. I cant afford to run a Falc.

[The Snout]

Originally Posted by prydey

you don't understand physics very well going by how you look at crash data.

i have seen the utube clip of new small car v old large car. how is that relevant? i'm comparing new small 5star v new large 5 star.

a car crashing into a solid fixed object is the same as hitting something of the same mass. it doesn't simulate a small object hitting a larger heavier object moving in the opposite direction.

i would suggest even though bf is 4 star, it would fare better than the fiesta.

fuel economy? i said 3-5L difference. you say 4-5L difference. either way, at 5L difference per 100km, its $3 extra per 60L fill. its nothing. people that say otherwise can seem to easily afford an extra carton of beer or pack of smokes etc. i'd rather drive a larger car knowing my family is just that little bit safer.

FG falcon is one of the safest cars on the road.

Can you explain your calculations of an extra $3 per 60L ? I'm not seeing how you are reaching that conclusion if there's 5L per 100km fuel economy difference.

[The Snout]

Originally Posted by kevino

Agree with you that FG is very very safe much safer than a Fiesta.

But disagree on your fuel cost.

Lets take an FG that does 600kms at 10 litres per km at $1.40 per litre that's 60 litres equalling $84.
Fiesta auto on a bad day does 600kms at 7 litres per km at $1.40 per litre that's 42 litres equalling $58.80

That's a difference of $26.80 not $3 if my maths are right.


So I do 800 kms a week , I,m $1500 a year better off in fuel and $20000 better off in purchase price in a Fiesta. I cant afford to run a Falc.

Thanks. That's what I am thinking too.

[prydey]

yeah, brain fade on the fuel thing. scratch that. not sure what i was thinking of.

mind you, ford do build a couple of falcons for the slightly more fuel conscious. one is ecolpi, the other is ecoboost. whilst both would possibly still be more than $3 dearer () the gap is closed somewhat.

[kevino]

What economy do you get out of your FG rob?

The ecoboost is interesting but because Ford never marketed it or advertised it its a real orphan with low numbers around, just wonder if it would be risky buying one.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by kevino

What economy do you get out of your FG rob?

my FG sits about 9.8 - 10.2, depending on what shift i'm on. on the highway its sub 8, with full boot and 4 passengers. trip computer and working it out the old fashioned way pretty much the same, so its not just a generous trip computer. falcons have never been better than what they currently are.

my wife's focus gets the same economy, but totally different scene. its the school run, shopping run machine, so a much lower ave speed.

Originally Posted by kevino

The ecoboost is interesting but because Ford never marketed it or advertised it its a real orphan with low numbers around, just wonder if it would be risky buying one.

i think their lack of perceived advertising or marketing is simply due to the way they do advertise or market the falcon. tv advertising is only 1 area, and not the be all and end all like many focus on.

ecoboost technology is here to stay. my next falcon will likely be one. i've driven one, and they are quicker than my current one, cheaper to run and cheaper rego, with no compromise to the great falcon package we all love.

[flooded one]

Originally Posted by FalconXV

I attended the meeting Sinead Phipps and David Katic had in August last year. I was absolutely dumbfounded when he said he was only targeting the Falcon at men in their 40's, as everyone under wants a Focus ( I was the exception, apparently). Hopeless.

Flies in the face of V8 Supercars, plenty of kids and younger people support the Falcon, to ignore them is a marketing disaster.

If Ford had a sporty ecoboost model, it might have lured a new generation from the tuner audience for instance, but they were either too myopic or determined to strangle it.

I want a falcon. I'm under 40. I sure as hell don't want a focus. what an idiot

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by FalconXV

I attended the meeting Sinead Phipps and David Katic had in August last year. I was absolutely dumbfounded when he said he was only targeting the Falcon at men in their 40's, as everyone under wants a Focus ( I was the exception, apparently). Hopeless.

Flies in the face of V8 Supercars, plenty of kids and younger people support the Falcon, to ignore them is a marketing disaster.

If Ford had a sporty ecoboost model, it might have lured a new generation from the tuner audience for instance, but they were either too myopic or determined to strangle it.

And they thought marketing using only online methods was the best way of speaking to this audience?

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by prydey

yeah, brain fade on the fuel thing. scratch that. not sure what i was thinking of.

mind you, ford do build a couple of falcons for the slightly more fuel conscious. one is ecolpi, the other is ecoboost. whilst both would possibly still be more than $3 dearer () the gap is closed somewhat.

What's this "Ecoboost" that you talk about...., never heard of that before. (end sarcasm)

[Te5063]

Love the ecoboost great car

[prydey]

the fact that the ecoboost falcon doesn't appear to be selling that well doesn't mean that people aren't aware that it is available. i know many non car people who know that falcon now comes with a 4cyl.

large cars are in decline and have been for a while. ford tried a few things to reverse the trend but the consumer has spoken and large cars are still on the nose.

like i've mentioned previously, too many people expect one car to cover an extremely broad audience. it just doesn't happen anymore. not with a sedan based vehicle anyway. this doesn't make the falcon a bad car. anyone who thinks the product is at fault, hasn't sampled one long term for quite some time.

[mik]

Originally Posted by Cuyper

Have had a BF company car for 3 years a VY before that and driven VEs, currently owning a Fiesta and soon buying a second. Have one kid, I'm not out to overpopulate the world so doubt will ever be more than two.

Haven't been in a serious crash however have seen enough wreaks to know small cars versus large cars is a false rumour, I'm sure you've seen the episode of 5th gear where the conducted a head on between a pretty strengthened steel large car and a current small car and seen the small car cut straight through the large car and still have the front door open easily. The older large car was stuffed. Its not about size its about strength and even the BF and VE are weak, cheap steel. FG maybe better I don't know. I do know if rather be in a crash in the fiesta than the BF that's for sure.

Drive a VE that's done a few ks and the things twist just as badly as a VN with the same miles on it. The difference in real world fuel economy is more like 4-5l/100, more if you're talking diesels and that's a ton of money per year if you actually drive the car. But your right I've never run out of room in the fiesta and don't need anything larger, have looked at focus's but they are not noticeably bigger inside.

ANCAP ratings are all done at the same speeds, small cars don't get any more damage than large cars, often they suffer less because they aren't hitting the wall/pole with much force/weight. Get on YouTube and watch the fiesta side impact, I know I did before I bought it. I know the Mondeo doesnt sell here but its because of non educated buyers rather than the car, it sells fine in Europe, it takes time for people to realise what's out there and how good it is. BTW handling is more important than anything, its far better to avoid a crash than be in one even with all the high strength steel and air bags in the world.. If you can drive around it, its a much better day. Avoiding accidents at 110 in a fiesta is effortless, you can throw it anywhere at that speed with as much steering lock as you want and it'll take you where you need to go. I appreciate that. I had to do it a few times already.

for ancap , it is probably a good thing in that it does encourage car makers to make them safer, but the testing is very limited and and in my opinion lacking, and somewhat misleading in some cases, no testing for rear end crashes is just wrong and considering almost a third of crashes are rear enders.................
as for small cars they are much better today, but they still very have little crumple zone compared to the bigger cars, and ..... it is not always about the damage to car old mate, it is often the sudden stop at the end that kills people, as for throwing around i have no doubt about the ability in my old falcon either.

[UberKnee]

The evolution of 4x4s has a say in it as well. They used to be rough, featureless cars that were only any good off road, thesedays if you need a car to go off road then the big 4x4s do that and are comfortable on the road.