Falcon four cylinder...Will it sell?

[deviant]

Just reading a bit about the new four cylinder, petrol turbo Falcon:

http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/firs ... .html#poll

What do we reckon? A seller? The death of the Falcon?

[hks_kansei]

I think it will survive as it always has.

Fleet sales and Government.


I can't see many Individuals choosing a 4cyl Falcon over say a Mondeo with better fit and finish (and actually more interior space)
The majority of people I've spoken to who have bought Falcons (ie: not a work car) have chosen it because they either want to tow things, or they've bought the sports versions (Turbo 6 or V8)
The 4 cyl won't affect the sport versions, presumably the XR series will continue, but if the base models are replaced with 4cyl, I can see sales dropping.

If Ford offered a Diesel Falcon I could see higher sales.
Lower fuel consumption, and just as high (maybe higher?) towing capacity.

[olboy]

" MMMMM ' I wonder how it will go with a car float on the back
OK for the Burbs I guess

Big car + Big engine = good
Little car + little engine = good
Little car + Big engine = extra good
Big Car + Little engine = No good

Don't think I'll trade my SS in on one

[Mr Morlock]

big topic and hot in the news at present. I suspect most of us would guess that a turbo engine often is thirsty when pushed hard. There is already a cheaper fuel Falcon and thats lpg. Whatever happens with engines the Falcon does not have a long life left- it must be replaced and if "it" is going to be produced here it needs volume sales to survive and of course the tick of approval by Ford head office.

[hks_kansei]

And this is where I am completely dumbfounded as to Australia's aversion to Diesel powered passenger cars.

It's cheaper to produce, more fuel economical, and can make similar power to a petrol engine (just in a vastly different manner)

I don't see why there haven't been Diesel Falcons and Commodores for years?


For some reason people here still associate Diesel with tractors, modern diesel engines are as quiet and smooth as their petrol counterpart.

[deviant]

big topic and hot in the news at present. I suspect most of us would guess that a turbo engine often is thirsty when pushed hard. There is already a cheaper fuel Falcon and thats lpg. Whatever happens with engines the Falcon does not have a long life left- it must be replaced and if "it" is going to be produced here it needs volume sales to survive and of course the tick of approval by Ford head office.

The fuel economy thing is going to be interesting. In Europe mid size cars are coming with smaller and smaller turbo petrol engines to combat emissions based tax and to get fleet averages lower but from all the reports I am reading these cars are only reaching the stated consumption figures (which are impressive) when they are driven like a saint on flat ground with a tail wind and cruise control on....I.E. Impossible to achieve in the real world.

Believe it or not but the new gen Ford Focus is being sold in Europe now with a 1000cc, 3 cylinder, petrol turbo engine...impressive that it generates MORE power and torque lower in the rev range than the outgoing 1600cc NA engine. Around 125BHP and 180NM from under 2000RPM I believe. The engine block fits on an A4 piece of paper!

The LPG cars have never really sold in big numbers, part of the problem being that you could not get an 'up spec' model with it and I think image hurts LPG. Everyone links it with taxi's and low power outputs.

As HKS says...Why no diesel? Holden (GM) and Ford (err..Ford) have good disesel engines available to them so who not use them? 4 cylinder for an entry model and why not a twin turbo 6 for higher models?
I have owned diesel hatchbacks and I loved the lazy nature of the engine (320NM @ 2000RPM) and the 3 weekly tank fill. Servicing was no more expensive than a petrol car and I barely noticed any diesel clatter. A friend has a Mondeo diesel and you would not pick it at all from inside the car.

[pcmx5]

My Renault Laguna 111 diesel gives about 5.8lt/100 klm on the freeway and has averaged 7.2 over the last 8000 klms at an average of 48klph, so plenty of stop start in that. 110 kw 340 Nm 2 lt and it is not even a really modern design. Only thing i cannot understand is why diesel which is cheaper in most markets than petrol is dearer in Aus?

Whatever, I did some motoring journalism in the late 70's/80's and remeber being astonished that I could get 25 mpg out of an economy 4 speed manual 3.3 ltre Falcon that they brought out with a moonshot diff.Only thing was that you had tp change down to go over the white line,it was about as entertaining to drive as a Datsun 120Y!! Ordinary Falcons were at around 16-18mpg.
Economy and safety have certainly come a long way. Nnot sure how many of these 4 cylinders they will sell, sems a bit late to me.

Peter.

[Guran]

A big heavy 4cyl turbocharged Falcon will still chew through petrol. The problem is the weight of the car, not the capacity of the engine. A boosted 4cyl Falcon should weigh a little less than the six, but it will need to be punted hard to make headway. This will make the ADR fuel consumption even less relevant than it already is for the six.

A turbo-diesel Falcon makes much more sense. It is truly mind-boggling that it's never been down, and almost as surprising is the length of time it took to get the diesel into Territory, which is even heavier. Now I've read that the diesel version is dominated Territory sales. Surprise surprise.

Frankly, I don't see the Falcon surviving beyond the current product cycle. Either production will be canned completely, or Ford Aus will start making FWD Taurus (maybe rebadged as a Falcon?). As the Ford execs keep saying - "no decision as been made at this stage."

[GP]

Well the 4 cylinder Commodore was a failure.

And this is where I am completely dumbfounded as to Australia's aversion to Diesel powered passenger cars

Bad for the environment maybe

It's cheaper to produce,

The modern electronic diesels are more expensive than petrol engines.(In fact we have trouble selling them now)

modern diesel engines are as quiet and smooth as their petrol counterpart.

Not quite yet

[hks_kansei]

Well the 4 cylinder Commodore was a failure.

And this is where I am completely dumbfounded as to Australia's aversion to Diesel powered passenger cars

Bad for the environment maybe

Not a clue, but I would imagine that less fuel being burned would = less emissions?
yes, perhaps Diesel makes more pollutants than petrol fro each litre burned, but to get to teh same destination the diesel burns fewer litres.

It's cheaper to produce,

The modern electronic diesels are more expensive than petrol engines.(In fact we have trouble selling them now)

Sorry, I meant diesel fuel is cheaper to produce than petrol.

modern diesel engines are as quiet and smooth as their petrol counterpart.

Not quite yet

But they're bloody close.
The current Mondeo diesel is no more noisy or rough than the Falcon's straight six.

[pcmx5]

[quote="Guran"]A big heavy 4cyl turbocharged Falcon will still chew through petrol.
I would have thought so too but they are claiming 8.2 ltr 100klm combined on the Govt test,probably not, like lots of these figures, achievable in real life but impressive nonetheless.

Any comparison of a 4 cylinder Commodore is from another era.Peter Brock ran a 2.1 lt version in a Gemini with irving head in the Readyplan rally (1997 or and the thing flew(3.3 with 2 cylinders cut off) but they kept having electrical problems with the cooking version, the conrods dislodged the alternator as they exited the block, hence we ended up with the 1900cc(2850 with two pots off)"starfire 4" in Holdens and Toyota Corona's. Now that engine SOUNDED like a diesel and was an absolute dog.

Also strange that diesels are so popular in Europe and the vast majority are manuals while here we are predominantly petrol and auto.

Peter.

[Mr Morlock]

GP may well be on to it.Its fair to wonder why we have not in the past embraced oilers. Insofar as small engines are concerned there is not much saving petrol versus diesel. Services costs are said to be more expensive and initial price is hefty compared to petrol- you can do the sums. Also diesels still rattle and sound dreadful at idle and they run out of puff fast- a bit like Harleys. Makers quote high NM torque but most of the Eu cars have very poor tow ratings or you find the maker cannot supplier an approved tow bar. Modern petrol engines run very sweet and quiet and have a broad power band. LPG has been badly handled - the latest Ford version seems to have got there too late.

Diesels were always more popular in Eu for a number of reasons related partly to taxing and of course manuals were the norm. Here we had mighty engines, autos like USA ,stacks of poke,acres of room, power to tow etc- but the market has changed- the small cars got bigger.

[Guran]

A big heavy 4cyl turbocharged Falcon will still chew through petrol.

I would have thought so too but they are claiming 8.2 ltr 100klm combined on the Govt test,probably not, like lots of these figures, achievable in real life but impressive nonetheless.

Yes it's an impressive number. But it means nothing. The ADR fuel consumption test is done on a dynometer for about 20 minutes, with some sensors stuffed in the exhaust pipe. The engine doesn't need to shift the weight of the car and they don't even measure the actual fuel used (they calculate it from the emissions). In the real world a small engine needs to work extra hard to shift that large mass. For this reason, real world fuel consumption, measured in terms of L/100km/tonne has hardly changed in the last twenty odd years. True! The car manufacturers are masters at making their cars look ever greener in official fuel consumption tests, but you never see that in real world driving.

[Bizi]

My TDI Jetta fwd sedan would beat the Falcon turbo on so many comparisons, but Ford has demonstrated that it will continually propose stuff then fails to get it to the market, all while asking for different taxpayer subsidies.

I am excited about Ford's turbo rwd Mx5! Haha, NC/MD turbo! That's what we need. Someone retrofit this to our roadster.
NEW Ford Capri.


I hope the bland old 4cyl taxi/seda sells well.

More turbo 4cylinder cars, especially Ford 4cylinders, is a good thing for us. Possible future mx5 retrofits, north-south, transmission etc, would be nice, so let's support this!

As Guran reflects, it's likely way too little, way too late.

Times have changed. Hyundai spends megabucks advertising that its cars are good; Holden's managers make noises that this is the end of the line - and has stopped making hero cars that get buyers into the showroom.

What are Holden, Ford and Toyota doing to generate real excitement for their mainstream models? It's been years since the old Aussie cars have been exciting!

Manufacturing talk, jobs, subsidies - where is the excitement about the PRODUCT?

[deviant]

GP may well be on to it.Its fair to wonder why we have not in the past embraced oilers. Insofar as small engines are concerned there is not much saving petrol versus diesel. Services costs are said to be more expensive and initial price is hefty compared to petrol- you can do the sums. Also diesels still rattle and sound dreadful at idle and they run out of puff fast- a bit like Harleys. Makers quote high NM torque but most of the Eu cars have very poor tow ratings or you find the maker cannot supplier an approved tow bar. Modern petrol engines run very sweet and quiet and have a broad power band. LPG has been badly handled - the latest Ford version seems to have got there too late.

Diesels were always more popular in Eu for a number of reasons related partly to taxing and of course manuals were the norm. Here we had mighty engines, autos like USA ,stacks of poke,acres of room, power to tow etc- but the market has changed- the small cars got bigger.

Not trying to be argumentative but my experience with modern oil burners is entirely different to this.

Purchase price is not massively different. They do clatter at idle but honestly inside the car you barely hear it and as soon as you move from idle there is no clatter at all.

The oiler hatch backs I had all had 1300KG limits but towing isnt just the only use for the torque....the driveability of them is very good. You dont need to row up and down the gears, you can use 3rd gear from barely moving through a 5000RPM redline and there is certainly no need to drop gears to overtake. For me the driveability is the biggest plus point..2l TD with 320+ NM torque or 2l petrol with under 200NM, makes a big difference in day to day driving.

Long distance cruising is spectacular, 1000KM at 140KMH and 2000RPM.

Servicing costs are certainly not more expensive.