New Ford Falcon Beats Holden's Commodore To Become Our First 5-Star Safety Rated Car

[benroethig]

Originally Posted by nota

In other words .. We had to kill the patient to 'save' it


What advances would a shared Mustang platform bring to existing Falcon?
How can it be that Ford's little Aussie outpost has consistently been able to engineer a superior product to the parent company's efforts - and why?

What makes Ford-Oz deliver a regular family sedan that has and continues to so comprehensively outhandle even the 'sporty' Mustang - not to mention Dearborn's rest including that other RWD relic - and can progressively developed a barely competitive 50 y/o motor into something that easily rivals current - and future - big $$ US engines?

A better powerplant, with vastly superior dynamics, offering more advanced transmissions, a huge range of platform variations, etc - and all realised on a fraction of the budget allocations which in the US achieves such mediocre product, from the 'we know better' mob you guys term as Falcon's 'saviours'

What advances would it bring? It saves Dearborn money which makes it possible to remember that the land down under exists.

[Robert Ryan]

What advances would it bring? It saves Dearborn money which makes it possible to remember that the land down under exists.

How does that help Australian Ford? Each division including the NA one has to be profitable. No way should the local product help prop a not very good product( Hideous Ford Flex /NA Focus and even the current Mustang comes to mind) of Ford NA.

[Robert Ryan]

Ultimately building Falcons in the US sharing the Mustang platform would help save the Falcon in Australia cost-wise long term, of which Ford really needs to do.

Quote:
Originally Posted by benroethig
And would make its future a little more secure

About as much sense as giving Toyota money to expand their Australian operation..idiotic.

[aldw]

Originally Posted by Robert Ryan

About as much sense as giving Toyota money to expand their Australian operation..idiotic.

Ford needs to combine the strengths of all their global operations together to succeed, not this parochial 'not made here' mindset that only serves to help the competition. Toyota can afford to spend money to expand Australian operations at this point far more than Ford can work to maintain sales. If Australian customers think that their Falcon is too good to be 'tainted' by association with Ford NA, then letting Toyota walk all over the Australia market would be a better choice.

[Generation IV]

This is where Ford's rediculous advertising slogans make me laugh. Ford US are insistent on naming all their cars 'European', even the Falcon!!! god knows why. But they think it appeals to alot more buyers in the market. For that to make sense you'd have to have a mind so out of whack you'd literally think you were an onion. The Falcon is about as European as a bowl of Vindaloo.

If Ford are so insistent on making their products have a European image, then why do they continue with this foolish mindset of Americanising everything. If anything, Ford US should be overthrown and replaced by Ford EU. If the situation became as sever as that. Marketing flaws, design flaws, platform flaws, the whole deal is traced to Ford US. The reason they are insistent in leaving the Falcon Australia-only is rediculous. I mean the Crown Victoria and Mustang are perfect examples of what cars shouldn't be.

Ford want to use the stupid idea of making the Falcon a Mustang derivative, sure go ahead, I mean staying in the red intentionally must be some idea of fun for them. Ford US have nothing useful to contribute to the Falcon. They will only make it fall if they intervene with useless ideas like this Mustang-platform sharing sh**.

[mikmak]

Originally Posted by aldw

Ford needs to combine the strengths of all their global operations together to succeed, not this parochial 'not made here' mindset that only serves to help the competition. Toyota can afford to spend money to expand Australian operations at this point far more than Ford can work to maintain sales. If Australian customers think that their Falcon is too good to be 'tainted' by association with Ford NA, then letting Toyota walk all over the Australia market would be a better choice.

Give me an example where Ford NA has contributed significantly to RWD Large or Medium cars in the last decade. Give me one example where we shouldn't be hesitant in regard to accepting Ford NAs "help". Just one, accessible affordable car that shares the same level of acclaim (local or otherwise). Toyota is dominating the Australian market through a combination classes and large passenger cars isn't one of them. Domestic manufacturers producing a model specific to their market is a smart way to maintain diversity in the global empire, whether it be GM, Ford or Toyota. These market specific models can them pass their models amongst each other. That is how Globalisation should work; through sharing. Not through one centralised design house determining a vehicle that tries to blend in to all markets whilst not being great in any one in particular.

Caddy exports the CTS because it is the best car from their market. Holden Exports the G8/Lumina/Commodore because it is their best, etc, etc.

Ford Europe exports the Mondeo and Focus because they are their best designs.

Ford NA exports the F Series because that's all they have

The only thing that The Falcon needs to be globally successful is export capability.

And the reason why it is foolish to invest in greater Toyota production in Oz is because they don't make anything that is unique. Well, perhaps the TRD Aurion, but that's hardly any great shakes. even the Epica out sells it.

Falcon G6/MKS
Normally Aspirated 6cylinder
Power kw(HP metric)
195(265) @6000 / 198(270) @6250
Torque nm(pound-force foot)
391 (288.4) @ 3250 / 359 (265) @4250
Towing Capacity kg(lbs)
2300 (5071) / 453.6(1000) <--lol
Curb Weight kg(lbs)
1760 (3880) / 1872 (4127)
City Fuel consumption L/100km (USMPG)
14.5(16.22) / 13.84(17)
Highway Fuel consumption L/100km (USMPG)
7.7 (30.55) / 9.8(24)

Note: I used the MKS to give NA the chance to showcase the 3.7 which is rumoured () to replace grandpa's axe in falcons next gen.

You can all you want. There is no significant contribution that Ford NA can provide to the Falcon program.

[Generation IV]

Originally Posted by mikmak

Give me an example where Ford NA has contributed significantly to RWD Large or Medium cars in the last decade. Give me one example where we shouldn't be hesitant in regard to accepting Ford NAs "help". Just one, accessible affordable car that shares the same level of acclaim (local or otherwise). Toyota is dominating the Australian market through a combination classes and large passenger cars isn't one of them. Domestic manufacturers producing a model specific to their market is a smart way to maintain diversity in the global empire, whether it be GM, Ford or Toyota. These market specific models can them pass their models amongst each other. That is how Globalisation should work; through sharing. Not through one centralised design house determining a vehicle that tries to blend in to all markets whilst not being great in any one in particular.

Caddy exports the CTS because it is the best car from their market. Holden Exports the G8/Lumina/Commodore because it is their best, etc, etc.

Ford Europe exports the Mondeo and Focus because they are their best designs.

Ford NA exports the F Series because that's all they have

The only thing that The Falcon needs to be globally successful is export capability.

And the reason why it is foolish to invest in greater Toyota production in Oz is because they don't make anything that is unique. Well, perhaps the TRD Aurion, but that's hardly any great shakes. even the Epica out sells it.

Falcon G6/MKS
Normally Aspirated 6cylinder
Power kw(HP metric)
195(265) @6000 / 198(270) @6250
Torque nm(pound-force foot)
391 (288.4) @ 3250 / 359 (265) @4250
Towing Capacity kg(lbs)
2300 (5071) / 453.6(1000) <--lol
Curb Weight kg(lbs)
1760 (3880) / 1872 (4127)
City Fuel consumption L/100km (USMPG)
14.5(16.22) / 13.84(17)
Highway Fuel consumption L/100km (USMPG)
7.7 (30.55) / 9.8(24)

Note: I used the MKS to give NA the chance to showcase the 3.7 which is rumoured () to replace grandpa's axe in falcons next gen.

You can all you want. There is no significant contribution that Ford NA can provide to the Falcon program.

Lol, so true. By the way, the 3.7 has fairly commendable outputs as well as fuel consumption, but unless Ford figure something out, their relative inexperience with V6's will show through and if the Falcon gains anymore weight or gets a bit bigger, the new Falcon in 2011 will be slower and thirstier and less refined and the 3.6 Alloytec will overtake it most definitely. The Alloytec is getting more and more smooth, refined, less thirsty and more powerful with each model update. Im actually expecting Holden to overtake Ford for a certain amount of time when the I6 is dropped and the 3.7 V6 is introduced.

[mikmak]

How so? The HFV6 is already outclassed by the current generation 3.7, albeit with a higher max torque rpm. I would expect that the Ecoboost version will also be significantly better again. What does GM have to take it on? DI? wow.

[ford&holden]

Originally Posted by mikmak

Give me an example where Ford NA has contributed significantly to RWD Large or Medium cars in the last decade. Give me one example where we shouldn't be hesitant in regard to accepting Ford NAs "help". Just one, accessible affordable car that shares the same level of acclaim (local or otherwise). Toyota is dominating the Australian market through a combination classes and large passenger cars isn't one of them. Domestic manufacturers producing a model specific to their market is a smart way to maintain diversity in the global empire, whether it be GM, Ford or Toyota. These market specific models can them pass their models amongst each other. That is how Globalisation should work; through sharing. Not through one centralised design house determining a vehicle that tries to blend in to all markets whilst not being great in any one in particular.

Caddy exports the CTS because it is the best car from their market. Holden Exports the G8/Lumina/Commodore because it is their best, etc, etc.

Ford Europe exports the Mondeo and Focus because they are their best designs.

Ford NA exports the F Series because that's all they have

The only thing that The Falcon needs to be globally successful is export capability.

And the reason why it is foolish to invest in greater Toyota production in Oz is because they don't make anything that is unique. Well, perhaps the TRD Aurion, but that's hardly any great shakes. even the Epica out sells it.

Falcon G6/MKS
Normally Aspirated 6cylinder
Power kw(HP metric)
195(265) @6000 / 198(270) @6250
Torque nm(pound-force foot)
391 (288.4) @ 3250 / 359 (265) @4250
Towing Capacity kg(lbs)
2300 (5071) / 453.6(1000) <--lol
Curb Weight kg(lbs)
1760 (3880) / 1872 (4127)
City Fuel consumption L/100km (USMPG)
14.5(16.22) / 13.84(17)
Highway Fuel consumption L/100km (USMPG)
7.7 (30.55) / 9.8(24)

Note: I used the MKS to give NA the chance to showcase the 3.7 which is rumoured () to replace grandpa's axe in falcons next gen.

You can all you want. There is no significant contribution that Ford NA can provide to the Falcon program.

Couldn't agree more, Ford NA will be the one who benefits ultimately.

[ford&holden]

Originally Posted by Generation IV

Lol, so true. By the way, the 3.7 has fairly commendable outputs as well as fuel consumption, but unless Ford figure something out, their relative inexperience with V6's will show through and if the Falcon gains anymore weight or gets a bit bigger, the new Falcon in 2011 will be slower and thirstier and less refined and the 3.6 Alloytec will overtake it most definitely. The Alloytec is getting more and more smooth, refined, less thirsty and more powerful with each model update. Im actually expecting Holden to overtake Ford for a certain amount of time when the I6 is dropped and the 3.7 V6 is introduced.

[mikmak]

Originally Posted by ford&holden

Couldn't agree more, Ford NA will be the one who benefits ultimately.

.....If they do as they are told

[Generation IV]

Originally Posted by mikmak

How so? The HFV6 is already outclassed by the current generation 3.7, albeit with a higher max torque rpm. I would expect that the Ecoboost version will also be significantly better again. What does GM have to take it on? DI? wow.

Are you kidding me? Yeh of course it outclasses it now and to assume the HFV6 will remain in the same shape it is now for another 6 years is foolish. mikmak, your taking the DI factor rather lightly. You don't think it will make much of a difference? Are you kidding? I'd like to see how the 3.7 would do against the DI 3.6L. You can't be serious in saying the HFV6 is so outclassed that it wouldn't make one bit of a difference either way.

Considering the 3.7 is coming over in a crate from the states and then slapped into the Falcon's engine bay, I'm expecting problems. And an engine producing less torque and having a higher fuel consumption figure will improve the Falcon? Whether you see the 3.7 as being a class in front of the 4.0L I6 is your own decision but I'm predicting problems.

The 3.6 Alloytec in the VE was much better than what it was in the VZ. Whoever thinks not is foolish. I wonder what another 4 or 5 years or so will see happen to the HFV6. It is a pretty good engine in its own right. Maybe we should get f&h's expert opinion on the 3.7's performance and how it will perform in the Falcon because he must know considering the idiotic remarks he'll say back in respect to a 6-cylinder discussion

[ford&holden]

Originally Posted by Generation IV

Are you kidding me? Yeh of course it outclasses it now and to assume the HFV6 will remain in the same shape it is now for another 6 years is foolish. mikmak, your taking the DI factor rather lightly. You don't think it will make much of a difference? Are you kidding? I'd like to see how the 3.7 would do against the DI 3.6L. You can't be serious in saying the HFV6 is so outclassed that it wouldn't make one bit of a difference either way.

Considering the 3.7 is coming over in a crate from the states and then slapped into the Falcon's engine bay, I'm expecting problems. And an engine producing less torque and having a higher fuel consumption figure will improve the Falcon? Whether you see the 3.7 as being a class in front of the 4.0L I6 is your own decision but I'm predicting problems.

The 3.6 Alloytec in the VE was much better than what it was in the VZ. Whoever thinks not is foolish. I wonder what another 4 or 5 years or so will see happen to the HFV6. It is a pretty good engine in its own right. Maybe we should get f&h's expert opinion on the 3.7's performance and how it will perform in the Falcon because he must know considering the idiotic remarks he'll say back in respect to a 6-cylinder discussion

I'll leave the idiotic comments to you

The same, if i can call it 'logic' you apply to the forthcoming updates to the HF V6, also apply to the duratec V6's.

Mikmak is correct, you are not, what a surprise.

Put it this way, the Duratec in falcon certainly can't perform any worse than the HF V6 in the VE...

[Generation IV]

Ford Duratec V6 / GM DI HF V6

Power (kW): 205 @ 6,250 / 225 @ 6,300rpm
Torque (Nm): 366 @ 4,250 / 370 @ 5,200rpm
Capacity (cc): 3721 (3.7L) / 3564 (3.6L)

3.7L Duratec V6 figures quoted on premium unleaded gasoline
3.6L DI HFV6 figures quoted on regular gasoline

Its close, in terms of torque, power needs no explanation, these are the current generations. Give another 4 years for when the Falcon receives it and we'll see more changes for both engines.

Passing judgement on the superior today is a stupid idea. You can bet the Ford Aus/Holden versions will produce different outputs. Taking past examples into the equation, you can probably bet the Holden version will produce more power and torque, like previous versions. Ford have no V6 history, so hard to judge on that front. This is all speculation people.

[Generation IV]

Originally Posted by ford&holden

I'll leave the idiotic comments to you

The same, if i can call it 'logic' you apply to the forthcoming updates to the HF V6, also apply to the duratec V6's.

Mikmak is correct, you are not, what a surprise.

Put it this way, the Duratec in falcon certainly can't perform any worse than the HF V6 in the VE...

I don't remember saying the 3.7 will perform worse. I have high expectations for it, because it certainly is a good engine, if the 3.5 is anything to go by. The Ecoboost moniker mikmak refers to is a twin-turbocharged version, of course that'll outperform an N/A engine. What a rediculous remark. I know nothing of a future turbocharged HFV6 so I can't say anything on that front.

True, these forthcoming updates would apply to the Duratec as well. However, Ford have failed to announce anything apart from a GDi twin-turbo version is possible for the MKS in 2011. GM have released a standard DI V6 already. If you ask me, GM is in front of the game there. I'm assuming you've driven the 3.7 f&h. Please enlighten us with your thoughts on it.

My main point is, that anyone suggesting the HFV6 will be inferior to an engine that is yet to be even driven or even applied to the Falcon for at least another couple of years is beyond me. Why would anyone believe the HFV6, I mean specifically the DI HFV6 would be trash in comparison?