diesel falcon

[Bolly47]

Did Ford Australia built couple of ford falcon with fitted secretly fit with 4 cylinders or V6 diesel engine as experiment some where in 2007-9 can anyone can confirm if is true or not

[FairmontGS]

https://performancedrive.com.au/top-...programs-1901/

[Vesper Martini]

At the time this is what Ford Ford Thought:

"There isn't the same strong customer need and want -- and it's not on the radar of customers who are really asking us about what they want from Falcon in the future. A diesel powertrain is not top of people's lists for a large sedan, it is for a medium SUV."

Instead they made Falcons with EcoBoost and LPI LPG system

https://www.carsales.com.au/editoria...-diesel-19683/

[Swordie]

I thought EcoBoost had a strong influence from the Rudd Government. I think they provided subsidies for Ford to introduce the EcoBoost.

Consumer demand was a strong driver of demand for diesel Territorys. There was allot demand fo Territorys.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Swordie

I thought EcoBoost had a strong influence from the Rudd Government. I think they provided subsidies for Ford to introduce the EcoBoost.

Consumer demand was a strong driver of demand for diesel Territorys. There was allot demand fo Territorys.

From memory $40M to both manufacturers under some 'green local car' incentive.

Holden turned on flex fuel and Ford put the Ecoboost in the Falcon.

[Polyal]

I remember crowing on about it as the time, car made sense to me (much like 5 series and E series TDi).

Would have been able to not bother with ecoboost which never really took off and gas just never got their no matter how low the running costs are. Diesel is plentiful, people are familiar with it etc.

Would love a FGX G6 TDI for a daily.

[Bossxr8]

I would not be surprised if they had a few 2.7 TDV6 FG mules running around. They trial things like this from time to time.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

From memory $40M to both manufacturers under some 'green local car' incentive.

Holden turned on flex fuel and Ford put the Ecoboost in the Falcon.

And what a rort that was! In no way did it cost Ford and GM $40M for those two programs, a large percentage of that money would have simply flowed back to Detroit.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that Ford and Holden at the time were trying new things to keep buyer interest, and the flow on to the jobs it would in theory have maintained. And I know developing even small changes is expensive. But, the Flex fuel stuff already existed on GM powertrains, all they did was add the parts to Holden spec engines and cars. The EcoBoost engine was already earmarked for RWD platforms at Jaguar, with ZF gearboxes, so the cost of development would have centered around calibration and crash testing.

A lot of creative bookkeeping went on during that whole era.

[DFB FGXR6]

Also, a diesel Falcon made no sense........in the sedan anyway.

Falcon sedan was a fleet whore, where the cheapest overall cost was key. An expensive diesel engine did not factor. Also, the torque of the I6, in petrol or LPG, was already diesel like. The sedan was otherwise bought at the top end via the XR and FPV lines, as in high performance engines. A diesel is not that.

On the Ute though, perhaps diesel would have been a good idea. But then again, the market was changing away from single cab Utes, a diesel engine would have simply taken away from the more profitable I6 engine sales.

Although it would have been an interesting idea, Ford were already very generous with the variety of powertrains they offered on Falcon. At one point they offered all of the following -

Ecoboost 4 cylinder (Auto)

I6 Petrol 6 cylinder (Man or Auto)
I6 LPG 6 cylinder (Auto)
I6 Turbo 270 (Man or Auto)
I6 Turbo 310 (Man or Auto)

5.0 V8 315 (Man or Auto)
5.0 V8 335 (Man or Auto)

That's 12 different powertrain variations on a vehicle who's sales were nosediving at the time.

A diesel too? Where would it have fitted?

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

And what a rort that was! In no way did it cost Ford and GM $40M for those two programs, a large percentage of that money would have simply flowed back to Detroit.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that Ford and Holden at the time were trying new things to keep buyer interest, and the flow on to the jobs it would in theory have maintained. And I know developing even small changes is expensive. But, the Flex fuel stuff already existed on GM powertrains, all they did was add the parts to Holden spec engines and cars. The EcoBoost engine was already earmarked for RWD platforms at Jaguar, with ZF gearboxes, so the cost of development would have centered around calibration and crash testing.

A lot of creative bookkeeping went on during that whole era.

I can see that making sense for Holden, all they did was tune their engines for E85 and emissions test it. Which would have been easy to get a pass from. Fairly simple.

But adding a new powertrain isn't a cheap exercise. You have to make it fit, then do all the calibration work on it, emissions testing, and then crash testing, which alone runs into the millions of dollars. Then you have to worry about NVH, which being a direct injection engine actually required a fair bit of work due to the diesel like noise from the injectors, and then you have dynamic work to be done due to the lighter engine sitting further back over the front wheels, then ABS/DSC recalibration and durability testing. $40 million easily in all that. Quite a lot of work.

Holden didn't even have to do half of that.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

Also, a diesel Falcon made no sense........in the sedan anyway.

Falcon sedan was a fleet whore, where the cheapest overall cost was key. An expensive diesel engine did not factor. Also, the torque of the I6, in petrol or LPG, was already diesel like. The sedan was otherwise bought at the top end via the XR and FPV lines, as in high performance engines. A diesel is not that.

On the Ute though, perhaps diesel would have been a good idea. But then again, the market was changing away from single cab Utes, a diesel engine would have simply taken away from the more profitable I6 engine sales.

Although it would have been an interesting idea, Ford were already very generous with the variety of powertrains they offered on Falcon. At one point they offered all of the following -

Ecoboost 4 cylinder (Auto)

I6 Petrol 6 cylinder (Man or Auto)
I6 LPG 6 cylinder (Auto)
I6 Turbo 270 (Man or Auto)
I6 Turbo 310 (Man or Auto)

5.0 V8 315 (Man or Auto)
5.0 V8 335 (Man or Auto)

That's 12 different powertrain variations on a vehicle who's sales were nosediving at the time.

A diesel too? Where would it have fitted?

IMO, a TDI falcon would have been good for the country folk as diesel supply is more consistent.

Also I believe the fuel consumption would have been better for a daily than the I6...the I6 drinks like a fish around town. Hence why it would popular in the Territory.

I dont have the sale numbers but it would be interesting to see how many petrol vs diesel Territory's were sold once TDI was available.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

Also, a diesel Falcon made no sense........in the sedan anyway.

Falcon sedan was a fleet whore, where the cheapest overall cost was key. An expensive diesel engine did not factor. Also, the torque of the I6, in petrol or LPG, was already diesel like. The sedan was otherwise bought at the top end via the XR and FPV lines, as in high performance engines. A diesel is not that.

On the Ute though, perhaps diesel would have been a good idea. But then again, the market was changing away from single cab Utes, a diesel engine would have simply taken away from the more profitable I6 engine sales.

Although it would have been an interesting idea, Ford were already very generous with the variety of powertrains they offered on Falcon. At one point they offered all of the following -

Ecoboost 4 cylinder (Auto)

I6 Petrol 6 cylinder (Man or Auto)
I6 LPG 6 cylinder (Auto)
I6 Turbo 270 (Man or Auto)
I6 Turbo 310 (Man or Auto)

5.0 V8 315 (Man or Auto)
5.0 V8 335 (Man or Auto)

That's 12 different powertrain variations on a vehicle who's sales were nosediving at the time.

A diesel too? Where would it have fitted?

From the article I posted the Diesel would have had to be "instead of" which would have meant closing down production of the Barra & Geelong engine plant..
Imagine that

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by Polyal

IMO, a TDI falcon would have been good for the country folk as diesel supply is more consistent.

Also I believe the fuel consumption would have been better for a daily than the I6...the I6 drinks like a fish around town. Hence why it would popular in the Territory.

I dont have the sale numbers but it would be interesting to see how many petrol vs diesel Territory's were sold once TDI was available.

Personally I would have purchased a diesel Falcon over the petrol based on my own experiences with territory.
bugger all Petrol Territory's were sold towards the end, I think they cost around 2 grand more for the Diesel too

To compare for the Falcon an 08 XF Jag with the same 2.7 diesel delivers 7.5L/100 average

[Franco Cozzo]

I reckon the biggest travesty was the work done to put the diesel in the Territory in the early 00s, then the clown they had as a CEO pulled the rug out at the last second.

Then by the time the diesel engine went back into the Territory it ended up with some thousand year old JLR diesel version of the 3.8L Buick

140KW/440NM or something which is a **** to drive because of the torque tags, nothing nothing nothing nothing nothing then everything at the roundabout.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

I reckon the biggest travesty was the work done to put the diesel in the Territory in the early 00s, then the clown they had as a CEO pulled the rug out at the last second.

Then by the time the diesel engine went back into the Territory it ended up with some thousand year old JLR diesel version of the 3.8L Buick

140KW/440NM or something which is a **** to drive because of the torque tags, nothing nothing nothing nothing nothing then everything at the roundabout.

That would have been Tom Gorman.......



Gorman rode on the tails of success setup by Geoff Polites. As the freshness of the BA Falcon started to wane and sales begun to taper then fall, he copped the blame.

At the end of the day, his ability to manage Ford Australia ended up in the hands of the US executives, he was simply the puppet tasked with acting out their directives.

It's telling that, like many before and after him, Gormon left the Ford Motor Company after his stint in Australia.

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

And what a rort that was! In no way did it cost Ford and GM $40M for those two programs, a large percentage of that money would have simply flowed back to Detroit.

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that Ford and Holden at the time were trying new things to keep buyer interest, and the flow on to the jobs it would in theory have maintained. And I know developing even small changes is expensive. But, the Flex fuel stuff already existed on GM powertrains, all they did was add the parts to Holden spec engines and cars. The EcoBoost engine was already earmarked for RWD platforms at Jaguar, with ZF gearboxes, so the cost of development would have centered around calibration and crash testing.

A lot of creative bookkeeping went on during that whole era.

They did the 4cyl Falcon because they were assured by the Government that their fleets would purchase it as they had a 4cyl only policy.
The sales never eventuated.
They all bought 4cyl suvs instead, and Territory didn't get a look in because despite being Australian, wasn't 4cyl.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Polyal

IMO, a TDI falcon would have been good for the country folk as diesel supply is more consistent.

Also I believe the fuel consumption would have been better for a daily than the I6...the I6 drinks like a fish around town. Hence why it would popular in the Territory.

I dont have the sale numbers but it would be interesting to see how many petrol vs diesel Territory's were sold once TDI was available.

A more accurate measure might be how many diesel 5 series, E Class, A6s were sold compared to the 6 cylinder petrols.
Diesel in those cars are a more compelling case, as all of those 6 cylinder petrols have no torque, unlike the Barra.
Looking at used sales, there’s bugger all diesels compared to petrols. Which would say no one wanted diesel sedans with negligible fuel savings.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

140KW/440NM or something which is a **** to drive because of the torque tags, nothing nothing nothing nothing nothing then everything at the roundabout.

That’s still comparable to most of the over priced Thai specials 15 years on.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by smoo

That’s still comparable to most of the over priced Thai specials 15 years on.

Not to mention the lovely 70-Series Landcruiser V8!

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I can see that making sense for Holden, all they did was tune their engines for E85 and emissions test it. Which would have been easy to get a pass from. Fairly simple.

But adding a new powertrain isn't a cheap exercise. You have to make it fit, then do all the calibration work on it, emissions testing, and then crash testing, which alone runs into the millions of dollars. Then you have to worry about NVH, which being a direct injection engine actually required a fair bit of work due to the diesel like noise from the injectors, and then you have dynamic work to be done due to the lighter engine sitting further back over the front wheels, then ABS/DSC recalibration and durability testing. $40 million easily in all that. Quite a lot of work.

Holden didn't even have to do half of that.

Nonsense! Holden introduced entirely new engines with direct injection. E85 or not, the new engines were far more fuel efficient.

New transmissions, new diff ratios, new exhaust & mounts, extra noise insulation. Direct injection engines are noisy like Diesels.

Dr Terry

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Dr Terry

Nonsense! Holden introduced entirely new engines with direct injection. E85 or not, the new engines were far more fuel efficient.

New transmissions, new diff ratios, new exhaust & mounts, extra noise insulation. Direct injection engines are noisy like Diesels.

Dr Terry

The only change they made was go from the L98 to the L77 with the V8

They've had AFM/DOD engines since the VZ with the L76, it had all the hardware it just never used the software side of it, then they went to L98 with the VE, which is the same engine minus the DOD/AFM hardware, when the grants came along they put the ethanol content sensor in and enabled it in software and they changed to L77 with the VEII which has all the DOD/AFM hardware and enabled it in software, it has a different cam and lifters to the older L76, thats it.

So they did virtually **** all with the V8 VEII E85 cars under the bonnet.

They introduced the LFX or what ever it is called with the VEII, thats only the 6 cylinder cars, there was no significant changes to the V8 cars.

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

And what a rort that was! In no way did it cost Ford and GM $40M for those two programs, a large percentage of that money would have simply flowed back to Detroit.

A lot of creative bookkeeping went on during that whole era.

An even larger percentage went to some of the overpaid workers sat the time.

Don't get me wrong, not all of the workers were overpaid, but many had trouble adjusting to more realistic wages after he factory closed down.

The simple fact was that the Australian automotive industry was totally uncompetitive in that era. Both Ford & GMH needed that money big time.

Dr Terry

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Dr Terry

An even larger percentage went to some of the overpaid workers sat the time.

Don't get me wrong, not all of the workers were overpaid, but many had trouble adjusting to more realistic wages after he factory closed down.

The simple fact was that the Australian automotive industry was totally uncompetitive in that era. Both Ford & GMH needed that money big time.

Dr Terry

Unless they're paying paid a bowl of rice a month, you will never compete with labour costs of Thailand, end of story.

Curious to what the guys who worked on the production line were paid, do we have any Ford Australia employees who worked in non skilled labour roles with Ford Australia? What were you getting paid if you don't mind divulging.

The irony is Chinese labour is now more expensive than Mexican labour, which has higher skills and is cheaper.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by Dr Terry

Nonsense! Holden introduced entirely new engines with direct injection. E85 or not, the new engines were far more fuel efficient.

New transmissions, new diff ratios, new exhaust & mounts, extra noise insulation. Direct injection engines are noisy like Diesels.

Dr Terry

Not really entirely new engines, all of that engineering was done by GM for other markets, Holden were already making direct injection versions of the HFV6 for other GM partners. And the V8's were just crate engines from the US. All Holden did was calibrate them for the local cars.

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

The only change they made was go from the L98 to the L77 with the V8

They've had AFM/DOD engines since the VZ with the L76, it had all the hardware it just never used the software side of it, then they went to L98 with the VE, which is the same engine minus the DOD/AFM hardware, when the grants came along they put the ethanol content sensor in and enabled it in software and they changed to L77 with the VEII which has all the DOD/AFM hardware and enabled it in software.

So they did virtually **** all with the V8 VEII E85 cars.

They introduced the LFX or what ever it is called with the VEII, thats only the 6 cylinder cars, there was no significant changes to the V8 cars.

The V8s weren't their big sellers, they just introduced the L77 (E85) upgrade as you have correctly said.

The V6s were their main game, just like the Fords. The LE0 & LY7 Alloytec V6s which had been around since the VZ days (beginning 2004) were replaced by the LF1 & LLT (3.0 & 3.6) SIDI (Direct Injection) engines for MY10 & then by the E85 versions, LFW & LFX (3.0 & 3.6) for Series II (MY11). These engine upgrades required as much work (if not more) than Ford going from AU to BA.

Dr Terry

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

Not really entirely new engines, all of that engineering was done by GM for other markets, Holden were already making direct injection versions of the HFV6 for other GM partners. And the V8's were just crate engines from the US. All Holden did was calibrate them for the local cars.

Correct, but all of the engineering for RWD cars was done here by GMH.

Also the main "engineering" required was adapting the engine to the chassis, just like Ford did with Diesel Territory. It wasn't just "calibration".

Dr Terry

[XR Martin]

Originally Posted by Dr Terry

The V8s weren't their big sellers, they just introduced the L77 (E85) upgrade as you have correctly said.

The V6s were their main game, just like the Fords. The LE0 & LY7 Alloytec V6s which had been around since the VZ days (beginning 2004) were replaced by the LF1 & LLT (3.0 & 3.6) SIDI (Direct Injection) engines for MY10 & then by the E85 versions, LFW & LFX (3.0 & 3.6) for Series II (MY11). These engine upgrades required as much work (if not more) than Ford going from AU to BA.

Dr Terry

V8s accounted for 30% in the VE days, and at the end was around 50%.

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Unless they're paying paid a bowl of rice a month, you will never compete with labour costs of Thailand, end of story.

Curious to what the guys who worked on the production line were paid, do we have any Ford Australia employees who worked in non skilled labour roles with Ford Australia? What were you getting paid if you don't mind divulging.

The irony is Chinese labour is now more expensive than Mexican labour, which has higher skills and is cheaper.

I'm not talking about the old "bowl of rice" workers in Asia.

I don't know real up to date figures, but I'm willing to bet that the average "unskilled" production line worker in the USA (read UAW member) earned substantially less than those on the Aussie production line.

Dr Terry

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by XR Martin

V8s accounted for 30% in the VE days, and at the end was around 50%.

The V6 is an absolute boat anchor, the last good V6 out of GM was the Ecotec - thats why I reckon the V8 was so successful for Holden and not so much for Ford.

That and the XR6 Turbo made the 5.4L 4V look like a turd rolled in glitter, it wasn't until the Miami came around that the V8 held its own.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Dr Terry

I'm not talking about the old "bowl of rice" workers in Asia.

I don't know real up to date figures, but I'm willing to bet that the average "unskilled" production line worker in the USA (read UAW member) earned substantially less than those on the Aussie production line.

Dr Terry

You're still comparing apples with Durians when you're talking US wages and Australian wages - the minimum wage in the US is like $7/hour and if you work hospitality its like $2/hour and they rely on tips.

Out of curiosity whats wages like in Japan and Germany's manufacturing industry?