Ecoboost whats the point

[galaxy xr8]

I think Ford should start looking at their image not their product range so much, but that's just me.

[RASER]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Reality check... 140 Kw's powering a Falcon...I don't think so

Errr, my 2008 Falcon 1-tonner Tray LPG has 157kW just 17kW more than your "140kW" low figure you mentioned above.

I tow tandem trailers, and load well over 1 tonne on the tray [woops, sometimes around 2 tonnes] and you know what, it has HEAPS of power and torque, i have NEVER wanted OR NEEDED more, even when lightly loaded tray it will outdrag 85% of the other vehicles at traffic-light-GP's

Whats the obsession with POWER?

The AJ-i4D out of the XF Jaguar is a 4 cyl. of 2179cc and 140kW, yet a MASSIVE 450Nm of torque.

Combined fuel use:
Falcon IL6 9.9L/100km
Jaguar 2.2 5.4L/100km

Carbon Dioxide
Falcon IL6 236g/km
Jaguar 2.2 149/km

Weight
Falcon IL6 1710kg
Jaguar 2.2 1745kg

0 - 100km/h
Falcon IL6 ?? [7 / 8s?]
Jaguar 2.2 8.5s [Care factor ZERO]

Lowest fuel consumption
Falcon IL6 7.2l/100km
Jaguar 2.2 4.8l/100km

So the Jag weighs MORE than the Falcon and near beats it in every single figure, yeap a small diesel in a Falcon wont work.....NOT

THIS is the engine the Falcon should have had, not the EB

[prydey]

Originally Posted by csv8

As I have said before..the Mondeo is the better car for the money, better equipment level etc..when comparing Ecoboost to Mondeo Zetec..Mondeo wins , hands down....

for you maybe. if a top line current mondeo was the same price as my 4yr old FG XR6, i would still buy the falcon. no contest. mondeo looks ok, but the interior is not to my taste. for me, the falcon kills it. i'm no geek. i don't need the gadgets. hell, i hardly use all the features of the FG.


this thread highlights how many people don't have the ability to look at the big picture. it it doesn't suit them, then it is wrong and pointless.

the problem with many 4cyl cars is that they are smaller. ecoboost gives the option of a full size car. it is aimed at fleets with 4cyl or <200g co2 policy. hardly a difficult concept to grasp. it also offers choice for all buyers.

guess what, lpg is not available as widely as petrol, so for some ecolpi isn't an option.

[Polyal]

I find some remarks on this car just staggering, and a real shame as i thought Ford fans were more open minded about new technology and being the market leader. Unless of course they are GM fan boys signing up for a quick laugh and really dont have a clue what they are talking about.

If you dont like EB4 then so what, obviously the car is not aimed at you and here is the kicker....

YOU DONT HAVE TO BUY ONE.

So, whats the point in starting a thread about a car you dont like and obviously dont understand.

Markets change very quickly and if anyone thinks the falcon or the commy will continue without change then they quite clearly dont understand the climate we are in.

EB4 is not here to kill off the I6, quite the opposite, its here to attempt to keep Falcon numbers up so we can enjoy our turbos and FPV's etc.

Some of the comments on car review websites and Facebook just show how stupid some people can be.

[Rodge]

Ummm Dash, what are you talking about ? Put the heavy V6 diesel engine in the Falc and its a heavier car, not a lighter one.

Even if Ford had access to the 2.2 litre diesel in the Jaguar as well as the money to fit the Falc with an 8 speed ZF and even more money to get the super slippery aerodynamics of the XF Jaguar it would still be 2 seconds slower to 100 km/hr. Nice little diesel engine in that Jag but its too slow !!

Raser 0 - 100km/h
Falcon IL6 ?? [7 / 8s?]
Jaguar 2.2 8.5s [Care factor ZERO]

Ford EB 6.6 seconds
Jaguar 8.5 seconds. Big difference in performance between those two figures. I for one (and i'll bet I'm not alone) would not buy a Falc with 8.5 second performance whereas one with mid 6's is more than satisfactory for 90% + of buyers.

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by RASER

Errr, my 2008 Falcon 1-tonner Tray LPG has 157kW just 17kW more than your "140kW" low figure you mentioned above.

I tow tandem trailers, and load well over 1 tonne on the tray [woops, sometimes around 2 tonnes] and you know what, it has HEAPS of power and torque, i have NEVER wanted OR NEEDED more, even when lightly loaded tray it will outdrag 85% of the other vehicles at traffic-light-GP's

Whats the obsession with POWER?

The AJ-i4D out of the XF Jaguar is a 4 cyl. of 2179cc and 140kW, yet a MASSIVE 450Nm of torque.

Combined fuel use:
Falcon IL6 9.9L/100km
Jaguar 2.2 5.4L/100km

Carbon Dioxide
Falcon IL6 236g/km
Jaguar 2.2 149/km

Weight
Falcon IL6 1710kg
Jaguar 2.2 1745kg

0 - 100km/h
Falcon IL6 ?? [7 / 8s?]
Jaguar 2.2 8.5s [Care factor ZERO]

Lowest fuel consumption
Falcon IL6 7.2l/100km
Jaguar 2.2 4.8l/100km

So the Jag weighs MORE than the Falcon and near beats it in every single figure, yeap a small diesel in a Falcon wont work.....NOT

THIS is the engine the Falcon should have had, not the EB

Looking at those stat's the diesel does make a very good case point.

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Ummm Dash, what are you talking about ? Put the heavy V6 diesel engine in the Falc and its a heavier car, not a lighter one.

Even if Ford had access to the 2.2 litre diesel in the Jaguar as well as the money to fit the Falc with an 8 speed ZF and even more money to get the super slippery aerodynamics of the XF Jaguar it would still be 2 seconds slower to 100 km/hr. Nice little diesel engine in that Jag but its too slow !!

What am I talking about?? the Falcon will still be lighter then the Territory with the V6 Diesel, so it should perform better!!

The Diesel option adds 54 kgs to a Territory. Which would take an XT from 1704 to 1758... Still 263 kgs lighter then the Territory... Would definitely make a difference!

[galaxy xr8]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Ummm Dash, what are you talking about ? Put the heavy V6 diesel engine in the Falc and its a heavier car, not a lighter one.

Even if Ford had access to the 2.2 litre diesel in the Jaguar as well as the money to fit the Falc with an 8 speed ZF and even more money to get the super slippery aerodynamics of the XF Jaguar it would still be 2 seconds slower to 100 km/hr. Nice little diesel engine in that Jag but its too slow !!

I think from memory that I did read somewhere that there is not much weight difference between the I6 and V6 diesel that now power's the SZ range ?.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by Polyal

I find some remarks on this car just staggering, and a real shame as i thought Ford fans were more open minded about new technology and being the market leader. Unless of course they are GM fan boys signing up for a quick laugh and really dont have a clue what they are talking about.

If you dont like EB4 then so what, obviously the car is not aimed at you and here is the kicker....

YOU DONT HAVE TO BUY ONE.

So, whats the point in starting a thread about a car you dont like and obviously dont understand.

Markets change very quickly and if anyone thinks the falcon or the commy will continue without change then they quite clearly dont understand the climate we are in.

EB4 is not here to kill off the I6, quite the opposite, its here to attempt to keep Falcon numbers up so we can enjoy our turbos and FPV's etc.

Some of the comments on car review websites and Facebook just show how stupid some people can be.

Never a truer word spoken.

Some of you haters need to go find another forum to crap on, because you quite clearly have no interest in Ford and the Falcon doing well.

[RASER]

Originally Posted by galaxy xr8

Looking at those stat's the diesel does make a very good case point.

Indeed, its a VERY impressive donk, MASSIVE low down torque which we love, and of course no engine is more tweakable than modern turbo diesels [if your after that sort of thing]

Mind you, Benz, VW and BMW all have similar leading engine 4cy. diesels, even Hyundai are getting in on the act, AUS is once again taking to long to get on it.

You could well do 1000km out of a diesel Falcon, that would stick it right up The General, that would be a great selling point, instead of *trying* to explain why/which ULP engine is better in a Falcon, what have the Ford dealers been told to do and push?

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by RASER

Indeed, its a VERY impressive donk, MASSIVE low down torque which we love, and of course no engine is more tweakable than modern turbo diesels [if your after that sort of thing]

Mind you, Benz, VW and BMW all have similar leading engine 4cy. diesels, even Hyundai are getting in on the act, AUS is once again taking to long to get on it.

You could well do 1000km out of a diesel Falcon, that would stick it right up The General

You can do 1000kms in a Diesel Territory... A Falcon would be more like 1200 + assuming you could get the economy down to 5.5 per hundred (territory will do 6.5 per hundred).

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

The Territory V6 in the lighter Falcon would out perform the Ecoboost all day everyday... And give buyers the prestige associated with the Diesel yuppie fuel.

Plus Ford would have saved a ******** of money at the same time (one motor instead of 2).

And people forget about the ute, diesel would be the difference between life and death for a ute. The market has shifted to diesel massively. People want to buy the Falcon it's just that Ford hasn't kept up with the market shift. I love my EcoLpi but I know that for Falcon ute to hope to get around 1000 units a month it needs diesel.

[RASER]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

You can do 1000kms in a Diesel Territory... A Falcon would be more like 1200 + assuming you could get the economy down to 5.5 per hundred (territory will do 6.5 per hundred).

+1

"A easy 1000km range for all drivers, 1500km for the hypermilers"

First to 2000km wins a year of fuel or some other prize [need to use 3.5l/100km, hard but doable, paging John Taylor]

Would sell like hotcakes if they marketed correctly

[Rodge]

Geez there wouldn't be barely another manufacturer in the world that offers a wider range of power options in a single car yet the bleaters are still crying if only it had this or that or the other.
They live in some fantasy land where they imagine a small niche manufacturer has unlimited resources for R & D.

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by Nic85

You do realise the N/A Camry gets to 100km/h in 9 seconds, right? And the Hybrid Camry is 8 second flat. A Focus with the 1L Ecoboost engine takes 12 seconds to 100km/h, and the car weighs 1200kgs. A Falcon with that engine, based on those facts, would take around 15-16 seconds, or about 2 months.

Ecoboost 1L is apparently capable of 177hp (130kw). Camry in all its 2.5 N/A slug glory manages 178hp. Hence the idea of electric motors in the front wheel hubs. But probably not something Ford could achieve with such small budgets.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by Brazen

And people forget about the ute, diesel would be the difference between life and death for a ute. The market has shifted to diesel massively. People want to buy the Falcon it's just that Ford hasn't kept up with the market shift. I love my EcoLpi but I know that for Falcon ute to hope to get around 1000 units a month it needs diesel.

umm, hello, Ranger!!!

too many people still want falcon to be a 'one size fits all' vehicle. Ford do not. they are the FORD motor company after all.

[Yellow_Festiva]

Prob been said a few times. The point is to give buyers, in more markets more options to get into a blue oval.. simple.

Any word in Diesel in the Falcon? I just did a long trip in the Focus (LV Diesel) pulling a 600kg trailer and a decent load inside as well.

Figured my rig was at the 2.1t mark all up.

Returned 7.4l on the freeway with normal driving, ie not driving for economy. Plus the added drag of the trailer and extra axle.

What is the current Focus rated at? 120kw / 350ish NM?

Would see sub 7L freeway econmy in a Falcon for sure with that donk under the hood...

But then again, may take sales from TDCi Mondeo...

Wonder how much it would have cost to develop? We will prob see the 2.7diesel in the Falcon soon enough due to the work that has gone into the Tezza.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by DASH GT

The Territory V6 in the lighter Falcon would out perform the Ecoboost all day everyday... And give buyers the prestige associated with the Diesel yuppie fuel.

Plus Ford would have saved a ******** of money at the same time (one motor instead of 2).

How so Dash ??? given that a 140 Kw diesel XF Jaguar takes 8.5 seconds to get to 100 km/hr vs 6.6 seconds for the EB Falc. Exactly what outperformance are you talking about ? BTW what's Yuppie about diesel fuel, what are you going on about ?

If its fuel economy and even if a theoretical diesel Falc got your theoretical 5.5 L/100 Km extra urban fuel economy, so what, EB extra urban rating is 6.0 L/100 and petrol is cheaper than diesel in most parts of Australia is it not ?

Hmmm, wonder how an EB Falc would go with an 8 sp ZF and the Jag's super slippery aerodynamics. I think we'd see it in the low 6 second range, so the difference in performance is probably a bit more than 2 seconds.
As for using the Terry diesel in the Falc, if the Terry diesel is fifty something kilo's heavier than the IL6 petrol Terry and the EB Falc is 74 Kg's lighter than the IL6 Falc then we can assume a diesel Falc would appear to weigh ~ 124 kg's more than an EB Falc with almost all of that weight over the nose of the car, you think that might have an effect on the handling just a little bit...

[Smoke Pursuit]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Geez there wouldn't be barely another manufacturer in the world that offers a wider range of power options in a single car yet the bleaters are still crying if only it had this or that or the other.
They live in some fantasy land where they imagine a small niche manufacturer has unlimited resources for R & D.

Well they would have saved themselves the R & D cost on ecoboost if they just settled for the Diesel wouldn't have they?

Seriously....

[Polyal]

Rodge, with EB4, LPG and TDi is 0-100 really a concern at all?

Sure if its over 10 seconds or so then it will feel like a slug but people are looking at alternatives to save money..its got nothing (IMO) to do with being green etc. For private buyers anyway, gov and business are being forced to think a certain way.

The TDi in a falcon (and ute) would be a winner. Sure the Ranger is here but we all talk about trying to save the Falcon and that means the Falcon changing, IMO even electronic gizmo's wont save the day...Have a look at the result with the Territory and try and logically say it would not help the falcon. I would also hazard a guess and say that there would be sales to be made with a TDi ute as most pickups are TDi. (Has the mining boom been the main factor for their increase?..dont they get diesel concessions?).

Most of the hard work is done with TDi, adapting it to a RWD sedan and ute would not be that hard for the potential it has to increase the sales. I would have preferred them to chase than than LPG and I am a LPG owner myself.

[EFFalcon]

must say, when i'm looking to buy a 4 cylinder falcon and/or a diesel falcon, my first concern is how well it handles......

oh wait, if that was the case i'd be buying something setup to handle in the first place, not a family taxi.

need to analyse the priorities of someone buying an EB/Diesel falcon over the I6.

[Rodge]

Ford Au obviously believe the EB Falc is the way of the future Dash.
Dave's review which many of the haters here appear to have deliberatly missed answers many of the questions.
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11363819
Now we even have Wheels and Drivel (the traditional Jurno Falc haters) coming out praising the EB Falc...

[Rodge]

Poyal, its weight, performance and handling and yes I think that combination matters to Falcon buyers which is why the EB Falc is now the logical choice for Falcon power from how I see it.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Rodge, with EB4, LPG and TDi is 0-100 really a concern at all?

Sure if its over 10 seconds or so then it will feel like a slug but people are looking at alternatives to save money..its got nothing (IMO) to do with being green etc. For private buyers anyway, gov and business are being forced to think a certain way.

The TDi in a falcon (and ute) would be a winner. Sure the Ranger is here but we all talk about trying to save the Falcon and that means the Falcon changing, IMO even electronic gizmo's wont save the day...Have a look at the result with the Territory and try and logically say it would not help the falcon. I would also hazard a guess and say that there would be sales to be made with a TDi ute as most pickups are TDi. (Has the mining boom been the main factor for their increase?..dont they get diesel concessions?).

Most of the hard work is done with TDi, adapting it to a RWD sedan and ute would not be that hard for the potential it has to increase the sales. I would have preferred them to chase than than LPG and I am a LPG owner myself.

Farmers and miners get diesel concessions. Many mining and construction sites are diesel only, petrol vehicles arnt allowed on site. The company I work for has a diesel Hiace van that they use to go on mining sites.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Farmers and miners get diesel concessions. Many mining and construction sites are diesel only, petrol vehicles arnt allowed on site. The company I work for has a diesel Hiace van that they use to go on mining sites.

Thought so, so imagine if you had TDi Falcon Utes with a mandate etc from the gov to say that if you want diesel concessions then you buy local.

I was at a mine site for 2 months and all the cars they had where large 4x4's, Vans, etc....And the majority of the time they were not full, one or two people, so perhaps they were buying them just because they are TDI..not so much the capacity.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Rodge

Poyal, its weight, performance and handling and yes I think that combination matters to Falcon buyers which is why the EB Falc is now the logical choice for Falcon power from how I see it.

I think you vastly over estimate how much handling etc matters to Falcon buyers, if we were worried about handling why would you buy a four door sedan?

Im not saying these are not important factors, all attributes need to be good, but its there priorities that change depending on the car and segment.

ECO and LPI are all about economy first and foremost. Even if the EB4 weighed the same as the I6 but used less fuel (yes doesnt make sense but stick with me) then it would still be successful. These owners dont care about chassis balance which is why when journalist thrash the bejesus out of these cars and say it doesnt pull the same G's as a R35 GTR the car is some how not up to the task, its BS.

[Rodge]

Poyal, I agree its mostly about economy but the other advantages i outlined in Post # 75 are the icing on the cake. Ford provide a fantastic range of engines to power the Falcon, of course in the "perfect world" we'd have even more...

[barra240t]

Just a little fun, Falcon XT EB has better fuel economy than auto Mazda 6, Subury Libarty and Honda Accord Euro. I found that interesting, I think G6 is still better as well, makes Falcon G6 limited ecoboost a great buy at $37,490 drive away at the moment.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by barra240t

Just a little fun, Falcon XT EB has better fuel economy than auto Mazda 6, Subury Libarty and Honda Accord Euro. I found that interesting, I think G6 is still better as well, makes Falcon G6 limited ecoboost a great buy at $37,490 drive away at the moment.

Have you sold many yet?

How is the interest in the demo?

[Polyal]

Im also interested in how long does it roughly equate for a new model to hit its stride? Lets just say we are all happy with the marketing efforts.

One month in is unfair, two its perhaps getting settled and you should know by three? Even then fleets etc are not going to swap overnight.

People will moan after one month of VFACTS stats like its the end of the world but success wont come overnight.

I should have taken a photo but last week at our local Ford dealer there were 4 VE commy's, all bright colours etc, SV6 or SS's...I enjoy seeing that. A few X5;s aswell.