Ford Oz to produce turbo 4-cyl engine for Falcon

[Nero]

seems an odd decision. A direct injection I6 on LPG would make sense.

[MartyHusseinXF]

No PETROL car matches the official consumption fuigures when driven by mr average.

Fixed.

I hit the provided consumption average in the Focus without driving for economy. Diesel ftw.

[MartyHusseinXF]

I'll say. If the figures I got were ever as high as the ADR figures for my car, I'd go looking for a fuel leak

Driving like a girls blouse in the SS FTL

Fixed mate

[Captain_Slow]

Sorry. I will do a bit more work on WOT-brake-WOT-brake-WOT-brake and report back revised, more manly figures

[itsnotagsr]

Just drive like a taxi driver....

[Sicarius123]

Just drive like a taxi driver....

What, fall asleep, change lanes, wake up?

[lumpy]

I also don't understand why all fleet cars need to be enormous pieces of shit with massive engines when all they serve to do is drive one person around with a bunch of sales brochures in the boot. Postie bikes would suffice. Soft rep cunts.

Not all reps cars are like that. Over the past few years the accountants at my work have tried to get reps into smaller/4 cyl cars and trialed Camry's, Forrestors, Outbacks and a couple of others. None of them have anywhere near the load space and towing ease/capacity of the Falcon wagons they currently use (reps do country trips with full trialers every month or two). So now they still have Falcon Wagons but on gas. Everyone else apart from senior managers are getting Mondeos in the future.

The current gas Falcon sedans are shitty family cars though, the boot space is rubbish. Plus the spare wheel is actually inside the boot (as the normal sunken boot floor and spare wheel well are taken up by gas tanks). You struggle to fit a normal pram in it due to the height restrictions. Moving to injected gas is unlikely to change this stupid layout, hence people will stay away. If it wasn't for this (and peoples fear of gas only cars, and the fact the egas variants miss out on 4 channel ABS, decent auto and stability control) they'd be selling heaps.

[Russell]

seems an odd decision. A direct injection I6 on LPG would make sense.

They're also doing that, Liquid Injection it'll be and it's available from mid next year.

[Russell]

Why do people think the 2l engine will be a high revver? The VW turbo engines can muster max Nms at revs < 2000rpm! Can't imagine why the Ford engine would be any different.

This thing apparently makes peak torque at 1500rpm. I'll never buy one but I can see why people would.

For an engine that hasn't even been released yet a lot of people here seem to know how it goes.

[Road_Terrorist]

Most of the mid and large size eurotrash sedans make do with turbo four pots in base models without the world coming to an end and most of them are barely any lighter than a falcadore these days. A Mondeo is only about 100kg lighter than a BF Falcon and if the Falcon has a lighter four cylinder engine that gap might even be narrowed even more and as a side benefit the Falcons handling might even improve with a bit less weight over the front end, so it's not all doom and gloom.

I'd speculate that a turbo four cylinder falcon would probably be the better option over the proposed downsized 3.0L V6 in VE Commodore but obviously it's impossible to judge that until both actually appear.

[Bozz]

No car matches the official consumption fuigures when driven by mr average.

I've got a 1400kg manual car with a 2 litre turbo direct injected petrol engine that constantly beats the advertised figure of 8.1 litres combined by about a 0.5-1 litre. With the missus driving. Who has no concept of using the right gear at the right time, nor the ability to recognise terrain or traffic patterns to utilise inertia and gravity to assist with economical driving.

But then again, she's miss average, not mr average.

Its pretty valid on some cars though, try as you might, you just cant even get close to the advertised figure.

[Bozz]

This thing apparently makes peak torque at 1500rpm. I'll never buy one but I can see why people would.

For an engine that hasn't even been released yet a lot of people here seem to know how it goes.

The VAG 2 litre TFSI makes peak torque from 1800rpm. Under 2000rpm, it drives as nice as any 2 litre non turbo high compression motor:
Check the torque curve on page 6:
http://www.golfmkv.com/forums/golfgo...golfengine.pdf

There's no reason Ford can't make a motor with more power and torque and it feels good pulling the car with four people in it.

[Falc&Send]

Why not use the Ovlov 5 cyl turbo as per Focus XR5T?

[Turbo4WD]

I am all for it.

As mentioned VAG has some great cars using the concept of a small forced induction engine to provide good economy and reasonable performance. The new Golf TSi has had some great reviews as have the Skoda range which include cars not much smaller than a Falcon powered by a 1.8L petrol turbo.

Whilst the Mazda CX7 is not a good example as that engine was actually pulled from the 3/6MPS - mated to the wrong (torque rating is not high enough) gearbox and then reprogrammed to make less low end torque to protect the auto box when in fact it really needed more to push the heavy car around. However if you look back to the 90's to the Eunos 800M it used a very small (2.3L) V6 with a supercharger and some clever valve timing - this was one of the best production petrol engines ever. It was very -smooth, good power and torque (by the standards at the time for a 6cyl luxury car) and fantastic fuel economy.

[excelboy]

Won't somebody think of the P platers