I wouldn't have thought of that^. But then again you're wrong2.
wrong2,
May 19, 12:55am
doesnt surprise
franc123,
May 19, 2:36am
I don't know what the moaning is about, the new engine is a superb supplementary option, just whats needed at the moment to make Falcons appeal to a wider group of buyers, those who are mainly urban drivers who fancy a proper large car but can't justify running a large 6 or 8 to the office and back will like it. For those that prefer the more traditional characteristics of the large engines when doing lots of highway driving and/or heavy towing then you tick that option, the four is not replacing these. Not hard is it.
friendly_prawn,
May 19, 2:55am
i was speaking to a couple of mechanics who state that the only reason ford is going through the exercise of introducing a 2.L crappy turbo crappy pooh bum engine is to comply with emissions controls. Any thoughts on that guys!
elect70,
May 19, 3:12am
BMW saw the writing on the wallre emissions& fuel usecouple years agothats why new M5 is now a 4.4 twin turbo intercooledV8412 Kw(thats 560 bhp )680 Nmtiorqueinstead of the old V10. All their range is downsizing inengine capacity but notpower .
bellky,
May 19, 3:15am
I don't really understand that^. It's making more power so it's using more petrol! So therefore more emissions!
friendly_prawn,
May 19, 3:16am
the mechanics i was speaking to said that it had something to do with the turbo'd engines being more emissions friendly.
robotnik,
May 19, 3:27am
The 2.0L 'Eco-boost' turbo will output 179kW and 353Nm of torque. Which is pretty good for a family car really. And being turbo it should be possible to modify it for more, for not a lot of cost. Anyway, there will still be an i/6 so the petrol head types can go for that one.
rob_man,
May 19, 3:38am
There's a few gayboys over in Environment too.
rob_man,
May 19, 3:42am
I think it will come down to better efficiency in turning hydrocarbons into energy, the ratio has been pretty tragic for most of the life span of the internal combustion engine. I think it was something like 15% up till a few years ago.
bagal,
May 19, 4:31am
Just proves Commy is way ahead of Falcon. They had a 2 l one years ago!
Design makesbetteruse of,higher comp ratio & direct injection ,sayBMW
mokaubach,
May 20, 2:30am
7.8!, rubbish, I've owned several, double your figure if you are pushing it and you would be closer to the mark.
phillip.weston,
May 20, 2:30am
Chill put mate they are only introducing a 2.0 4cyl (which has near identical performance but better economy figures to the 6cyl) to supplement the existing range - so the 6 and 8cyl variants will remain. The EcoBoost 4cyl will appeal to fleet operators, taxis, rental cars etc where the EcoBoost will do just as good of a job and return lower fuel consumption.
smac,
May 20, 2:57am
You've owned several 6 speed FG's!
chris_051,
May 20, 8:35am
That was over the whole trip about 630km, and I wasnt breaking the speed limit, 100kmh cruise most of the time, last time I did it in a rental was a Rav 4, returned 8.4l/100km, go figure. Ohh and yeah even my current V8 Falcon driving spirtedly on a long trip I wouldn't be anywhere near 'double those figures', maybe if I were towing 2 tonne.
inkapuka,
May 20, 10:53am
ford are plastic fantastic lol
mokaubach,
May 20, 12:14pm
Hang on a minute, you said you gave the Car "a good raping", now you say you didn't exceed 100kph!, I challenge your figure that is well under published figures, I drive my FGXR6 briskly and from memory the average computer history is sitting at 13.6, I have never seen sub 10 , neither has Ford. Sorry but I just don't believe your figure unless you were being towed!
chris_051,
May 20, 12:55pm
Yup not hanging around, keeping speed on the hills and overtaking with air con which isn't the best for fuel economy but believe it or not over a long distance of mostly easy going constant 100kmh speeds, a 50km stretch of road with a heavy foot doesn't alter the average fuel figures by much. and yep the average COMBINED fuel figure for the Falcon is 9.9l/100km (which is highway and urban), so yes Ford has seen less than 10, Ive done over 300,000km in Falcons from EF to FG and can vouch for that myself even my V8 Fairlane can achieve 9l/100km akld-wgtn, maybe you should learn how to drive!
smac,
May 20, 8:19pm
He's talking about a single trip that is predominantly open road. What's your urban/rural split!
friendly_prawn,
May 20, 8:29pm
Yes but only either fwd or 4WD. 4WD fine, but a front wheel drive coon!
smac,
May 20, 8:43pm
Pretty sure they're RWD until 2016.I think.
friendly_prawn,
May 20, 9:03pm
OH well, thats some consolation. I guess it gives them time to see common sense.
smac,
May 20, 9:33pm
From what I've read there is a SMALL chance the RWD stays, if they decide to adopt the Mustang as the base for the global model for the large car. However if they go Mondeo (Fusion) then it will be FWD or AWD. Basically Ford's business model is global (makes sense), no more niche market models. At the moment the smart money is on the Mondeo/Fusion. The aussie govt have bailed out Falcon/Ford until 2016, but after that.
Since the public registrations are closed, you must have an invite from a current member to be able to register and post in this thread.
Have an account? Login here.