First Drive: Falcon Ecoboost

[prydey]

obviously keen to buy one are you?

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

ford better make sure they do a bathurst eco run again....just incase anybody missed the first round like brazen appears to have missed it

I was too busy testing how much fuel a Camry uses towing a 747.

[prydey]

so you are saying the test is biased because it suited the falcon more? where i live, there are hills, straights, corners etc,

sure, maybe not as steep as mt panorama but you can't just discount the test because you didn't like the outcome.

regardless of the result, the falcon managed to match its claimed economy, the commodore didn't.

[jpd80]

And how ironic will that be for Holden, a DI Turbo I-4 not only out performs the SIDI 3.0 but also beats it on fuel economy.

There is absolutely nothing Holden can do to change those two things happening.

Holden fans might be "yeah,so what" regarding Ecoboost but there are a few senior Holden chiefs very concerned,
Omega isn't Holden's main business but it adds a lot of production numbers..

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by jpd80

And how ironic will that be for Holden, a DI Turbo I-4 not only out performs the SIDI 3.0 but also beats it on fuel economy.
There is absolutely nothing Holden can do to change those two things happening.

Holden fans might be "yeah,so what" regarding Ecoboost but there are a few senior Holden chiefs very concerned,
Omega isn't Holden's main business but it adds a lot of production numbers..

I got shot down previously (for putting forward a positive towards Ford's prospects...) about this. But, say Ford can steal just 200 sales a month from Commodore, several things happen.
* Is great for Falcon, Broadmeadows manufacturing and Ford
* Closes the sales gap between the two models.
* Adds to GMH pain as the Elizabeth plant is already overproducing and is yet to be rightsized and which is moving away from Commodore to Cruze as it's staple output.
* Closes the gap between 2nd and 3rd in the sales race and helps fend off Mazda/Hyundai etc.

Remember, EcoBoost will have access to those 4cyl only fleets and also those limited to 200gCO2/km. Potentially big fleets.

Reckon Ford will be working this very hard behind the scenes

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by phillyc

I got shot down previously (for putting forward a positive towards Ford's prospects...) about this. But, say Ford can steal just 200 sales a month from Commodore, several things happen.
* Is great for Falcon, Broadmeadows manufacturing and Ford
* Closes the sales gap between the two models.
* Adds to GMH pain as the Elizabeth plant is already overproducing and is yet to be rightsized and which is moving away from Commodore to Cruze as it's staple output.
* Closes the gap between 2nd and 3rd in the sales race and helps fend off Mazda/Hyundai etc.

Remember, EcoBoost will have access to those 4cyl only fleets and also those limited to 200gCO2/km. Potentially big fleets.

Reckon Ford will be working this very hard behind the scenes

LOL, what's the bet fleets suddenly decide en mass to buy Ford and Holden LPG and Ford Ecoboost
causing the basic six cylinder petrol models languishing and open to more discounting...


I can see sales ricocheting around for months without people being quite sure what's happening..

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by jpd80

LOL, what's the bet fleets suddenly decide en mass to buy Ford and Holden LPG and Ford Ecoboost
causing the basic six cylinder petrol models languishing and open to more discounting...


I can see sales ricocheting around for months without people being quite sure what's happening..

Yeah. Could happen As long as the net result is a positive for the Falcon and Ford. Don't care!

But sales ping-pong could happen! Very confusing for the product planners.

Anyway, it appears they are forward building (to stock) some EcoLPi which will create production space for EcoBoost in April. Hopefully allowing a bigger initial push or less delay getting them out there.

[Buntz]

I read the TopGear review of it. (Yeah... I know)

James Stanford did it (who is a bit of a tool). He tells a story about how his dad got a job in Australia (living in England) designing engine parts for Ford's straight six in the 1980's. So he didn't really want to like the I4. Thought it wouldn't be enough. But then goes on to say he was wrong.

He said it handles. Feels much faster than a 3.0 Commo. The engine is 'extremely refined'. Has 'a slightly rorty note', and there is minimal vibration.

It's also only slower than the I6 to the 100KM/H by 0.25 of a second. I6 is 7.29. I4 7.54.

He says it feels wrong. A 4cyl in the same car just shouldn't be doing this.

Hell. After 2016... Falcon may never have an NA 6. - My own comment.

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Brazen

I was too busy testing how much fuel a Camry uses towing a 747.

please enlighten me as to why the real world test independently done away from ford on bathurst roads...is seen as somehow biased or nonsense...or whatever u are hinting at....because im missing something....PLEASE EXPLAIN.

[Buntz]

Anyone else notice that the EcoBoost Falcon will be more fuel efficient than the current Ford Taurus?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

Anyone else notice that the EcoBoost Falcon will be more fuel efficient than the current Ford Taurus?

Emmm, the Ecoboost there is an AWD 3.5 twin turbo?

EB 20 Taurus will appear later this year and is expected to get at least 31 mpg
on US Highway cycle which roughly equates to Euro Combined of 8.4 l/100 km

Meh, not bad a 3900 lb EB 20 Taurus versus a 3600 lb EB Falcon...

[mrghia]

seen a pic of the engine bay with the motor in it i looks odd but wont stop me getting one when i can afford it

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

please enlighten me as to why the real world test independently done away from ford on bathurst roads...is seen as somehow biased or nonsense...or whatever u are hinting at....because im missing something....PLEASE EXPLAIN.

Because running around a mountainess and punishing race track without stopping isn't the same as dropping the kids to school or going to the shops.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Because running around a mountainess and punishing race track without stopping isn't the same as dropping the kids to school or going to the shops.

sounds to me like you like to choose a scenario that might favour the holden. what a surprise there.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Because running around a mountainess and punishing race track without stopping isn't the same as dropping the kids to school or going to the shops.

If you look at the Urban test cycles for Omega, 3.6 SIDI, 4.0 Falcon and Ecoboost falcon, they're all fairly close,
the two smaller engines will probably give a slight better fuel economy in the real world..

[outback_ute]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Because running around a mountainess and punishing race track without stopping isn't the same as dropping the kids to school or going to the shops.

You could relate going up the mountain with accelerating from stop lights - not that much different really

[FalconXV]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Emmm, the Ecoboost there is an AWD 3.5 twin turbo?

EB 20 Taurus will appear later this year and is expected to get at least 31 mpg
on US Highway cycle which roughly equates to Euro Combined of 8.4 l/100 km

Meh, not bad a 3900 lb EB 20 Taurus versus a 3600 lb EB Falcon...

Wheels should conduct a direct comparison.

[XRtowcar]

Wonder if Ford will be prepared to heavily discount the Ecoboost to fleet buyers like Holden does with the Sidi 3.0.
Will the cost of the engine make it too difficult to reduce the price?

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Because running around a mountainess and punishing race track without stopping isn't the same as dropping the kids to school or going to the shops.

it was an independant test wasnt it???so there was no agenda...and bathurst is a PUBLIC ROAD unless u live under a rock....and it has as much braking and cruisy down hill sections as it does up hill i dont understand what u dont get...

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by XRtowcar

Wonder if Ford will be prepared to heavily discount the Ecoboost to fleet buyers like Holden does with the Sidi 3.0.
Will the cost of the engine make it too difficult to reduce the price?

pretty sure theyre are in the same boat...as even the new gas commie has a 2500$ premium just like the ford...so discounts arent knew for fleets.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

it was an independant test wasnt it???so there was no agenda...and bathurst is a PUBLIC ROAD unless u live under a rock....and it has as much braking and cruisy down hill sections as it does up hill i dont understand what u dont get...

No, the test was performed by the Holden biased DRIVE magazine and they came up with the Falcon as a winner.
You could tell that the guys at DRIVE were just not taken with the baby Holden, not at all...

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Emmm, the Ecoboost there is an AWD 3.5 twin turbo?

EB 20 Taurus will appear later this year and is expected to get at least 31 mpg
on US Highway cycle which roughly equates to Euro Combined of 8.4 l/100 km

Meh, not bad a 3900 lb EB 20 Taurus versus a 3600 lb EB Falcon...

No. That is against the most efficient of the range, the 3.7 FWD model @ 23mpg. AWD is even worse about 21 mpg. I'd like to see the Taurus get 31 mpg... that'd be a sight.

To keep things in perspective... lets stick with just US mpg.

All models with and without AWD and EB V6 use more fuel than Falcon with 4.0L I6. We all know Taurus has a weight problem... and that it will come down when they make the CD4+ or whatever. But still... Falcon is achieving now... what U.S. hope to level with. Why can't we just sell them Falcon?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

No. That is against the most efficient of the range, the 3.7(3.5) FWD model @ 23mpg. AWD is even worse about 21 mpg. I'd like to see the Taurus get 31 mpg... that'd be a sight.

Well get ready because 2013 model will have Ecoboost 2.0 and Ford are on record as saying it will achieve at least 31 MPG Highway mode.
Which won't be hard considering that Ford Edge is rated at 30 mpg and is slightly heavier.

To keep things in perspective... lets stick with just US mpg.

All models with and without AWD and EB V6 use more fuel than Falcon with 4.0L I6. We all know Taurus has a weight problem... and that it will come down when they make the CD4+ or whatever. But still... Falcon is achieving now... what U.S. hope to level with. Why can't we just sell them Falcon?

Mate, i'd love to debate you but you need to do some research into what the US EPA City and Highway cycles
entail versus EPA Urban, Extra urban and combined as none of the tests exactly align, some are very different.

Edit,
I notice that Toyota Aurion has same urban/Extra Urban and combined as XT Falcon,
this equates to US figures of City 20, Highway 30 and combined of 25 mpg
so compared to FWD 3.5 V6 Taurus 18/28 mpg, Falcon dose pretty darned good.

Ford has not made its mind up on large cars either way, they are waiting to see what FoA decides so
Ford can work out a plan going forward because it looks like large cars everywhere in Ford is now in
decline, so maybe a common RWD has a shot, just as AWD with Fusion/Mondeo has a big shot too.

Interesting times ahead...

Oh, Hybrid Fusion is supposedly way better than Camry hybrid with city 47 mpg/ Hwy 44 mpg
That is scary good and the Electric motor will make performance feel like a six cylinder...

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

But still... Falcon is achieving now... what U.S. hope to level with. Why can't we just sell them Falcon?

You would have to build it there to get it cheap enough, and if you build it there you have to ask why build it here? If you still sent them FG2 Falcon, they would be disappointed with tech levels and styling.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

You would have to build it there to get it cheap enough, and if you build it there you have to ask why build it here? If you still sent them FG2 Falcon, they would be disappointed with tech levels and styling.

There's a lot of ways that One Ford can help a next gen Falcon:
- Advanced power trains either FWD/AWD or RWD (take your pick)
- Use EUCD/-C1 wiring loom like Fusion, Mondeo, Focus, S-Max, C-Max, Kuga and now Ranger..
- Side frames and door panels are already EUCD tech
- sharing common Dash, Instrument panel and switch gear with either Europe or USA.
- Supplies of trim and glass from Ford Asia pacific supplier base.
- Front suspension modules can be shared with either Fusion/Mondeo or Mustang
- Rear suspension can be adapted from powered IRS developed for AWD fusion or Kuga...

I'm sure that there are heaps of other engineering modules that can be drawn together
to make another Falcon work financially, be that a conventional RWD or FWD/AWD.

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Well get ready because 2013 model will have Ecoboost 2.0 and Ford are on record as saying it will achieve at least 31 MPG Highway mode.
Which won't be hard considering that Ford Edge is rated at 30 mpg and is slightly heavier.

Yeah Ford have a said a lot of things before and never come through with them. The Edge claims 21 MPG City, 30 MPG hwy... with the EB 2.0. Which has a combined of 24 MPG. Which is worse then my calculations... but I've just been adding them both and dividing by 2. I get 25.5 MPG for that car. But it's seem to be that it gets an extra 2 MPG city, and 4 MPG Hwy over the 3.7L V6 it shares with the Taurus. So when we add that. Taurus with a 2.0 EB get's a combined of 26 MPG... which would be better than Ford's estimate. That's 9.05L/100Km.

Falcon accordingly will claim 8.5L/100kms. That's 27.6 MPG combined. That's with a 'less efficient' RWD layout. So Clearly FoA is making a huge statement about what can be down with some sense and intelligence.

Originally Posted by jpd80

Mate, i'd love to debate you but you need to do some research into what the US EPA City and Highway cycles entail
versus EPA Urban, Extra urban and combined.

The best I can say is this, Urban and City are pretty close to the point of interchangeable.

US Highway has had two lots of correction factors applied to it in order to bring figures closer
to those most drivers could expect driving between 40 and 60 mph but that is completely
different to what is achieved under Extra urban which approximate what you would get
at steady state on the highway...

A shorthand I use is to take Euro combined and improve the fuel economy by
10% to approximate US Highway, that kinda works but isn't fool proof..

Like I said above, I just add both together and divide by and I get slightly better than their own combined average. Which is a good margin for comparisons sake. It's not rocket surgery.

Originally Posted by jpd80

Under that regime our XT falcon works out to be 16/26 mpg, that's whay I go a bit quite when
people start splashing around figures, Falcon has much better torque, lighter weight than FWD 3.5 Taurus.

Ford has not made its mind up on large cars either way, they are waiting to see what FoA decides so
Ford can work out a plan going forward because it looks like large cars everywhere in Ford is now in
decline, so maybe a common RWD has a shot, just as AWD with Fusion/Mondeo has a big shot too.

Interesting times ahead...

As far as goes. Falcon is Ford's best chance at ever being competitive in the luxury saloon market which it has publicly stated. It has ranges from 4 cyl to 8 cyl. Base, Luxury, and Performance. Gadgets. They just need to be allowed for. No major development there. Falcon also has a sibling SUV, now with Euro friendly diesel.

[Crazy Dazz]

Ok, so Ford’s American engineers have discovered that turbo-charging increases the power of an engine. Not sure how that is news to the rest of the world?
And yes, tests have shown that if you thrash the turbo 4, its almost as fast as hammering the I6. Again, not exactly new.
For mine, the big shock is that for this ECOboost engine they can still only claim 8.1l/100k when driven for economy. History would tend to indicate that when pushed hard, the fuel consumption of the turbo will rise disproportionately. With the inherent questions over reliability and longevity, I’m struggling to see the advantages over the venerable I6?
I can only hope that this theoretical fuel saving helps sell Falcons to government fleets and other mechanical ignoramuses thus ensuring the survival of the Falcon and the continued availability of the I6.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

Yeah Ford have a said a lot of things before and never come through with them. The Edge claims 21 MPG City, 30 MPG hwy... with the EB 2.0. Which has a combined of 24 MPG. Which is worse then my calculations... but I've just been adding them both and dividing by 2. I get 25.5 MPG for that car. But it's seem to be that it gets an extra 2 MPG city, and 4 MPG Hwy over the 3.7L V6 it shares with the Taurus. So when we add that. Taurus with a 2.0 EB get's a combined of 26 MPG... which would be better than Ford's estimate. That's 9.05L/100Km.

Falcon accordingly will claim 8.5L/100kms. That's 27.6 MPG combined. That's with a 'less efficient' RWD layout. So Clearly FoA is making a huge statement about what can be down with some sense and intelligence.
.

None of your figures are transportable as the US tests are completely different to our Euro/Aussie test cycles.

US EPA combined is derived from a 45/55 split of the city/highway cycles.
The US figures have had correction factors applied twice bringing figures down a further 10% or more...

You need a good site to read up what the GO is, try this one,
it's kind of a one stop shop for all the tests...LINK

Have a good read and you'll see what i mean.... Check out US Focus 2.0 Vs Our 2.0 Focus
US V6 Camry Vs Aussie Aurion, you ll find other examples but ti will show you that the figures don't align...

US EPA City:


Euro Urban:




US EPA Highway




Euro Extra Urban




OK I'm done editing...

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

but I've just been adding them both and dividing by 2.

this isn't how they achieve the combined cycle figure.

[Crazy Dazz]

I hope it helps with Falcon sales, but I can't understand why you'd buy a EB4 Falcon over a Mondeo with the same engine?