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 Ideal Car for the Times
The tipping point came when Al Gore released his new documentary: I Was Wrong. Completely repudiating An Inconvenient Truth, Gore showed in minute detail how flawed his previous views were.
The world was not actually warming, he noted, instead it was cooling – and cooling in a way that was very likely to result in greater crop yields, more favourable rainfall patterns and political stability.
And the cause? From his documentary we learned for the first time that CO2 was proving in fact to be hugely beneficial. The greater CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere were counteracting the altered reflectivity of Earth’s surface caused by widespread urban development and farming practices.
But there were other changes, too. The Federal Government, revealing under Freedom of Information pressures previously unheard of research, showed that speed limits were set ridiculously low. States were pressured until the open road speed limit was wound back 30 or more years, with the country road limit once again unlimited – but the onus of proof being on the driver to demonstrate that they were driving in a safe manner.
Interstate driving at 150 km/h was once again widespread.
The 40 and 50 km/h limits previously implemented in city and some urban areas were lifted to 80 km/h, and even more important for performance car enthusiasts, the laws relating to street racing were completely repealed.
Once again you could simply gun your car away from the lights at full throttle, shutting down those piss-weak four cylinders…
And developments were occurring internationally as well. The discovery of enormous volumes of tar sands – and, even more importantly, the incredibly cheap methods of extracting oil from them – meant that in one fell swoop, ideas like Peak Oil were made completely invalid.
Fuel prices immediately started dropping and it wasn’t long before a litre of petrol was again a sub-dollar price.
Australians flocked to large cars, revelling in their interior space and ability to tow the ski-boat and caravan. Rather than being the choice of only fleets (with a tiny proportion being sold to private buyers), large car sales grew enormously, families flooding back to these vehicles.
TV ads showed Dads leering over the fence at their neighbour’s new Australian large car. Bars were full of talk about the low fuel prices, impromptu street drag races and – amidst good natured jeers and laughter – how once there was concern about oil running out and the warming of Earth.
In many ways it was like a return to the Nineteen Seventies – only better.
And into this environment Ford released the perfect car – the FG Falcon. Oh indeed it was the ideal car for the times…
on April 14th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Going fishing Julian….
That must be a bloody huge hook you are using with all that bait on it….
:p
on April 14th, 2008 at 9:29 pm
Ah, this reminds me of an interview with Belinda Carlyle (she of the Go-Go Girls) I watched ten years ago, when she was espousing safe sex.
Interviewer: “It was no secret that when you were a Go go girl, you engaged in a promiscuous lifestyle. Can you understand why young people today may have issues with your credibility when you are telling them to do what I say not what I do?”
I’ve been reading you for a good fifteen years Julian, and note a number of large, thirsty cars in your background – VL turbo, 2 Lexuses, BMW 535i, Maxima Turbo etc.
And lets not even get started on the development costs and associated dust to dust footprint of your hybrids.
i.e. I’ve had my fun (2 Lexuses, Commodore Turbo, Maxima Turbo,
on April 14th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
NEW FALCON NOT IRRELEVENT
Just drove my first manual Gen 3 (5.7 litre) Commodore the other day….and I want one! Don’t need one,but hey, that huge torquey effortless feel and the V8 rumble is addictive! No, I’m not a Redneck and I know that I won’t go to heaven but hey, I tightened my belt automotively speaking in the 1970′s fuel crisis, survived through the 1980′s fuel crisis by reducing my car use, buying a house in the right location for public transport and refining my conservationist driving skills. However was driviving and enjoying a lovely 308 engined Commodore in the midst of that crisis.
I bought my 308 dirt cheap because, well, the world was ending. It’s previous owner traded it in on a Coralla. He later regretted downsizing but at the time…..I drove my big V8 sensibly and graually modified it into a first rate sports sedan and after the world did not actually end, I sold it in early 1990′s after 6 years trouble free motoring. Of course by then we had all remembered why we moved on to bigger cars with bigger engines as we and our families all got bigger and wages grew and grew. Prices of large cars had recovered and I dropped barely $2,700 depreciation over the 6 years! I think history repeats but admit that I had an each way bet last year and bought an XR6. In Australia we can still afford larger cars. Not in the UK or Europe, where fuel really costs a lot and families squeeze into smaller cars, unless they are really quite well off, when they can buy and run a large sedan – read Merc E and S class/BMW 5 and 7 and so on. Thing is, in Australia we have access to large and powerful cars for a paultry 40 or so weeks of wages for the average worker to buy one. Our European relatives are astounded when they come here. (Of course our houses are bigger and ditto our boats and our dogs and and and.) Smart people the world over are working on many alternative fuel and propulsion technologies which will be adapted across all vehicles but here and now Ford Australia and GMH just don’t have the research budget to lead the charge, not if we folk can have such bargain cars as the new Falcadores. I reckon that right now we still have the luxury of spreading out a bit in this wide brown land even if most of the world can’t. There even seems to be an export market for our unique large but inexpensive RWD ,large engined and mechanically straight forward car designs. Maybe they wont regain high market share but they do have a place in some market segments. Remember the 4 cyl Commodore failed and Mitsubishe dropped the 4 cyl Magna due to market demand for the six once the 1980′s fuel crisis abated.
So about my Aussie muscle car cravings… can’t I have one last hurrah? Let’s just hope most of the 5 million cars made in China last year are hybrids or soon will be. I will promise to keep my mountain bike and my bus pass for all the mundane stuff and strive to reduce my carbon footprint in other ways. However the (V8) force is strong. Bob
on April 15th, 2008 at 4:32 am
I can’t help thinking of another “famous” Australian car when I look at the FG Falcon. That car is the CL Valiant. Need I say more?
on April 15th, 2008 at 7:20 am
Grant, A number of points need to be made.
Anyone who suggests that views should not change because circumstances change is a fool. Why ? Because another way of saying that is that everyone should be acting, today, on the basis of information that is yet to be discovered, tomorrow.
Secondly, on that list you have deliberately excluded a lot of cars that I have owned, including a 660cc turbo Daihastu, a 354cc Honda Z, a 1.2 litre AlfaSud, a 1 litre Honda Insight, a 1.6 litre Camira, a 2 litre Camira, a 2 litre turbo Liberty RS, and a 2.2 turbo litre Mazda MX6 turbo.
Thirdly, with the exception of I think the BMW 735i (not a 535i), all the cars I have owned in the last decade are more economical (in my real world driving) than the FG Falcon is likely to be. (That supposition is based on the released fuel economy of the FG compared with its predecessor.)
Finally, the FG Falcon is being released as a brand new car NOW – not ten yerars ago, not 15 years ago. It therefore needs to be judged on current criteria, just as any other consumer product is judged on the basis of the norms applying at the time of its release.
The specs and first tests show it to be a large, enormously powerful and very fast car that drinks very nearly as much as the previous Falcon model. That combination is just ludicrous for all but a tiny handful of performance car enthusiasts. Like, it\’s the ultimate Australian family car for a time when there was no societal concern about world warming, open road speed limits didn’t really exist, there was no legislation against street racing, and fuel was way under a dollar a litre…
on April 15th, 2008 at 9:58 am
Gee Julian, I want some of that special Numbinbah Valley pharmacology you must have had….
Hinterland hippies….;-p
on April 15th, 2008 at 10:07 am
And our sycophantic media just lap it all up:
http://carsguide.news.com.au/site/motoring-news/story/falcon_reaches_unscaled_heights/?from=CG_email
http://carsguide.news.com.au/site/motoring-news/story/new_ford_soars_like_a_falcon/?from=CG_email
One would assume from reading this that the large car class in Australia isn’t free-falling in sales, and that in fact Australian consumers are pleading for improvements in NVH, handling and variable ratio steering.
So far the only thing that I can see that is a widespread market positive for the FG Falcon – the ONLY THING – is its mooted 5 star crash testing. And that on its own sure as hell won’t be enough to bring buyers flocking back.
on April 15th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
For all the praise loaded on the FG the questions remain; who is in the position to buy them and will they?
I don’t think it is an issue of size, fuel consumption, polllution etc., but more one of choice. Certainly there are some small cars in the monthly top 10 sellers, but there are also things like the Hilux as well as the Commo and the Aurion. For every small car purchased there is a opposite large vehicle purchase
Two of the key things working against the Falcon are quality and flexibility. The Territory addresses flexibility and sells around 1000 a month despite bland and aging looks and higher consumption.
As much as I admire the FG, and I had a BA XR8 Ute, my last and next purchases will not be the Falcon, Territory or anything Australian made until somebody starts a offering quality, space and fuel efficient and flexible vehicle. maybe Ford Oz will pick up the Galaxy as a spin off of the Focus. That might be in with a chance as long as they paint and rust protect it properly.
on April 15th, 2008 at 12:45 pm
people want to feel the accellerative push at their back, be safe, comfortable, want their vehicle to carry half a soccer team and finally not pay too much for the experience. i would like to see something REAL different. say a really powerful AWD turbo diesel Falcon wagon, or a 6.0l LS3 holden vectra (!).
The point i am trying to make is, cars are put through a “formula” so no matter what size or type ov vehicle (same class) they all feel beige and similar, with only relatively minor details accounting for mot of the differences between them.
on April 15th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
In a few years the falcon will be seen as one of the biggest missed opportunities in Oz automotive history. That opportunity being putting any one of their own Ford/Mazda turbo diesels in it!
on April 15th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
First, there are actually huge reserves of coal tar in Canada, heavy oil in Venezuala, and coal that can be turned into diesel in Australia. The Middle East has the largest reserves of oil. But Canada and Venezuala have the largest reserves of hydrocarbons that can be turned into oil. And Australia’s coal could be being turned into diesel economically at a far lower oil price than we have now.
Second, irrespective of global warming and oil prices, a light quick car is far far far more fun than a heavy quick car. Big heavy cars are for old men.
on April 15th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
I wish Mitsubishi had built an AWD turbo diesel wagon. I think a car like that would have kept them afloat for quite a while.
Come to think of it I wish Holden and Ford would do a similar thing. I’m not old, I’m married with 2 kids and I do like to have a bit of fang every now and then. I constantly argue with my father about why I have the financial capacity but not the interest to buy a V8 like him. Generally these discussions come down to my lack of ‘manhood’ for NOT driving a V8.
I don’t care about having a penis substitute for a car but I do care more and more about the environment. I wholehartedly agree with Edwards earlier post about Ford missing the boat. They had the perfect opportunity to corner the market.
Unfortunately they, like Holden are perpetuating the more power, bigger engine rant and then pass it on to the consumer via poorly represented media reporting.
God, I sound like I’m becoming a rebel against ‘The Man’…
on April 15th, 2008 at 9:53 pm
Julian, the Falcon’s real world economy figures have generally outdone the quoted factory figures; especially in one comparison where it drank less than Aurion ( Wheels); from some of the accounts the afforementioend media outlets were getting even better economy.
Is 10.5L really unreasonable for a $35k large car?
Bear in mind Ford has all but confirmed diesel for Falcon and Territory in 2010, and given the resources at their hand I think this is the best they could have done. Perhaps you should reserve further judgement until you drive it.
on April 16th, 2008 at 12:33 am
We have a phrase for these big, heavy, cheap(ish) blue-collar cars in the UK: fat blokes’ motors. Trouble is that all sizes of cars are getting heavier and larger every year. It’s difficult to find even a ‘small’ car that weighs less than 1200kgs these days.
on April 16th, 2008 at 6:17 am
Mitchell,
I am sure it will drive wonderfully.
The previous Falcon model drove very well and I am sure this one will be better. Unfortunately for Ford, that’s simply not the point. The Mitsubishi 380 in most forms drove pretty well too…
on April 16th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Julian, I have been thinking for the last 24 hours about some way to disagree with you. But I can’t.
I love the look of the FG, and I am very impressed with the improvements Ford have made to the soon-to-be-dead inline 6. I think the interior is great, and there is plenty of room, etc.
However. At the same time that we looked at the FG, right next to it was a brand new Mondeo TDCi. Interior space was near as makes no difference for me (and I’m not a small man) build quality was noticably better, and the spec level was higher, for significantly less money.
I don’t know if the Mondeo will be a success or not, I hope it will, but with petrol pushing past $1.50 a litre (in Melbourne at least) it is very hard to see how this car will be popular with private buyers.
I fear this will be the last Falcon Ford Australia produce. Wether they are smart enough to engineer a local version of the Focus, Mondeo, or something new, remains to be seen, but I suspect our market simply isn’t large enough to justify it.
on April 16th, 2008 at 2:46 pm
Ah yes, a sycophantic media lapping up the Falcon press releases.
Just like a sycophantic media and public lapping up Al Gore’s ramblings………….
Al Gore once claimed to have invented the Internet (later retracted). The guy has no credibility, yet because this is a populist issue, no media outlets ask the hard questions…..
on April 17th, 2008 at 7:09 am
Grant – Let’s not forget Julian’s Audi S4
Bob – I totally agree with your sentiments re:5.7L V8. Back in 2003, I was provided with a manual SS for 24hrs. My wife still reminds me that I had the stupidest grin on my face. Fantastic fun, but… I couldn’t justify it, and still cannot. But the memories are priceless!
As for the Falcon blog, it seems to me that every new iteration of a car has pretty much grown in size (until the new Mazda2). Ford is no more guilty of this than any other manufacturer. Its just that they only locally manufacture one car, and that car has become a bit too big for the target market. Hence the criticisms.
It’s like the “how much is enough power?” argument
on April 17th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
I have been reading Julian’s stories or some time now and I find I think very similarly to what he has to say in them, including this one on the new Falcon. I would love this Australian design to become very successful but I also think it is the wrong car for the time. At least I thought so until I read some of these other responses. Many people obviously have varied needs and some of these have been expressed in these reponses.
The Falcon does seem to do a good job in its areas of strength; size, power, safety, refinement, etc, etc… The photos of its interior suggest it has gained some class and refinement there too. But it was Stephen’s letter in particular that got me thinking. The Mondeo is probably going to become a main competitor to the Falcon for many reasons. It represents the latest in European development, is similar in size and is for sale from the same showroom.
I did a quick comparison using Redbook for data and discovered that the Mondeo is less than 10% lighter and less than 10% more fuel efficient, yet the Falcon is bigger with nearly double the torque and power. With this in mind, I think the Falcon has a good chance of beating its competitors in the marketplace. I hope so even though I am no fan of big cars.
on April 18th, 2008 at 3:55 pm
Ken,
Happy to mention my ownership of an Audi S4 – 2.2 litres of 5 cylinder turbo. Lots of torque and in my driving, usually pretty economical.
on April 18th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Ron,
I’d be pretty astonished if the diesel Mondeo has fuel economy only 10 per cent better than a Falcon. Oh, what’s that? The Falcon isn’t available with a diesel?
on April 19th, 2008 at 12:37 am
You don’t want hot RWD Falcons in OZ anymore? Then send them to the United States of America (where we haven’t had a good, high-performance RWD Ford sedan in decades).
We could trade you container ship loads of boring FWD garbage (Focus, Taurus, Escape Hybrid FWD . . . yawn)
The rolling electric-hybrid phonebooths-on-wheels are coming, of course, as the World’s governments grab up all of our automotive freedoms to serve the socialist canard of “climate change.” So we should all celebrate what’s left among the supercars while we still have the dwindling chance.
on April 20th, 2008 at 1:31 am
Diesel Falcon has been confirmed by Ford Australia CEO in the last few days, Julian. Hope this makes you more optimistic about the Falcon.
Is the 380 comparison really fair though? Let’s bear in mind the Falcon has never slipped out of the top 10 seller list like the 380 did- if it dropped down to say, #15 then there is still a strong business case, although I suspect Ford would have a much lower budget to work with. Another possible strategy is making it a strictly fleet vehicle, keeping the FG shape and putting in a 2.2 litre Duratec motor and 195 tyres- alot of fleets trust Falcon.
But did you really expect big economy gains from an engine that is about to die?
I look forward to a review by yourself- maybe you’ll return less than 10.5 litres,eh?
on April 22nd, 2008 at 1:07 pm
Hi Julian. Nice reply and even though I still agree with you, I still would like to see the new Falcon succeed. It may not have a diesel motor option but it does have an LPG motor option. Again I used Redbook for comparisons and the Falcon is actually cheaper than the Mondeo in this comparison. Power is now only a bit over 50% more for the Falcon but the Mondeo is massively more fuel efficient. 7.3 l/100km compared with 15.1 l/100km.
I did a bit more research using http://carsguide.news.com.au/site/on-going-costs/petrol-prices/ and used my postcode to find out today’s fuel prices. Diesel cost 165.9 c/l and LPG was 61.9 c/l. the fuel costs for these two cars in cents per 100 km would therefore be $9.35 for the Falcon and $12.11 for the Mondeo.
Just like there are many people with different needs, there are many ways of seeing the good and bad points of cars. Keep up the good articles. I always look forward to reading them.
on April 23rd, 2008 at 9:58 am
Hey Julian, the best way to save fuel and to reduce one’s carbon footprint is NOT to just focus on cars but to think laterally. Like to HALVE both? I have, by firstly halving my car usage. Yes,halved.
I moved closer to where I worked and then took the Bus more days than not. Now my kids have learned to walk to the School bus stop, saving driving for wet or hot days. We even plan our activities to be efficient and even car pool. Then when I do drive, I can enjoy driving a nice, large, safe, comfortable, durable sports sedan. Oh, don’t forget that the WAY you drive can make up to 50% difference to your fuel use (ref Autocar testing done in UK at Motor Industry Research Association, plus my own experience teaching Advanced Driving). Tyre, brake and mechanical components can all be burned up or conserved via driving style and their replacement also involves energy costs and greenhouse gasses. I could go on about passive solar in your house, conserving resources and lobbying government and industry to do their bit…
Lets not crucify Ford and GMH for sticking to the thing they do well – medium to large RWD cars and commercials at an astoundingly low price (in weeks of work need o purchase the car c/f UK and Europe). Sure they could fit a diesel or any other engine and yes with hindsight the new models could be smaller, or better yet they could reintroduce the light six (Torana) with 4 cyl/diesel etcoption but don’t expect the Aussie outposts to solve the world’s alternative propulsion problem – that will come anyway, be it fuel cells or hydrogen or what ever.
If falcadores are wrong so too are Merc, BMW, Jag and everone else making the same formula large RWD as a part of their fleet. Meanwhile, think laterally and examin your location and lifestyle as well as your vehicle and driving style. Bob
beyond the car itself – they are im.
on April 23rd, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Geez this site is an unbelievable wank fest.
The new FG XR6 Turbo gives you 270kw 533nm of torque 0-100 in 5.1 and the quarter in 13.3 for a not unreasonable $45,000.
As for the argument about killing the planet?? Well the Falcon XR6 Turbo sips a little over 11L/100km in official figures while the Camry sips 9.9L/100km.
So for less than 2L/100km you get a vehicle with a hell of a lot more power, torque, acceleration, handling, room and towing ability.
Even compare the FG XR6 with ZF auto to the Camry. The XR6 offers superior power, towing etc yet only consumes 10.1L/100km compared to the Camrys 9.9L/100km.
If petrol hits $2 a litre and you drive an average of 500km a week you are saving yourself FOUR DOLLARS A WEEK by downsizing from Falcon to Camry!
There is not a linear relationship between engine capacity and fuel consumption. If a few dollars a week in petrol can destroy you than I question whether you can afford to drive a car in the first place.
If you want to help the environment than forget cars. Turn off your computer and go outside and work in the garden.
on April 23rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Handling, power, acceleration, room and towing ability are simply NOT the criteria that most people use when buying a car!
They might have been once; they are not now.
Tell me, how do YOU explain the fact that the Corolla is Australia’s best selling car for the first quarter of the year?
And don’t pretty well all of your points more or less also apply to the outgoing Falcon model, which has sold very poorly in recent times?
To be a success, the FG has to sell in large numbers, not to tiny niches like those who want what you have described.
on April 24th, 2008 at 6:41 am
Julian Edgar: “Handling, power, acceleration, room and towing ability are simply NOT the criteria that most people use when buying a car!”
Talk about an overgeneralization! (Such comments are disheartening from a journalist who once wrote the brilliant book “21st Century Performance”)
The market for automobiles remains diverse. While there are certainly an increased number of buyers who are now more focused on fuel economy (either for economic or political reasons), the other attributes of quality motoring are hardly obsolete.
Moreover, to uphold any of the boring, souless “transportation appliances” from Toyota as “the benchmark” or some paragon of automotive virtue is a titanic mistake. For a variety of reasons, Ford cannot and should not ape Toyota. Ford must be true to its “D.N.A” as Ford!
If all of the OEMs abandon suitable sporting platforms (such as the FG Falcon) in a rush to build the ultimate rolling-mini-fridge of a FWD microcar — merely to placate a minority of obnoxious environmental “know-it-alls” or to overserve the market niche of economy-minded “anti-motorists”– we will all be deprived of a lot more interesting and useful vehicles than the FG Falcon. While some demented “wankers” dream of a dark day when “Handling, power, acceleration, room and towing ability” or even the potential for same are no longer available in any new vehicle showroom anywhere, true auto enthusiasts should fight against such a nightmare with every fibre of their respective beings.
Thus, the FG Falcon and any other RWD sedans of clear sporting/grand touring potential should be heralded as defiant acts in support of a broader automotive freedom-of-choice. They must be venerated as less compromised expressions of the automotive art form. They must be appreciated for their fealty to customers who demand “Handling, power, acceleration, room and towing ability,” as well as style and increased safety.
James, of course, makes a highly logical argument in favor of the FG XR6. Certainly, scores of “applicance motorists” would rather have that extra four dollars per week. But plenty more have enough common sense to appreciate a balance between fuel economy and other essential elements of motoring. Ford has an obligation to serve both groups of customers.
on April 27th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Emotionally I can agree with you Speedzzter. Unfortunately, in the real world, terms like ‘automotive art form’, ‘appliance motorists’ and ‘boring, or soulless’ get carved up like the unrealistic fodder they are. Having lived and worked in numerous countries far less rich than we are, I’m well aware of the economic and social limitations imposed on car owners in other societies. For the majority, any car which cannot compete in both fuel economy and internal/external space ratio stakes (of course, also reliability, build quality, handling, performance), is dead in the water. We certainly aren’t at that stage yet, but the reality is oil has never been more expensive, and one has to wonder how much of our weekly budget has to be eaten up by fuel consumption before we accept that it is an unreal luxury. Im highly surprised someone so clealy knowledgeable about performance and sports cars seems to regard smaller and front-wheel-drive cars as ‘second best’.
There are multiple examples of well built, performance-oriented vehicles that would be an absolute joy to drive and own, which also, just quietly, return mileage approximately half (or less) that of a new falcon (I refer to VW Golf Sport TDi at 5.5l/100km, or Skoda Octavia RS at 7.9l/100km). I understand your unwillingness to part with something that once was great, but unfortunately all things change, and most of the world has moved on from heavy, powerful rear wheel drive sedans.
on April 28th, 2008 at 6:19 am
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/MiniSite/MiniSiteArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=51756&vf=28&MiniSiteID=8
on April 29th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Julian Edgar said,
on April 23rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Handling, power, acceleration, room and towing ability are simply NOT the criteria that most people use when buying a car!
They might have been once; they are not now.
Tell me, how do YOU explain the fact that the Corolla is Australia’s best selling car for the first quarter of the year?
And don’t pretty well all of your points more or less also apply to the outgoing Falcon model, which has sold very poorly in recent times?
To be a success, the FG has to sell in large numbers, not to tiny niches like those who want what you have described.
————————————————————————————-
Yes the Toyota Corolla is the best selling car in the first quarter. And how do they advertise the Corolla as “the hottest Corolla ever”. Mazda 3 is hot on the heels of the Corolla and who can forget the Mazda “zoom, zoom” advertisement.
Yes we can all sit here and applaud Toyota for introducing the Prius but while they were busy building their hybrid model they were even more busy building the Toyota Tundra-a V8 Pickup truck to enter into the market of gaz guzzling Sports Utilities.
If I can draw your attention to a recent drive article
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/ArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=51974&vf=7
you will be interested to know that fuel efficiency in motor vehicles has virtually remained unchanged since 1963 at 11.4litres/100 kilometres. Even more telling is that a base model Falcon with 5 spped auto delivers less than the mean while the ZF equipped Falcon even more so.
I really am at a loss to undrstand your criticism of the Falcon. Is it outdated and inefficient?????
Well how about we compare it to two Japanese juggernauts in the same market: The Nissan Maxima and Honda Legend. Surely Japanese wizardry should humble the jurassic Falcon???
According to Government green vehicle guide:
Nissan Maxima uses 11.8L/100 kilometres
Honda Legend uses 10.8L/100 kilometres
Ford Falcon (base) 10.5L/100 kilometres
Ford Falcon (XR6) 10.1L/100 kilometres
So surely the Falcon must be smaller to use less fuel??
Nissan Maxima wheelbase: 2824mm
Honda legend Wheelbase: 2799mm
Ford Falcon wheelbase: 2838mm
So the Falcon is down on power???
Honda: 217kw@6200rpm 351nm@5000rpm
Nissan 170kw@5600rpm 333nm@2600rpm
Falcon 195kw@6000rpm 391nm@3250rpm
Well then the Falcon must cost an arm and a leg??
Nissan Maxima ST-L $34,9990
Honda Legend $74,990
Ford Falcon $36,490
So tell me what exactly is wrong with the Falcon??????
It has class leading fuel consumption, safety, technology, performance, handling all for a price to embarass the competition.
Ford already offers an alternative fuel car-the LPG Falcon, will have a diesel option come 2010 as well as the new Ecoboost V6.
You seem to lack a grasp of vehicle economics. The Falcon DOESN’T have to sell in huge numbers to be viable. Do you realise a Falcon doesn’t cost much more to build than a Corolla yet the price for a Falcon is 10 grand more??? The Falcon will be viable if they can notch up annual sales of 40,000 a year and even less once engines are imported from America in 2010. For a small car to be viable they would have to sell 400,000 a year.
If the Falcon is such a horrendously thirsty dinosaur then why are our roads packed with SUV’s that consume more fuel than the Falcon??? Why did Toyota see it fit to invest in building the Aurion and boasting about 200kw?? Why are many manufacturers working on next generation RWD platforms with companies like Hyundai working on their first RWD platform ??
The truth is that the FG Falcon is a brilliant car but there are many people in Australia who are ashamed of our culture. It is an interesting phenomenon the Australian culture cringe. People seem to believe the local product inferior to a BMW built in South Africa or a Honda Civic built in Thailand.
It is very rich to criticise the Falcon for using more fuel than a Toyota Yaris when you don’t see any other manufacturers doing anything. For more than twice the price as a Falcon a BMW offers barely better fuel consumption, less performance and higher running costs.
What is killing the Falcon is not the Corolla but the Landcruiser. The SUV market has exploded. I suggest to anybody reading this to go for a drive and see what is parked in peoples driveways.
When I was a kid our family had a 1968 Fairmont. Our neighbour had a Kingswood and our other neighbour had a Valiant. MOST PEOPLE WERE ONE CAR FAMILIES. These days I usually see either 2 small cars or a SUV and a small car.
I am no mathematical genius but I can work out that one Falcon is cheaper to run being able to do everything than having a Toyota Corolla during the week and a Toyota Prado for the weekend.
The real truth of the matter is that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Falcon or the Commodore for that matter. It is simply that people have more choice than ever before especialy given low tariffs and high aussie dollar.
10 years ago a Mazda 6 was more expensive than a Ford Falcon.
These days a Mazda 6 is cheaper than an ex-fleet Ford Falcon.
There is nothing wrong with the Falcon it is probably one of the best cars in the world given it’s performance, safety and features for the price. The truth is that people don’t give a shit about fuel prices and people don’t give a shit about the environment.
Fuel costs as a % of income are lowest in Australias history. The ironic thing is that the problem with the Falcon is that it is too small. The modern Corolla is bigger than the 90′s Camry and now that there are so many SUV’s available the Falcon is being squeezed beween the HUGE modern “small cars” and SUV’s which offer better visibility, ground clearance and off road ability.
I was in the same situation where the Ford Territory Turbo offered so many of my needs and offered better space and off road ability than the Falcon.
I really, really doubt that a an obeste 1400kg Corolla jampacked with features and a “hot” 100kw is a symbol of a society concerned about fuel consumption and the environment.
The truth is that the large car market is bigger than it ever has been in history.
on May 3rd, 2008 at 8:23 am
Toyota tipped to build hybrid Camry in Australia –
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,23638252-421,00.html
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/05/02/1209235157161.html?s_rid=smh:top5
That would certainly put the cat amongst the pigeons, especially if govt and fleet purchasers (the vast majority of Commodore and Falcon sales) want to look green…
on May 4th, 2008 at 8:18 am
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,23636,23640413-462,00.html
From that article:
“The worst news is for local car-makers. Holden sold 650 fewer Commodores in April than in March. The company’s mainstay car is 5000 units down for the year to date, compared with the same period in 2007.
“The one-time market leader was outsold by Toyota’s Corolla, with 3722 of the imported four-cylinder compacts sold during April compared with the Commodore’s 3325 sales.
“Toyota also lost sales, but extended its market lead. With almost 21,000 sales, it sold more than twice as many vehicles of all models as second-placed Holden.
“Toyota’s Yaris, Camry, Aurion and HiLux models, as well as the Corolla, were among the 10 most popular models.
“Ford, whose new Falcon goes on sale soon, was third, with 8246 sales — its worst result.
“Mazda was next with 6749, then Mitsubishi on 5014.
“Ford and Holden’s fortunes rely on large V6s, which continue to decline in popularity.
“The only Ford- or Holden-badged cars to improve sales during March were the Focus and the Astra, both made in Europe and fitted with economical, four-cylinder petrol or diesel engines. “
on May 6th, 2008 at 3:17 am
So what, Julian did you expect of the FG Falcon? Bearing in mind a complete reshuffle of engines is imminent, including a diesel- Did you expect them to abandon the Falcon nameplate altogether?
Judging by recent media reports, it appears all three of our car makers are on the cusp of embracing greener engines etc, even if they are seemingly late to the party- but I think you spoke too soon with this article.
As for the FG, I have no doubt it will fulfill it’s purpose well with reasonable economy- Comparable, if not better than it’s rivals. Come on, Jules!
on May 6th, 2008 at 7:32 am
What did I expect of the new Falcon?
In short: it would be smaller than the previous car; it would be lighter than the previous car; it would run engines with clearly better fuel economy than the previous car (not a tiny change like a few percent); it would have less power than the previous car but broadly match it in performance (referring to typical spec models); and it would have at least one model designed specifically for outstanding fuel economy – eg a downsized turbo LPG engine, or a diesel engine.
WRT to engines, remember Ford spent quite a lot of money on upgrading the old engines for the FG – it’s HOW they chose to spend it that is so stupid.
You say that Australian manufacturers are ‘late to the party’. That can’t be said about Toyota (they build a four cylinder in Australia, and as I have said previously, that car is available as a hybrid overseas and so could easily be made here, as it appears will be the case) but Holden and Ford haven’t been ‘late to the party’ – they haven’t even been aware the party is being held…
Now they’ve suddenly woken up and are scrambling – but years late.
on May 6th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
http://carsguide.news.com.au/site/motoring-news/story/falcon_diesel_still_on_the_books/
When even the current Ford boss says the FG should have had a diesel, that’s _really_ saying something about a car that’s barely been released.
on May 6th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
Julian – I generally agree with your thoughts but what do you make of the Hi-lux topping the sales charts last month? It isn’t exaclty a beacon of efficiency and is still popular. It would be interesting to know what proportion of those sales were private and how many were related to the mining boom.
on May 6th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
I think it’s an interesting stat.
From where I sit, tradespeople seem to doing extraordinarily well at the moment. That and the mining boom would make that sort of commercial a good seller, and obviously as business vehicles (what proportion – 90 per cent of all sales?), the fuel is a tax deduction so rising fuel prices don’t impinge in the same way as for the private market.
That said, the diesel also drives very well, and has a listed fuel economy of only 8.1 litres/100 (4 x 2 model), which is obviously very good for the size of vehicle and its load carrying capacity.
on May 6th, 2008 at 8:22 pm
Point taken, they went for the marketable edge instead- at least the car appears smaller though. Personally, I hope they take some weight out of it next update, to supplement the V6 and diesel, aswell as making the front end slipperier(sic) for lower Cd.
How difficult would it be for Ford to implement a stop-start system ala BMW Efficient Dynamics, Julian?
on May 7th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Geez this Julian bloke has no idea whatsoever.
Why would they make the Falcon smaller than the previous one?? That would push it into the midsized market where it would have to compete in the 20k category. If you have been paying any attention to the automotive industry you would notice that EVERY SINGLE VEHICLE IS GETTING BIGGER AND HEAVIER.
The modern day Corolla is bigger than the the early 90′s Camry and weighs more than the 80′s Commodore and Falcon. The Mondeo is already bigger than the Falcon in some dimensions.
The Falcon already has an alternative fuel vehicle-it’s called the E-gas Falcon. The ones at work get a 1000kilometres a tank for a cost of $100 to fill and this all for a bragain priced car that can fit five in comfort and tow a boat.
For someone who claims to be an objective journalist your bias towards Toyota is sickening (I notice that Toyota often advertises on this site).
How can you praise Toyota when their “economical” Toyota Camry four cylinder uses 9.9L/100 kilometres when the larger, faster and more powerful Falcon uses 10.1L/100 kilometres. Given that the Toyota has 2 less cylinders, 1.6L less capacity and weighs over 200 kilos less shouldn’t you expect it to be a LOT more economical than the Falcon??
So the Falcon is behind other vehicles and “late for the party is it”. Well lets compare it to it’s European competitors shall we.
Ford Falcon: 10.1L/100 km
Honda Legend: 11.8L/100km
BMW 540i: 10.4L/100km
Nissan Maxima: 10.8L/100km
Looks like the Falcon is ahead of it’s competitors doesn’t it?? Even more amazing considering the Falcon is cheaper than the BMW and Honda and bigger and heavier than the Nissan.
Why don’t you do objective journalism and change your sites name to ToyotaFanClub.com.au. Your arguments are not based on fact just bias and stupidity.
Absolutely sickening.
on May 7th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
The Falcon is a fine car but this is 2008 and the game has moved on. 10 or 5 years ago it would have been a winner but times have changed in the car world. The sales numbers tell the story…
on May 7th, 2008 at 6:25 pm
James,
1) Bigger is always better, eh? I’ve written about that one before – and things are getting ever closer to the ‘laughable’ example I gave in 2004: see http://blog.autospeed.com/2004/11/21/subtle-shifts-in-paradigms-can-result-in-long-term-sea-changes/
2) The E-gas Falcon. Yes, using gas technology that even the aftermarket LPG guys now laugh about. It’s certainly better than nothing, but a pretty lame execution when evaluated in any current context.
3) I praise Toyota and their Camry & Aurion because those cars make for a far better car manufacturing business case than Holden and (for the moment, at least) Ford can offer. That praise has zip to do with the quality of the cars – in fact, in my test of the Camry, I wasn’t very impressed – http://autospeed.com/cms/A_107795/article.html
4) Your comparisons with other cars completely miss the point. The Legend, 540i and Maxima are either (1) sold all around the world in large numbers, and/or (2) sold for much higher prices than the Falcon. That combination of factors makes those cars profitable. This discussion is not about whether a Falcon has better fuel economy than a 540i; this is whether each car is a better choice for the respective manufacturer, cars through which they can make a profit and stay in business. In short, we’re talking about the Australian (and any viable export) markets for cars made here. I mean, just as an obvious point, aren’t the cars you mention all also available in LHD?
5) It’s always puzzled me that when some people say ‘objective’ they really mean ‘make no judgements’. It’s completely objective to say that Toyota is doing vastly better in Australia than Holden and Ford. Toyota last year in Australia made something like 150,000 cars, and exported just under 100,000! On the most recent figures, Toyota last month sold more cars in Australia than Ford and Holden COMBINED!
6) I am no particular fan of Toyota per se. I am not really an enthusiast for any marque – as I say in an upcoming blog entry, any car manufacturer can at any time produce a dog of a car. But this discussion isn’t really about the worth or otherwise of individual cars (eg comparisons of handling, or NVH, or fuel economy), it’s about commercial success in our market. I don’t think the FG Falcon will be a commercial success (unless they pull out all stops and bring forward the new engines, especially the diesel), and I think it should have been obvious to the company that they were heading in the wrong direction. The comments by the new boss about the missing diesel support that.
7) Do you really see the FG Falcon suddenly changing the new car sales market, eg Ford knocking off Toyota ? Or Ford making more Falcons than Toyota makes Camrys? I can’t see that happening and – to be honest – I’d be pretty surpised if any one else could imagine that either. So if the Falcon is not going to do this, there must be something wrong with the Falcon…
on May 7th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
How does Toyota have a far better car manufacturing case than Ford or Holden?
You do know that Toyota has been making noises about closing the local plant.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Toyota-plays-down-fears-of-plant-closure/2007/10/27/1192941374640.html
If anything Ford and Holden have a stronger business case for manufacturing in Australia than Toyota. This is because the Camry and V6 Camry (Aurion) are built all over the world mostly in countries with lower manufacturing costs than Australia an plenty of extra capacity to take up the Altona slack. The Altona plant could shut tomorrow and it wouldn’t affect Toyota one bit. Look how easy the transition from Australian Corolla to Imported Corolla was in 2000.
On the other hand if they closed the Broadmeadows plant and Elizabeth plant it would destroy Ford and Holden. The Falcon, Commodore and Territory are not built anywhere else in the world and Ford and GM do not have any products anywhere like them in LHD. It wold wipe out two thirds of Holden and Ford sales overnight.
No offence but for somebody who runs an automotive website you are not very smart. The Falcon doesn’t have to outsell the Camry it just has to be PROFITABLE. The reason that Ford and Holden build large cars is that they can be just as profitable from a smaller volume. For 2007 Ford Australia is expected to turn a profit and this is from selling some 35,000 Falcons 15,000 Territory’s and 10,000 Falcon Utes.
It’s called BUSINESS. Ford Australia would rather sell 35,000 Falcons a year in a market with little competition and higher profits than attept to compete in the small market with fierce competition and non-existant profits. For a small car factory to be viable it has to be manufacturing 250,000 vehicles plus in a third world country.
You are concerned about hybrids good for you but change is going to have to come from market forces which means petrol has to get dearer and technology cheaper.
If the FG Falcon was the size of a Corolla, weighed 1400kg and was powered by a alternative energy drivetrain that delivered 7L/100km and cost $50,000 would anybody buy it? NO!
You just have to look at the sales of the Prius. Sure it has carved itself a niche but it is still not a blib on the radar of the Corolla and Toyota was so concerned about the environment that they decide to build the Toyota Tundra-a gas guzzling V8 pickup.
So let me spell it out for you:
1)Large cars are the most PROFITABE. In a global economy the only way we can have a viable car manufacturing industry is to produce high profit, low volume vehicles and fill this niche all over the world (as we speak talks are being held in Broadmeadows to export the Falcon to China, the middle east and Europe).
2)Alternative fuel technology is not VIABLE. It is not economically viable but the Falcon is prepared. The ending of local engine technology in Geelong means that Ford Australia now has access to massive drivetrain investments in the United States ie. ecoboost
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EcoBoost#TwinForce_.2F_EcoBoost
on May 8th, 2008 at 9:17 am
That would all be wonderful if the Australian large car market wasn’t in massive decline, and if Ford was selling the Falcon in major export markets. If they manage to get large scale exports for the Falcon, then the situation changes. Right now they are trying to find those export markets after they’ve designed and built the car!
on May 8th, 2008 at 1:01 pm
First of all you can’t just decide to export a car you have to meet a lot of regulations in overseas markets. Holden had the advantage of being based on a Opel platform while Toyota had the advantage of being an overseas car. Since the BA work has been done on harmonising the car for export such as movement of the fuel tank and dash harmonisation for left hook.
If you want to thank anybody for the decline in large cars thank Mr Johnny Howard who signed us into free trade deals which made it easy for foreign cars to get in but impossible for our cars to get out.
After we signed a free trade deal with Thailand Ford Territorys began to be exported there but after only 30 Territory’s were exported Thailand changed their tax structure pricing our products out of competition.
How can you expect to have a viable industry when foreign cars have free entry to Australia while our exports have to face tariffs, tax hikes etc.
http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mellor.nsf/story2/FB1D27AEB153BA06CA257442000967B4
on May 10th, 2008 at 7:01 am
And even the TV ads are out of the Eighties!
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=iAhW-f7yuiE
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=-gWO-vH6oE4
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=yGgfGjo1JbQ
on May 14th, 2008 at 7:44 am
“FORD Australia has announced a net after-tax
loss of $87.2 million for 2007, a year in which
Australians purchased a record of 1,049,982
new vehicles.
“Ford announced the bad news after 4pm last
Friday (May 9) in a bid to minimise media
coverage, in the same way that Holden revealed
its $146.56 million loss for 2006.
“While Holden will not reveal its 2007
fi nancial results until June, the Ford result is
more than double what the company lost in
2006 ($40.3 million) and comes as a result of a
year-on-year decline in sales of 6894 vehicles.”
From go-auto news, May 13.
What were you saying about Ford’s profit, James?
on May 14th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
I’m as suprised as you are Julian. That asshole Tom Gorman announced that Ford Australia was going to turn a profit before he jumped ship and left Ford altogether. he has been the worst President in Ford Australias history all that he has done is cut back on vehicle production, closed the Geelong plant and sat on his ass.
The new President Bill Osbourne is looking much more promising. he has openly criticized Tom Gorman for not introducing a diesel variant with the FG falcon and not chasing exports. He is now in talks with Dearborn about getting funding to export the falcon to the Middle East, China and Europe.
You may also find interesting I was having a conversation with a Ford engineer the other day. I openely asked him why they didn’t bring back the 3.2L like they had in the EA. Apparently they did testing on a low capacity straight six and there was little fuel economy gains as there was still the frictional losses present and the engine had to work harder.
Food for thought.
I consider 10.1L/100km adequte in the Falcon seeing this puts it WAAY ahead of rivals like the Honda Legend, Commodore and Nissan Maxima.
on May 14th, 2008 at 7:13 pm
“I’m as suprised as you are Julian. ”
Pardon? I am NOT surprised by Ford’s (lack of) profits…. How could they possibly be making decent profits with their (lack of) scale economies, no export market, declining market share, and declining real sales numbers?
If Ford reckons that downsizing an engine has no affect on fuel economy, they are about alone in the world in thinking that… Even in their 1988 models it had SOME benefit…
I am absolutely certain that a downsized, LPG turbo engine would have had vast fuel economy / running cost benefits over their current line-up – but they made a choice (note: a CHOICE) that was otherwise…
on May 14th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
“If Ford reckons that downsizing an engine has no affect on fuel economy, they are about alone in the world in thinking that… Even in their 1988 models it had SOME benefit…”
Just like the four cylinder Commodore???
LPG is already a fuel efficient alternative. We have a few E-Gas falcons at work and they cost roughly $100 to fill and you get between 800-1000 kays a tank. That economy is equivalent to 8L/100km in a petrol car and considering the size and carrying capacity of the Falcon and this is pretty damn good. And ask any taxi driver why they choose the Falcon-the main reason is that the Falcon inline six is THE BEST engine to use with LPG. No other engine is reliable enough.
Even with all the benefits of the E-Gas Falcon take up has been slow so why should Ford invest so much money in alternative technology for the Falcon six when there is little market for it and the straight six is being replaced in two years?
There was market research done on the erosion of Falcon sales and do you know what the findings were?? People weren’t abandoning Falcons for smaller more fuel efficient cars they were in fact leaving the Falcon for SUV’s and Luxury Euros. People aren’t as concerned about fuel prices as you imagine July. The ones most affected by petrol prices aren’ the ones who buys new cars anyway.
on May 14th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
Ah well, let’s just wait for the FG to sell up an enormous storm. That will show how right Ford is with their product planning decision-making – and how totally wrong I am.
I will be very surpised if it sells any better than the BF sold in its last year.
And, if that happens, it will be a disaster for Ford in Australia.
Time will tell.
on August 22nd, 2008 at 11:44 am
The FG is selling so well that Ford are now cutting production jobs.
http://www.news.com.au/business/story/0,27753,24222706-462,00.html
Now who is still prepared to say the car was the right car for the times? James (and others), where are you?
on August 22nd, 2008 at 8:27 pm
and the boss has just left…
on September 14th, 2008 at 7:10 pm
I think you’ll find the job cuts have a lot to do with the evolution of the manufacturing process – in this respect Ford is behind Toyota, but improving all the time. As for ozzy, well, who knows?
on September 17th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
The Broadmeadows plant is running a 4 day week until mid Nov, and the line rate has dropped from 55 vehicles per hour to 38.
Any more of Andrews ‘evolution’ and there won’t be a plant.
on February 14th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Julian….
Come on, you once owned a Skyline GTR! Small cars?
The RB26DETT churning endless power, all in the package that makes any hoon dribble.
Hipocrit
on February 14th, 2009 at 2:06 pm
Adam, you are an idiot. What does the skyline have to do with anything?
(However, i am a bit of a one eyed fan… brilliant car, i own a r34)
Great article Julian…
on February 14th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
adam, I also once owned a Honda Z. So?
on February 25th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Dear Julian, I dont think you should admit to owning the hondaZ knowledge of it one thing ownership is another case regards Russ-S