Falcon I6 to be dropped in favour of a V6 - Page 3

Bucknaked · 11-07-2007, 10:44 AM

Built By Ford, Powered by Holden. Better get used to it. HSFPV. Has a nice ring to it.

mcflux · 11-07-2007, 10:47 AM

*reviving old Orion issue*

A V6 would mean less overhang...

loxxr6 · 11-07-2007, 10:50 AM

The specs on the SV6 engine Vs the proposed Duratec engine are pretty close.

It'd be interesting to see what performance change in the Falcon would be with that engine.

seXCmont · 11-07-2007, 10:54 AM

if Ford reads this thread i think they might change the minds and keep the i6 forever.
LONG LIVE THE STRAIGHT 6

11-07-2007, 10:55 AM

With the V6 they can make the front end smaller and more compact evening out the weight balance of the car. I might not be lighter but more compact.

But Falcons have inline 6's, everyone else has V6's in cars based on FWD's

seXCmont · 11-07-2007, 10:56 AM

If it aint a i6 and RWD and made in Aus. its not a Falcon.

RPO83 · 11-07-2007, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeathXR

Globalisation and rationalisation in a company that is bleeding cash and restructuring to survive means this is inevitable, particular if future Falcons become a global platform, which is what we want, can't have it both ways. An I6 that struggles to meet Euro IV, and future emissions requirements is useless. The only way it'll survive with an I6 is if Ford invests in a global I6 engine.

(PS. Yep, head is Mexican, crank is UK cast, Aus machined I believe.)

Don't tell us the reality of it all, be insightful and constructive like others on here and say that its going to be gay and leave it at that...

dannyxm · 11-07-2007, 11:09 AM

It wont happen.

Ford spend far too much on refining the great I6 engine, not to mention its LPG compatability and the government grants given to Ford to build the I6.

If it does happen in future, it wont be until after the Orion, a long time after.

T3ts50 · 11-07-2007, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by danny888

It wont happen.

Ford spend far too much on refining the great I6 engine, not to mention its LPG compatability and the government grants given to Ford to build the I6.

If it does happen in future, it wont be until after the Orion, a long time after.

Exactly, didnt the government give Ford 30mil to keep devoloping the Inline six?

Fairlane · 11-07-2007, 11:28 AM

ohh man this sucks.

Falcon = I6

If the Falcon doesnt have a big 4.0l I6 it loses all appeal in my books, might as well buy a commodore.

BENT_8 · 11-07-2007, 11:30 AM

Ummm...so let me get this straight....The I6 Falcon is the iconic aussie 6 yeah.
This despite the fact that Holden had produced locally made straight sixes in its passenger cars since 1948 and Ford only started building it's passenger car with I6 here since the early sixties.
Yep got it now......
I think it is inevitible that the FoMoCo will follow suit and turn to the V6.

I'm surprised that you all find it unbelievable.
Ford have always followed with their development.
They were late in releasing the XA when the newer shaped HQ was setting records, They were late releasing the XD when Holden had already released the VB, They were late to offer trip computers with the XF when The VH had em earlier, they were late to offer IRS when Holden offered it 8yrs before, They were late with the EF shape compared to VR and again with AU to VT they were late with their forced induction engine when the VS came with S/C and not until BA did Ford offer this option and now 20yrs on they are late to offer a V6 too.
Infact the only thing Ford led the way with was plastic bumpers and even then the motoring world were unsure of the new 'plastic Falcon' then
Am i the only one who recognises a pattern here?

Oh BTW HI!

:

Falcon SXR8 · 11-07-2007, 11:38 AM

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooo not a V6 never, I would never buy a V6 the i6 is the way to go and keep going. Good torque and power and they don't get all rattly when there reved.

irlewy86 · 11-07-2007, 11:42 AM

The Australian government has pumped a mighty amount of money through Ford in recent years to ensure its I6 meets Euro standards. It wont be dropped in the immediate future otherwise the Government would have every right to demand its (and technically our) money back. As governments come and go though fuel consumption and emissions standards are changed 4.0L inline 6's may become a thing of the past. The US government is poised to change the laws regarding fleet cars so that to all cars have to achieve about 7.0l to the 100k (which not even the humble 4 cylinder Camry is doing at the moment cough cough 9.9L)

Perana · 11-07-2007, 11:42 AM

I can see this happening in the long run sadly.. while it would be great to keep the I6 it's really not economically viable.. a larger version of the new Jag/Volvo I6 would be great but that would be quite expensive.

The likely replacement for the I6 does look quite impressive.. note the TwinForce version down the page...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine

csv8 · 11-07-2007, 11:46 AM

isn't FORD/VOLVO a V6?

steel_dot · 11-07-2007, 12:10 PM

Doesnt worry me if it's an I6 or a V6. As long as it's a good engine (ie good fuel economy, power and torque, size and weight are also factors). Engine development is very expensive, doesn't make sense if Ford globally have two similiar types of engine.

I personally didnt think much of the I6 pre-BA. With the BA, the I6 became a great engine. The turbo made it even better.

If the falcon is still designed in Oz and the engine is sourced overseas, it'll still be a falcon to me. Plus the general public wouldnt have a clue and wouldnt care if its an I6 or V6.

andrewts · 11-07-2007, 12:11 PM

This is a shame I guess. The I6 is a very durable engine, with good power, power to never make you wish you had an 8 (Re: Commodore). It'll be sad to see it go if it does, and even though I really hope it doesn't, If the V6 on offer will be mated with a short ratio gerabox, then I guess it could work.

irlewy86 · 11-07-2007, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steel_dot

Doesnt worry me if it's an I6 or a V6. As long as it's a good engine (ie good fuel economy, power and torque, size and weight are also factors). Engine development is very expensive, doesn't make sense if Ford globally have two similiar types of engine.

I personally didnt think much of the I6 pre-BA. With the BA, the I6 became a great engine. The turbo made it even better.

If the falcon is still designed in Oz and the engine is sourced overseas, it'll still be a falcon to me. Plus the general public wouldnt have a clue and wouldnt care if its an I6 or V6.

Pfft, historically the I6 has been a great weapon, take the XF for example the fuel injected 250 was pumping out 128kw as opposed to Holdens VL Calais V8 motor with 125kw. That and they were bulletproof. My XF towed many an import of the mountain when their turbo rice overheated, and the Thermo in the dash rarely peaked past the quarter mark doing it.

There was a newspaper article recently about a guy in Brisbane who was developing a new bottom end for engines that what improve engine power output by 20% and reduce fuel consumption by 30%. Now couple that to a Bosh DFI in the ol' Barra 190 and you have a I6 pumping ot 250kw and using a lot less fuel than the 120kw Camry

nommic · 11-07-2007, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Perana XR8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Cyclone_engine

That actually doesn't sound too bad ... still torn though, I love my I6 :(

Gunns · 11-07-2007, 12:28 PM

The V6 is far better than the I6, as the V configuration gives much better bottom holding capabilities when used as a boat anchor.

StealthAu · 11-07-2007, 12:49 PM

v6, i6, who really gives a rats. Were there people debating the change form the pre-crossflow to the crossflow motor 30 odd years back? If you are in the mentality of v6 is bad, stick with what you've got.

FlipXW · 11-07-2007, 01:27 PM

please noooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sleekism · 11-07-2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BENT_8

Ummm...so let me get this straight....The I6 Falcon is the iconic aussie 6 yeah.
This despite the fact that Holden had produced locally made straight sixes in its passenger cars since 1948 and Ford only started building it's passenger car with I6 here since the early sixties.
Yep got it now......
I think it is inevitible that the FoMoCo will follow suit and turn to the V6.

I'm surprised that you all find it unbelievable.
Ford have always followed with their development.
They were late in releasing the XA when the newer shaped HQ was setting records, They were late releasing the XD when Holden had already released the VB, They were late to offer trip computers with the XF when The VH had em earlier, they were late to offer IRS when Holden offered it 8yrs before, They were late with the EF shape compared to VR and again with AU to VT they were late with their forced induction engine when the VS came with S/C and not until BA did Ford offer this option and now 20yrs on they are late to offer a V6 too.
Infact the only thing Ford led the way with was plastic bumpers and even then the motoring world were unsure of the new 'plastic Falcon' then
Am i the only one who recognises a pattern here?

Oh BTW HI!

:

Um so let me get this straight!

So Ford developing their engine for unleaded fuel while Holden dropped there 202 for an imported Nissan makes them worse than Holden?

Introducing an OHC Aussie engine in the late 80's while Holden persevered with a 60's pushrod V6 up until the 21st century puts them technologically behind Holden?

Being the first to introduce VCT puts them behind Holden?

Having a naturally aspirated six that equals the horsepower of a SUPERCHARGED Holden V6 makes them inferior?

Holden always being a generation behind with the handling dynamics means they are better (why do you think the Fords are always heavier and then then next gen the Holden matches the Ford weight)

Yes Holden used to have a good six too but they couldn't be bothered investing in it so since they dropped it they have had sixes made for smaller cars.

The good thing about Ford is they don't change things just for the sake of fashion.

PS (Holden shat themselves when the XR styling was introduced and followed suit)

aquahead2001 · 11-07-2007, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gunns

The V6 is far better than the I6, as the V configuration gives much better bottom holding capabilities when used as a boat anchor.

I wasn nearly about to give you a spray but realised that we're on the same wavelength. I have also found that as a sacrifical anode, the Alloy of most V6's does a great job!

Hunter · 11-07-2007, 02:47 PM

I don't see why its so hard to believe that Ford Aus would cut their losses and cease using the I6 - yes they put a lot of money into it but that was prior to Ford USA getting into even more trouble than it was - Ford USA is in serious financial trouble and this has really only gotten this bad in the past 2 years or so - the Barra was in development almost 10 years back!

Other companies have invested heaps in technologies or designs before then shortly after ditched them so its not inconceivable or even illogical for Ford Aus to do this. Perhaps they've already broken even on the Barra design, who knows? What I do know is that petrol prices usually trend upwards and the Falcon isn't exactly selling so well... therefore they are likely to be looking at why this is and I dare say Ford Australia's marketing/PR people have figured out that fuel prices don't work in your favour if your product(s) is perceived as a gas guzzler or of inferior quality. Now before you flame me I'm not saying this is the case but if the public thinks this then the public won't buy the Falcon.

I love the I6 as much as the next guy but I can bet your left nut that Ford Aus is doing all it can to recoup lost market share/sales and if that means ditching the I6 then they will. They probably figure that most car buyers are dumb (which they are) and will buy whatever is shoved/marketed into their face. How many average Joes can you name that know what an 'I6' is or even why they would want one? How about RWD? Few of them understand what it means let alone why they want one.

As I said, sadly this prediction will probably come true :(.

DK30RB · 11-07-2007, 03:35 PM

mmmh lets see.....

3.5litre V6 Toyota Aurion. 200kw, 9.8l per 100. Quicker than a falcon.

4litre I6 Ford Falcon 190kw, higher fuel consumption. Slower than Aurion.

Drive both cars back to back and then HONESTLY say which one is smoother.

V6 toyota leaves the I6 for dead...... Face reality, it's not just a brainwashed misconception. In most cases (not all) a V6 will be soother, more powerfull and more fuel efficient compared to an equivalent I6.

Its the year 2007 - Not 1960 which is where ford should have left the I6.

BENT_8 · 11-07-2007, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleekism

Um so let me get this straight!

So Ford developing their engine for unleaded fuel while Holden dropped there 202 for an imported Nissan makes them worse than Holden?

Introducing an OHC Aussie engine in the late 80's while Holden persevered with a 60's pushrod V6 up until the 21st century puts them technologically behind Holden?

Being the first to introduce VCT puts them behind Holden?

Having a naturally aspirated six that equals the horsepower of a SUPERCHARGED Holden V6 makes them inferior?

Holden always being a generation behind with the handling dynamics means they are better (why do you think the Fords are always heavier and then then next gen the Holden matches the Ford weight)

Yes Holden used to have a good six too but they couldn't be bothered investing in it so since they dropped it they have had sixes made for smaller cars.

The good thing about Ford is they don't change things just for the sake of fashion.

PS (Holden shat themselves when the XR styling was introduced and followed suit)

Ok champ but lets not forget that Holden had already seriously modified it's straight six to the point of being not worth going any further.
They increased it's capacity to 3300cc, introduced a better breathing 12 port head with the blue motor, added electronic ignition and EST with the black motor and finally EFI to the VK red donk.
Then it was found to be uneconomical to maintain the Fishermans bend engine plant which was closed. THIS resulted in Holden seeking the RB30, which i might add is still one of the best designed engines ever to make its way into an Aussie built car, not what i'd call a bad substitute would you?

Did Holden notice a huge decrease in sales when they dropped their straight six in favour of Nissan's or the following Buick V6?
No!
Holdens have gone on, albeit with what was a dodgy version of the V6 in it's first two forms, to have huge success with the sales of it's V6 commodore over the past 20yrs since it's release.
As for the styling of the XR series, dude take a close look at an EB or EL GT and tell me how much cosmetically better they are to say a VL Walky.
Now that is what i would call a car companies weak attempt to follow in anothers footsteps 5 yrs too late.
When have Ford ever done anything that even resembles fashion so that point i will agree with.
Oh and i forgot to mention cruise control in my last post too.

TheSneakiness · 11-07-2007, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DK30RB

mmmh lets see.....

3.5litre V6 Toyota Aurion. 200kw, 9.8l per 100. Quicker than a falcon.

4litre I6 Ford Falcon 190kw, higher fuel consumption. Slower than Aurion.

Drive both cars back to back and then HONESTLY say which one is smoother.

V6 toyota leaves the I6 for dead...... Face reality, it's not just a brainwashed misconception. In most cases (not all) a V6 will be soother, more powerfull and more fuel efficient compared to an equivalent I6.

Its the year 2007 - Not 1960 which is where ford should have left the I6.

Also remember that the Falcon is a buttload heavier than the Aurion... :togo:

irlewy86 · 11-07-2007, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DK30RB

mmmh lets see.....

3.5litre V6 Toyota Aurion. 200kw, 9.8l per 100. Quicker than a falcon.

4litre I6 Ford Falcon 190kw, higher fuel consumption. Slower than Aurion.

Drive both cars back to back and then HONESTLY say which one is smoother.

V6 toyota leaves the I6 for dead...... Face reality, it's not just a brainwashed misconception. In most cases (not all) a V6 will be soother, more powerfull and more fuel efficient compared to an equivalent I6.

Its the year 2007 - Not 1960 which is where ford should have left the I6.

The difference in fuel consumption (as per ADR testing) is .3L per 100k. This may have something to do with the car not carrying a tailshaft and rear diff, which means a whole lot more in the total design of car. I mean for the lousy 40cents a litre you save what is the increase cost of front tyres not to mention the initial difference in purchase price. Don't patronise me with the so called Aurion superiority myth. Give me 3 months with an Aurion and I'll pick more faults in it than a Nissan Tida. The rest of the world has an enormous amount of respect for the durability of Australian designed and built cars, seems like the place it dosen't get respect is at home.

Bobman · 11-07-2007, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DK30RB

mmmh lets see.....

3.5litre V6 Toyota Aurion. 200kw, 9.8l per 100. Quicker than a falcon.

4litre I6 Ford Falcon 190kw, higher fuel consumption. Slower than Aurion.

Drive both cars back to back and then HONESTLY say which one is smoother.

V6 toyota leaves the I6 for dead...... Face reality, it's not just a brainwashed misconception. In most cases (not all) a V6 will be soother, more powerfull and more fuel efficient compared to an equivalent I6.

Its the year 2007 - Not 1960 which is where ford should have left the I6.

Mmm, what have you got to say about BMW then? Which is far superior than both Ford and Toyota.

I hope the I6 stays, it's a durable torquey engine with the unique 'straight six' sound, unlike the tinny sounding V6's as on new Commodore or Toyota's.