Orion: Learning From VE's Mistakes

[Phoon Hoon]

Not everything went to plan for Holden with the launch of the VE. Much of the media questioned a larger, heavier, more powerful car in this age of high fuel prices and falling sales of traditional family sedans.

This has made me think about how Ford should learn from this in the two years they have before Orion is released. Here's some suggestions:

1. Lose some weight. Lighter car = more fuel efficient.
2. Alloy blocks on engines (see point 1).
3. Further develop the outstanding turbo engines as an alternative to a V8.
4. Make the Egas engine direct injection and offer it on more models.
5. Beg/borrow/steel a turbo diesel engine from somewhere in the Ford world and offer it on the range.
6. More fuel friendly 5 speed auto an option on base models - even better would be the 6 speed ZF.

My two cents.

[XR8putts]

7. Build a GTHO.



Sorry, I got a headache.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Phoon Hoon

Not everything went to plan for Holden with the launch of the VE. Much of the media questioned a larger, heavier, more powerful car in this age of high fuel prices and falling sales of traditional family sedans.

This has made me think about how Ford should learn from this in the two years they have before Orion is released. Here's some suggestions:

1. Lose some weight. Lighter car = more fuel efficient.
2. Alloy blocks on engines (see point 1).
3. Further develop the outstanding turbo engines as an alternative to a V8.
4. Make the Egas engine direct injection and offer it on more models.
5. Beg/borrow/steel a turbo diesel engine from somewhere in the Ford world and offer it on the range.
6. More fuel friendly 5 speed auto an option on base models - even better would be the 6 speed ZF.

My two cents.

1. Would be good, but normally the next model is heavier.
2. it's about a 10kg diff so I don't see a point as iron block and turbo is a better combo.
3. The 3valve is getting dropped so what are they gonna replace that with?? Just an idea.
4. Direct injection petrol engine would solve the fuel efficiency problem, but the DI e-gas would be another good product.
5. For an export car I would agree with you.
6. The contract with ION expires in 08, so you never know.

[Dr Smith]

I think fuel economy will be pounced on by the media at the release of Aurion, Camry and next Falcon. Orion developers would obviously be making this a huge focus (they were anyway). Look atthe BAMkII to BF upgrade for the Fairmont Ghia. Went from A4 to A6, gained power and better NVH and dropped its fuel use by nearly 11%.

If the current BF A4 gets a fuel economy drop of 10% for Orion is will get into the high 9'sL/100km on the official figures.

Obviously weight savings through smarter panel/body pressings will help, countered by weight gains through adding more features.

[Deadman]

Ford pretty much said that they'll have some time to make some minor last minute changes in reaction to the VE, but the basic car is pretty much already designed and ready to go...

So I doubt we'll see any massive changes. Probably just small costmetic, equipment levels and pricing changes.

I'm no expert on desgin times, but I'm sure with less than 2 years to launch, they're not excactly compiling the list of "to dos" and starting the sketches ;)

[AWD Chaser]

Originally Posted by Deadman

Ford pretty much said that they'll have some time to make some minor last minute changes in reaction to the VE, but the basic car is pretty much already designed and ready to go...

So I doubt we'll see any massive changes. Probably just small costmetic, equipment levels and pricing changes.

I'm no expert on desgin times, but I'm sure with less than 2 years to launch, they're not excactly compiling the list of "to dos" and starting the sketches ;)

Designed - yes, ready to go, no.
My guess would be that most of the design is finished, but I would doubt it the whole lineup has been choosen/finalised... but close... Ford do have until at very early 08 till the orion is released, but fit in 1 year of testing on finalised models, and that gives them about 6 months to finsh anything else they need to do, then test... crashes, economy, engines, including extra stress testing on turbo models (remember when Ford released a few basic pack BA XR6T to a few cabbies to rack up some testing k's? Melbourne I think), and other tests..... we will probably see final test models floating around about 6 months before the release, but if Ford really wanted to keep it a surprise, it would have BA bumpers, and BA interior....
I doubt FPV have finished a model lineup and/or engine features/work...

[jabba]

Originally Posted by vztrt

12. it's about a 10kg diff so I don't see a point as iron block and turbo is a better combo..

All the 6's have alloy blocks all ready....The alloy 5.4 block saves 30kg in weight over the iron block....

Ford an use more exotic materials in the construction of the Falcon, which they have all ready mentioned that they will be doing. They have a contract with a mining company to buy the magnesium alloy, in which Ford were going to start introducing the Mag alloy into the Falcon range to reduce over all weight... What's more they can replace quite a few panel with carbon fibre, Bonnet, roof skin and boot lid. This will also remove another 30kg at least.. Of course it will cost more to construct the Falcon which is a negative, but the construction methods will align it's self with the BMW...

[XplosiveR6]

Originally Posted by vztrt

1. Would be good, but normally the next model is heavier.
2. it's about a 10kg diff so I don't see a point as iron block and turbo is a better combo.
3. The 3valve is getting dropped so what are they gonna replace that with?? Just an idea.
4. Direct injection petrol engine would solve the fuel efficiency problem, but the DI e-gas would be another good product.
5. For an export car I would agree with you.
6. The contract with ION expires in 08, so you never know.

1. what does that have to be so?, by your rational, the 2020 falcon must weigh 3 tonne then! Newer technologys in materials = lower weights just looks at the BMW's they are actally loosing weight but including more features, and they make a hell of a lot more BMW's then falcons

2. How is an iron block and turbo a better combo? how many turbo cars do you see now days with an iron block? none

4. diesel is a great alternative to the ever increasing fuel prices, even people now, in smaller cars are rushing out to get turbo diesels, why for only export markets?

[Walkinshaw]

Originally Posted by jabba

All the 6's have alloy blocks all ready.....

This is the first ive heard of the 4.0 having an alloy block. Might pay to go have a look at the rust on your cast block ;)

[rhysy_boi]

my block is rusted, my sump is a little corroded.

is it just me or were the new VE's pricing very high?

i mean SS's in the $50k range, SSV's low $60k! for the price you can buy FPV's!

Rhyso

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by XplosiveR6

1. what does that have to be so?, by your rational, the 2020 falcon must weigh 3 tonne then! Newer technologys in materials = lower weights just looks at the BMW's they are actally loosing weight but including more features, and they make a hell of a lot more BMW's then falcons

2. How is an iron block and turbo a better combo? how many turbo cars do you see now days with an iron block? none

4. diesel is a great alternative to the ever increasing fuel prices, even people now, in smaller cars are rushing out to get turbo diesels, why for only export markets?

1. Why dont you use lighter materials? Cost, BMW can put high price tags on their cars while Ford cant. You dont get BMW quality in a Falcon. Ford say they woint be using lighter materials and pressing processes for 10 years. So making the car have less drag and a more economic engine will have to be done.

2. Since you like quoting the German manufacturers, have a look at their high class T/TT. They have Iron blocks in their engines...why??...reliability.

4. Diesel has an extra tax of 17c/pl that wasn't dropped when the GST was introduced so that diesel didn't become a dominant fuel in this country. LPG is the biggest growing fuel in this country according to Vfacts.
It takes about 6 years to recoup cost on the premium you pay on a diesel car so it's not that great an option in this country. If Ford did produce one than they would make it available in this country but this car would only be made if there was a viable export market as IMO it wouldn't be viable to just be sold in OZ.


Oh and Jabba the I6 only has an alloy head. Holden have an all alloy motor.

[Lukeyson]

Originally Posted by rhysy_boi

is it just me or were the new VE's pricing very high?

i mean SS's in the $50k range, SSV's low $60k! for the price you can buy FPV's!

where did you hear those prices ?
saw this posted early last week another thread

[blackahcdx]

it will be hard for ford to bring down the weight of the falcon when they add extra features such as Curtain Airbags, will be interesting indeed

[Bossxr8]

Ford would have been doing product planning when the petrol prices started going through the roof, so they have had plenty of time to react. Fuel economy would be their number 1 priority, they wouldn't have any other choice. They know how important fuel economy has become and to launch with worse fuel economy than a previous model would be suicide. They will have it sussed. They were lucky that they started with the new model later than Holden as they were too late into their development cycle to change much bar possible ratio changes to increase economy. Holden did most of the initial product planning, engineering and testing when petrol prices were still cheap.

[AWD Chaser]

Originally Posted by blackahcdx

it will be hard for ford to bring down the weight of the falcon when they add extra features such as Curtain Airbags, will be interesting indeed

But whats more important... L per 100k's or a 5 star NCAP rating.... big news if it's a 5 star NCAP rating for a tiny bit of weight for curtain airbags. Surely that setup wouldn't be more then 30kgs? If you have more the 30kgs of airbags and plastic poping around to protect you... i'm not too sure i'd feel so safe.... lol...

[ltd]

A mate who worked for Holden in servicing for a few years and then saw the light and moved to ford told me of the common gen3 problems. He said that one of the reasons for the piston slap startup noise was the fact that the gen3 was an all alloy block. Cast Iron block apparently would have disguised most of that noise and therefore eliminated the problem. Alloy blocks do save weight, but they also transfer alot more noise. Another case in point is the rather wheezy 3.6 alloytech motor. Since moving to all alloy alot of intrusional noise has affected this motors NVH. I suppose if Ford wanted to save weight they could always use some components like ceramic alternators, or better yet, look to the aviation industry for weight savers.

Carbon Fibre is a good idea, but at this stage it is incredibly expensive. Boeing are selling the new 787 that seats up to 280 people at roughly 200 mill each whilst a 747 that seats up to 430 people will cost you 202 mill. The difference, the 787 is smaller, but made of carbon fibre.
Good comparison for how much more expensive carbon fibre is.

Body panels in plastic is a possibility however there are no plastics on the market today that are able to retain shape as accurately as steel. Aluminium body panels would be a good idea.

Things such as a proper hand brake that doesn't bind would aid fuel consumption, as well as proper seperation of the callipers to reduce pad/rotor contact when not in use. Bigger wheel bearings reduce rolling resistance, and aid consumption. Silica tyres are already standard. High pressure turbo's would be a good way of getting consumption figures down, high end models with the xr6t or typhoon motor would use less fuel than the 3V V8, as consumption tests already indicate. (Lets face it, the 3v doesn't sound like a v8 anyway). As others suggested Direct Injection, or a turbo gas setup would be the cherry. Nothing all that fancy just a turbo gas with about 250-260kw would really pull those HSV boys into line. A low pressure turbo gas at about 220kw would be good for the standard lower end models. At 50cpl, who'd complain. Direct injection gas is a good idea and can achieve those figures on the standard motor with no turbo due to its higher octane rating, however the guy who designed and patented it doesn't have the money or facilities to produce the system on a massive scale. Maybe ford should try and get this guy inhouse to manufacture the system. Holden and Toyota wouldn't have much of a response then.

Some ideas.

[GK]

Originally Posted by XR8fella

His : 2001 XR8 Ute , Black, Manual

HEAR IT IDLE

Hers : 2001 XR8 Sedan , Black, Auto
HEAR IT IDLE
HEAR IT TAKE OFF

I had a listen, both sound gr8!

GK

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by ltd

Carbon Fibre is a good idea, but at this stage it is incredibly expensive.

That and the fact that Boeing bought all the carbon fibre that out in the market.

[banarcus]

I've heard 3Vs that sound real tough but thirsty they are.

[McobraR]

I say use compacted graphite iron (CGI) for the blocks.

[Iphido]

Orion will have to be lighter and more fuel efficent. If you think things for fuel are bad now, what about in 8-10 years time.

1) Injected LPG six cylinder engine. And a bloody good one. No compromises, I want rev limiter, DSC, traction control etc. ~11:1 compression, decent tank that doesn't hog luggage room.

2) Lose 50kg over BF. CGI blocks (atleast 30kg right there), CGI suspension components (A arms etc), a sprinkle of aluminium and magnesium. Some more use of hi-strength alloys in the body..

3) More aero dynamic, Cd of .28 minium, save fuel, lower NVH, increase high speed performance and top speed, better stability at speed.

4) Direct injection offered on Ghia, XR6, and option on a Economy pack for the XT.

5) 5 stars crash rating.

[Bud Bud]

Originally Posted by ltd

Carbon Fibre is a good idea, but at this stage it is incredibly expensive. Boeing are selling the new 787 that seats up to 280 people at roughly 200 mill each whilst a 747 that seats up to 430 people will cost you 202 mill. The difference, the 787 is smaller, but made of carbon fibre.
Good comparison for how much more expensive carbon fibre is.


Some ideas.

Not quite. The 747 jumbo was developed in the 60's, to the tune of over a billion dollars plus another $200 million to build the factory that was needed to assemble it in. Remember, this was in the still the 1960's and as a consequence the decision to build it nearly bankrupt Boeing right from the start.

Pan Am placed the first order for 25 at a cost of around $550 million US which in part assured the success of the Jumbo and therefore guaranteeing the future for Boeing. This split of the cost made a 747 worth around $25 million US back then.

Today they can cost as much as $175 million each. Also over 1400 versions have been built since then with only constant minor and few major updates (facelifts) since. The development cost have well and truly been recovered making this jet now very cheap to build and sell by comparison to any thing else.

Although the current 747-400 is a very modern jet compared to the first ones out of the box, it still is 1960,s technology. Fly by wire Glass cockpits and winglets have been added as the technology became available but the jet is still a compromise as it never was designed for these upgrades in the first place.

The 787 is brand spanking new and will end up in the same category as the 747 did back in the beginning. All of the development costs will need to be recouped all over again. It is more than just the use of composites that need to be taken into consideration.

The only fair analogy you can make here is if Ford still made the XY today but only upgraded the technology when it became available. Some would say this would be good, but the reality is it would still rattle or creak and would not perform to any where near the same levels of comfort and performance as the BF.

B.T.W. this would make a new falcon very cheap by today’s standards, but you would never have seen any thing from XA-BF either.

Holden has just spent $1 billion on its latest baby and Ford spent $ 700 million on the AU and then another $ 500 million on the BA after the poor sales performance of the AU. They would not of had budgeted for this in the first place. Ford has also spent another $200 million on the BF and yet this car still needs to get to 2008.

All of this needs to be paid for at some point.

[SB076]

Granted this doesnt fit in with everyones lifestyle and the next model Falcon needs to accomodate the wider community, but I would love to see a smaller lighter falcon than the current model.

Something WRX size or a bit bigger with an option of a 4.6L V8 maybe like a four door Mustang.

Granted fuel is always going to be a factor, but some people will always want there toys.

[jabba]

Originally Posted by SB076

Granted this doesnt fit in with everyones lifestyle and the next model Falcon needs to accomodate the wider community, but I would love to see a smaller lighter falcon than the current model.

Something WRX size or a bit bigger with an option of a 4.6L V8 maybe like a four door Mustang.

Granted fuel is always going to be a factor, but some people will always want there toys.

WRX size : ..... That will kill the Falcon.. Try and go on a holiday with two kids in a WRX... Impossible... No leg room (front or back) no luggage room in the boot or cabin and packed so tight together that you can smell each other's breath with out trying....

[SB076]

Originally Posted by jabba

WRX size : ..... That will kill the Falcon.. Try and go on a holiday with two kids in a WRX... Impossible... No leg room (front or back) no luggage room in the boot or cabin and packed so tight together that you can smell each other's breath with out trying....

I said granted it doesn't fit everyones lifestyle, thats just what I would like (I dont have kids) Maybe WRX size is a bit too small, but I wouldn't mind seeing something smaller than the current falcon. I doubt very much that Ford would manufacture a smaller Falcon for the reasons you have outlined. But maybe they could manufacture a variation of the next model Falcon with a shorter wheelbase, but still offer a V8. Just my 2 cents. Why you ask, just for fun........ Current model BA/BF falcons are great on the open road, but when you have to go into the city and park etc, it would be nice to have a slighter smaller car.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by Bud Bud

Not quite. The 747 jumbo was developed in the 60's, to the tune of over a billion dollars plus another $200 million to build the factory that was needed to assemble it in. Remember, this was in the still the 1960's and as a consequence the decision to build it nearly bankrupt Boeing right from the start.

Pan Am placed the first order for 25 at a cost of around $550 million US which in part assured the success of the Jumbo and therefore guaranteeing the future for Boeing. This split of the cost made a 747 worth around $25 million US back then.

Today they can cost as much as $175 million each. Also over 1400 versions have been built since then with only constant minor and few major updates (facelifts) since. The development cost have well and truly been recovered making this jet now very cheap to build and sell by comparison to any thing else.

Although the current 747-400 is a very modern jet compared to the first ones out of the box, it still is 1960,s technology. Fly by wire Glass cockpits and winglets have been added as the technology became available but the jet is still a compromise as it never was designed for these upgrades in the first place.

The 787 is brand spanking new and will end up in the same category as the 747 did back in the beginning. All of the development costs will need to be recouped all over again. It is more than just the use of composites that need to be taken into consideration.

The only fair analogy you can make here is if Ford still made the XY today but only upgraded the technology when it became available. Some would say this would be good, but the reality is it would still rattle or creak and would not perform to any where near the same levels of comfort and performance as the BF.

B.T.W. this would make a new falcon very cheap by today’s standards, but you would never have seen any thing from XA-BF either.

Holden has just spent $1 billion on its latest baby and Ford spent $ 700 million on the AU and then another $ 500 million on the BA after the poor sales performance of the AU. They would not of had budgeted for this in the first place. Ford has also spent another $200 million on the BF and yet this car still needs to get to 2008.

All of this needs to be paid for at some point.

OK Bud Bud, I'm assuming your an aviation enthusiast.
Firstly, the 747 was conceptualised in December 1966 when Juan Trippe, the then chairman of Pan Am approached boeing about a jet airliner that could carry 350 passengers at 0.9 Mach. Boeing wanted an order for 50 aircraft, Juan Trippe promised an order for 25 with options.

The 747 has been numerously modernised beyond just the cockpit. It has had to. Originally it's MTOW was 675000 lbs and that is now 980000lbs. Structurally, the plane is over 90% stronger than the 100 series.

As better materials have become available such as aluminium and stronger alloys they have been used.
Fasteners have also come along way in 40 years and having over 6 million of them does substantiate quite an improvement in equipment design. The wingbox has been extensively modified, as well as the lengthening of the upper deck of the fuselage. All of the systems on board the 747 from the leading edge flap drives, brakes, insulation, metals etc have been modernised.

The only thing that has retained its original structure is the overall appearance. Whilst this may be similar to the original 100 series even the airframe has undergone substantial redesign. There are fewer stringers now than before as materials have gotten stronger; the wing has undergone substantial changes to the spar structure and spacing and even the pods that hold the engines are revised for the increase from 43000 lbs thrust on the original GE engines to the 62500 lbs thrust developed by the RB211's. There is even a removable fifth and sixth pod on the wings now to allow for transporting of engines - requiring extensive redesign to accomodate effectively an 8 tonne dead weight.

I respectfully submit that the webpage you are looking at is out of date, as the 747 has not been 175 million for quite some time. The current price of a 747 is US$216-247 million for the 400 and 400ER version, the 747-8 or intercontinental is US$272.5-282.5 million. These are the list prices from Boeing.

Additionally, the 747-8 is not a rehashed version of the 400/ER. It too has undergone some extensive redesign with the employment of extensive carbon fibre used in the construction of the fuselage and wings. As a result, bigger windows on the 478 are being used due to greater spaces beween the spars and stringers and the aircraft will have a whole new wing. Humidifiers also will be used due to the lower content of aluminium in this aircraft; similar to the 787.
Ford would have to replace every component inside and out of any current model car and just retain the garnish panels to achieve the same feat as Boeing have done with the 747.

Finally, the 787 will not fall into the same category as the 747, it will be subjected to issues like ETOPS, whereas the 47 doesn't need to worry about that. Here's a little fun fact for you, did you know that the 747 does not have enough fuel to fly from Sydney to LAX?

[Iphido]

I see the 747 and the falcon as the same continual development. Major series changes result in major structural changes and smaller changes are continual refinements.

While the bore spacing on the I6 and the basic look of a 747 are pretty much the same, most other things have been extensively redesigned.

Why reinvent the basics? I perfer these continual refinements to blowing half your budget to get where you already are on a all new design. Take a look at the Porsche 911.

I belive orion will actually be bigger than the current falcon in most dimentions.

Being big can be a flaw and a strength. Ford should work on the disadvantages of being big (Fuel economy, ease of parking (sensors/cameras front and rear), handling etc) and further push the advantages (fantastic airy interior space, awesome highway driving, safety).

[Bucket]

Originally Posted by ltd

OK Bud Bud, I'm assuming your an aviation enthusiast.
Firstly, the 747 was conceptualised in December 1966 when Juan Trippe, the then chairman of Pan Am approached boeing about a jet airliner that could carry 350 passengers at 0.9 Mach. Boeing wanted an order for 50 aircraft, Juan Trippe promised an order for 25 with options.

The 747 has been numerously modernised beyond just the cockpit. It has had to. Originally it's MTOW was 675000 lbs and that is now 980000lbs. Structurally, the plane is over 90% stronger than the 100 series.

As better materials have become available such as aluminium and stronger alloys they have been used.
Fasteners have also come along way in 40 years and having over 6 million of them does substantiate quite an improvement in equipment design. The wingbox has been extensively modified, as well as the lengthening of the upper deck of the fuselage. All of the systems on board the 747 from the leading edge flap drives, brakes, insulation, metals etc have been modernised.

The only thing that has retained its original structure is the overall appearance. Whilst this may be similar to the original 100 series even the airframe has undergone substantial redesign. There are fewer stringers now than before as materials have gotten stronger; the wing has undergone substantial changes to the spar structure and spacing and even the pods that hold the engines are revised for the increase from 43000 lbs thrust on the original GE engines to the 62500 lbs thrust developed by the RB211's. There is even a removable fifth and sixth pod on the wings now to allow for transporting of engines - requiring extensive redesign to accomodate effectively an 8 tonne dead weight.

I respectfully submit that the webpage you are looking at is out of date, as the 747 has not been 175 million for quite some time. The current price of a 747 is US$216-247 million for the 400 and 400ER version, the 747-8 or intercontinental is US$272.5-282.5 million. These are the list prices from Boeing.

Additionally, the 747-8 is not a rehashed version of the 400/ER. It too has undergone some extensive redesign with the employment of extensive carbon fibre used in the construction of the fuselage and wings. As a result, bigger windows on the 478 are being used due to greater spaces beween the spars and stringers and the aircraft will have a whole new wing. Humidifiers also will be used due to the lower content of aluminium in this aircraft; similar to the 787.
Ford would have to replace every component inside and out of any current model car and just retain the garnish panels to achieve the same feat as Boeing have done with the 747.

Finally, the 787 will not fall into the same category as the 747, it will be subjected to issues like ETOPS, whereas the 47 doesn't need to worry about that. Here's a little fun fact for you, did you know that the 747 does not have enough fuel to fly from Sydney to LAX?

:ticking: :

You learn something new everyday

[sfr rob]

i still cant believe they are dropping the 3v V8, its a disgrace!!!!!
I would love to see some turbo diesel performance cars in the futre.. yes you read right... PERFORMANCE cars, its amazing what can be had with some diesels.
i just hope the new shape of the new model wont look anything like the VE, it is hidious.

[Van D]

Originally Posted by SB076

I said granted it doesn't fit everyones lifestyle, thats just what I would like (I dont have kids) Maybe WRX size is a bit too small, but I wouldn't mind seeing something smaller than the current falcon. I doubt very much that Ford would manufacture a smaller Falcon for the reasons you have outlined. But maybe they could manufacture a variation of the next model Falcon with a shorter wheelbase, but still offer a V8. Just my 2 cents. Why you ask, just for fun........ Current model BA/BF falcons are great on the open road, but when you have to go into the city and park etc, it would be nice to have a slighter smaller car.

That's what Focus' are for :