First Drive: Falcon Ecoboost

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by mik

perhaps it was in the too hard basket to bring so much new stuff in all at once, with the new engines and other upgrades on other models.

I don't think your read correctly, the variable ratio Bishop steering rack, also used by Mercedes, was introduced on FG, but it has been deleted on FGII, with it now using a fixed ratio rack.

It could have just continued on un-touched for FGII, but its more than likely it was deleted to save on costs.

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I don't think your read correctly, the variable ratio Bishop steering rack, also used by Mercedes, was introduced on FG, but it has been deleted on FGII, with it now using a fixed ratio rack.

It could have just continued on un-touched for FGII, but its more than likely it was deleted to save on costs.

Do you know if the variable type is not compatible with EPAS, or, would EPAS make the variable type redundant? Or neither?

[mik]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I don't think your read correctly, the variable ratio Bishop steering rack, also used by Mercedes, was introduced on FG, but it has been deleted on FGII, with it now using a fixed ratio rack.

It could have just continued on un-touched for FGII, but its more than likely it was deleted to save on costs.

i get that a fair bit mate , they will be carting me off soon

[TMC]

I can't wait to test drive one of these gutsy 4cyl Falcons. Will they be putting the 3.5L V6 Ecoboost into the Falcon? If it's a good as the figures show, this will be a great engine for the performance derived Falcons, and dare I say it Territory of the future. I still reckon FPV should do a Territory, but with the 3.5L Ecoboost.

Any V8 Ecoboosts on the cards??????????? Would that have the power and torque of a V12 Merlin engine. Gearbox gutting power that would be.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by TMC

I can't wait to test drive one of these gutsy 4cyl Falcons. Will they be putting the 3.5L V6 Ecoboost into the Falcon? If it's a good as the figures show, this will be a great engine for the performance derived Falcons, and dare I say it Territory of the future. I still reckon FPV should do a Territory, but with the 3.5L Ecoboost.

Any V8 Ecoboosts on the cards??????????? Would that have the power and torque of a V12 Merlin engine. Gearbox gutting power that would be.

1) The V6 Falcon started under Tom Gorman was to use the RWD 3.7 V6 now available in Mustang and F150
2) To make the V6 fit, the inner spring aprons were reworked and a bonnet bulge was needed.

3) V8 Ecoboost was looked at but cancelled in favor of 6.7 V8 diesel for Super Duty F trucks.
Given the poor showing of the 6.2 V8, the Ecoboost v6 may well replace it in Super Duty
a S/C 5.0 V8 may be a more cost effective alternative to the 6.7 V8 diesel..Time will tell..

An interesting point to ponder,
if FoA had killed the I-6 Ford USA were not going to give us the Ecoboost V6 so
our XR6T and G6ET would have been replaced by NA 5.0 v8 giving XR8 and G8E.

Swings and roundabouts...

[TMC]

Originally Posted by jpd80

1) The V6 Falcon started under Tom Gorman was to use the RWD 3.7 V6 now available in Mustang and F150
2) To make the V6 fit, the inner spring aprons were reworked and a bonnet bulge was needed.

3) V8 Ecoboost was looked at but cancelled in favor of 6.7 V8 diesel for Super Duty F trucks.
Given the poor showing of the 6.2 V8, the Ecoboost v6 may well replace it in Super Duty
a S/C 5.0 V8 may be a more cost effective alternative to the 6.7 V8 diesel..Time will tell..

An interesting point to ponder,
if FoA had killed the I-6 Ford USA were not going to give us the Ecoboost V6 so
our XR6T and G6ET would have been replaced by NA 5.0 v8 giving XR8 and G8E.

Swings and roundabouts...

This is just a thought. Why can't the I6 be developed with Ecoboost technology. Destroke it back to 3 inches to get economy, thereby reducing it's cubic capacity(to around 3.1L), use a longer conrod to retain deck height, which will reduce any sideways vibration harmonics ensuring even longer bearing life etc and due to the reduced stroke would be able to use smaller counterweights lightening the whole reciprocating mass, turbocharge it and direct inject it. Only half the number of camshafts, phasers, and turbo's than the V6 Ecoboost. While your at it lighten the whole thing up. It keeps the I6 configuration (which people are more accustomed to in a Falcon) and that engine would be one hell of a goer, with torque and more revability than the current I6. I think people would take to that much easier than a 4cyl Falcon. I think the 4cyl Falcon stigma will be hard to shift. Imagine all the Holden fanatics bagging it.

[TMC]

Found this on Youtube. Basically a Ford USA advert for the 3.5L V6 Ecoboost in the F150. These Ecoboost motors are amazing. I think the 3.5L V6 would be overkill for the likes of the Territory, but I'd still love to drive a 3.5L V6 Ecoboost Falcon or Territory. Those things would hammer. They'd also pull a house down with ease.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw1zdFZwlLU

[flappist]

Originally Posted by TMC

This is just a thought. Why can't the I6 be developed with Ecoboost technology. Destroke it back to 3 inches to get economy, thereby reducing it's cubic capacity(to around 3.1L), but turbocharge it and direct inject it. Only half the number of camshafts, phasers, and turbo's than the V6 Ecoboost. While your at it lighten the whole thing up. It keeps the I6 configuration (which people are more accustomed to in a Falcon) and that engine would be one hell of a goer, with torque and more revability than the current I6. I think people would take to that much easier than a 4cyl Falcon. I think the 4cyl Falcon stigma will be hard to shift. Imagine all the Holden fanatics bagging it.

You do realise that the majority of 6 cylinder Falcon drivers think it is a V6 rather than an I6 and really do not care either way.

Why spend $gazillions developing what would be almost a completely new engine for what is really a tiny market when there is one available out of the box?

There was once a time when most of our engines were home grown. Now all of holden and apart from the I6 all of Ford are imports. The I6 has survived so long purely because it really has not changed much in over 20 years with just a bit of mucking about with computers and a changed head config about 10 years ago.

[FGII-XR6]

looks good for the ecoboost falcon but I personally don't think it is for me. plenty of potential for fleet sales and greenies though. also the young who haven't been spoilt by the tourquy I6 in the falcon would find it attractive.
I'm sure many of you would agree there is something special about the falcon I6 that we don't want to give up
the legacy of the starfire commodore may hamper sales but it was a long time ago and there enough buyers young enough to not know about this disaster

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by TMC

This is just a thought. Why can't the I6 be developed with Ecoboost technology. Destroke it back to 3 inches to get economy, thereby reducing it's cubic capacity(to around 3.1L), use a longer conrod to retain deck height, which will reduce any sideways vibration harmonics ensuring even longer bearing life etc and due to the reduced stroke would be able to use smaller counterweights lightening the whole reciprocating mass, turbocharge it and direct inject it. Only half the number of camshafts, phasers, and turbo's than the V6 Ecoboost. While your at it lighten the whole thing up. It keeps the I6 configuration (which people are more accustomed to in a Falcon) and that engine would be one hell of a goer, with torque and more revability than the current I6. I think people would take to that much easier than a 4cyl Falcon. I think the 4cyl Falcon stigma will be hard to shift. Imagine all the Holden fanatics bagging it.

Short answer = no money in the tin.
Unless you have a valid business case and the budget for doing a unique low production
volume engine then FoA is compelled to use the existing I-6 or global engines it is.

The problem with doing basically a DI 3.0 I-6 that becomes an Ecoboost I-6
is that it really doesn't change the falcon's image, an Ecoboost I-4 allows Ford
the license to do that whilst retaining all the virtues and existing 4.0 I-6 customer base,
they need to amortize the costs associated with developments on current engines
before prematurely replacing them which is what happens when you offer an alternative
perceived as better by the customer. It's a game of chess and the pieces have to be
moved in a planned coordinated fashion to allow continued funding and the best bang for bucks.

The worst thing you could do is introduce a V6 diesel Falcon, people point to being
an expensive flop but what would be even worse is if it was a roaring success and killed
the I-6 and that plant that makes it long before Ford is ready to make changes.
You may get that 6 litre/100km Falcon but IMO, it would come at a hell of a price.....

Until a decision is made on the post 2015 car Falcon is on bread and water,
heck, they couldn't even afford EPASS , voice recognition, self park, active cruise and lane control.
All of those are IMO far more desirable than using the money for another local engine...(at this point)

Engine development relies on government funding, if Ford could convince the pollies
that your 3.0 DI engine was a more fuel efficient engine that could also be turboed,
they may spit some cash for it but not until the next car is decided....

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Do you know if the variable type is not compatible with EPAS, or, would EPAS make the variable type redundant? Or neither?

I'd assume EPAS would make it redundant, because its all computer controlled you can change the way the steering is weighted or how it reacts over a whole range of different driving conditions. The variable ratio does a similar thing, makes the steering react differently at off centre all the way to full lock, the ratio changes the further the wheel is turned I believe. EPAS would just do it electronically and with a greater range of variance.

Originally Posted by TMC

This is just a thought. Why can't the I6 be developed with Ecoboost technology. Destroke it back to 3 inches to get economy, thereby reducing it's cubic capacity(to around 3.1L), use a longer conrod to retain deck height, which will reduce any sideways vibration harmonics ensuring even longer bearing life etc and due to the reduced stroke would be able to use smaller counterweights lightening the whole reciprocating mass, turbocharge it and direct inject it. Only half the number of camshafts, phasers, and turbo's than the V6 Ecoboost. While your at it lighten the whole thing up. It keeps the I6 configuration (which people are more accustomed to in a Falcon) and that engine would be one hell of a goer, with torque and more revability than the current I6. I think people would take to that much easier than a 4cyl Falcon. I think the 4cyl Falcon stigma will be hard to shift. Imagine all the Holden fanatics bagging it.

There's no reason why Ecoboost couldn't adopted for I6, Ford has the patents on it, and it mostly revolves around turbocharging, DI and variable cam timing. Higher compression than normal turbo engines and lots of work on knock control are the keys to it. All Falcon would need is DI, and they have tested it on I6, but I don't know if it will ever make production.

In theory if they went DI, the XR6 Turbo could be ecoboost if they follow the procedure that Ford use to create an Ecoboost variant. I assume anyway.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I'd assume EPAS would make it redundant, because its all computer controlled you can change the way the steering is weighted or how it reacts over a whole range of different driving conditions. The variable ratio does a similar thing, makes the steering react differently at off centre all the way to full lock, the ratio changes the further the wheel is turned I believe. EPAS would just do it electronically and with a greater range of variance.



There's no reason why Ecoboost couldn't adopted for I6, Ford has the patents on it, and it mostly revolves around turbocharging, DI and variable cam timing. Higher compression than normal turbo engines and lots of work on knock control are the keys to it. All Falcon would need is DI, and they have tested it on I6, but I don't know if it will ever make production.

In theory if they went DI, the XR6 Turbo could be ecoboost if they follow the procedure that Ford use to create an Ecoboost variant. I assume anyway.

What would be the point? Ford would have to spend millions just to give it the same kind of internals that the 3.5 V6 has to match its durability and longevity. Why spend all that money when it already has the engine to do the job?

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by chevypower

Ford would have to spend millions just to give it the same kind of internals that the 3.5 V6 has to match its durability and longevity.

Umm, what? The internals of the I6 have proven over years of service, abuse and high HP applications that the engine has no issues with durability and longevity, and doesnt need anything to "match" the 3.5 which is still yet to prove itself in the real world over years of use and abuse.

Also, BossXR8, have you seen a test mule I6 with DI??

[XR Martin]

Im a fan of the I6, but id be surprised if it could take the abuse that the ecoboost did in these torture tests. (make sure you see all the episodes)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4X_INCEzqo

[TMC]

Watched the entire 3.5L Ecoboost F150 Torture test series and those motors are awesome. I want one NOW.

Holden should be really worried. Ford Australia better hurry up and get it over here and start advertising it like crazy.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Umm, what? The internals of the I6 have proven over years of service, abuse and high HP applications that the engine has no issues with durability and longevity, and doesnt need anything to "match" the 3.5 which is still yet to prove itself in the real world over years of use and abuse.

Also, BossXR8, have you seen a test mule I6 with DI??

It wasn't built from the ground-up as a truck engine, like the 3.5 was. The I-6 has been fine because it has been used as a Falcon engine, not as an F-150 engine that can pull 5 tonnes all day, every day.
Do you think you can slap on a direct injection system, and it will conquer the same torture tests that the 3.5 went through?

I'm not saying the I-6 is a weak motor. I am just saying that it wasn't purpose-built for durability to the same degree that the 3.5 EB was.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by chevypower

I'm not saying the I-6 is a weak motor. I am just saying that it wasn't purpose-built for durability to the same degree that the 3.5 EB was.

It's all good.
Falcon is a budget engine, it only gets a fraction of the funding corporate engines and at
some stage in the future when it suits Ford, we will get a raft of great plug and play engines.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Umm, what? The internals of the I6 have proven over years of service, abuse and high HP applications that the engine has no issues with durability and longevity, and doesnt need anything to "match" the 3.5 which is still yet to prove itself in the real world over years of use and abuse.

Also, BossXR8, have you seen a test mule I6 with DI??

I haven't seen them but I know they exist, and have been pieced together to test. Don't know if its gone any further than that though, but it's proven its possible.

Originally Posted by chevypower

It wasn't built from the ground-up as a truck engine, like the 3.5 was. The I-6 has been fine because it has been used as a Falcon engine, not as an F-150 engine that can pull 5 tonnes all day, every day.
Do you think you can slap on a direct injection system, and it will conquer the same torture tests that the 3.5 went through?

I'm not saying the I-6 is a weak motor. I am just saying that it wasn't purpose-built for durability to the same degree that the 3.5 EB was.

I6 has to pass the same torturous durability tests as every other Ford engine has too. I would gaurantee it could do anything the EB V6 could do. And some of those tests in the videos Ford posted have already been done with I6, the dyno ones anyway.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I haven't seen them but I know they exist, and have been pieced together to test. Don't know if its gone any further than that though, but it's proven its possible.

Hmm.

Graziano did say there was a final update planned for E8 in 2013. Could this be part of it I wonder?

Then again, if the Ecoboost option takes off, they couldnt justify the $$$ for such a small volume of I6 motors sold (assuming the EB4 takes the role of the I6 in the 'cooking models' lineup).

[Franco Cozzo]

I reckon that Ford torture test is BS, especially the last test, they'd need to do so much work to get an engine running properly in regards to wiring/ECU work/programming to get it to run in another car without any issues and running normally.

It was done by Ford and advertised by them so theres some bias there for sure.

They should let a 3rd party do the testing.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Hmm.

Graziano did say there was a final update planned for E8 in 2013. Could this be part of it I wonder?

Then again, if the Ecoboost option takes off, they couldnt justify the $$$ for such a small volume of I6 motors sold (assuming the EB4 takes the role of the I6 in the 'cooking models' lineup).

It will come down to cost. If they could do it without spending too much and it provides what they want from from it it may happen, but I think it will be expensive and they won't be able to justify the costs involved.

Its the same as the EA twin cam engines, prototypes were designed and built, but the SOHC version provided all they wanted/needed and it was cheaper, so it was put on the shelf.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Hmm.

Graziano did say there was a final update planned for E8 in 2013. Could this be part of it I wonder?

Then again, if the Ecoboost option takes off, they couldnt justify the $$$ for such a small volume of I6 motors sold (assuming the EB4 takes the role of the I6 in the 'cooking models' lineup).

They could if it was part of meeting EURO 5 and an undertaking to further develop the I-6 in the post 2015 car,
approval and grants for that would have to be received this year which apparently the government is doing,

There's approx $20 million for E8 next year(2012) from the government, it was posted in a copy of a 2006 hansard
when Howard government approved it....maybe that is for something interesting in FG III......


but of course the Falcon is dying and no money is being spent......that's sarcasm btw

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I reckon that Ford torture test is BS, especially the last test, they'd need to do so much work to get an engine running properly in regards to wiring/ECU work/programming to get it to run in another car without any issues and running normally.

Rubbish, it's a Ford sponsored truck running a 6.2 and Ford ECU, the switch and hook up consists of
basically bolting the engine in hooking up all lines and changing the ECU to the one in the original truck
It's that easy.

It was done by Ford and advertised by them so theres some bias there for sure.
They should let a 3rd party do the testing.

It's called advertising and why should Holden corner the market on shameless self promotion
maybe it's time Ford did something similar in full glare of the public media, catch the imagination ....
2.0 Ecoboost in T6 Ranger and go give it pigs you know what......

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Rubbish, it's a Ford sponsored truck running a 6.2 and Ford ECU, the switch and hook up consists of
basically bolting the engine in hooking up all lines and changing the ECU to the one in the original truck
It's that easy.


It's called advertising and why should Holden corner the market on shameless self promotion ....

I call BS on the logging one too, if something with like 400ftlb of torque could pull those logs up that hill without issue, why aren't they using pickup trucks instead of a big-***, expensive, diesel skidders which probably costs as much as 10 F150s.

NA V8 to TT V6, all the wiring involved, exhaust work etc, yeah its possible, but we live in the world of probable.

Give it to me for a week, $100 says I can break it before you can say 160,000 equvilent miles of total bull excriment.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I call BS on the logging one too, if something with like 400ftlb of torque could pull those logs up that hill without issue, why aren't they using pickup trucks instead of a big-***, expensive, diesel skidders which probably costs as much as 10 F150s..

It's the similar to this: All new Ranger tows steam locomotive...

Sure you can get one log up a hill crawling but it just not commercially sound to do it
and yes I doubt you could do it continuously without trouble...

It's called advertising....

NA V8 to TT V6, all the wiring involved, exhaust work etc, yeah its possible, but we live in the world of probable.

Especially when you have a team of Ford engineers right there doing the job.
It's called advertising....

Give it to me for a week, $100 says I can break it before you can say 160,000 equvilent miles of total bull excriment.

Here's a clue, they're not trying to prove it's bogan proof.....

I'm not out to convince you because

It's called advertising....

[martyk54]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

Im a fan of the I6, but id be surprised if it could take the abuse that the ecoboost did in these torture tests. (make sure you see all the episodes)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4X_INCEzqo

Let us wait and see if ecoboost Taxis are still kicking after 1,000,000 kms. I6 will do it without any major work.

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by martyk54

Let us wait and see if ecoboost Taxis are still kicking after 1,000,000 kms. I6 will do it without any major work.

Taxis will be using LPi, not Ecoboost.

[Racecraft]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Taxis will be using LPi, not Ecoboost.

Not even LPi.... Hybrid or aftermarket LPG is where that market has headed....

Not to diss the LPi, but Ford were 3 years too late....

[Falc'man]

There's an advertising thread somewhere else.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by martyk54

Let us wait and see if ecoboost Taxis are still kicking after 1,000,000 kms. I6 will do it without any major work.

Think about it, taxi work is easy on engines, that's why they last forever.....