History repeating itself...

[Polyal]

Im not going to pretend I know everything that has happened in the past (born in 1982 here), but from what I understand the 1980's had a fuel crisis, along with some tougher environmental regulations that seemed to really change the automotive landscape. Lets be honest, not alot of good came from the 80's with regards to cars.

So here we are in 2011, fuel prices are tipped to be going up to record heights, our local manufacturers seem to have to bend over and comply with every new CO2 etc target that comes from Euroland, manufacturers are downsizing engines and using turbo's and even looking at downsizing their dimensions.

So whats changed? We all know life and history tends to work in cycles.

Holden seem to have moved quickly to the Cruze (camira), turbos are all the rage albeit with better injection methods, and what is Ford doing? So far in the short term investing in the Falcon.

Is this similar to the XF story, but this time they are armed with a few more tricks? We have ECOLPi, diesel and a ECOBoost on the way. Did the Cortina at the time increase its sales dramatically or did the XF stay strong?

If Ford can prove to the public that these alternatives can provide the answer to our rising living costs and still provide the functionality that we once previously enjoyed surely they are on a winner?

For those that brought during the 1980's, did you swap to a small car and then return to a large later on? Stick with what you had?

What I find curious about the medium/small car segment is that people with small families are buying into these cars. Is it purely because of running costs or the actual purchase price of the car?

Speaking from personal experience, with two small children I cant see my next purchase being any smaller than the Falcon we already have, its already full of stuff whenever we go on a trip. For daily duties I agree, we can live with a small car but as soon as you go outside that function you really need more capabilities.


I find the two strategies that GM and Ford are implementing here to be fascinating, as who knows if one does not work it would really impact their longevity as we know it.

GM seem to have heavily backed the Cruze, which I wonder long term will that work? Unsure of how much they import for it but once our dollar goes back down what will the business case look like?

The Commy has a LPG option but I have heard very little about it aswell...

Thoughts? Happy to be schooled a little here and hear what others experienced during this time.

[Mr Hardware]

Yes this is history repeating itself Polyal.
My old man in the 80's traded in his 202 torana for a camira and never did return to a six-cyl.
All I can say is the worst thing Ford could do is drop the V8. I hope it never makes that mistake again.

[bobthebilda]

The differences between fuel crisis in the past and the one we are about to go thru (and I mean over the next decade), was that previously the problems were with supply being withdrawn from the market (ie OPEC cutting off supplies), what is happening now is a a "demand=> supply" issue. No matter how much OPEC tries to pump more oil, they just wont be able to keep up with demand ( especially if all the Chinese and Indians try and live a western lifestyle)

In all honesty, for your situation, I bet if you sat down and worked it out, it is often cheaper just to have a small / medium car for the daily run around, and then to Hire a large car every time you go on big trips.

If you do 15000 K's a year at 60 kmh hour, you are only driving a car for 250 hours a year. 40 minutes a day driving, 23 hours 20 minutes sitting idle. Add in fuel costs, rego, insurance and depreciation and you probably find a taxi is a better option.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by bobthebilda

In all honesty, for your situation, I bet if you sat down and worked it out, it is often cheaper just to have a small / medium car for the daily run around, and then to Hire a large car every time you go on big trips.

If you do 15000 K's a year at 60 kmh hour, you are only driving a car for 250 hours a year. 40 minutes a day driving, 23 hours 20 minutes sitting idle. Add in fuel costs, rego, insurance and depreciation and you probably find a taxi is a better option.

Thats interesting, but kind of like the theory of renting vs a mortgage perhaps? Is owning a fully practical car really going to be such a "life choice", one in which other desires might need to take a backseat?

Without doing any calculations, the way I see it is that we could do with a SUV type car (Territory) and then a run around like a Focus/Fiesta. God knows if we decide to have another child its going to be a tight fit in anything less than a Falcon/Territory.

This is where my issue is, and perhaps in the future we will be well off enough it wont be a concern (although lowering expenses is always nice), I want to have a Falcon et al in my driving life.

If Ford can prove to me that I am no worse off by buying a falcon instead of a small car then there is no risk on my end. I think this is were Ford really need to step up since they have invested so much into the technology. If there is one time in its history that the marketing department and supply chain need to earn their keep its now, otherwise alot of people might be looking for a new job.

[Mr Hardware]

with a new falcon doing 9.9l/100klms, only 15% more than little crapboxes like lancers, then i see no need for people to downgrade to save $3.20 a week

[Auslandau]

As far as the history on how things turned out though .....

Ford Continued to stick with the large sized XD while Holden went the opposite with the C'dore thinking that smaller was better (Including the 4 cyl) ..... Ford kicked there bum in sales!

Ford Dropped the V8 from the XF range ..... XF became one of the biggest seller in the Falcon history.

The difference between those 2 eras and now ...... better more fuel efficient large cars comparable to the shoe boxes but they cannot (will not) get this message out to people! Talk to the general public out there ..... Big is thirsty; end of story. Once the Turbo 4 comes out in the Falcon .... boy have they some educating to do!

[bobthebilda]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Thats interesting, but kind of like the theory of renting vs a mortgage perhaps? Is owning a fully practical car really going to be such a "life choice", one in which other desires might need to take a backseat?

Without doing any calculations, the way I see it is that we could do with a SUV type car (Territory) and then a run around like a Focus/Fiesta. God knows if we decide to have another child its going to be a tight fit in anything less than a Falcon/Territory.
.

But people who want to lower running costs on a car, tend to miss the main point. And its not something that Ford engineering has anything to do with. If you buy a $36000 Falcon LPG, and it is costing you (300k's a week @ 13 litres per 100 k's @65 cents a litre) =$25.35 ($1318 a year), then all looks fine. If you sell it in 3 years time for $16000, then your $1318 a year fuel cost, doesnt look too good against a $6666 a year depreciation cost.

By halfing the pruchase price, you will more than half the depreciation cost, running costs etc, so will end up with an extra $4000 in the bank. $4000 could effectively give you 60 days a year of renting a brand new Falcon, when ever you wanted it. And it actually works out even better because doing stupid things in a rental car gives you a much better feeling than doing it in your own car lol.

[SSD-85]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

As far as the history on how things turned out though .....

Ford Continued to stick with the large sized XD while Holden went the opposite with the C'dore thinking that smaller was better (Including the 4 cyl) ..... Ford kicked there bum in sales!

Ford Dropped the V8 from the XF range ..... XF became one of the biggest seller in the Falcon history.

The difference between those 2 eras and now ...... better more fuel efficient large cars comparable to the shoe boxes but they cannot (will not) get this message out to people! Talk to the general public out there ..... Big is thirsty; end of story. Once the Turbo 4 comes out in the Falcon .... boy have they some educating to do!

Wasnt at one stage the XD, XE or XF 6 cyl more fuel efficient than any 4 cylinder car on the market at the time?

Then more recently, it was said that the FG LPG had lower running costs than a corolla.

People seem to have responded to Fords argument more positively back in the 80s. But not really now. It seems to be so ingrained into joe average's mind that small car = cheaper in every single way.

[Streets]

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

All I can say is the worst thing Ford could do is drop the V8. I hope it never makes that mistake again.

I thought Ford had dropped the V8 in the FGs.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by Scotty85

Wasnt at one stage the XD, XE or XF 6 cyl more fuel efficient than any 4 cylinder car on the market at the time?

Then more recently, it was said that the FG LPG had lower running costs than a corolla.

People seem to have responded to Fords argument more positively back in the 80s. But not really now. It seems to be so ingrained into joe average's mind that small car = cheaper in every single way.

Ford had WAY better marketing back then, remember when Ford used to relate the benefits of owning a Falcon to real life situations?

Not like nowadays where they spend half the ad talking about how the FG was the first Aussie car with Ipod dock (who gives a crap if it was first if every fricken other car has it??)

In the 80s they were very good talking about owning a Falcon when fuel costs were rising...

Like that ad showing a dad who owns an XD showing off the Falcon to the other dad which owns a small gutless family car and comparing how the Falcon can fit the whole family comfortably and overtake B-doubles with ease. The ad brought back into people's mind the trade-offs of going to the new wave of smaller family cars.

Or the XE ad showing the highway fuel consumption and comparing it to smaller 4 cylinders cars.

[SSD-85]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Ford had WAY better marketing back then, remember when Ford used to relate the benefits of owning a Falcon to real life situations?

Not like nowadays where they spend half the ad talking about how the FG was the first Aussie car with Ipod dock (who gives a crap if it was first if every fricken other car has it??)

In the 80s they were very good talking about owning a Falcon when fuel costs were rising...

Like that ad showing a dad who owns an XD showing off the Falcon to the other dad which owns a small gutless family car and comparing how the Falcon can fit the whole family comfortably and overtake B-doubles with ease. The ad brought back into people's mind the trade-offs of going to the new wave of smaller family cars.

Or the XE ad showing the highway fuel consumption and comparing it to smaller 4 cylinders cars.

Thats very true. I wasnt old enough to know back in the 80s but ive watched a lot of them on Youtube & so forth. I must say the ads/marketing by Ford were MUCH better done back then.
I really do think it has come down to the marketing, because from what I understand, times were a lot tougher for people/families back then than what they are now. I do realise society has changed significantly since then also, but people still buy Commodes in droves so need more be said?

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Ford had WAY better marketing back then, remember when Ford used to relate the benefits of owning a Falcon to real life situations?

Like that ad showing a dad who owns an XD showing off the Falcon to the other dad which owns a small gutless family car and comparing how the Falcon can fit the whole family comfortably and overtake B-doubles with ease. The ad brought back into people's mind the trade-offs of going to the new wave of smaller family cars.

I've seen that advert on Youtube somewhere, they could easily rework the idea into an ad for the FG.
"err..the luggage is coming back by rail..."
Don't settle for less. Falcon is the answer.

The problem is that small cars a lot better now than they were back in 1980, so they would really have to push the fuel efficiency arguement. But the fundamental message is still the same.

[Polyal]

Yes small cars are not underpowered or lack features these days (or are even "small").

The positives of equal FE with more space and functionality really need to be driven home...big time.

[Mr Hardware]

Yes, spot on Brazen. Ford had marketing balls back then, showing that the falcon was the answer for the big family man for this big country. Bring that back!

[2011G6E]

You have to remember that fuel economy was a whole different ball game in the early eighties. I started driving in 1982, and if you could get 10ltr/100km out of your four cylinder (remember also that five speeds were rare in the 1970's and even into the early eighties). Our new G6E with the four liter six and six speed ZF auto, an engine still tight and new, gets between 7.5 and 8.5 just cruising along at 100kph, but it's well under 9ltr/100km usually...this is a large heavy car with an automatic box. The fuel economy figures it gives would have staggered any driver from the early eighties.

Power is another matter as well.
I have sitting here a December 1982 issue of "Wheels" magazine, with a cover story saying "V8's rule! Commodore SS Group 3 and Falcon 5.8 ESP: Flat to the boards in the cars that prove Australian muscle rules the world!".
The power outputs are sobering...remember that these were the two premium performance offerings from the big two car makers...one with a modified 5 liter V8, the other with a 351 Cleveland, both legendary engines in this country. Both these cars were four speed manuals.
The SS Group Three put out 180kw, and the ESP with the 351 Clevo put out only 149kw. Wow. Heart stopping.

A glance through the new car prices guide in the back shows some equally sad figures. A standard six cylinder Commodore put out a maximum of 83kw, and a six cylinder 4.1 Falcon put out 105kw. Four cylinder cars like Lasers and Camiras and Geminis put out between 48kw and 64kw.

Now we have standard six cylinder family cars like the Falcon putting out 195kw and the Commodore putting out 210kw. Turbo Falcons put out figures that would put a Phase Three GTHO in the shade.


Without wanting to sound like an old fart (I'm only 46...) "You young guys never had it so good!"...

[JG34JA]

A very interesting OP and great answers so far. Bob is correct in saying this time there is a demand>supply dynamic in the oil market that was not present in the 1980's. It is massive (China, India, etc.) In addition central banks are printing currency like there's no tomorrow and creating inflation in oil (and other commodity) prices.

To Polyal, in the 1980s, we were just a smidge older than you and watched as the HZ Kingswoods of the extended family were substituted for XD-F Falcons. Like then, now Holden has released a smaller Australian built line based on a global car, while Ford has stuck with full size and is aiming at lowering running costs via diesel, LPG and technology improvements across its Australian built lines. Differences are that today Holden has their fullsize model continuing and have not downsized it (without investing much in sheetmetal changes so far: this shows they should have continued the HZ-WB), that in the 1980's the Falcon had a full model range (ute, van, sedan, wagon); in the 1980's Ford had confident marketers who were not afraid to shout their cars' virtues from rooftops, aiming their comments at ordinary people, and Ford did not have imports of comparable size to the Falcon to sell either. Also, Australia has one of the most open new vehicle markets in the world today, and consumers have responded to the great choice by buying cars they feel suit them - the new sales market is very different to the 1980's.

If we were to take the 1980s as a direct allegory of today, the continuous commodity/inflation bubble initiated by Nixon in 1971 abandoning the Gold Standard was bust in 1982 by the US Fed raising interest rates under Paul Volcker. It was at this time that Australia floated the dollar, a commodity currency: unfortunate timing to say the least! Asset class outperformance shifted from the hard commodities back to the paper. Oil prices (and other commodities') fell, and full size Falcons once more dominated sales choices: their engineering effort to make the Falcon's consumption on par with 4cyl cars was icing on the cake. There is no sign of these falls occurring at present, and indeed the supply<demand situation of today is very different to the early 1980s too. Also, and incredibly importantly, the entire Western World was not drowning in debt (private, public, sovereign) in the early 1980s. Look for Mr Bernanke to raise interest rates (and not deliver the "priced in" QE3) in response to rising 30 and 10 year Treausury yields, but don't hold your breath as he appears to have very little choice at the moment. Monetary policy moves the world.

For my money, an LPG Falcon (wagon! dammit!) would be the perfect solution to a potential decade of further commodity price rises. Space, practicality, low servicing costs and economy appeal here.

[Kingsley]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

You have to remember that fuel economy was a whole different ball game in the early eighties. I started driving in 1982, and if you could get 10ltr/100km out of your four cylinder (remember also that five speeds were rare in the 1970's and even into the early eighties). Our new G6E with the four liter six and six speed ZF auto, an engine still tight and new, gets between 7.5 and 8.5 just cruising along at 100kph, but it's well under 9ltr/100km usually...this is a large heavy car with an automatic box. The fuel economy figures it gives would have staggered any driver from the early eighties.

Power is another matter as well.
I have sitting here a December 1982 issue of "Wheels" magazine, with a cover story saying "V8's rule! Commodore SS Group 3 and Falcon 5.8 ESP: Flat to the boards in the cars that prove Australian muscle rules the world!".
The power outputs are sobering...remember that these were the two premium performance offerings from the big two car makers...one with a modified 5 liter V8, the other with a 351 Cleveland, both legendary engines in this country. Both these cars were four speed manuals.
The SS Group Three put out 180kw, and the ESP with the 351 Clevo put out only 149kw. Wow. Heart stopping.

A glance through the new car prices guide in the back shows some equally sad figures. A standard six cylinder Commodore put out a maximum of 83kw, and a six cylinder 4.1 Falcon put out 105kw. Four cylinder cars like Lasers and Camiras and Geminis put out between 48kw and 64kw.

Now we have standard six cylinder family cars like the Falcon putting out 195kw and the Commodore putting out 210kw. Turbo Falcons put out figures that would put a Phase Three GTHO in the shade.


Without wanting to sound like an old fart (I'm only 46...) "You young guys never had it so good!"...

Totally agree. Plus these days you can easily pick up credit to fund anything without first proving to the bank that you had enough funds so you didn't need the loan in the first place!!!

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

with a new falcon doing 9.9l/100klms

and the rest. in the stop-start of typical metropolitan traffic, there is no comparison between a Falcon and a small four cylinder. my GTI gives me 8L to the falcon's 13L/100km. better performance, better economy. the only thing i give away is rear room but who the hell cares? I hardly ever carry anyone, and the GTI is far more practical when it comes to throwing something big in the back (Falcon boot being close to useless - too shallow).

clearly, I'm not the only one who thinks so. people are walking away from big cars in droves.

[b0son]

Originally Posted by Polyal

The positives of equal FE

?! for every gain the falcon has made, so have smaller cars. there is still a chasm in terms of economy between a Falcadore and small 4 cylinder. add diesels to the mix, and the budget conscious has little option but to ignore a Falcadore altogether.

[2011G6E]

Originally Posted by b0son

and the rest. in the stop-start of typical metropolitan traffic, there is no comparison between a Falcon and a small four cylinder. my GTI gives me 8L to the falcon's 13L/100km. better performance, better economy. the only thing i give away is rear room but who the hell cares? I hardly ever carry anyone, and the GTI is far more practical when it comes to throwing something big in the back (Falcon boot being close to useless - too shallow).

clearly, I'm not the only one who thinks so. people are walking away from big cars in droves.

We were very close to buying a Golf GTi...but practicalities like when visitors come out here for a visit and we need extra space and also the lack of good twisty roads meant we went for the G6E. Couldn't be happier...but sometimes I wonder...

Fuel economy has always been a sales driver, despite what people who think there "no real engine but a V8" think. The vast majority of buyers don't buy on visceral emotions like speed, sound, and the prestige of a V8 badge...they want a comfortable, reliable car that doesn't cost the Earth to run. Nowadays when a "small car" isn't really "small", what's the real point in having a big car that costs a lot more to insure and, especially, register?
When fuel prices start to rise, the majority of car buying people think with thier heads and not thier hearts. Car makers will also see this and wonder if it's worth keeping cars in the range that are only there to cater to a vanishingly small minority of buyers.
In a Ford dealer I know, there's been an FPV ute sitting in the showroom for a few months now...people might look a it as they walk through the door, or have a quick look at the interior or display stand it's on...but they walk right on by and purchase a normal Falcon or Fiesta or Mondeo.

[ray38l]

On the issue of fuel prices because there is to much demand that's all crap. All the oil companies are jacking prices up under the lie of not enough oil.
2 years ago when i was working in the mines the media was asking questions about how much coal was left. During that time the mine i was at just started a new pit that had a lifespan of 40 years plus 4 times that again in untouched land they owned.
The governments need to look into the oil and coal industry and see how they are ripping everyone off.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Mr Hardware

with a new falcon doing 9.9l/100klms, only 15% more than little crapboxes like lancers, then i see no need for people to downgrade to save $3.20 a week

My Fiesta is doing 6.3L/100km, the Focus 4.8L/100km. Mum's Festiva is doing 6.4L/100km, Dad's 323 is doing 7L/100km flat.

Thats a bit less than 9.9L/100km.

[flappist]

Ford dropped the V8 for 2 reasons.

1) They were running out of clevos and had no easy replacement
2) Nobody was buying V8s anyway, even Holden dropped theirs but as they were using an internally sourced product they just limped along.

If there is a drop in sales of the current V8 due to whatever reason and it becomes unprofitable to offer a V8 model(s) then they will drop it again.

So don't put them in a position where they even think about it. GO OUT AND BUY A NEW FPV V8.........

[bobthebilda]

Originally Posted by ray38l

On the issue of fuel prices because there is to much demand that's all crap. All the oil companies are jacking prices up under the lie of not enough oil.
2 years ago when i was working in the mines the media was asking questions about how much coal was left. During that time the mine i was at just started a new pit that had a lifespan of 40 years plus 4 times that again in untouched land they owned.
The governments need to look into the oil and coal industry and see how they are ripping everyone off.

Why would a government, that reaps 50 cents for every litre of fuel you buy, look into how oil companies are ripping you off. The fact is, when petrol prices are $1.35 a litre oil companies probably dont make money. And if oil companies didnt make money, they wouldnt invest billions each year trying to find it.
Maybe you could explain why we are paying near $120 for a barrel of oil, and drilling in 5km deep waters in the Gulf of Mexico and looking to exploit the Arctic, if we have such sufficient levels of oil to meet demand??

Once they bring out of the coal powered Falcon, the pit where you worked, may have some relevance to road transport.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by flappist

Ford dropped the V8 for 2 reasons.

1) They were running out of clevos and had no easy replacement
2) Nobody was buying V8s anyway, even Holden dropped theirs but as they were using an internally sourced product they just limped along.

If there is a drop in sales of the current V8 due to whatever reason and it becomes unprofitable to offer a V8 model(s) then they will drop it again.

So don't put them in a position where they even think about it. GO OUT AND BUY A NEW FPV V8.........

Wasnt the Clevo not up to enviro standards aswell...quite similar to the 5.4 meeting euro, and being a bit of an orphan?

It has been said Fords lack of V8 sales has in part been blamed with them not sticking with it, much like the current situation...and look what came later on in the EB...a 5.0L....its all a little spooky.

[302 XC]

Well theres no way youll get me in a small car,no matter how cheap they are or become
I need something that pulls my trailer (it wieghs 700KG empty)
There aint no 4 banger out there thatll pull it empty let alone full

So let me think a bit here
Ford was winning races in the 80s then dropped the V8
Arent they winning races lately
Ah yeah drop the 8
Yes the new age cars have good power, but will they be goin strong in 10-20-30 years time
Well i suppose it doesnt matter IF ya replace every 3-5 years does it
The credit/line of credit/loan issue is certainy something to consider as well

I had a cheap runabout when younger only drove 40K round trip to work
The wifey always had 6 cylinder cars 700-1,000Ks a week

[nstg8a]

im thinking very seriously of buying a small 4 cylinder if my ef is written off, as much as id want another v8, and il miss the rwd fun a small car simply makes more sense for me at the moment.

its not just the running costs either, my ef only costs $30 a week to run to work, but rego also comes into. when its $1000 just to register the sucker it adds up pretty quick.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Wasnt the Clevo not up to enviro standards aswell...quite similar to the 5.4 meeting euro, and being a bit of an orphan?

It has been said Fords lack of V8 sales has in part been blamed with them not sticking with it, much like the current situation...and look what came later on in the EB...a 5.0L....its all a little spooky.

Yes but they were not making them any more and if memory serves had stopped making them years before.

[onfire]

I think even with all this, I'd still always drive a 6 cylinder. Something about a smaller car, I don't like. It's not at all trying to sound tough, something about a 4 cylinder doesn't work for me.

I need that consistent power supply, even if I don't use it.

[2011G6E]

10, 20, or 30 years time...?

Even talking as a guy who dearly loves our new G6E, when I look at all the little details, I seriously doubt it will still be on the road after 20 years. Sitting in our yard is a 1957 Morris Minor sedan...it was a normal family car in the fifities and sixties, and after 54 years is still going strong. Modern cars are unfortunately full of complicated electronics and delicate components that simply aren't designed to last that long.
I look at the "rough tough" Prado's we have a work, and since the last model with a manual gear lever to change between low and high range, they have now gone to an electronic switch on the dash. This means that there is now a switch, associated wiring, computer control, wiring to the transfer case, and some sort of multi-position solenoid actuator on the gearbox itself.
Why? So they can replace a small space on an already expansive center console where a small stubby gear lever was with a fancy button? It also has a totally unecissary push button start. They live a bit of a hard life out here, and are already showing problems, but even in the most careful of hands, I'd hate to see one of these in ten years time...

So yes, modern cars are amazingly fuel efficient, powerful, and reliable. Now. But they simply aren't built to be sitting in the shed in thirty years time still giving sterling service. That's probably one area we had it better "in the old days".

"Consistant power supply" is something that modern turbo four cylinders also have. Gone are the old "slap on a aftermarket Garrett and hope it all works" home made jobs or low-volume ones with hopeless lag and peaky boost. Modern turbos, if done well, are like the perfect butler...the job gets done without you noticing they are there.