Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated.

Go Back   Australian Ford Forums > General Topics > The Pub

The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-01-2010, 07:24 PM   #61
g220ba
FGX XR8
 
g220ba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 702
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVD
persoanally id prefer to see the 5cyl out of the XR5, it wouldn't be too bad of a change for a falcon... of course with a re-work for some more torque and what not, but it could be a good thing for the falcon, so then it isn't just seen as one of those BIG family cars that drink fuel (which they dont....)
Unfortunetly thats a Vovlo motor and they and their technology appear to be going to Geely.
g220ba is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 07:28 PM   #62
galaxy xr8
Giddy up.
 
galaxy xr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Kramerica Industries.
Posts: 15,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingoTE50
And Ford should not go ahead with a turbo four ,there is no way known that current falcon drivers would even entertain the idea of buying one....
I would, I am eagerly awaiting the ecoboost to see it's performance and economy, I am one of those falcon driver's that you claim ,will not buy one, but I can assure you, it has me interested.
galaxy xr8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 07:34 PM   #63
SVD
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 84ltd
Unfortunetly thats a Vovlo motor and they and their technology appear to be going to Geely.
so whats happening to the XR5 turbo's and Focus RS?
SVD is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 07:37 PM   #64
vztrt
IWCMOGTVM Club Supporter
 
vztrt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern Suburbs Melbourne
Posts: 17,799
Valued Contributor: For members whose non technical contributions are worthy of recognition. - Issue reason: vztrt is one of the most consistent and respected contributors to AFF, I have found his contributions are most useful to discussion as well as answering members queries. 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVD
so whats happening to the XR5 turbo's and Focus RS?

5 to 4 pot.
__________________
Daniel
vztrt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 09:17 PM   #65
mik
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
mik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Melb north
Posts: 12,025
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TUF_302
My brothers old R31 Skyline gets better fuel economy from its 3ltr strait 6, and its 18 years old lol! , wonder how long there will be a 3ltr commy around lol!
mik is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 09:28 PM   #66
The G6ET Spot
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 3,412
Default

I love it that you don't get a spare wheel with it either.

It is optional
The G6ET Spot is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 09:45 PM   #67
Chilliman
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Chilliman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingoTE50
And Ford should not go ahead with a turbo four ,there is no way known that current falcon drivers would even entertain the idea of buying one....
If Ford don't get it right then they shouldn't go ahead with it, but if they do get it right (and Ford has been getting alot right lately) then it has the potential to bring alot of new buyers to the Falcon nameplate.
__________________
Quote:
From www.motortrend.com

"Torque is the new horsepower"
Chilliman is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 10:15 PM   #68
castellan
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,215
Default

A 4 CYL falcon!
Holden tried that! with the VC commo.
They were waffling on that they were going to sell more 4cyl then the 6.
But they were rubbish and were no better on fuel then a 6 in the real world driving.
The falcon is way to heavy. and a turbo 4 would be stupid.
castellan is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 10:18 PM   #69
Joe5619
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 2,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by castellan
A 4 CYL falcon!
Holden tried that! with the VC commo.
They were waffling on that they were going to sell more 4cyl then the 6.
But they were rubbish and were no better on fuel then a 6 in the real world driving.
The falcon is way to heavy. and a turbo 4 would be stupid.
Yeah, becuase technology & customer "wants" havn't changed in 20 years either!!
Joe5619 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 11-01-2010, 11:06 PM   #70
mik
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
mik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Melb north
Posts: 12,025
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by castellan
A 4 CYL falcon!
Holden tried that! with the VC commo.
They were waffling on that they were going to sell more 4cyl then the 6.
But they were rubbish and were no better on fuel then a 6 in the real world driving.
The falcon is way to heavy. and a turbo 4 would be stupid.
we`ll have to wait and see , that was then this is now.
mik is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 12:25 AM   #71
blue_ute
Regular Member
 
blue_ute's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: wa
Posts: 167
Default

i think i found what they'll use to sell their cars (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yG1-mdPn7T0)its a pro holden review but i'm confused they say it will stay in the same rev range while going up a hill isn't that a bad thing ?
blue_ute is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 08:25 AM   #72
SVTVNM
Guzzler
 
SVTVNM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Country Victoria
Posts: 539
Default

Is it just me or it seems that Holdens Commodore adverts don't seem to spruke the Economy of the SIDI engines like they used too. Backing marketing off? or just realization of a products failure to live up to it's expectations.
__________________
AUI XR8 - 250kw Herrod enhanced, 18's, lowered
1999 Mustang Cobra, Mick Webb tweaked, 18's,
1971 XYGT (replica) My first love.
SVTVNM is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 08:36 AM   #73
cosmo20btt
Fordaholic
 
cosmo20btt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 884
Default

Typical that the NRMA are just mimicking the specs straight off the GMH propaganda site, they had a dyno figure yet never mentioned what they got. Then went on to say it might suite most people, what a waste of real peoples time.
cosmo20btt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 09:13 AM   #74
Chopped
as in chopped
 
Chopped's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,991
Default

Who or what is car advice ?

http://www.caradvice.com.au/about-us/ < lol
(what a bunch of champions / seems like anyone can give car reviews / and if the people like what you wrote THEN you are the best motoring site out there.....obviously)
__________________
-> Reading this signature was pointless <-
Chopped is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 10:49 AM   #75
bingoTE50
Steve
 
bingoTE50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sth East Qld
Posts: 1,284
Default

I did say current Falcon drivers would not buy it.....

What will it achieve ? 200kw ? 8l/100 combined , Ron 98 fuel ? . What price ?- 5k cheaper ? Towing ability ? Torque lag ?
It still has to haul plenty of weight,I cannot see the point. Buy a Mondeo..
__________________
Currently no Fords . 2005 Statesman International 5.7, Mazda 2 and a Hilux.
Former Fords: 2010 Ford Escape 2007 BF11 GT, TE50 Series 1 ,AU V8 One Tonner ,EL Falcon Wagon, ED Fairmont , EB Falcon Series 1. Mk 2 Cortina
Company Fords : 3 BA Falcons , EB 11 Falcon Wagon , Ford F350 351 V8.
bingoTE50 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 01:04 PM   #76
galaxy xr8
Giddy up.
 
galaxy xr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Kramerica Industries.
Posts: 15,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by castellan
A 4 CYL falcon!
Holden tried that! with the VC commo.
They were waffling on that they were going to sell more 4cyl then the 6.
But they were rubbish and were no better on fuel then a 6 in the real world driving.
The falcon is way to heavy. and a turbo 4 would be stupid.
I think you will be very surprised, with comment's like your's, you obviously have no idea on the real world and what the Ecoboost posses, like someone has allready told you, thing's have improved somewhat since the '80's my friend, just watch this space.
galaxy xr8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 01:08 PM   #77
galaxy xr8
Giddy up.
 
galaxy xr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Kramerica Industries.
Posts: 15,639
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bingoTE50
I did say current Falcon drivers would not buy it.....

What will it achieve ? 200kw ? 8l/100 combined , Ron 98 fuel ? . What price ?- 5k cheaper ? Towing ability ? Torque lag ?
It still has to haul plenty of weight,I cannot see the point. Buy a Mondeo..
You obvioulsy missread or missed me, what do you think I am a non current falcon driver.......
I think you will be susprised at the ecoboosts potential with all the areas that you have covered.
galaxy xr8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 01:18 PM   #78
Luke Plaizier
Lukeyson
Donating Member1
 
Luke Plaizier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW
Posts: 2,584
Default

Here's a write-up on the Ecoboost 3.5V6 in the Taurus SHO.

http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor...0111-m1rp.html

I bet you that's the only time Jez will ever say anything nice about the weight of the Falcon - when it let's him say negative things about another Ford.


Lukeyson
__________________
If the human brain was simple enough to understand, we'd be too simple to understand it.
Luke Plaizier is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 03:37 PM   #79
cosmo20btt
Fordaholic
 
cosmo20btt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier
Here's a write-up on the Ecoboost 3.5V6 in the Taurus SHO.

http://news.drive.com.au/drive/motor...0111-m1rp.html




Lukeyson
Did anyone realize the weight of the Taurus? 2100kg, XR6 around 1700kg make Taurus look like a barge, yet again our Aussie version outshines the US.
cosmo20btt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 03:43 PM   #80
g220ba
FGX XR8
 
g220ba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 702
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20btt
Did anyone realize the weight of the Taurus? 2100kg, XR6 around 1700kg make Taurus look like a barge, yet again our Aussie version outshines the US.
AWD will do that to a car.
g220ba is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 03:56 PM   #81
cosmo20btt
Fordaholic
 
cosmo20btt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 84ltd
AWD will do that to a car.
To top it off Territory rwd 2005kg & 2085 kg for AWD version, this is the best part, with cast iron engine block. It does not make sense turning Australia into little yankee land. I really think people will vote with their feet if we lose what we have now, as I have said before, we have good products on the market now, Ford just has to wait till the mistakes of it's fore fathers runs it's course. GMH has made it's bed & has to lie in it for now, Toyota has found that Aussies are not interested in a large FWD as they fumble around trying to make a large FWD more appetizing as local content, Mitsubishi made a good v6 FWD & where is it now? dead & buried like the Falcon will be if released here in FWD
cosmo20btt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 04:48 PM   #82
Deco28
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 236
Default

Holden should have just detuned the 3.6l SIDI for the base models.

Check this economy out..

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/483...test-review/3/

9.6l/100km combined driving for the Statesman. Wowzers.
Deco28 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 05:11 PM   #83
Kamshaaft
Broken eBay Starter Motor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 546
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cosmo20btt
Did anyone realize the weight of the Taurus? 2100kg, XR6 around 1700kg make Taurus look like a barge, yet again our Aussie version outshines the US.
No surprise that pretty much every Yank or Canuck I've talked to that has at least some awareness of motoring has salivated all over the Falcon (particularly our XR6T & F6). A fair few of them love the Commodores too* would you believe it, especially the HSV models**. They must be desperate over there!

....That or we take our own automotive industry for granted.

*(though nowhere near the near-100% who would give their left AND their right nut for an XR6T in LHD).

**(thanks to Top Gear making the world aware of our kickass cars here I guess).
Kamshaaft is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 05:49 PM   #84
bingoTE50
Steve
 
bingoTE50's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sth East Qld
Posts: 1,284
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by galaxy xr8
You obvioulsy missread or missed me, what do you think I am a non current falcon driver.......
I think you will be susprised at the ecoboosts potential with all the areas that you have covered.
My post was not particularly aimed at yourself,more the whole concept.
Perhaps if it was the turbo diesel out of the ranger it may be more to my liking , but not 4 cyl turbo petrol.
Anyway,it looks like we won't have much choice in the near future if todays reports are correct regarding the aussie Falcon .
__________________
Currently no Fords . 2005 Statesman International 5.7, Mazda 2 and a Hilux.
Former Fords: 2010 Ford Escape 2007 BF11 GT, TE50 Series 1 ,AU V8 One Tonner ,EL Falcon Wagon, ED Fairmont , EB Falcon Series 1. Mk 2 Cortina
Company Fords : 3 BA Falcons , EB 11 Falcon Wagon , Ford F350 351 V8.
bingoTE50 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 07:03 PM   #85
Bossxr8
Peter Car
 
Bossxr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by castellan
A 4 CYL falcon!
Holden tried that! with the VC commo.
They were waffling on that they were going to sell more 4cyl then the 6.
But they were rubbish and were no better on fuel then a 6 in the real world driving.
The falcon is way to heavy. and a turbo 4 would be stupid.
All they did was cut 2 cylinders off the already gutless 202, making it essentially the same thing with a lot less power. What did they think was going to happen, it needed to be revved hard to go, and sucked the juice because it was based on the already ineffiecent 202. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see it was never going to work, but thats Holdens brilliant engineering for you.

The turbo 4 to be used in Falcon is turbo and direct injection, makes peak torque at 1500 rpm and will make over 170 kw in a car that should be somehwere between 50 and 100kg lighter than a Falcon 6. It will work brilliantly, the European Ford S Max will be around the same weight with esentially the same engine and uses less than 8 litres per 100km.
Bossxr8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 08:07 PM   #86
cosmo20btt
Fordaholic
 
cosmo20btt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossxr8
All they did was cut 2 cylinders off the already gutless 202, making it essentially the same thing with a lot less power. What did they think was going to happen, it needed to be revved hard to go, and sucked the juice because it was based on the already ineffiecent 202. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to see it was never going to work, but thats Holdens brilliant engineering for you.

The turbo 4 to be used in Falcon is turbo and direct injection, makes peak torque at 1500 rpm and will make over 170 kw in a car that should be somehwere between 50 and 100kg lighter than a Falcon 6. It will work brilliantly, the European Ford S Max will be around the same weight with esentially the same engine and uses less than 8 litres per 100km.
It may be trivial but it was toyota that made the stuff up four engine, as every engine had toyota written on the con rods,& based 0n 173 I think from memory.

Last edited by cosmo20btt; 12-01-2010 at 08:18 PM.
cosmo20btt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 08:16 PM   #87
Bossxr8
Peter Car
 
Bossxr8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
Default

Doesn't change the fact that it was absolute garbage. They would have known it was going to fail, they would have just hoped it didn't.

It was also apparently rough as guts too because cutting 2 cylinders off an I6 to make a 4, and trying to make it rev harder to bring power up from nothing to barely adequate introduced a lot of vibration problems they couldn't overcome.

Holdens brilliant engineering strikes again.
Bossxr8 is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 08:21 PM   #88
cosmo20btt
Fordaholic
 
cosmo20btt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 884
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bossxr8
Doesn't change the fact that it was absolute garbage. They would have known it was going to fail, they would have just hoped it didn't.

It was also apparently rough as guts too because cutting 2 cylinders off an I6 to make a 4, and trying to make it rev harder to bring power up from nothing to barely adequate introduced a lot of vibration problems they couldn't overcome.

Holdens brilliant engineering strikes again.
Oh right they were crap the amount of motors that I saw that just about cracked in half or blow smoke or knocked.. If I had a dollar for ever one. HEH HEH
cosmo20btt is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 09:32 PM   #89
castellan
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,215
Default

The 2.0L ecoboost is aimed for fleet.

The holden starfire 4 was a 6 cyl 173 cut down. it came out in the 1978 UC torana and was so advanced that the 1980 VC blue motor was up dated from it.
The rods in the starfire 4 are the same as the blue 173.
And they did put starfire 4 in the toyota corona.

Galaxy v8 i think if you wanted a 4CYL, why not just get the mondeo. :togo:
castellan is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Old 12-01-2010, 10:02 PM   #90
kezzer
Regular Member
 
kezzer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 489
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deco28
Holden should have just detuned the 3.6l SIDI for the base models.

Check this economy out..

http://www.themotorreport.com.au/483...test-review/3/

9.6l/100km combined driving for the Statesman. Wowzers.
Sorta of debunks this whole thread really
kezzer is offline   Reply With Quote Multi-Quote with this Post
Reply


Forum Jump


All times are GMT +11. The time now is 05:08 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Other than what is legally copyrighted by the respective owners, this site is copyright www.fordforums.com.au
Positive SSL