Mullaly confirms Falcon and Mustang to share platform from 2016 - Page 11

phillyc · 22-01-2010, 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

well said Swordsman88,
It's not enough for these little Holden apologists to gloat about their export
prospects, they then have to turn around and stick the knife into Ford.

Jezz Spinks has jumped the gun in my books, he's just cherry picked a second
hand quote from Angus McKenzie's Motor Trend, a know anti-Ford site.

I'm still seething that these people turned up to a major reveal of the global
Focus and all they could do is deliver their spin on a non-relative issue.

Yea, they had a total of 4 stories to essentially run with.

1 -ve from Ford = Incorrectly quoted / interpreted Falcon as gone.
1 +ve from Ford = Ford Aus are making money and Falcon twinned with Mustang.

1 -ve from GMHolden = Cruze delayed for 2010 (indefinitely? not even speculated)
1 +ve from GMHolden = Lutz sprouting off that he'd like Commodore US exports.

Which stories got the runs?! The negative from Ford and the positive from GMHolden. Both stories are pure speculation.

Which stories deserved to be run?! The Falcon factory is making money & the Cruze is again delayed. The Ford profit got lost in the wake and the Cruze announcement didn't raise an eyebrow or any questions about will it actually happen.

That is bias. Complete, total, all encompassing bias.

jpd80 · 22-01-2010, 10:07 PM

Maybe we should start a new positive thread on what people would like to see in the 2015 Falcon....
Perhaps a poll or two on engines, transmissions, body styles and sizes.

banarcus · 22-01-2010, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

Maybe we should start a new positive thread on what people would like to see in the 2015 Falcon....
Perhaps a poll or two on engines, transmissions, body styles and sizes.

Yep I can see a change for something a little smaller, something like a premium RWD somewhere between a 3 and 5 series BMW with access to technology with other Fords from around the world. Perhaps a slightly smaller RWD Mondeo with US V6 and V8 engines. Surely not too hard to ask would it not considering a streamlining of platforms is what is being suggested. Or is what I have suggested just a Lincoln MKZ with an option to go V8 and RWD?

Really, take a look at the demographics that the Falcon has been targeted to and see what is happening to this part of the population. People are going for smaller premium cars with all(or more than) the fruit of a Fairmont Ghia with those choosing larger RWD cars either enthusiasts or fleets or of course older baby boomers. The younger generation have not been brought up on a staple diet of local product like the older generations and this as the large car segment shrinks, will have a more profound effect.

In five years time, I dont see the relevance of a large RWD sedan the size of a current Falcon. Of course, it could be shared with the United States and it's much larger market but the commodore wasn't exactly popular over there was it? Maybe if the Falcon could be built over there too, to overcome their strong unions, the cost of making a less relevant car can be justified.

morak001 · 23-01-2010, 03:14 AM

My own speculation, built from stuff on this forum, a GRWD platform has been specified as a definate strategic plan. And since the Crown Vic. has been (will be?) discontinued there will be not much left in the Ford bank for RWD aside from the mustang and Falcon.
To me it would make sense to consider a GRWD platform that would integrate Mustang (SWB 2 door), Falcon (mid 4 door saloon) and Lincoln (lwb 4 door saloon).
My perception is that this would go a long way to satisfy AU market (mustang/f'coon/f'lane), middle east markets and whatever the US would like inc. cop cars/ limo & extended wb stuff.

To leave a global market when you have the worlds best RWD engineers seems suicidal. These world best engineers will go to the next best job available, ie the opposition.

To me it is not overly complicated, or am I overly simplified?

Chilliman · 23-01-2010, 11:03 AM

My own thoughts:

I can see GRWD being a strategy rather than a pure single platform, that shares many key components (driveline, front suspension etc). And there can still be a place for Aussie production.

1. A 'sports' short wheel base platform for Mustang manufactured in the US and exported around the world

2. A Long wheel base version that will replace the Crown Victoria in the police market (I only see Taurus being a stop gap measure) and provide the basis of a large RWD luxury car for Lincoln - Manufactured in US and exported here (return of the Fairlane/LTD?)

3. A short wheel base sedan to replace our Falcon. Manufactured here and exported around the world - 2.0Litre EcoBoost power for Europe,
5.0Litre Coyote power for the Middle East and the US - in high spec luxury trim it could be badged as a Lincoln.

Just some thoughts..............

Chilliman · 23-01-2010, 02:21 PM

This is what some others think (Taken from the Motortrend site):

Ah, so this all suddenly makes sense. Here's how I picture their car lineup around 2015 in size order:

Fiesta - B3
Focus - C2
Fusion/Mondeo - CD4
Mustang - GRWD SWB
Falcon(AU)/TBird - GRWD LWB
Taurus - CD4 LWB

How far off am I Aus?

Thats it.

Read more: http://forums.motortrend.com/70/8089...#ixzz0dOyRWiMd

Ironically its a commemt section that was spawned from the same article that gave birth to the Jizz Spanks 'Falcon is dead article'.

FPV GTHO · 24-01-2010, 01:36 AM

GRWD wont remain GRWD forever, it'll eventually be given some other moniker, possibly DE something or other.

jpd80 · 24-01-2010, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

GRWD wont remain GRWD forever, it'll eventually be given some other moniker, possibly DE something or other.

D-E8?

**CAT600** · 24-01-2010, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by banarcus

......In five years time, I dont see the relevance of a large RWD sedan the size of a current Falcon.....

You know, you say that, the indicators in the media/press are all there, but I cant think of a single car model (small/medium or large category) that has shrunk in the last 20, hell, 10 years.

Equivalent models are still getting bigger...... dosent make sence to me as I agree that Falcon should get a bit smaller and a lot lighter (as technology allows).

Daniel

Nikked · 24-01-2010, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CAT600

You know, you say that, the indicators in the media/press are all there, but I cant think of a single car model (small/medium or large category) that has shrunk in the last 20, hell, 10 years.

Equivalent models are still getting bigger...... dosent make sence to me as I agree that Falcon should get a bit smaller and a lot lighter (as technology allows).

Daniel

The corolla is a prime example.

THe falcon won't get larger, but make greater use of its size, i'ld say the wheelbase will remain the same size, but with a more compact body, like the VE (sort of) most rwd sedans are having the the wheels right in the corners to maximize cabin space.

jpd80 · 24-01-2010, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

The corolla is a prime example.

THe falcon won't get larger, but make greater use of its size, i'ld say the wheelbase will remain the same size, but with a more compact body, like the VE (sort of) most rwd sedans are having the the wheels right in the corners to maximize cabin space.

If the Inline 6 goes, then the nose of the Falcon can be shortened roughly 125mm (5"),
combine that with moving the rear axle rearwards by about 50mm (2") and you get a car
that keeps the same interior space as FG but takes on a much newer exterior look while
being shorter and lighter. Maybe such a car could span mid sized and large car brackets.....

CFOUR · 24-01-2010, 01:52 PM

With all the saftey rails and braces Its quite cramped in the fg compared to the au/ba/bf. Also the falcon needs more rear head room, the last time I fit sitting comfy was el and it's has got worse with every model.

**Bluehoon** · 24-01-2010, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CFOUR

With all the saftey rails and braces Its quite cramped in the fg compared to the au/ba/bf. Also the falcon needs more rear head room, the last time I fit sitting comfy was el and it's has got worse with every model.

Funny that, of all the Falcons since EL, my brothers EL is still the easiest car to get in and out of, front or back, and has a tonne of head room, front or back.

However, E-Series - ****ing owners off since 1988....

jpd80 · 24-01-2010, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluehoon

Funny that, of all the Falcons since EL, my brothers EL is still the easiest car to get in and out of, front or back, and has a tonne of head room, front or back.

However, E-Series - ****ing owners off since 1988....

That's because the basic shape of the passenger compartment wasn't changed until FG,
it's one of the more expensive items to change and Ford was stuck with it for a decade.

vztrt · 24-01-2010, 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

If the Inline 6 goes, then the nose of the Falcon can be shortened roughly 125mm (5"),
combine that with moving the rear axle rearwards by about 50mm (2") and you get a car
that keeps the same interior space as FG but takes on a much newer exterior look while
being shorter and lighter. Maybe such a car could span mid sized and large car brackets.....

I'd use the extra room to increase the size in the cabin.

Nikked · 24-01-2010, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

I'd use the extra room to increase the size in the cabin.

The point i was trying to make with my post.

The mondeo is a medium car, but is almost as roomy as the falcon, so the falcon needs to star large, but with smarter use of space. The FG almost got it right, its just the wheel base limits what could be done.

4Vman · 24-01-2010, 08:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikked

The point i was trying to make with my post.

The mondeo is a medium car, but is almost as roomy as the falcon, so the falcon needs to star large, but with smarter use of space. The FG almost got it right, its just the wheel base limits what could be done.

The I6 holds the Falcon design back a fair bit compared to most other large sedans, having such a tall long engine to deal with forward of the firewall reduces cabin space substantially if you're working to a fixed wheelbase objective...

vztrt · 24-01-2010, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

The I6 holds the Falcon design back a fair bit compared to most other large sedans, having such a tall long engine to deal with forward of the firewall reduces cabin space substantially if you're working to a fixed wheelbase objective...

Funny enough if it was FWD it would allow more space, but at the end of the day its a compromise that I'm quite happy to put up with especially when it drives so well.

4Vman · 24-01-2010, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

Funny enough if it was FWD it would allow more space, but at the end of the day its a compromise that I'm quite happy to put up with especially when it drives so well.

Geez imagine trying to get the I6 to fit "east west"

As great an engine as it is, and has been, i wonder how much sticking with it has inadvertantly backed the Falcon into the deadend corner its in now?

prydey · 24-01-2010, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

The I6 holds the Falcon design back a fair bit compared to most other large sedans, having such a tall long engine to deal with forward of the firewall reduces cabin space substantially if you're working to a fixed wheelbase objective...

most other makers of I6 engines have also moved to V config. not sure about bmw but merc and nissan stopped I6's some time ago. as witnessed by those 2 marques though, it doesn't mean you have to switch to FWD.

worldwide everyone is going down the small capacity, forced induction route. at least the falcon has that on board already in the near future.

4Vman · 24-01-2010, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

most other makers of I6 engines have also moved to V config. not sure about bmw but merc and nissan stopped I6's some time ago. as witnessed by those 2 marques though, it doesn't mean you have to switch to FWD.

worldwide everyone is going down the small capacity, forced induction route. at least the falcon has that on board already in the near future.

I think ultimately "V" configuration engines will be the prefered layout for engines larger than 4cyls for obvious reasons, when efficient use of space is a critical design element its the logical way forward.

vztrt · 24-01-2010, 08:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

most other makers of I6 engines have also moved to V config. not sure about bmw but merc and nissan stopped I6's some time ago. as witnessed by those 2 marques though, it doesn't mean you have to switch to FWD.

worldwide everyone is going down the small capacity, forced induction route. at least the falcon has that on board already in the near future.

Merc yes, BMW wont go V6 for passenger cars as the said they are rubbish.

prydey · 24-01-2010, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

Merc yes, BMW wont go V6 for passenger cars as the said they are rubbish.

they build a great I6, but other manufacturers (main rival merc) have shown that it is possible to build a good V motor.

4Vman · 24-01-2010, 08:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

they build a great I6, but other manufacturers (main rival merc) have shown that it is possible to build a good V motor.

Porche are pretty handy with 3 cyl per bank engines too....

cosmo20btt · 24-01-2010, 10:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4Vman

Porche are pretty handy with 3 cyl per bank engines too....

Horizontally apposed is still the same balance as an inline motor.

Ghiadude · 24-01-2010, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20btt

Horizontally apposed is still the same balance as an inline motor.

except for the "boxer shimy"

Paxton · 24-01-2010, 10:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vztrt

Merc yes, BMW wont go V6 for passenger cars as the said they are rubbish.

I've got a very old Wheel$ article to back that up.

Basically, BMW have built V6 engines, but keep going back to their I6 configuration, partly for their I4 engines, but mostly because they are smoother. Also note the reference to the 2003 Falcon.

Ohio XB · 25-01-2010, 03:11 AM

I think it is funny in that article that BMW did their testing by "...chopping two cylinders of a 90 degree V-8 and six cylinders off a 60 degree V-12."

Nothing like butchering a motor and saying it is not as good as one that was designed and made without being butchered.

The 3.0 Duratec 24 valve V-6 is my 1996 Sable, which is a wreck, runs as smooth and powerful as the day it was new. It has over 150,000 miles on it.

Steve

jpd80 · 25-01-2010, 06:41 AM

I think the I-6 Vs V6 battle was fought and won by V6 years ago,
its versatility in FWD and RWD configurations makes it the winner.

Since the bulk of Ford's cars are now FWD it makes sense for them to pick the V6
but that doesn't mean that the I-6 can't stay with us for about 5 years more.............

prydey · 25-01-2010, 06:49 AM

getting back closer to the topic, whats the breakdown of models in the large car segment that run rear drive compared to front drive? toyota offer front drive, and american fords, but most other marques are rear drive. merc, bmw, audi, volvo?, honda,etc

surely it would be in ford's best interests to have a rear drive platform available.