Julian Edgar, 47, has been writing about car modification and automotive
technology for 20 years. He has owned cars with two, three, four, five, six
and eight cylinders; single turbo, twin turbo, supercharged, diesel and
hybrid electric drivelines. He lists his automotive interests as
turbocharging, aerodynamics, suspension design and human powered vehicles.
The new Falcon? Mostly irrelevant…
Yesterday Ford took the wraps off the new FG Falcon.
New Australian developed and built cars come along only very rarely; Ford took the unusual step of releasing the car on a Sunday so that it could gain precious free airtime on the Sunday night TV news and in the Monday papers.
Away from my home base, I watched the Sunday night Channel Nine TV news in Adelaide with interest. How breathlessly and non-critically would they report the release of the new car?
The report was relatively short but it was what followed that had me gobsmacked.
Immediately after the report on the Falcon finished, the Nine news moved straight to a segment on the booming sales of the hybrid Toyota Prius, and the way in which some individuals are now converting their cars to battery electric power. The station interviewed several Sydney electric car enthusiasts and presented a glowing report on the cars. Phrases like ‘fuel economy’, ‘greenhouse gas emissions’ ‘oil consumption’ and ‘cost to run’ sprinkled the report.
The juxtaposition couldn’t have been a bigger slap in the face for Ford: even the dimmest viewer could not have missed the implicit comparison.
Today, on the Monday after the Falcon’s release, my emailed News.com.au update doesn’t have a single mention of the new Falcon.
Imagine how different the news reports would have been if Ford had released a car with breakthrough fuel economy and lower greenhouse gas emissions. A turbo diesel engine, or a downsized six cylinder turbocharged to gain efficiency.
Instead we have launch control – and even more power, torque and weight. Oh yes, and a fuel consumption improvement that is nominal to say the least.
It’s very hard to believe that the Falcon will not go the way of the Mitsubishi 380 – and for much the same reasons. High quality engineering directed in completely the wrong direction, aiming at a target that started to move a decade ago and has now gone…
(See also this blog)
on February 18th, 2008 at 5:35 pm
Apparently the decision-makers at the big car companies don’t live on the same planet – literally and figuratively – as the rest of us. The 380, then the new Commodore, and now the new Falcon show it. And they wonder why Toyota is wiping the floor with them.
on February 18th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Julian, to some extent I empathise with you, and I would love to see a Falcon capable of 6L/100km, which may or may not happen. However, for a website called AutoSpeed not to pay homage to the performance, handling improvements and new technology is somewhat puzzling. Also take note fuel economy has been somewhat reduced.
People should acknowledge this car has probably lifted the handling/ dynamics game above and beyond that of the Europeans (given that the BA/BF and VE equalled them), aswell as reduced NVH with only a minimal weight increase.
Maybe the new V6 will usher in better economy, I hope a Stop-Start feature is part of the lineup, but I think this new Falcon is nothing to baulk at.
I will complement you on the totality of engineering this site covers, which has made me completely fascinated in electric cars, An electric Falcon, Julian? Now thats what I’m talking about!
on February 19th, 2008 at 7:15 am
How fair and equitable your view is, must have been ok to drive oh wait you only saw the new Falcon on the tv and this formed the basis of your comments. Sound like comments you’d get from the 20 year olds that know everything about cars at any car forum website. At least drive the bloody thing if you’re allowed to.
on February 19th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Eddie, I am sure it will drive very well. The current models drive well, and this one probably drives better.
But so what?
The debate has long sinced moved on from handling at 150 km/h – or even pulling ten-tenths around a corner at 80 km/h. Whether it can get to 100 km/h in 8 seconds, or 7.8 seconds – or whatever – is irrelevant to most potential buyers – how many of those use full throttle launches anyway?
My comments are based on size and fuel consumption – and primarily fuel consumption. That’s what I immediately pored over when I saw the Ford press releases – do they have even one model that will really make an impact on private buyers and environment-aware fleet buyers, one that takes into account the concerns of fuel consumption (and to a lesser extent, greenhouse gas emissions). The answer is clearly “no they don’t”.
Why not a downsized turbo engine on LPG? Or even just a downsized turbo engine? (At least they continued the LPG model.) The technology is there to achieve something to make the Australian public sit up and take notice; instead they chose to spend the money on a new front suspension and so on.
The large car market in Australia is in massive decline, and this Falcon will not change that. But it’s not the fact that it is a large car per se, it’s the fact that Ford have chosen to make it very powerful and therefore maintain the thirst – as if the average buyer really wants more power!
So I think that, unfortunately, it doesn’t really matter how well the car drives…
It now becomes even clearer why Ford has chosen to build the Mondeo in Australia.
on February 19th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Mitchell,
Do you really think that the buyers of the large Australian cars (mostly fleets with some private buyers) put improved handling dynamics and NVH reduction at the top of their priority list?
The technology of the car looks excellent – pity it’s aimed at improving the aspects where the car is either already very good, or aspects that don’t matter much except to a tiny subsection of the potential buyers.
A car that has been developed with no reference to where the world is going – quite bizarre.
And you mention an electric Falcon. If Ford with this car can’t even use technologies cost-effectively available to them RIGHT NOW – like diesel, downsized turbocharging, etc – then the likelihood of an electric Falcon is zero.
on February 19th, 2008 at 9:11 am
It is good harping about fuel economy Julian, but unfortunately people also like more luxury, more features, more safety and govt. keep on raising the bar on crash protection. which if nothing increases the weight of a car. now if we were paying 100k for the car it might do to invest in weight saving expenses. Yes they could decrease the size of the car but then I am sure many people especially large families will complain about the size of the car as it cannot fit all their things.
As far as turbo charging, it is a good idea, but tell me how many people will be able to afford the extra maintenance, the extra insurance premiums of the turbo, extra fuel consumption as it will most probably need premium fuel. Plus the fact that most states do not P plate drivers behind turbo cars. we own two tubo cars and both their premiums are atleast 2-3 times more than the NA versions of the same car.
on February 19th, 2008 at 9:21 am
Other car manufacturers meet crash protection legislation without having huge and heavy cars. In fact, if anything, the Australian manufacturers have lagged behind smaller overseas-built cars that have better crash safety results. (But we don’t yet know how the new Falcon goes in independent testing.)
Extra fuel consumption of a downsized turbo engine? Perhaps have a read of http://www.autospeed.com/cms/A_109931/article.html
With regard to size, you seem to miss the point that families have already moved away from buying these cars!
Yes of course there will be some people who want a very powerful, thirsty and large car. But those people are no longer numerous – and for obvious reasons.
on February 19th, 2008 at 10:47 am
We all know the large car segment has shrunk over the past 15 years but the falcon and commodore are still in the top 10 cars sold in Oz.
Why would Ford not be willing to service this segment? Customer demand is still there for the Falcon.
I think Mr Edgar’s expertise doesnt quite extend into the marketing sphere.
I intend to buy the FG XR6T. The car now puports to consume 11.7L/100km vs the 12.9 of my 4-spd auto from 2003. This car meets my demands precisely.
Bravo Ford, I’ll be a repeat customer.
on February 19th, 2008 at 10:59 am
I remember the 1970′s fuel crisis and another in the 1980′s and the consequent rush to smaller cars and smaller engines eg 4 cyl Commodore. Also the rush for nearly all cars to become front wheel drive for space efficiency and (more truthfully for cheaper manafacture). However after the initial shock of a “fuel cris” abates, people find they do like a bit more space and pace NEXT time they buy a car. Don’t write off the medium large RWD sedan quite yet; we are in another short term knee jerk reaction. I have owned some 2 dozen 4,6 and 8 cly cars and found the bigger, more powerful Aussies have a long term durability and an ability to both work hard and be enjoyable to drive without sending you broke. Our expertise in durable, relatively cheap medium to large RWD cars IS our competative advantage – an E Class Merc/5 series BMW size and style for the working man. That said, VE Commodore is too big and a 6 litre V8 for the masses is an obscenity but imagine a VR size Commodore built like a VE with a modern V6 and maybe an optional four (untill a few years on when the histoy of 4cl Magna and commodore and Torana will undoubtedly repeat). My current XR6 falcon is a real joy to drive almost matching my Merc E class (which with 2.8 litres of high tech, high reving motor lacked the go and saved little in fuel).
Don’t rubbish the Falcadore style car we make here – they are refreshingly dirrerent in a world of dull econo boxes and are a world class bargain measured in the no of weeks of work the average wage earner needs to do to pay the price of the car. My previous AU 11 falcon 6cyl could travel Gold Coast to Newcastle on a tank of regular unleaded with four of us onboard and the 500 litre boot brim full, the aircon running and lots of space and comfort. And real useable performance when you want it. Modern technology applied to the “old” Aussie formula has let us have the best of both world while science and engineering teams the world over are working on various alternatives that will one day hopefully supplement and even replace petrol engines. We just ain’t there yet, so don’t crucify the local makers for not having solved the wolds problems. Bob
on February 19th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Yes lets not forget the improved fuel figures, admirable from such a motor, I bet the highway cycle is nothing short of astonishing!
Ideally, a small turbo diesel should serve as the base model. A 1.8 TDCi Falcon could do the speed limit, and this is one example where the torque attributes of diesel could very well translate into every day real world benefits.
Building off that, Ford is trying to move away from the fleet and taxi image, but it seems to be their best hope at maintaining sales. Combining that with black plastic bumpers (done stylishly, for unbeaten repair costs), 185/55 chinese tyres ( DSC can pick up the slack), and an XL spec interior for a sub $20k taxi, and there you have an environmentally friendly and cost effective fleet model. Also, recyclability should be around 99 percent.
I get the impression Ford will have to go down the fleet route again, as they will have no advantage over Holden when the V6 arrives (Holden will probably bring out a similar forced induction motor…)
on February 19th, 2008 at 11:37 am
building off that, perhaps recycl-ED is better than recyle-ABLE….
on February 19th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
I don’t see why the Falcon should be singled out whilst Julian’s comment also applies to Commodore and 380. It appears the attitude of all Australian vehicle manufacturers should be brought to question here regarding the issue of high power/poor fuel consumption. I might add that most imported cars are built to different market requirements than ours. Whilst competent, they don’t provide cheap long distance motoring for those of us who choose to live outside the large cities of Australia. Fuel isn’t the only cost to be considered.
on February 19th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
I agree that the demand for the larger cars are declining, but it is not gone, this is proven by the large success of the commodore. Sure the fuel consumption isn’t great, but I’m sure if ford had the money to develop both the fundamentals such as newer better suspension and ground breaking technologies such as a new Diesel, Hybrid or some sort of extra efficient engine they would. I think it is unfair to be so harsh on the falcon, especially when 1 billion dollars was spent of the commodore, a lot more than the falcon and yet there is no fuel saving model in its line up. You say Australia is lagging behind yet the new C-Class is 1.7 tonnes and a much smaller vehicle. Sure the falcon isn’t perfect, but I think its wrong just to write it off so early.
on February 19th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
The ‘success’ of the Commodore? It has not sold any better than the previous model, has it? And being outsold some months by the Corolla?
I have made similar comments already about the 380, Commodore and Aurion. However, clearly the more time that progresses, the sillier it looks to release such cars.
Of course Ford, like any car company, had a limited pot of money to spend. But look how they chose to spend it!
on February 19th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Well it looks like most of us disagree with you Julian.
Plenty of Aussies are happy to buy the falcon, and Im one of them. Ultimately the customer calls the shots and currently they still like the falcon. Obviously not as much in % times as in years past, but hey, if Ford didnt think the Falcon was a goer they would can it. Instead theyve carved off a market for the Ford Territory.
Btw, have u been living under a rock? Theyve killed off the 4.0L six for a 3.5L V6 which I presume will be more fuel effic.
I don’t know how you can say the target market has gone. I still see dozens of XR model falcons around.
on February 19th, 2008 at 5:51 pm
The rock I have been living under shows the new car having revised in-line six engines! (And why they bothered revising them when a new V6 is coming is one of the puzzles about this model.)
Prior to the release of the FG, sales of the Falcon were the worse (not sure if that’s as a percentage of the overall market or just the large car market ) for something like four decades.
The new model will have to make a radical difference to those figures to survive, I think. (And remember that the VE Commodore is selling in much the same numbers as the model it replaced, so in relative terms, the FG will need to do better – MUCH better – than the VE.)
on February 19th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
No better than the previous model you’re right, and most likely worse than previous models. But Like the previous models it is/was best selling car for most months of the year, yes its declined but i would still call that success, and I’m guessing holden would agree.
on February 19th, 2008 at 8:33 pm
I can’t for the life of me understand why anyone would chose a Falcodore over a Mazda6, Accord Euro, Mondeo, Liberty, etc.? They are all large enough for 90% of families, more efficient, better built (Euro especially), brilliant to drive, don’t make you feel like a bogan, bang up-to-date technologies/styling, way nicer interiors, less weight, diesel options and 5 star safety ratings. Plus many of these alternatives have excellent performance models too (xr5, MPS, B4, etc).
I wonder what the sales figures are for Falcons and Commodores minus the fleet sales?
on February 19th, 2008 at 8:38 pm
The large car market is a tough market in Aus, especially as it’s so small. It’s interesting that, compared to similar cars around the world, all four probably compare very favourably to those in other markets. This is especially true when you compare what Ford offers in the same size in other markets.
I think there’s still a reasonable market for such a car, provided you think globally, and the platform has the capacity for relatively cheap variations to suit local demand.
I hope we’ll see an export Falcon soon.
on February 19th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Edward, a few reasons might be 3 kids, or the capacity to comfortably carry three, towing anything more than a moderately loaded 6×4 trailer, low service costs, a desire to support local engineering/manufacturing.
Don’t get me wrong, I see your point. 7 years ago I bought a V6 Vectra instead of a Falcon. I can see the advantages of both type of car. I just believe there are valid reasons for buying a large car.
I now have a Territory and it’s perfect for us (camping, towing, carry up to 7, family of 5). That it has Falcon running gear means it’s cheap to service, and if you’re not a lead foot, not so bad on fuel either. It’s the first car we *really* like.
on February 20th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Julian,
You are incorrect in stating the Ford will be producing the Mondeo in Australia ; they plan on producing the Focus.
While the large car segment has been declining, a large part of the migration of customers is not to small cars, but rather to SUV’s, which are heavier and less fuel efficient. Holden Commodore V8 sales are very healthy, which suggests that private buyers ARE interested in power.
on February 20th, 2008 at 3:56 am
With fuel at £1.06 a litre in the UK (around A$2.24) I doubt we’ll be seeing export Falcons here anytime soon. Ford already produces plenty of efficient 4-cylinder turbodiesel engines for the Mondeo, which is also an overweight lump (1600kg+), so why don’t they stick the bigger ones in the Falcon? The low down torque characteristics should suit Australians’ preferences for automatic gearboxes and accessible performance at lower speeds.
on February 20th, 2008 at 6:37 am
Yes Ben, I definitely wasn’t thinking Europe when I wrote that, or Asia for that matter. I was thinking North America, but also Mid East.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the same V6 turbo diesel they’re testing with the Territory is being considered for the Falcon too. Definitely a good idea.
I also think it’s totally unrealistic to expect Ford Australia to develop a hybrid Falcon, especially if it’s only for this market. They just don’t have the budget, and who’s seriously going to bet the business on that? Get it wrong, and they’re gone.
on February 20th, 2008 at 7:08 am
Paul, thanks for the correction – yes, Ford is to build the Focus in Australia not the Mondeo.
Re potential exports of the Falcon – media reports suggest it has not been engineered for LHD. You work out what RHD markets would want such a car…
Re a diesel Falcon (let alone a diesel Territory) – surely this should have been a greater priority than increasing the power outputs of the petrol inline sixes? As I said above, it’s very odd how Ford has chosen to spend their resources.
on February 20th, 2008 at 7:42 am
Edward
each of those cars you list are underpowered. I am attracted to the XR model falcons and no car in the world comes close for the bang-for-buck performance of an XR6T in auto form. A WRX and Commodore SS are comparable but the WRX now looks like a car for secretaries.
I am not a bogan. I have a degree and earn an above average wage in Canberra and probably have a higher IQ and general knowledge than you. I am certainly not bigoted against aussie cars like you are.
cheers
on February 20th, 2008 at 8:10 am
Zoran, you are making assumptions about my earning capacity, IQ and general knowledge without ever meeting me!!! Did I touch a nerve? Regardless, apologies for the Bogan comment as that wasn’t the point I was trying to make.
on February 20th, 2008 at 11:52 am
The new Falcon is irrelevant? To you, it may be. Plainly, to the many people who will buy a new Falcon, it is not. I think the old Falcon is currently ranked about 11th in terms of units sold, and the Prius is ranked where?
It is not the kind of car that you would buy, and it is not the kind of car I would buy, but there are many people still buying them.
on February 20th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Strange how Ford did not update the LPG engine/transmission combo fot the FG Falcon. It still uses the oldtech setup from the AU/BA/BF. No gas injection and the old tech 4 speed auto.
Does this mean that Ford sees no future in LPG?
on February 20th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
I’m the happy owner of an XR6 Turbo Falcon, bought from new. I love its handling, acceleration, size, passive safety and yes, even its 10-11l/100km fuel economy on the open road.
Would I buy an electric Falcon? No. Would I buy a turbo diesel Falcon? Yes.
But in the meantime, I’m perfectly happy to keep buying a high power turbo petrol model and cop the paltry 5-6 bucks extra it costs me per 100kms in fuel.
There’s plenty of realists out there to whom the objective argument (its really not a lot of money we’re talking about, and the environmental impact is negligible in a country as sparsely populated as ours) will kill the emotional argument every time.
Regards,
Grant
on February 20th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
Jamie, by definition the new Falcon is not irrelevant to those who will buy it. However, I think it is of little relevance to the majority of new car buyers, something that by their coverage the general media also seem to think.
And for those saying that they would/wouldn’t buy an electric Falcon, I have certainly not suggested that such a car would be viable. Obviously it wouldn’t be. But – to say it all again – a diesel turbo, or a downsized petrol turbo, both wih much better economy and lower greenhouse gas emissions than the current cars, would have (1) attracted substantial media interest, and (2) IMHO be decent sellers.
on February 20th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
With regards to a smaller turbocharged engine for the same power and better efficiency, it may be worth adapting the old 3.3 EA crank to suit the modern engines. That and a GT25 may be worth some efficiency gains without dropping off power.
Obviously it wouldn’t be worth someone doing that to save money, but it would certainly be worth it for publicity, or if you were looking for something to do for your mechanical engineering degree at uni.
Ben
on February 21st, 2008 at 8:15 am
I reckon a couple of years ago, people sat around a room brainstorming engine options for the Orion, probably a few times. The diesel would take time and be expensive, a smaller turbo might have been considered, but with the new V6 coming, the time to get return on investment would be small. So, the compromise solution that was probably reluctantly arrived at was fettling the existing engine.
It’s a balance between managers/budget, engineers’ desires and time, and produce research input, and time to market.
This is the type of thing that happens in software development anyway, and I can’t imagine it’s radically different for cars, just longer timeframes and much bigger investment (risk).
AFAIK, the diesel for the Terri is a goer. Gorman is quoted as saying “Part of our V6 strategy is we want to get diesel engines into our core domestic products,”
on February 21st, 2008 at 8:35 am
http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/consumers-hold-power-over-new-fuel-choices/2008/02/19/1203190818894.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
He says some odd things about alternative power sources but in the context of this discussion (esp in the mainstream media coverage of the FG Falcon) it’s interesting.
on February 21st, 2008 at 8:36 am
Wow did a 12 year old write this article??
The sheer lack of knowledge from a supposed automotive website is simply astonishing.
Does the moron who wrote this realise that the profit on large cars is much greater than small cars as it actually costs litte more to manufacture a large car than a small car but people are willing to pay more for a large car. If Australia switched to small cars they would have to compete with enormous economies of scale and an intensely competitive small car market.
I’m hearing all this rhetoric about electric cars and hybrids but would anybody like to enlighten me to as the sales of electric and hybrid cars?
You also fail to recognise that the Falcon already has an alternative energy vehicle: The E-Gas Falcon.
LPG is more of a viable alternative given it’s low price in Australia and given our huge reserves of natural gas I envision LNG Falcons will play an important role in the future.
What you also fail to recognise is that while large cars have declined, SUV sales are booming which discounts the belief that people are moving to more fuel efficient vehicles given that a mid-sized SUV will actually use more fuel than a large car.
The FG Falcon is the right car for the time. The fleet model XT offers what fleet buyers want-improved fuel economy and safety and the new G6E Turbo provides something for retail buyers-blistering performance, european styling and dynamics and reasonable fuel economy all for a bargain price.
This rhetoric about hybrids/electrics is disgusting. Toyota may have the Prius but they are still investing in building pickup trucks such as the Tundra and have spent a considerable amount of money on the Aurion large car.
The Falcon and Commodore are brilliant cars which offer so much for such a little price. The Australian large car market may have declined but it is still a very profitable 140,000 units a year and I am glad that our local manufacturers offer such performance and variety at a reasonable price.
I would hardly call the G6E Turbo irrelevant given it’s performance of European vehicles many times the price, it’s reasonable fuel economy of little over 11L/100km and it’s gob smacking low price.
The author of this should seriously consider a career change.
on February 21st, 2008 at 10:22 am
To Edward for his earlier comment about “why don’t people just buy a Mazda 6 etc” I’d say the fuel saving is not as good in the real world as it is in the dream world where people actually believe manufacturer consumption figures. I know, I have owned one (5 speed auto) for nearly 12 months now. It’s a great car, reliable, handles and serves our family of 4 very well….but don’t kid yourself that it’s significantly easier on fuel than a Falcon or Commodore. It averages 11litres/100k’s of 95 octane (minimum) with mixed town and country driving. With 95 phased out by Shell and with others to follow (BP have started already) you HAVE to put 98 in it. That’s a 12-14c/litre premium to get not much better economy than a Falcodore running on 91 or the smug-righteous-idiot fuel (E10) at significantly less per litre. And less performance. And less ability to tow. And less ability to carry 5 adults. And and and….
There is still a place in the world for these sorts of cars, for many reasons that are different for every buyer. Saying they are irrelevant when they are still near the top of the sales charts is just foolish.
While I’m ranting, let’s talk about ethanol. A stupid solution to the problem of car emissions, almost as ridiculous and ill-conceived a the Toyota Prius. Ethanol only works when you aren’t using foodstocks to make it, and the processing energy use is high. Priuses…well what are you going to do with all those big dead batteries in 10 years time, landfill ? Turbo-diesels can get as good economy as a Pious now, and hydrogen fuel-cells will one day consign these ridiculous pseudo-attempts to the dustbin of history where they belong.
on February 21st, 2008 at 1:06 pm
I agree with Julian’s post. The only way forward for Australian manufacturing is in a profitable, growing segment.
The head of General Motors thinks we are at “peak oil” already. If you want to buy big/heavy/muscle cars, thats fine with me, you’ll still be able to buy them, just don’t expect them to be made in Australia for too much longer, unless they can start exporting them in large numbers.
on February 21st, 2008 at 1:53 pm
Just changed jobs and inturn changed company cars as well.
Went from a Falcon BA LPG (Auto) to a Corolla (Auto).
Visiting the same clients and driving the same routes each week, both cars came back to getting 500km’s per week out of a tank.
The Falcon returned around 16L/100 whilst the Corrolla returned around 9.0L/100
There’s a place for both cars in the world.
I luved the low down torque of the Falcon yet luv the handling of the Corolla.
At the end of the day, if you gave $50 to each person, they would each spend it differently.
on February 21st, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Julian, the FG Falcon was engineered for LHD and in fact may have even been engineered to US design rules… a cutaway diagram I saw on Sunday appears to show the fuel tank stepping forward from the rear axle line, with the bulk of it apparently under the left side of the rear seat. Fuel tanks forward of the axle are mandatory in the US thanks to the exploding Ford Pinto. The LHD export programme however was killed by Dearborn a few months ago.
I believe the diesel development is being done in tandem with the petrol V6. Makes sense to do the V6 diesel and V6 petrol together and cover all the NVH issues in one go, as either V6 will have different NVH characteristics to the I6 or V8. Not a good idea to do the NVH work for the V6 diesel and get it to market, then have to redo it all again for the petrol V6 if it has different harmonics.
There’s only so much Ford can do with a limited budget. You should have some idea how long it takes a manufacturer to develop a new engine package. The decision to switch from the local I6 to the imported D37 opens the door to cheap access to US developments of this engine, eg a hybrid package, a proper 21st-century LPG system, cylinder deactivation, direct injection etc. Much cheaper than going it alone.
It mightn’t be reflected in the product yet, but Ford is moving in the right direction. Having said that, I’ll still front up to buy a 2009 XR6T as a long-term keeper. By the time the warranty has expired the bugs will have been ironed out of LPG liquid phase injection kits. LPI will be awesome on the turbo donk.
on February 21st, 2008 at 7:07 pm
I see what you are saying Julian. Ford, as well as the other local manufacturers get government grants each year for research and development. The last one I saw publicised, saw Ford spend their millions to develop the turbo Territory, a car which has very low sales because it is quite a pointless car in the text of the type of customer the Territory is focussed at – Families. If they spend the R&D developing a turbo-DIESEL Territory, then at least it would show that the company is at least trying to catch up to the rest of the world. A friend recently bought a Mondeo XR5 and it is a much better finished car than the current Falcon. It is at least the equal in interior size, has a much larger boot and has a range of engines, including an excellent turbo diesel. It really is a world-class car. Ford obviously relies on it’s ‘Hero’ models for sales of the lesser models and is still cashing in on the V8 Supercar Holden v Ford war. It is a shame the E-Gas model misses out on ESP and retains the old 4-speed auto. It is obviously aimed at taxidrivers and fleets. I wonder which manufacturer will take a gamble and end the current power war that is going on by releasing a range of efficient engines/drivetrains.
on February 21st, 2008 at 9:12 pm
Just looking at data Mitsubishi released when ending the manufacture of the 380. The data is about the Australian car market.
In the period 2000 – 2007 new car sales grew by 33 per cent. But in the same period, sales of new large cars didn’t grow by the same amount. It didn’t even level off – instead it FELL by 33 per cent!
http://www.mynrma.com.au/cps/rde/xchg/mynrma/hs.xsl/2007_market_wrap.htm is a good summary of the car sales in 2007.
on February 22nd, 2008 at 6:40 am
How much did the medium SUV (RAV4 up to Territory size) market grow in the same period?
My guess is there are a few things eating into the large car market. Fuel prices causing more to buy small cars, and the practicality of a car like the Territory/Kluger/Captiva etc.
on February 22nd, 2008 at 7:31 am
Exactly Dave!
The SUV segment has exploded at the same time that the large car segment has declined. I bet you that a lot of former large car buyers have since switched to SUV’s.
Remember that the Ford Territory based on the Ford Falcon and with higher fuel consumption is the CLASS LEADER in the medium SUV segment.
What is more important is that 60% of Territory sales are retail. That is a very important consideration.
Fuel prices and environmental concerns are neglible. The real factors behind the decline in large car sales are:
-the high Aussie dollar making imports cheaper
-lower tariffs making imports cheaper
-switch to user-choose in fleet sales
-decline in Government fleet purchases
-the boom in SUV sales (which attract 0% tariffs.
The per capita fuel consumption in Australia has RISEN. That is a fact!
Stop posting idiocy.
on February 22nd, 2008 at 8:48 am
“While I’m ranting, let’s talk about ethanol. A stupid solution to the problem of car emissions, almost as ridiculous and ill-conceived a the Toyota Prius. Ethanol only works when you aren’t using foodstocks to make it, and the processing energy use is high. Priuses…well what are you going to do with all those big dead batteries in 10 years time, landfill ? Turbo-diesels can get as good economy as a Pious now, and hydrogen fuel-cells will one day consign these ridiculous pseudo-attempts to the dustbin of history where they belong.”
1. Ethanol in Australia is derived from sugar cane (hardly a necessary foodstock) and it is far less energy intensive to extract than from corn (USA).
2. Turbo diesels can give you great economy. But they are expensive to purchase and may not give you any cost benefit in the time you own it.
3. Hydrogen fuel cells run on Hydrogen. There is no current fuel infrastructure for hydrogen. Also, it is very energy intensive break water into hydrogen (+ o2). Where exactly do we get that energy from? (currently fossil fuels!!)
The best way to reduce your fuel bill (and c02 emissions) is to drive more economically (you can reduce consumption by 10-30%) and drive LESS!
on February 22nd, 2008 at 12:04 pm
What really amazes me is that Ford won’t produce this car in the US. Same story for Holden but I’ll stay out of that one. The ford Crown Victoria is a 30 year old body on frame solid axle dinosaur. Ford sells at least 150k of these things every year to police depts and taxi companies. But in all these years they’ve never considered producing the Australian designed Falcon in the US. Maybe its already too late. NYC is mandating hybrid taxies by next year and other cities are sure to follow. But ford is completely unwilling to even consider replacing the Crown Vic with something newer or more fuel efficient. They won’t even offer a 6 cyl option. Its been left to rot on the vine for years.
I can appreciate the point about the shrinking large car market in Australia. The same is true in the US to a lesser extent. But even in a shrinking market you could easily make a case to produce the same car in the US. There is a market for these cars here. Chrysler has been able to capitalize on it, ford simply won’t and GM’s strategy of importing cars from Australia is doomed to failure. They’ll have a small amount of sales thats for sure, but they’ll never turn a profit on those sales until they set up production in north America.
cheers
Justin
on February 25th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Richard: re “Strange how Ford did not update the LPG engine/transmission combo”
I reckon the reason they didn’t touch this combo is because of the taxi fleet. The less change there, the better sales potential. They rear doors were changed between teh BF and FG because of feedback from the taxi industry (it only took 10 years .. the dors are a carry-over from the AU)
on February 26th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
The question is how many of these do they need to sell for the FG to be a profitable line? And is this likely? I hope they do well so they can justify investment in new engine technology in the future.
on February 26th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
It’s a new Falcon, it’s good, it’s aussie, buy it. Support Ford (and Holden) and aussies. Who wants everything to (eventually) be made in China? Not me…
on February 26th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Personally I have nothing against imports, as long as they are of decent quality. Have a look at the Skoda review, we need more cars like that. Even something the size of a falcadore with a similar engine to the golf/octavia would be good.
As for Chinese? I don’t know about now, but last year the flagship for one of the ‘top’ chinese brands received the worst safety rating I have ever seen. I’ll stop short of giving one a good kick to see how far I can get the engine into the passenger compartment, but I still don’t want to see the thing…
on February 27th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Holy Crap! Could this be the first web forum to have ever changed someone’s opinion??? Not being a Ford or Holden fan, I was immediately in support of Julian’s comments, but after spending some time reading through the various opinons (mostly in opposition) I have ‘almost’ changed my mind. As I do think we humans are destroying the planet, I would dearly love to see some more fuel efficient models released. But to be honest, who would buy them? I wouldn’t! I’m not planning on buying ANY new car any time soon. It just doesn’t make sense to me. In fact, from an environmental angle, keeping your current big V8/V6 is better than dumping it for a new Prius. So now I’ve kinda lost where I was going with this… Oh that’s right, Australia produces 1.2% of the world’s Co2! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions) So who care’s if there isn’t a hybrid Falcon. It’d kinda be pretty pointless. As far as fuel prices go? They’ll just keep going up until only rich people will drive V8′s and the rest will have to catch the bus or ride to work on recumbant trikes! (Julian???)
on February 29th, 2008 at 10:47 am
The Ford people that conceived the new Falcon must lived in another planet. In the last 3-4 years, consumers have been grappling with high fuel prices. The last 2 years, rising mortgage rates and escalating food prices have been added to the consumer equation. The Falcon is a Sony Walkman when the everyone else have moved on to an Apple iPod. Where’s the turbo-diesel or hybrid version of the Falcon? LPG is only good for cooking – if it’s such a good thing, why aren’t the other car manufacturers catching on?
The new Falcon (& also VE Commodore) are dinosaurs – victims of a harsh & changed environment that is becoming toxic to them. Who would buy a Falcommodore? heavy fuel consumption (>12 L/100km), killer depreciation (a fraction after 3 yr of ownership), heavyweight thus consuming brake pads & tires (eg. VE Commodore V8s @ $400-500/tire). You’re right, Julian, the new Falcon is indeed irrelevant!
on March 1st, 2008 at 8:28 am
re Dave C (about reasons why Ford does not have a oiler Falcon):
Well, it’s not inconceivable that the Mondeo’s turbo diesel engine be used to power the Falcon.
I think the reason for Ford not to go with a diesel option is because they think that the typical Falcon owner is the guy who wants everything ‘big and powerful’, and for some reason, lots of males whom I have chatted with who think they’d like to buy the new Falcon just don’t think a diesel engine is grunty (man-ly?) enough. These same people just don’t seem to place too much emphasis on fuel economy. Testesterone seems to be more essential.
on March 1st, 2008 at 4:21 pm
a turbo diesel can be just as manly as a n/a petrol. Even more so when you look at how much more weight you can haul when your peak torque figure isnt too far off idle (and so can be accessed at a lower road speed). I mean when was the last time you thought a landcruiser was weak?
on March 4th, 2008 at 9:02 pm
It’s not about Landcruisers being weak mate, and it’s also not about torque and haulage. It’s all about the macho image a grunty V8 or even a V6 gives the Falcon. That was my point.
on March 12th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Relative to other cars in the class the Falcons fuel economy is respectable – at 10.5L it is only 0.6L more than a Camry. The FG is a very well engineered vehicle. Lets hope the build quality is much improved though! A car that offers world class safety, ride, handling and performance with only slightly compromised economy is relevant to the needs of Australians. And the respectably frugal – given the prodigious power – FG turbo is relevant to the needs of those with petrol in the bloodstream…
on March 12th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Lachy, all those points apply to the current model. It’s got a good engine, good handling, good ride, good space (but there’s certainly no evidence of ‘world class safety’ for the FG [yet] or old model). The old model has even got that ‘slightly compromised’ fuel economy.
So why will the FG Falcon increase in Australian sales over the current model? (And as indicated earlier, it needs to massively increase in sales if it is to be a success.)
on March 13th, 2008 at 10:33 am
When you look at the consistent sales performance of the VE Commodore,it’s not unreasonable to expect a similar result for the fresher, more dynamic,elegant and frugal FG Falcon. It’s unfair to paint the Falcon as a poor corporate citizen when tests have consistently shown better real-world economy figures, especially highway where nothing else Australian made drinks less. I can’t wait to drive one!
on May 4th, 2008 at 11:33 pm
I love Falcons, and I think the new Commodore is a pretty cool car, but if they don’t keep up on all playing fields (including fuel, and environmental) then people will walk over to an alternative, and people aren’t as loyal as they once were. And I have to say it, where is the deisel, or at least something. Great car car, but…
on June 17th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
I dont think Ford or Holden have the formula wrong for building cars, infact personally i think they have it spot on, big powerful cars
always have and hopefully always will be part of Australia , I think the drop in sales of Falcon and Commodore have more to do with huge range of large powerful cars now available in Australia that werent when ford and holden ruled the sales chart. Anytime your on the highway youll notice the majority of Aussie familys driving Japanese and European large cars and 4x4s, I reckon Ford and Holdens success lays in them having a larger selection of the good old fashioned large powerful car, maybe now though with the very popular japanese sport styling like the Hilux and Triton, which even ,true blue me likes.
on October 1st, 2008 at 5:25 am
“To the end of August, sales of Ford’s
Falcon Ute are down 5.3 per cent on 2007
levels, while Falcon sedan sales are down
7.9 per cent and Territory sales are 22.3 per
cent lower.” – go auto news Oct 1 2008
on October 1st, 2008 at 10:50 am
Whilst I can agree with Julian and others who suggest that the Aussie large cars are too big and thirsty for daily use around the city and suburbs, I think that their real purpose is the consumption of Australia’s endless stretches of open road. My dad drives a VE Commodore fleet car all over SA, sometimes more than 1500km a week, carrying a boot full of work-related equipment. Under these operating conditions, I have personally seen better than 8.6l/100km from the auto V6, despite a weighbridge figure of more than 1800kg and I can’t think of any other type of car which would be as suitable for this kind of work as the big Aussie 6 cylinder. For people who live or work in rural areas or who regularly drive long distances, or tow a trailer, I can’t think of a better car, especially for the same money. Also, I have spoken directly to an engineer at Holden who admitted that, as some others have already commented, they would not be able to make a profit on a small car without drastically increasing production volumes because the margin on small cars is so much smaller.
on October 3rd, 2008 at 8:53 pm
We are being bombarded with comments regarding the alleged high price of petrol. owever, I wonder. In 1971, we paid approximately 12 cents per litre, in 1981 about 42 cpl and in 1993 68cpl. I would like to see some real research on the changing prices of fuel over the past three decades in today’s dollar terms. I don’t think paying $1.45 per litre is greatly above what fuel prices have been in comparison to wages. Certainly not 20 or 30 cents above. Are we being brain washed for some reason or is ter a basis for what we are bing told? I am currently doing my own research on this but it is very difficult to find year by year averages of fuel prices (say for Brisbane). Would a motoring writer do an article on this issue so that all drivers have a clear picture of the real situation with fuel prices?
on October 4th, 2008 at 7:19 am
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24444825-2,00.html – “Another nail has been hammered into the coffin of the Ford Falcon, with the former family favourite outsold for the first time in its long history by a Mazda.”
The Mazda 3 has just outsold the new Falcon….
From comments made in the thread above:
“The FG Falcon is the right car for the time.”
“Sure the falcon isn’t perfect, but I think its wrong just to write it off so early.”
[My blog post] “Sound[s] like comments you’d get from the 20 year olds that know everything about cars at any car forum website.”
“Customer demand is still there for the Falcon. I think Mr Edgar’s expertise doesnt quite extend into the marketing sphere.”
“Don’t write off the medium large RWD sedan quite yet; we are in another short term knee jerk reaction.”
“Wow did a 12 year old write this article?? The sheer lack of knowledge from a supposed automotive website is simply astonishing.”
…and so on and so on.
Come on guys, don’t stop now with the discussion!
James (and others who said similar things above), where are you now?
on October 4th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
lying in wait until another topic that they think they can ‘win’ with comes up.
On an unrelated note, how did your RS liberty do for fuel? I have a GT Legacy wagon (1990 vintage) and it gets about 7km/l. It’s absolutely appalling, especially given that the car isn’t *that* heavy in todays standards (two fat blokes, a full tank, an empty wheelie bin, and the car weighed in at 1720kg).
on October 4th, 2008 at 5:06 pm
It’s a long time ago but I remember 10-12 litres/100km. I do remember that with new exhaust and intake it clearly improved over standard.
on October 7th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Come on guys, don’t stop now with the discussion!
James (and others who said similar things above), where are you now?
—————————————————————————–
Um you do realise that in the same article it says the HOLDEN COMMODORE was the best selling car (as it has been for the last 12 years). Given that the Commodore is thirstier and less safe than the Falcon yet is number one in the Australian new car market I wouldn’t exacty say the Falcon is irrelevant.
The Falcon is simply let down by marketing. It neither has the reliability perception of Toyota nor the Australian perception of Holden and to top it off they did a piss poor effort in advertising with the average punter not even realising there is a new Falcon topped off with crappy finger commercials when they should be pushing the 5-star rating, superior fuel economy, aluminum virtual pivot suspension etc.
But perhaps the average new car buyer is shallower than we think. The Mazda 3 is easily best car in it’s class but is itself greatly outsold by the Corolla. Australians want a badge thus why rubbish cars like the Mercedes A-class exist. Holden says “I’m Australian”, Toyota says “I want an A to B car”, Mazda says “I’m exciting” and Mercedes says “I want a sophisticated badge no matter how rubbish the car”.
Unfortunately all that Ford says to the average person. Is “I’m a taxi driver, grew up in the 60′s or am a p plater who likes doing massive smokey burnouts”
On the positive side the Falcon still outsells Aurion 2:1. The Falcon Ute outsells the Commodore Ute. The ageing Territory is still a class leader and while most makes and the market in gerneral is down on 2007 Ford and the Falcon have inceased on 2007.
I think people need to get out of their basement take off the tin foil helmet and live in the real world the best selling car is still a Australian RWD six and hybrids make only a handful of sales a month. The people here are the same type of people who rushed out and bought the dog four cylinder Commodores in the late 70′s.
This website is about as interesting as washing up which the mrs is bugging me to do. I have a full week of test driving an R33, buying a Capri Turbo, test riding a Ducati Sport 1000, V8 conversion for my XE and manual conversion for mates VL Turbo finished off with druft comp.
How I envy those here who bought a Prius instead of an XR6 Turbo and spend their weekends on internet forums predicting the end of the world.
on October 8th, 2008 at 2:13 am
Maybe this will force Ford Oz to adapt to a FWD platform,as reported; but that mightn’t be such a bad thing. A globally amortised platform gives Ford Oz much much greater flexibility, and since Falcon has never descended below top 5 in sales (correct me if I’m wrong), this can only re-inforce a still strong business case.
Also, the Mk1 Focus is still regarded as one of the best FWD chassis ever made- (although with Taurus hardpoints weight distribution/ inertia could be compromised).
Julian is there any possiblity of an economy graph to show the L/100 of Australian vehicles since the 60s? I think thats one area that has seen little improvement and perhaps the reason for this panic (IIRC VT-Y V6′s used to return high 8′s) and it would be interesting to see.
Finally, I don’t feel Ford has misread the market for the FG- it is a great vehicle and on merits alone deserves to succeed. Economy is reasonable, and for people such as myself who enjoy driving more than saving $10 or so every week it simply isn’t paramount. I don’t understand everyone’s obsession when the difference is incremental.
Here’s an idea for another blog topic- what do we want to see on the next generation of Aussie cars?
on December 24th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
I think the Falcon is the right car at the wrong time. Over here in NZ, you can buy an XR6T for only 3 grand more than a Mondeo XR5, a car that is smaller, MUCH slower, barely more fuel efficient, doesn’t handle as well and is only available in manual. Or there is the Camry, which is even less capable than the Mondeo, albeit with more interior space. Then there is the G6ET. I notice there is no mention of Ford using the turbo engine instead of the V8 for a better performance/economy in this model. Five star ANCAP crash safety rating for occupant safety. The styling HAS been made to make the Falcon appear “smaller” and more in line with current trends towards “downsizing cars”. For a reference just park it between the VE and the Mondeo. Then there is the fact that towing a boat doesn’t feel like you are pushing the performance of the car either, that would be because it DOESN’T. I can see why a lot of people disagree with the merits of the Falcon, personally I just hope to win the Lotto, at which point I would camp outside my Ford dealership. And to be honest if there was no Falcon, I’d camp outside Holden. NOT TOYOTA.
on January 24th, 2009 at 9:06 am
its funny how people get on here and rant about fuel savings, honestly fuel is the one of the CHEAPEST parts of owning a car…think about it, how much to replace tires, servicing etc..my aging vy sv8 yes 190k runs like the day it was built, power and all, averages 11-12l per 100 city and highway, costs me less than 100 bucks to service myself(simple) and thats using a top quality (full synthetic) oil. a blast to drive at the track and home!!!!
i went to sell my other car recently, i could not believe the prices there asking for poor quality, older model, Japanese 4cyl cars….. half these cars use more fuel than a late model v8.. yet the average numbskull buyer reads 4cyl and buys thinking fuel economy.
the Toyota prius………all i can say is, a tdi vw golf uses less fuel, nicer to drive(read handles better, is a real car etc) i had the unfortunate privilege to drive one of these heaps recently..give me my full size sedan any day, ill pay the extra 20 bucks a week.
you say the tdi’s are expensive to purchase???? obviously forgotten how much your prius cost originally.
on January 25th, 2009 at 6:27 am
Ahh but for some people there is a certain buzz in getting good economy figures. And for some people it is actually worth getting a more economical car. An example…
I used 25.2L for my 243km run (filled up this morning, two return trips on the highway). It cost me $42 ($1.67/l for BP Ultimate). That’s 9.6km/l.
If I were to get 15km/l (via change of car) I would have spent ~$26. And it would have probably been normal unleaded I bought, so say that dropped it to $20. That’s a $22 saving over just that two days. I generally work four days a week, so thats $44 a week
Over the course of a year that would work out to be a $2288 saving. Which at least in new zealand is about the cost of buying and registering a small car that can achieve those numbers on the highway (albeit an old one). It should also be noted that with a car focussed on economy would probably need less, and cheaper, servicing than my GT Legacy needs.
That said, enough of my rant. I’m happy to pay the extra in fuel/servicing for my car. I have an AWD wagon with space for all and their stuff, good ride and handling, more performance than I need (what I want is different though), and it’s replacement value is about $1500, depending who you know. I can’t ask the world for that price, can I?
on January 25th, 2009 at 8:00 am
I’m addicted to that buzz! My company car is a 2005 VW Caddy TDi. I have a daily 35km commute to and from work. Although 90% of this drive is in 100km/h zones, it is usually in moderate traffic. Until I read an article on saving fuel, (by who else but Julian) I was a right hand lane missile, driving as fast as I could without scoring a ticket. Usually this was around 115-120km/h. To achieve this I regularly had to pass those bloody slow people in the fast lane, and also race the other missiles to prove that I was the fastest. The trips were fun, but full of stress and aggression.
While Julian’s article had nothing in it that I didn’t already know, one quote stuck with me, and changed my behaviour. Julian says how if he isn’t in a hurry/emergency he drives under the posted limit in the slow lane. That got to me… What’s the rush? Why burn all that fuel, and drive with such aggression for no reason other than my urge to race? I’d still make it to work/home in plenty of time..
As a right lane missile the good old Caddy used to get 700-800km/s from 60l of diesel. That is pretty good for such a large frontal area, and for such aggressive driving. These days I do 90km/h in the left hand land. I barely have to ever touch the brakes, and never bother to look out for ‘the law’. I have a comfortable drive to and from work, feeling calm and relaxed at each end. I can always ‘bank’ on getting 900kms before filling up! That gives me a buzz… And only a buzz as I don’t even pay for the Diesel, my company does!
See! People are strange creatures…
on June 10th, 2009 at 12:33 am
The FG Falcon looks nice but dosen’t really improve on previous models. Why fork out the big dollars on a new ford when the last couple of models had similar offerings and can be had for just a fraction of the price.
on June 18th, 2009 at 5:08 pm
Interesting comment Sandra. I thought improvements to fuel economy, handling, steering, safety (5 starts), rear seat access, interior look/feel/quietness, base model standard equipment (including 5 speed auto) were worthy of note.
Maybe us Aussies don’t really care about this stuff, and care more about image?
Maybe the real problem is it, with the exception of the G series, doesn’t look that much different?
on June 24th, 2009 at 8:44 pm
Err Dave the new model uses more fuel has an impractical interior with poor ergonomics.
It has better grip and steering that is not used by 99.99% of owners and the steering ratio feel just isn’t right.
The new ford is more of a look feel upgrade with a few electronic upgrades that are behind the sences that most owners will never know. I wouldn’t considered it to be a major improvement and it doesn’t compare with other manufactures offerings.
on July 24th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
I personally love obsession with fuel economy… cost wise its irrelevant when depreciation is taken into account, or all the other costs.
I bought an FG falcon because its the most practical, comfortable and well rounded car that can be owned at a total ownership cost less than a Subaru liberty. Whatever…
on July 27th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
The announcement by Ford last week about putting smaller, more economical engines into the Falcon made me think of your article from Feb last year. Great call by you, and beter late then never by Ford. I hope they take the opportunity to faclift and differentiate from the BF to a greater extent, and that this strategy works for them.
on July 28th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Recent announcement hopefully makes it more relevant ( 2.0T, diesel).
on August 5th, 2010 at 7:32 pm
Maybe Ford will create a car same as the Toyota Yaris T1 or the Hyundai Getz. Small cars with great fuel effeciency. I’ve driven the Yaris and while it is more expensive than its predecessor, Tazz, it is a good replacement.