FORD & GM downgraded - Page 2

ford.boy · 11-05-2005, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPO83

It won't crap over the Duratec 35 though.

The negative rating isn't an indication that Ford will collapse, its just a kick in the **** for being managed poorly. Dearborn can crap on all they like about the future, but if they can't do what they say can be achieved then there's good reason for their stock downgrade. If this persists then Bill Ford Jr. should take a long holiday.

Right, so this Duratec 35 you speak of (forgive my complete ignorance of the up and comming engines from Ford) could be and indication that ford is starting to weed out the crap?

RPO83 · 11-05-2005, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ford.boy

Right, so this Duratec 35 you speak of (forgive my complete ignorance of the up and comming engines from Ford) could be and indication that ford is starting to weed out the crap?

They have already started to weed out the crap, once the Fusion, Five-Hundred and Freestyle have the 3.5 they will be an extremely competitive package. Bulid quality has improved also. The products are sound, Ford's program is just seen as too slow in the marketplace.

Dave_au · 11-05-2005, 10:18 PM

I guess the issue for our 4L is whether there are enough applications, enough efficiency of scale/returns, and sound distribution channels to warrant Ford to keep production going.

Bossxr8 · 12-05-2005, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RPO83

They have already started to weed out the crap, once the Fusion, Five-Hundred and Freestyle have the 3.5 they will be an extremely competitive package. Bulid quality has improved also. The products are sound, Ford's program is just seen as too slow in the marketplace.

Do you have the exact power and torque figures, cause if I remember correctly its something like 150kw and 320nm, which puts it well behind the Barra 182 let alone the 240T. I really can't see Ford using one of these V6's as they just don't make enough grunt.

Dave_au · 12-05-2005, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I really can't see Ford using one of these V6's as they just don't make enough grunt.

Well the problem is that Ford Aus has to do what FoMoCo tells them to do, and if FoMoCo says "you have to use this engine if your going to have a 6" then their options may be limited.

You don't really think Mitsubishi Aus wanted the TL Magna's nose - they were forced to have it on the principles of a "global face" by Boulay.

RPO83 · 12-05-2005, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Do you have the exact power and torque figures, cause if I remember correctly its something like 150kw and 320nm, which puts it well behind the Barra 182 let alone the 240T. I really can't see Ford using one of these V6's as they just don't make enough grunt.

If the Duratec 3.0 has 154kW then I would safely assume the 3.5 has more power and torque.

I can only see FoA using the Duratec 35 if emission laws were tightened to such an extent that further development on the I6 is not economically viable.

Bossxr8 · 14-05-2005, 01:58 PM

Have a read of yesterdays Herald Sun cars guide if you can. Ford has been given a grant from the government of around $30 million to help development of the Barra 6. They will be focusing on passing future emissions levels and NVH. About time the government did something decent.

rodderz · 14-05-2005, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Have a read of yesterdays Herald Sun cars guide if you can. Ford has been given a grant from the government of around $30 million to help development of the Barra 6. They will be focusing on passing future emissions levels and NVH. About time the government did something decent.

Yup read that too...good stuff by Ford and the government. As they said the current Barra engines more than meet emission levels but this grant will ensure the straight 6 will continue to be a clean engine till past 2010.

Later in the year the engines will meet Euro standards anyway so the engines will be running leaner....which means cleaner, and more power!