Barra inline 6 confirmed till 2016

[flappist]

Originally Posted by z80

So you're a semi driver who delivers Fords to dealers all round australia?.....

Oh, have you seen me driving past your school while you were on fruit break?

[z80]

Originally Posted by flappist

Oh, have you seen me driving past your school while you were on fruit break?

Just asking... cause I thought I recognised your truck outside your home in Norlane near Ford's.

(same number plates as your login).

[XRtowcar]

What does the I6 need to survive?
Alloy block.
Direct injection.
Vtec would be fun.
With current tech, it could make 230kw's.

[smoo]

Originally Posted by flappist

No I am not saying the I6 is not a good engine, I am saying that your one eyed "world class" babble is unfounded.

You keep fixating of the kw/l and ignoring the Nm/l even though it was a reply to your earlier post. Why is that? Oh it does not support your position.....

I have no interest in alloytec or any other holden engine. Do you base you expert opinion on it is better than holden so it must be world class?

The "we all know", is that based on your personal driving, "pen pushing journo" reports or internet forum posts?

Not one eyed at all, just seeing it as it is. The dohc I6 is a huge leap foward (enough to mix it with the BMW, Nissan) of the old rough AU sohc before it, where a 30 year old BMW I6 would deal to it.
Again, whether it is kw/l or nm/l, it is all theoretical BS that has no real world relevance. Does it give you a warm and fuzzy feeling knowing you drive a car with stats 15 year old school boys boast about while dreaming of a Honda?
Maybe you could provide reasons as to why it isn't a world class engine...
And the fact it hasn't won an award or is lagging in kw/l or nm/l doesn't cut it.
Throw some money at the I6 and it will have more than 5 years left in her.
In saying that if Ford managed to get the TDV6 in the Falcon then the NA I6 would become redundant, that seems to be the way of a few makers these days.

[flappist]

Originally Posted by smoo

Not one eyed at all, just seeing it as it is. The dohc I6 is a huge leap foward (enough to mix it with the BMW, Nissan) of the old rough AU sohc before it, where a 30 year old BMW I6 would deal to it.
Again, whether it is kw/l or nm/l, it is all theoretical BS that has no real world relevance. Does it give you a warm and fuzzy feeling knowing you drive a car with stats 15 year old school boys boast about while dreaming of a Honda?
Maybe you could provide reasons as to why it isn't a world class engine...
And the fact it hasn't won an award or is lagging in kw/l or nm/l doesn't cut it.
Throw some money at the I6 and it will have more than 5 years left in her.
In saying that if Ford managed to get the TDV6 in the Falcon then the NA I6 would become redundant, that seems to be the way of a few makers these days.

Are you talking about my BA, XF, XD or XY falcon with this fuzziness......

[flappist]

Originally Posted by z80

Just asking... cause I thought I recognised your truck outside your home in Norlane near Ford's.

(same number plates as your login).

Yeh you got me, I commute there daily from QLD.

You are not the sharpest tool in the box are you......

[FreddyDUZ747]

I would of thought that grownups would have something better to type than this useless *itching,just let it go and post some usefull info somewhere else on the forum or even here if you's like.........

The Barra I6 and this is from a Holden person through and through,it is possible to see through the haze.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by nasss92

- SMOO, here here to that mate

it will be very interesting to see what the updated barra I6 will be like in the october fg II release... these engines have much more power being held up by the current fg platforms setup, for example:
stats for current bara read Power: 195 kW (261 hp) @ 6000 rpm
Torque: 391 N·m (288 lb·ft) @ 3250 rpm note: this is on 91 octane, its potential with 98 RON, produce over 200 kW (268 hp) and 420 N·m competitors like toyota aurion have their figures of 200 kW (268 hp) at 6,200 rpm,336 N·m of peak torque at 4,700 rpm using 98 octane petrol.. already we see its capacity for being a torque monster over its market rivals

1.the exhaust system is extremely restrictive.. holding up anywhere between 10-20rwkw across the rev range.. an uprated header and cat system can take care of this (there are examples of economy in xr6s with exhaust and ecu tune attaining +650km per tank running in urban environments)
2. the ecu system can quiet easily be tuned, 10-15 kw (which also differs with other variables like exhaust etc).... not including the capacity to do a system which offeres economy + track tune like the current mustang (im sure it wouldnt be that expensive to have 2 tunes running on the factory ecu, or offer a xcal 3 setup from the factory which could cost an easy grand)
3. engine modifications - a multitude of things can be change ie. running alloy heads like the f6, uprated underdrive pulleys, CAI's, cam work and different springs, head porting etc. all of which have potential to increase efficiency and power = more go for longer (WIN WIN!)
4. weight saving - ford hasnt even touched the capacity for weight saving.. carbon fibre and the like are revolutionising the automotive industry.. carbonart have developed a range of products from drivetrain to suspension to engine mods that reduce weight and improve part performance.. their IRS for the ford ute weighs in at 29kg vs factory 220kg .. in a 1800 odd kg car, thers potential for hundreds of kilos of weight shaving which would = the only relative weak point of the ford, its power/weight ratio to improve dramatically

point in case.. ther is still so much potential in the I6 and its falcon/terry setups to improve everything from power to economy, and although i am not an engineer (or have in depth knowledge on ford R and D policies or their capacity for changing production) it would be definitely a ridiculous claim to suggest to barra (and its potential with the current falcon set up) is not a premier world class engine and has no room for feasible expansion in its present sate.

up the mighty barra I6 (and falcon), i like many, will continue to enjoy driving past rice burners with my 4 mates in the car and some in the boot... maybe even a trailer out the back too
i wish you goodluck finding something that can do the same which isnt forced induction or v8

I6 will continue later in the year as nearly unchanged.

And alloy heads like the F6. Huh?

[nasss92]

bossxr8.. i am under the impression from a mechanic at my local shop that the f6 heads are alloy (or could be pistons, memory playing up atm.. but from wat i was told not the same as the stock barra in the xr6 na and turbo) in order to handle the extra power from the larger garret gt3540 turbo safely... happy to be corrected if this isnt the case

also wy would it remain the same and not add anything to the update? there are many cheap parts that can be used to easily lift performance and economy levels.. if they dont it would be the same as the liquid lpg that is being released in the next month or so.. has ford released any comments to the media or backchannels yet?

anyone know wy the ford marketing team doesnt advertise the higher level performance figures of the n/a barra on 98 octane aswell as 91? it dsn't make sense to me as other companies base their advertised statistics on the higher graded fuel, and subtle differences like power outputs im sure would help tip those buyers on the edge over to the blue corner when its such a tight middle sedan market

[SteveJH]

You realize that all the i6's have an alloy head right? And have done so since...the XD?

[Polyal]

Be prepare to be corrected mate

[nasss92]

haha ok i will definately edit that post then... maybe a reinforced or stronger head set up, which makes sense cause of the power increase.. cheers for the correction guys, my bad

[Bossxr8]

All heads are alloy, have been since the early 80's, the turbo models have exhaust valves from inconel due to the extra heat they generate. Thats about the only difference between NA and turbo heads.

The update will basically be carryover for the engine, I can't say much more than that.

Emissions play a huge role in what we build, its not like the aftermarket where driveability, emissions, reliability, noise requirements, economy and cost take a back seat to power. Ford have to comply with very stringent requirements in regard to the above mentioned areas that aftermarket parts makers don't.

I don't know why Ford don't quote their power figures for the NA 6 on 95 or 98.

[nasss92]

pretty dumb if you ask me 195 kW & 391 Nm vs 205 kW (rough) and 420 N·m , that small difference to the general uneducated car buy would be a few thousand cars a year atleast i would imagine.. wy is ford's marketing team so poor!?

is their any regulations preventing ford acting as a tuner after the sale of the vehicle ? ie. offering customers a ecu tune package through their local dealership were an edit can be achieved? the feasibility of this would be pretty cheap considering they already have all the diagnostics and computer software, all the customer would need to get is an xcal or equivalent .. just thinking out load now .. so much potential for the vehicle being wasted

[z80]

Originally Posted by flappist

Yeh you got me, I commute there daily from QLD.

You are not the sharpest tool in the box are you......

Must have caught a glimpse of you on the return leg of your bi-weekly run.
Hervey Bay, Norlane..same socio-economic profile, and just as sharp.
I spotted it immiediately.

[nasss92]

enough with the shots boys .. if you cant keep on thread dont comment

[drew`SEVNT5]

Originally Posted by smoo

And my bike produces 120 kw/l, can you think of any more irrelavant comparisons that should be added ontop of yours?
What is the point in comparing theoretical kw or nm/litre figures? They have no real world relevance. Get in the drivers seat to see how good the I6 performs. As I said, low 7l/100km is not uncommon, turbo diesel like low down torque, as well as 1 million+ kms lifespan. The only thing going against the I6 at this stage would be its weight and limited/no fwd application. Apart from that it IS a world class engine.

If it is a world class engine, it would be used world wide.

It is not.

Coyote is World Class.

As is the Alloytech....

[drew`SEVNT5]

Originally Posted by nasss92

anyone know wy the ford marketing team doesnt advertise the higher level performance figures of the n/a barra on 98 octane aswell as 91? it dsn't make sense to me as other companies base their advertised statistics on the higher graded fuel, and subtle differences like power outputs im sure would help tip those buyers on the edge over to the blue corner when its such a tight middle sedan market

Because 99.99% of people driving XT's/G6/G6E/XR6's: a) couldn't give a toss; b) 95 and 98 octane isn't exactly everywhere in this wide land, once you get out of town (hell, I have enough trouble finding Shell 95, cos thats all my Shell card will give me, and I am in metro Melbourne!); c) Why push it over the *magical* 200kw barrier, and potenetially run into trouble with regulators (VicRoads, NSW RTA, etc etc) later down the track (ie: the smith family only have one car, and its a FG G6... Too bad young Johnny can't drive it, etc etc)

Its only self indulgent tosspots who make a point of running the old tractor motor that is the Barra I6 on high octane, just to get that warm fuzzy feeling deep down, maybe a fizzing at the root?

[Bobman]

Originally Posted by drew`SEVNT5

Its only self indulgent tosspots who make a point of running the old tractor motor that is the Barra I6 on high octane, just to get that warm fuzzy feeling deep down, maybe a fizzing at the root?

Would rather be eating quality foods compared to buying everything in "home brand". Same applies to feeding my car.

[drew`SEVNT5]

Originally Posted by Bobman

Would rather be eating quality foods compared to buying everything in "home brand". Same applies to feeding my car.

Enjoy paying your extra 10c/pl + for no discernible gain, then.


As opposed to eating good quality food vs. maccas.

[nasss92]

my comment concerns an issue which deals with a relevant issue of fords marketing neglect... important on the basis that if sales arent up, ther will not be any more engines for us to be discussing now will ther. as unfortunate as it is, and what has already been established many times on this website, is that a ford is no longer a given choice for members of australian society as it was in years past and so people dont buy it and find out what a quality product it is

a failure to convey what is critical information concerning the potential of a given product is negligible on the company's behalf (especially wen its market competition is quoting its figures on 98, giving a clear statistical advantage = they attain greater sales).. the roads authorities for that matter will respond to whatever their so called relevant data suggests to them, whether ther is commercials with power outputs of +200kw or not... you going to suggest if falcon was advertised over 200kw then they would consider banning the falcon, commodore, aurion another or such family sedans from the p-plater market??

and in relation to ur fuel comment, that is ur personal choice.. it's quiet laughable that u feel the need to comment on the state of everyone elses.. maccas over good food huh, **** id hate for you to be my food provider

[drew`SEVNT5]

Originally Posted by nasss92

my comment concerns an issue which deals with a relevant issue of fords marketing neglect... important on the basis that if sales arent up, ther will not be any more engines for us to be discussing now will ther. as unfortunate as it is, and what has already been established many times on this website, is that a ford is no longer a given choice for members of australian society as it was in years past and so people dont buy it and find out what a quality product it is

a failure to convey what is critical information concerning the potential of a given product is negligible on the company's behalf (especially wen its market competition is quoting its figures on 98, giving a clear statistical advantage = they attain greater sales).. the roads authorities for that matter will respond to whatever their so called relevant data suggests to them, whether ther is commercials with power outputs of +200kw or not... you going to suggest if falcon was advertised over 200kw then they would consider banning the falcon, commodore, aurion another or such family sedans from the p-plater market??

and in relation to ur fuel comment, that is ur personal choice.. it's quiet laughable that u feel the need to comment on the state of everyone elses.. maccas over good food huh, **** id hate for you to be my food provider

And I throw it back to you: How many potential Falcon/Commodore/Aurion buyers are a) going to care that it puts out 200-somethingkws rather than 195kw?; b) how many are going to run there car on anything other than 91/E10, whichever is cheapest at on the day?

I say they could ban it, if they ever get serious and bring a form of power-to-weight calculation in it.

Also, I don't think comprehension is your strong suit... I was saying that filling your AU/BA/BF/FG I6 N/A shitter with 95 or 98 instead of 91 is COMPLETELY different to the analogy that Bobman put up: that being that he would rather eat quality food than rubbish, and the same applies to his car...

I pointed out, there is no discernable gain from running your taxi-pack on 95/98 rather than 91/E10, UNLIKE if you just eat McD's all day, instead of eating good, fresh, healthy food (none of which could describe McDonalds, ever!)

[FPV GTHO]

Originally Posted by drew`SEVNT5

If it is a world class engine, it would be used world wide.

It is not.

Coyote is World Class.

As is the Alloytech....

Not quite, what you are describing is simply a world engine. I wouldnt call the I6 necessarily world class, but i definately wouldnt call the Alloytech world class either. That family of engine would have to rate as the worst V6 made by a major manufacturer. Off the top of my head Ford, Nissan/Renault, Toyota, Honda, Mercedes and VAG all make better V6's.

[nasss92]

its marketing, and like what was mentioned before thers alot of bench sitters in the market so im sure every little positive counts.. wy not do what other players are doing to show you cars qualities off, and ensure you attain all the sales to keep the production of your product into the future

no discernable gain... 10 odd killowatts and 30 nm of torque is no discernible gain.. i guess the subsequent gain in economy is no discernible gain aswell (which would come close to matching the extra few dollars spent per tank) not to mention the piece of mind that ur looking after ur engine better.. wy spend some extra cash for better tires or brakes, hell wy even clean ur car .. if u can look after your own possessions, for a small fraction more, why is it such a bad thing? ur comments are ridiculous, "self indulgent tosspot", you're embarassing urself... my gripe is not that someone is less of a person for running 91 octane, its just the immaturity of your apparent need to turn the comment personal. direct it at the engine or dont comment at all, like mine was directed at the marketing of the vehicle package in which the engine runs not that 91 octane was for people who choose to scrape by on the bare minimum and eat maccas instead of healthy food.. you wreak the quality of what forums like this seek to achieve, a basis for information to be shared in a positive matter

[Maggot]

I find myself if a strange position of agreeing with you nass.

- I run my lawnmowers and chainsaws and generators, along with the cars.. on 98, in fact it is the weapon of choice in 2 stroke engines.

- as far back as the vz (and maybe earlier).. holden were putting 98 fuel power figures on the window in the showroom, so why not do it?.. I have seen many magazines print power figures betwen the cars with NO mention of fuel types, either because they did not know or they did not care.

- the fg na pings like a bugger on lower fuel once it gets used to 98, the earlier falcons would switch to crappier fuel much easier.

Back on topic... when (and it is a when) the falc is not an inline six anymore.. I will stop buying them, so hopefully there is a model or two left with it.

[naddis01]

Why not just rate it on 95 but say it can run on 91? Surely that is the simple answer to this 'problem'.

[4.0i OHC]

I don't know why everyone is so quick to criticise the inline six. Whenever I drive an I6 Falcon, I'm simply struck by the refinement, the torque that feels endless (and developed at low revs too!). It's just effortless to drive; you're never left wanting for more power. Every time I drive an I6 Falcon, I wonder how Ford could develop an engine that's so great to drive, while maintaining comparatively good fuel economy (if I remember correctly, the Falcon has a better fuel consumption figure than the 3.0 Commodore, with considerably more torque to boot). I don't think it matters if the bore spacing is the same as it was in 1960.

That said, I don't think that every aspect of the Falcon is perfect. The rear seats are simply undersized, the air conditioning is woefully inadequate, the quality of interior plastics leaves much to be desired, and it's impossible to forget about the ugly duckling styling. I don't consider myself blindly biased towards Ford; I consider the Falcon to have both strong points and weak points. I'm just puzzled as to why so many criticise what I find to be the Falcon's strongest point. Maybe my understanding of things might not be perfect.

EDIT: Do those of you that dislike the Falcon I6 feel the same way about BMW inline sixes? In my view, the Falcon six certainly comes close, and betters any V6 I've ever driven.

[4.0i OHC]

Originally Posted by nasss92

its marketing, and like what was mentioned before thers alot of bench sitters in the market so im sure every little positive counts.. wy not do what other players are doing to show you cars qualities off, and ensure you attain all the sales to keep the production of your product into the future

no discernable gain... 10 odd killowatts and 30 nm of torque is no discernible gain.. i guess the subsequent gain in economy is no discernible gain aswell (which would come close to matching the extra few dollars spent per tank) not to mention the piece of mind that ur looking after ur engine better.. wy spend some extra cash for better tires or brakes, hell wy even clean ur car .. if u can look after your own possessions, for a small fraction more, why is it such a bad thing? ur comments are ridiculous, "self indulgent tosspot", you're embarassing urself... my gripe is not that someone is less of a person for running 91 octane, its just the immaturity of your apparent need to turn the comment personal. direct it at the engine or dont comment at all, like mine was directed at the marketing of the vehicle package in which the engine runs not that 91 octane was for people who choose to scrape by on the bare minimum and eat maccas instead of healthy food.. you wreak the quality of what forums like this seek to achieve, a basis for information to be shared in a positive matter

I agree, why bother putting 95/98 octane petrol in an FG I6 Falcon, when it's clearly a shitter. Why bother upgrading tyres or brakes, nothing will improve the car, as it's evidently a shitter. If you can't see that, you're one eyed, and you're wearing blue tinted glasses. It's obvious.

Why don't we all sell our I6 Falcons and buy V6 Commodores and Mercedes-Benzes, as they will certainly provide more excitement than a handjob from the Queen Mother. Feel the lack of torque! Whoo! Loving the whiny bus-like engine note! Who needs smoothness and refinement? Not me!

[2011G6E]

Most 2-strokes are such relatively low compression that premium doesn't make any difference.

I know it's old, but the superbike of the seventies, the Kawasaki H2-750 three cylinder two-stroke (one of which i own) has shattering performance and was unequalled by a 750cc bike until well into the eighties.
All on a measly 7:1 compression ratio.

I haven't tried the G6E on premium yet on a long trip. By the time our holidays come around in August the engine will have a few more kilometers on it and we might try it then to see if there's any noticeable difference. It'd want to be good though for the extra price.

[g220ba]

Originally Posted by drew`SEVNT5

Its only self indulgent tosspots who make a point of running the old tractor motor that is the Barra I6 on high octane, just to get that warm fuzzy feeling deep down, maybe a fizzing at the root?

This is a joke right?

Surely you can't believe that you're so righteous to profess to everyone what they should be running in their cars?

If you're serious then i'm speachless that you can possibly firstly call a n/a I6 falcon a shitter (how do you come to such a conclusion?), secondly calling anyone who fills their n/a I6 with 98 octane self indulgent tosspots. Wow how's the weather up their mate?