Fg Mk2 Online

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

look up the price of an XT.

Ford dont want to sell XT's as reflected by the dealer bonus's on them.

XT is for national fleet customers only now, its not longer an option for private / small business.

In Fords eyes XR6 is now the base model for private / small business.

Holden are doing the same with Omega, unless your a national fleet customer they are actually dearer then SV6.

[dimka100]

What makes you think the EcoBoost will have 400nm??? Ford have previously indicated they will not be going for big spec numbers, but rather they will be concentrating on fuel economy and drivability …

The 2012 Focus ST is rated at 185kw and 360nm … I see these numbers as the maximum the Falcon may be getting, but more realistically the Falcon numbers will probably be slightly lower … remember this engine is not designed to win a grand prix but rather deliver good economy with efficient drivability … with the weight of the Falcon going after big numbers means the 8ltr per 100km target will be unachievable …

Originally Posted by Redrum

Over 400nm torque

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Professor Farnsworth

look up the price of an XT.

$40,290, but as Dash GT said above dealers tend not to stock them new rather keep a number of ex-fleet in the used section. Of course when the "$28,888 oops we have had a huge order cancelled" clearouts happen they all stock up....

[mcnews]

I actually heard from a mate who is an engineer with a supplier that works closely with Ford on important parts of the vehicle that they actually have detuned the EcoBoost package a little for that exact criteria and that the test drivers were really, really surprised at how well it went.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by dimka100

What makes you think the EcoBoost will have 400nm??? Ford have previously indicated they will not be going for big spec numbers, but rather they will be concentrating on fuel economy and drivability …

The 2012 Focus ST is rated at 185kw and 360nm … I see these numbers as the maximum the Falcon may be getting, but more realistically the Falcon numbers will probably be slightly lower … remember this engine is not designed to win a grand prix but rather deliver good economy with efficient drivability … with the weight of the Falcon going after big numbers means the 8ltr per 100km target will be unachievable …

It could unknowingly become a performance option depending on what the aftermarket crew comes up with.

Considering this engine is in other Fords world wide like the new Focus ST, its not just what people here in Australia can do with their aftermarket wizzardry.

[mik]

would`nt be amusing if the little engined falc became the best handling model ever because of the weight loss/distribution factor......... GT stripes anyone .

[kocho]

I'm really looking forward to the Ecoboost Falcon. After all the reports from the States, It'll be interesting to see how it goes in the Falcon!

[dimka100]

Has the potential to be that BUT ...

A. Previous reports have indicated that Ford will most likely not introduce it in the XR range.

B. FPV will not be releasing am ore hotted up version.

So being confined to the G's and GE's its unlikely ... that is unless you fit a proper aftermarket suspension to the Falcon

Originally Posted by mik

would`nt be amusing if the little engined falc became the best handling model ever because of the weight loss/distribution factor......... GT stripes anyone .

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by mcnews

I actually heard from a mate who is an engineer with a supplier that works closely with Ford on important parts of the vehicle that they actually have detuned the EcoBoost package a little for that exact criteria and that the test drivers were really, really surprised at how well it went.

And we have yet to see the retail price on that..no doubt at all that early adopters will be bent right over... How much will the difference be between the run-out special on a normal XR6 and the retail on a new model FG2 Ecoboost, and how many hundreds of thousands of km's will they have to drive to save that difference in fuel costs ??

Oh I'll work it out just for fun:-
Maybe the retail driveaway on an Ecoboost might be something like circa $54,990 and you can buy an XR6 on run-out for $34,990, difference = $20,000, so at 2 litres per 100 km's more efficient, (estimate 7.9 litres per 100 km's for Ecoboost vs 9.9 for inline 6) and with fuel at say $1.60 = 12,500 litres / 2 x 100 = 625,000 km's divided by an average per annum of 15,000 km's motoring per annum = 41 years motoring
See what I mean by early adopters paying retail and getting bent over.

Anyone genuinely interested in low cost large car motoring will simply buy an XR6 on run-out special pricing.

[mcnews]

Fleets Rodge.... And greenies that don't care. Holden cylinder deactivation or sidi crap marketing over substance anyone....
Amazing what they can do with two litres these days, I drove a big VW Amarok 4wd in Darwin a while ago, hard to believe only two-litre engine.

[Rodge]

Trev, Fair comment about Fleet discounts but the retail customer is left paying through the nose if they want the latest new technology, that's my point.
Greenies buy hybrids, (trsut me I know I am married to one), and yes Sidi is creative marketing B.S. at its finest.

[Professor Farnsworth]

Borderline racism is not acceptable. No further chances.

[Rodge]

Because I like the latest technology but resent fleets getting big discounts early on when I can't You can't tell me that doesn't put heaps of people off. The same applies to all the new retail pricing on FG2, its just so excessive the retail customer is seriously disadvantaged.

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by dimka100

What makes you think the EcoBoost will have 400nm??? Ford have previously indicated they will not be going for big spec numbers, but rather they will be concentrating on fuel economy and drivability 

The 2012 Focus ST is rated at 185kw and 360nm  I see these numbers as the maximum the Falcon may be getting, but more realistically the Falcon numbers will probably be slightly lower  remember this engine is not designed to win a grand prix but rather deliver good economy with efficient drivability  with the weight of the Falcon going after big numbers means the 8ltr per 100km target will be unachievable 

There are a few guys that are privvy to insider info, he is one of them.
What gives you the impression more torque isn't better for economy?

[dimka100]

Well to make more power the engine needs to burn more fuel …

When looking at the same engine, and assuming the engine in the same efficiency band (i.e. you are not trying to make too little power or too much power) a lower power out figure will be more economical than a higher power output figure … that is because more power requires more air, and more air requires more fuel to burn to maintain the same air/fuel mixture … (assuming the same efficiency band tuning is applied).

The statement above may sometimes be counteracted when too little power is applied to a weight of a vehicle, hence making the higher power tune more economical, but in the Falcons case too little power is probably well below 300nm before it starts affecting economy negatively …

When looking at other current implementations of the Ecoboost I can see the Volvo XC70 being a good reference point to the Falcon as it has similar dimensions and weight to the Falcon (i.e. large car) … its economy is 8.7ltr and its power figures are 177kw and 320nm, its 4wd so there is some extra drive train loss in there … The Focus ST on the other hand will have more power and better fuel economy of 7.7ltr but it’s a much lighter FWD car …

That’s why I think the Falcon’s power will fall somewhere in between these two … unless Ford in not interested of achieving its original advertised 8ltr fuel economy targets … also don’t forget the Focus ST is tuned for premium fuel only, I would be surprised if Ford did the same for the Falcon and made it incompatible with 91.

Originally Posted by Falc'man

There are a few guys that are privvy to insider info, he is one of them.
What gives you the impression more torque isn't better for economy?

[XtRmn8]

Brochures are now on line for Mk2. Looks like Ford are holding back some info as the details and full specifications are very limited.

No rear and shots of the cars, no interior pictures etc.

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by dimka100

Well to make more power the engine needs to burn more fuel …

Not quite.

Originally Posted by dimka100

When looking at the same engine, and assuming the engine in the same efficiency band (i.e. you are not trying to make too little power or too much power) a lower power out figure will be more economical than a higher power output figure … that is because more power requires more air, and more air requires more fuel to burn to maintain the same air/fuel mixture … (assuming the same efficiency band tuning is applied).

The statement above may sometimes be counteracted when too little power is applied to a weight of a vehicle, hence making the higher power tune more economical, but in the Falcons case too little power is probably well below 300nm before it starts affecting economy negatively …

When looking at other current implementations of the Ecoboost I can see the Volvo XC70 being a good reference point to the Falcon as it has similar dimensions and weight to the Falcon (i.e. large car) … its economy is 8.7ltr and its power figures are 177kw and 320nm, its 4wd so there is some extra drive train loss in there … The Focus ST on the other hand will have more power and better fuel economy of 7.7ltr but it’s a much lighter FWD car …

That’s why I think the Falcon’s power will fall somewhere in between these two … unless Ford in not interested of achieving its original advertised 8ltr fuel economy targets … also don’t forget the Focus ST is tuned for premium fuel only, I would be surprised if Ford did the same for the Falcon and made it incompatible with 91.

Seeing this would be the first time the 2.0EB has been used in RWD - i.e., in an engine bay with more room for better flowing intake, header and exhaust design - in no way is this going to impede efficiency. Plus, if a member with a proven history suggests over 400Nm, I wouldn't be jumping out disagreeing with him. Barring all that, there's no way to know what the actual ideal rating for the Falcon would be unless you're part of the R&D team.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Not quite.

More power, for a given amount of torque, requires more revs. More revs = more fuel.

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by Rodge

And we have yet to see the retail price on that..no doubt at all that early adopters will be bent right over... How much will the difference be between the run-out special on a normal XR6 and the retail on a new model FG2 Ecoboost, and how many hundreds of thousands of km's will they have to drive to save that difference in fuel costs ??

Oh I'll work it out just for fun:-
Maybe the retail driveaway on an Ecoboost might be something like circa $54,990 and you can buy an XR6 on run-out for $34,990, difference = $20,000, so at 2 litres per 100 km's more efficient, (estimate 7.9 litres per 100 km's for Ecoboost vs 9.9 for inline 6) and with fuel at say $1.60 = 12,500 litres / 2 x 100 = 625,000 km's divided by an average per annum of 15,000 km's motoring per annum = 41 years motoring
See what I mean by early adopters paying retail and getting bent over.

Anyone genuinely interested in low cost large car motoring will simply buy an XR6 on run-out special pricing.

Why do you even bother coming to a Ford website with this attitude??

To start with, the I4 is coming out at the start out next year, all of FG1 run out models will be gone & FGII will have only been out 1-2 months, so there won’t be any 35K run out models in the market... They'll most likely come back at some stage, but by then they'll be some 4I's to add to the mix, or maybe they wont lift build rate, so between LPi, normal I6 & I4, the might not be many run-out deals for a loonng time!!!!

And people really save money on pruis???

[HSE2]

I would have thought by now we have had enough ecoboost threads. Unless I have missed something Ecoboost I4 is not part of this release i.e. FG Mk2 online.

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Because I like the latest technology but resent fleets getting big discounts...

Why would you deserve the same discount as someone who'd buy much larger quantities?

Originally Posted by b0son

More power, for a given amount of torque, requires more revs. More revs = more fuel.

You can tell how your post is irrelevant if you consider that the I6 in the FG is more economical than the previous iterations with less power.

This is about efficiency. Making more from less, or the same - If they can do so then why shouldn't they? I've shown how it's a possibility in my previous post.

[dimka100]

You right bulk buying should yield you a discount …. BUT a discount of 20 – 30 % of the RRP is a bit much and simply means you are inflating your RRP to convince the fleets you are giving them a “big discount”.

Also do not forget that the Dealers are also buying the cars in bulk (well the big dealer networks anyways) which means they will easily get the same “big discounts” from Ford just like the fleets if not better … while they will want a greater profit, they can still pass a lot of that saving back to the consumer if they wish to sell …

Ultimately the whole inflated RRP strategy just does not work … the market is not stupid and simply prices these cars at their real price which generally equals to the “big fleet discount”, otherwise private buyers simply do not buy them …

The best strategy is the one VW uses, that is fleets get Farkall discount of the RRP price (or very very little) for the majority of their models (GTI or Rspec ...) the market is happy and gladly pays RRP prices, second hand cars keep their value very well, and everyone is happy (both consumer, dealer, and manufacturer) … Ford’s strategy simply devalues their cars, keeps the private market mostly away, and does no favours to anyone.

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Why would you deserve the same discount as someone who'd buy much larger quantities?

[Joe5619]

Originally Posted by dimka100

You right bulk buying should yield you a discount …. BUT a discount of 20 – 30 % of the RRP is a bit much and simply means you are inflating your RRP to convince the fleets you are giving them a “big discount”.

How dumb do you think fleet managers are, that they'd look at "discount recieved" & not "amount paid"!!

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Joe5619

How dumb do you think fleet managers are, that they'd look at "discount recieved" & not "amount paid"!!

That plus he missed Dash GT's post on how Ford are positioning the XT. Anyway if Ford's strategies are wrong I'm pretty sure they'll consult the aff experts like they always do.

[Dr Smith]

Back on topic, and some self-interest, the MKII G6ET picks up as standard sat nav, 19" rims & alarm which were options on MK1 so that's about $4500 at rrp. Anything else?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by flappist

$40,290, but as Dash GT said above dealers tend not to stock them new rather keep a number of ex-fleet in the used section. Of course when the "$28,888 oops we have had a huge order cancelled" clearouts happen they all stock up....

I think the only time retail buyers will see an XT is when it's used as a loaded SR package,
something like that would take a bit of $36,990 price fatigue off the XR and G Series models.

Even though Ford has used discount XR to great effect, i feel that long term it's not good to do that.
A prettier XT could fill that role and allow Ford to move XR6 up a rung, but only if Holden plays ball....
Maybe start matching Holden's "International" with XT SR or even the old "Futura" badge for specials....

[PHANTMXR6]

Might be trivial to some, but rather annoying to others, but why does the FG now get called the FG MKI when it never existed?

Just because Ford have released an update and called it MKII doesn't mean the FG is now called MKI.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by PHANTMXR6

Might be trivial to some, but rather annoying to others, but why does the FG now get called the FG MKI when it never existed?

Just because Ford have released an update and called it MKII doesn't mean the FG is now called MKI.

Because that's what's happened every other time, so to avoid confusion the original becomes series 1
as in XF, EA, EB, AU, BA, BF so why should FG be any different, it will happen regardless
due to used vehicle sector taking up the nomenclature....

[prydey]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Because that's what's happened every other time, so to avoid confusion the original becomes series 1
as in XF, EA, EB, AU, BA, BF so why should FG be any different, it will happen regardless
due to used vehicle sector taking up the nomenclature....

sorry, i agree with phantmxr6.

the original is what it is. then there's a mk2/series 2 etc.

[FreddyDUZ747]

Originally Posted by PHANTMXR6

Might be trivial to some, but rather annoying to others, but why does the FG now get called the FG MKI when it never existed?

Just because Ford have released an update and called it MKII doesn't mean the FG is now called MKI.

Isnt this argumentative?