Does Ford Australia Have Any Plans Ford A V6 Engine?

[OzJavelin]

O/T but anyway ..
Unlike Holden and Chrysler, Ford Australia did not really "make it's name" with I6's did it? When people think of great Fords they think V8s .. flatties, Y-block Cussos, GTs .. right up to the current day. They ONLY real exception to this is the XR6T. People remember the underwhelming power of the XP 170 "Pursuit" engines, the huge fuel guzzling capacity 250 cross-flow engines (only exceeded by Commodore 202s of the day!), the regular head gasket blowing capacity of EA-EL Falcons. Having driven (but never owned) a lot of 6-cyl Falcons I can say that personally I'd have a V6 Commodore over any of them anyday. I can put up with the harsh noise etc for the benefits of measurably better acceleration and fuel economy. The BA Falcons I've driven haven't swayed me from this opinion either. They still appear big, fat, lazy engines .. and I've owned some of American's finest fat, lazy engines (440 Mopar, 400Chev, etc). They make 225ci slants seem sporty! I'd much rather the less powerful 5.0 Windsor in my AU and put up with the crappy fuel economy. Now XR6T or Typhoon might be another matter?? I don't particularly care if Ford continue I6 or V6 .. I just don't like they way they build any six cylinder engine ..

[Stav]

Originally Posted by gmhdriver

In all seriousness I dont think configuration has anything to do with torque output whatsoever. It is more to do with the fact that the Alloytec is a 3.6l while the barra is a 4.0l. As a general rule, more capacity = more torque.
Another factor is that the Barra has a longer stroke than the alloytec. This gives the barra significantly more torque down low but less power up top, whereas it is the opposite with the Alloytec.
If the Alloytec was stroked to 4.0, I'd be willing to bet that torque output would be on par or even exceed that of the barra. In conclusion, what I'm trying to say is, it means diddly squat whether the cylinders are arranged in a straight line or in a V format, it is capacity and bore/stroke relationship that makes the difference in power/torque output.

Hmmm. Well I have witnessed a number of instances which would make me think otherwise.
1. I have driven a couple of SV6's, and while they do feel a bit doughy initially off the line, once they get moving they don't feel slow at all and keep pulling all the way to 6800rpm.I have also found that the 5sp auto shifts very quickly and smoothly.
2.I have been a passenger in a stock auto SV6 which against a BA XR8 only lost by about 1.5 - 2 carlengths to about 150,(yes I know illegal but don't look at me I wasn't driving!) with both drivers giving it their best.
3. I have witnessed at Calder raceway bog stock SV6's pull times of 15.1 - 15.4 consistantly all night, while one did a 14.8.



The falcon I6 has a long enough stroke as it is. Any longer and it would start hindering top end performance. Look at the Boss V8 for example.

I do not own a barra.I own a modded AU. Firstly ,if the 3.8 v6 was a straight six it is generally accepted in engineering that those configurations have a tendancy to produce more torque than a v motor. While I have been less than impressed with the street acceleration with the sv6 it appears that with your knowledge that indeed they are capable of a 15.1 .
However as a street family sports car I think they lack the streetable power that they deserve. I get them by around 2 to 3 car lengths by 60-70 kays.The Ba XR8 in stock as rock form pull 14.9-15.1 quarter miles.(the ones I have seen...stock)

[merlin]

The I6 is what got me into Fords in the first place. Having always owned sixes, it was natural I became a Ford lover due to the Holdens ancient V6. Back when I saw the spec sheet of the Barra I6 in 2002 with its DOHC, VCT, 182Kw and 380Nm of torque I was sold, bought an XR6 5 speed straight off the bat - was a great car, with heaps of torque, I had an SV6 as a company car for 3 months and was not impressed at all - all the torque dissapeared for high up revs and a thrashy sound. not nice.

[Citric GT]

After driving VZ Alloytechs at work, I can safely say that the Barra 6 is a far better device. The Alloytech is quieter and smoother at low revs (so was the old Ecotech), but once you get over about 3500rpm its definately noisier and rougher. As for performance, there is not one point in the rev range where it can come close to the Ford 6. Having said that, for an everyday family car or fleet car there is nothing wrong with them. They are quiet, comfortable and have plenty of power for the job.

Originally Posted by MITCHAY

What about the Nissan VQ35DE-The 350Z engine. That's a V6 and they go alright.

Nissan do a lot of engine sharing. This engine was taken from the current maxima and is also the new Merano i think. They had to drop the Rb series I6 i think because it couldn't meet Jap emmissions.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Casper

As far as balance goes.. to be truely inherently balanced an engine has to have pistons divisable by four. 4, 8, 12 or 16.
No 6 cylinder is "inherently" balanced however the Inline setup is more inherently stable then a V design. Inline 8's are smoother then butter.

Unfortunatly the V6 design is actually an extreamly unbalanced design.

Casper,

Where did this divisable by 4 theory come from?
It's just plain wrong (or at least on oversimplification).

For anyone genuinely interested in this topic read this (click).

Specifically the I6 vs V6 discussion is on page 3 (click).

An I6 IS inherently balanced because the crankshaft is symmetrical looking along it's length (as are just about all engines) AND it cancels vibrations end-to-end as it has the pairs 1-6, 2-5, 3-4 equidistant from the centreline when viewed from the side.

Which is something that cannot be achieved with a V6 which will always generate end-to-end vibration. Thus the need for balance shafts in V6's to minimise this vibration.

[WASP]

Interesting discussion. From where I'm sitting you can look at this from a technical point of view or a marketing one. From a technical point of view I much prefer the I6, especially for turbocharged application. Putting my marketing hat on, common perception out there in the ‘non car enthusiast’ world is that a V6 is more modern, and therefore more sophisticated and economical than an I6. :

You need to remember that many target buyers have grown up with I6’s in their Falcons and Kingwoods etc., and associate that design with old technology. Sad isn't it, but if I had the build a car which needed to be sold to the masses rather than enthusiasts, the V6 unfortunately would be the way to go. I personally hold this as one of the primary reasons why Commodores ‘still’ outsell Falcons despite the obvious...:

[Biggoggs]

Raptor: rofl, I quoted that link in my first post, re-quoted it, and now you post it. I think people here just have short attention spans :P

Casper: I don't want to sound offensive, but most of what you said isn't true. I wouldn't know where to start, so please just read the link Raptor posted.

CDAA: I agree, `non car enthusiasts' seem to think of a V6 as a mini-V8. I mean, if powerful cars have a V12, V10, or V8, then a V6 must be powerful too, because it's got a `V' in it.

[Casper]

I stand corrected, the place I got my info from a long time ago was not as clear or as easily understood as that posted above.
Still, end result is similar. An inline setup appears to be far more balanced then a V Setup. If you change my "divide by 4" to "divide by 3" it is almost right : Still, reading through it that doesnt work either.

End result... I6 is one of THE most inherently balanced engine configurations and the V6 is inherently unbalanced... which is basically what I said. My maths was all screwed up but my end answer still worked out right.

Meh, I really should do more research when answering these questions I think.

[Tiapan]

Man up and get a v8- sorry

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Hunter

No of course not but I was thinking more along the lines of being 'rev-friendly', eg shortening the stroke and reducing bore slightly. The Falcon 6 is a big and slow motor (relatively speaking), she don't like high revs. At least the older pre-Barra motors don't. They sound pretty naff at high rpm (the sound an engine makes when its saying "PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS ANYMORE!").

I dont know about the pre-barra motor, but the BA seems like it love it at high revs and sounds decent for a six with stock exhaust. The VX I drive every time it goes over 3000rpm it worries me that it wont last long if I constantly keep doing this.

[Falcon Freak]

The Ford I6 has been improving with age. I had an EL which didn't like it much above 3000 RPM. Then I had an AU which would almost go to 4,000 RPM without too much protest. My BA has a 5.4 so I don't know how well the Barra I6 revs. But from what I have read it is deffinately an improvement over the AU I6.

FF

[GTENVY]

Originally Posted by gmhdriver

From that description it sounds like you're a cop??


I guess some people will never be satisfied. When the VN first came out it was heavily critisized for having excessive throttle response from take off.. So Holden has revised this by dialling out the low down torque and placing it further up in the rev range so people wouldn't have traction problems.... and what happens? People start complaining about the lack of low down torque.
With the ecotec, one of it's main critisisms was that in was breathless in the upper rev range. The alloytec has addressed these issues and revs cleanly up to 6800rpm...what happens? People find something else to ИИИИИ about.

I have driven both 175 and 190 Alloytecs extensively and IMO they do the job perfectly well and I certainly don't have any issues with them which are worth complaining about. It seems to me that some people like to find things to pick on and whinge about just for the hell of it, probably only due to the badge the car wears.

That sounds like that belongs on another forum.... just the other way around :

[GTENVY]

Originally Posted by Casper

I stand corrected, the place I got my info from a long time ago was not as clear or as easily understood as that posted above.
Still, end result is similar. An inline setup appears to be far more balanced then a V Setup. If you change my "divide by 4" to "divide by 3" it is almost right : Still, reading through it that doesnt work either.

End result... I6 is one of THE most inherently balanced engine configurations and the V6 is inherently unbalanced... which is basically what I said. My maths was all screwed up but my end answer still worked out right.

Meh, I really should do more research when answering these questions I think.

You'll find the only better balanced six is horizontial opposed - that's why porsche use them

[mik]

2006 ve commodore: HI SPEC
Maximum torque, 335 Nm @ 3200 rpm
2001au falcon:
LOW SPEC 357 Nm@ 3000 rpm
TORQUE IS WHAT MATTERS
maybe ve commodore should have been vo? = very ordinary

[Casper]

1998 AU1 VCT. 374Nm@3500

I think my wheel nuts have more torque than the VE :

[Biggoggs]

Originally Posted by GTENVY

You'll find the only better balanced six is horizontial opposed - that's why porsche use them

Possibly, but then it's got the same downsides as the V6- duplicate heads, more difficult forced induction, etc. And I can imagine working on it being quite difficult. Not that anyone who buys a new Porsche is going to worry

mik: Well yea, but the AU2 only had 157kW. Old V8's had 400-something Nm but it was all down low, didn't have much power :(
It'd be nice to see them both graphed on a dyno actually...

[GTENVY]

Flat 4
Inline 4
V4
Inline 6
Flat 6 (probably about equal with V6)
V8
Inline 8

Casper I think alot of engineer's that design engine's would disagree with the V4 being where it is in that list (how many V4's do you know of that have been produced). V6 is unbalanced due to a 60 degree angle that V6 cylinder heads are on from the crank, the V8 is quite balanced due to its 90 degree V.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by GTENVY

Flat 4
Inline 4
V4
Inline 6
Flat 6 (probably about equal with V6)
V8
Inline 8

Casper I think alot of engineer's that design engine's would disagree with the V4 being where it is in that list (how many V4's do you know of that have been produced. V6 is unbalanced due to a 60 degree angle that V6 cylinder heads are on from the crank, the V8 is quite balanced due to its 90 degree V.

that list was in no particular order, just a list of what was better balanced then a V6, and has been proven flawed anyhow.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by Biggoggs

Raptor: rofl, I quoted that link in my first post, re-quoted it, and now you post it. I think people here just have short attention spans :P

......

Great minds think alike eh Biggoggs.

My apologies, I somehow missed that you had already referenced that site when I scanned over the first few pages of this thread. Maybe my short attention span :

[ltd]

Man alive, Holden's high end or high output motor makes the same kw, and less torque than the Ford Povvo pack falcon. Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Oh, and the Repco catalogue only lists extractors for the LS1, as ford apparently don't need them. Maw ha ha ha ha ha.

Sorry GMH, but had to laugh.

[mickey t]

ford is actually testing a V6 in territory at the moment, and is being encouraged to plug it into the ute as well.

and don't think petrol...

[Perana]

Jag/Land Rover 2.7 Turbo Diesel ;)

[Paxton]

Originally Posted by Perana XR8

Jag/Land Rover 2.7 Turbo Diesel ;)

/me gets down on two knees and begs, PLEASE LET IT BE SO.

[Biggoggs]

Raptor: Well, at least yours worked :P

Originally Posted by GTENVY

Casper I think alot of engineer's that design engine's would disagree with the V4 being where it is in that list (how many V4's do you know of that have been produced). V6 is unbalanced due to a 60 degree angle that V6 cylinder heads are on from the crank, the V8 is quite balanced due to its 90 degree V.

I think the Honda VFR motorcycles use V4's, it wouldn't be very efficient though. V8's are smooth, but the heavy V8 counterweights are a slight engineering turn-off (just a little O/T comment).

What's up with the Diesel ideas, btw?

[Perana]

V4's in cars aren't all that common but they do exist.. Ford Germany used them a lot in the late 60's and 70's. SAAB and FIAT being two others that have made a V4 from memory.

[efgiar]

diahatsu mad a 3cyl :P

[SSBUB]

my oldies used to own a 3cyl charade - the old cheese got done for speeding in it hahaha

[Falcon Freak]

Originally Posted by mickey t

ford is actually testing a V6 in territory at the moment, and is being encouraged to plug it into the ute as well.

and don't think petrol...

:

FF

[gmhdriver]

Originally Posted by mickey t

ford is actually testing a V6 in territory at the moment, and is being encouraged to plug it into the ute as well.

and don't think petrol...

Didn't Tom Gorman rule out any possibility of a diesel Territory not so long ago?