The "Ford" and "Falcon" brand - Page 3

Swordsman88 · 24-01-2010, 09:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by prydey

as mentioned earlier, i recently drove an fg for 4 days while my bf2 was having warranty work done. to be honest, the only thing that stood out was the engine performance, and given my bf2 is an egas, its to be expected. the brakes weren't as good (fg had 40000, my bf2 has 90000), and handling wise there wasn't much in it. i admit i have put xr6 springs in my bf2 and it rides on 18" g6et rims so it felt a lot more solid on the road.

i don't push cars to their limit, esp when cornering. it was treated like a family wagon and i have to say, my bf2 is a wagon so it has leaf spring rear, and for all everyone carries on, the average punter wouldn't tell the difference in day to day driving, esp on medium to good surfaces, which in the metro areas, most are.

i've never driven a bf 190kw petrol powered car so can't compare the 2 but i was impressed with the power of the fg. the gearbox calibration (5sp) seemed to hang on to 1st gear much longer than my 4sp. the 4sp changes up almost as soon as you are rolling.

i think we make far to much fuss about things that the average punter would never pick.

build quality fits that mould. does the average punter really go around checking panel gaps and alignment? everything seemed bolted together pretty good to me. glovebox lid was extremely poor though, that did stand out.

While i see your point re 'the average punter', with all due respect (bearing in mind i dont' know the full nature of the mods to your car) i find it very hard to believe a BF2 egas wagon would drive anywhere near the standard of a current FG XR6. Just wont' happen. You either drive like a total granny or you aren't trying hard enough to notice the nuances of the cars you pilot.

I'm not saying your car is 'bad', it may very well be alot better for your lifestyle than an FG, but the FG is the better car in a range of areas. NVH, performance, safety, handling, features, interior design, build etc. Of course being a wagon versus sedan this confuses matters (as does egas verus petrol) but put it like this.

Is a BF XR6 sedan a bad car? No, of course not. Its a great car and one i have thought about owning (esp with zf 6 spd auto). Is it better than an FG XR6 sedan? No, its not. Unless you use price (second hand verus new) or subjective stuff like styling etc. then you will never be able to make a case for the BF over the FG if for no other reason then the FG is just a BF that has been improved.....

I also think the average punter could tell the difference if they bothered, its just perception that blinds them to what is better. Be it 'newer' or 'a certain brand' etc. Just because your mum may not steer like craig lowndes does not mean she can't pick up on ride quality, queitness etc..... Whether she gives a toss is another matter....

prydey · 24-01-2010, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

While i see your point re 'the average punter', with all due respect (bearing in mind i dont' know the full nature of the mods to your car) i find it very hard to believe a BF2 egas wagon would drive anywhere near the standard of a current FG XR6. Just wont' happen. You either drive like a total granny or you aren't trying hard enough to notice the nuances of the cars you pilot.

I'm not saying your car is 'bad', it may very well be alot better for your lifestyle than an FG, but the FG is the better car in a range of areas. NVH, performance, safety, handling, features, interior design, build etc. Of course being a wagon versus sedan this confuses matters (as does egas verus petrol) but put it like this.

Is a BF XR6 sedan a bad car? No, of course not. Its a great car and one i have thought about owning (esp with zf 6 spd auto). Is it better than an FG XR6 sedan? No, its not. Unless you use price (second hand verus new) or subjective stuff like styling etc. then you will never be able to make a case for the BF over the FG if for no other reason then the FG is just a BF that has been improved.....

I also think the average punter could tell the difference if they bothered, its just perception that blinds them to what is better. Be it 'newer' or 'a certain brand' etc. Just because your mum may not steer like craig lowndes does not mean she can't pick up on ride quality, queitness etc..... Whether she gives a toss is another matter....

hey, don't get me wrong, nowhere did i say the bf2 was a better car. yes it was quieter, and NVH was better, but things like 'handling', the average punter will never explore anywhere near the boundaries. i would consider myself an enthusiast, and even in the 4 days i had the fg, i wouldn't be able to pick the difference between IRS and live axle, in my daily commute. on rough surfaces, sure but i can only speak of what i experienced.

i didn't drive a fg xr6, it was an xt, and in my experience the base models are always sprung too softly for my liking, which is why i have xr6 springs in mine. i axcept a xr6 would've handled more to my liking had i driven one. also i would imagine my larger, wider wheels would also give a better 'feel' over the stock fg rims.

my driving style gets me by. i'm not afraid to make good use of the loud pedal, but i no longer see the point in pushing cars round corners.

you will notice i did give credit to the performance of the fg although i haven't driven a 190kw to compare against the previous model. while i enjoyed the extra power, i only really used it when showing it off, otherwise my egas is more than fine.

Falcon_Crazy · 24-01-2010, 10:02 PM

I love reading these threads..so many passionate people - I hope you take the time to write to Ford, and gently, put your comments forward..or perhaps, go and buy a new Falcon.

I just want you all, to take the time, pen a letter to Ford - If you feel so stongly about it, dont tell us blue blooded fellas. Say it nicely to Ford, and then walk into a dealer, and hand over ya hard earned....

**Luke Plaizier** · 24-01-2010, 10:17 PM

Write to where exactly, and addressed to whom?

Lukeyson

sxckevo · 24-01-2010, 11:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

Write to where exactly, and addressed to whom?

Lukeyson

can't we all just send a msg via the email on the ford website. they also have the mailing address on there as well. make it forum policy to do so

Paxton · 24-01-2010, 11:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

Write to where exactly, and addressed to whom?

Lukeyson

Ford Motor Company of Australia
1735 Sydney Road Private Mail Bag 6.
Campbellfield VIC 3061

trippytaka · 25-01-2010, 12:06 AM

Can everyone please keep it coming... honest feelings about the brand? My best friend works for a marketing company that looks after a portion of the Ford account. I'm really keen to shoot this off to her.

Seriously... I'll get this acoss to the right people. Big companies like Ford know the value of "opinion leaders" within social circles, so keep the comments coming... constructive and honest.

**Luke Plaizier** · 25-01-2010, 09:00 AM

Given that some are suggesting we write in politely and intelligently to Ford, what sorts of things should we be saying, and how should we be saying it?

Should we be re-iterating that the Falcon should remain RWD, since that decision is going to be on the agenda in the next 12 to 18 months? Let me play devils advocate here and theorise on what we're up against:

Given that Ford's motives for FWD would be economy, packaging, globalisation and maximising sale, what sorts of credible reasons can we give to provide some contrary arguments with similarg goals?

*Carrying the family and still enjoying the drive - is that a viable brand image in this day and age given the trend towards safety and zero risk?
* Is it about the safety, comfort or towing that only RWD size brings - and if so why then wouldn't you buy a 4WD?
* If it's about drag strip times and performance, why then would an AWD not be better, given that the FG seems to be launch-traction limited these days?

* How important is it, really, that Aussie built RWD 'Sport cars' are always 4 door family sedans? Why wouldn't a big V8 RWD 2 door Mustang (Or 'Falcon Coupe' if you think that brand is stronger here) substitute if sold cheap enough?
* Or how important is it that the car is Australian designed and built when SO many people rubbish Australian-ness and buy foreign? Would Australian's support something made in this land that is GENUINELY better than foreign product? Or is the Poor Australian Quality perception now so ingrained in our culture that it just doesn't matter any more how good a Falcon is, the brand image just can't be wiped clean any more - nor separated from the Holden/Ford rivalry, or the culture of the Aussie made Family RWD 6 Cylinder?

Moving on, should we tell Ford to eat their pride and suck up to the media good and proper, and/or form some sort of longer term strategy for improving their relationship with the media in Austraia? There's a feeling a long-term brokenness about Ford in the Media.

Finally, what sort of tone should we set? Negative or Positive? Should we tell them what we think they have done wrong, or come up with suggestions on what they should do right?

Lukeyson

trippytaka · 25-01-2010, 10:57 AM

Just be honest. Tell them how you feel and what you think, where you think they get it right, where you think they get it wrong... everything.

**Luke Plaizier** · 25-01-2010, 11:03 AM

I know, we should tell them to read these Forums more, like Geoff Polites used to.....

Lukeyson

BrisVegas · 25-01-2010, 11:22 AM

Ford is slowly turning the tide. I remember when Ford was dominating holden in the 80's and 90's. It was positively perceived and had better product. I lived out west and only true die hards out there had Commodores. You either drove a hilux or Cruiser or a Falcon. Falcon had a rep for being the strongest, most reliable vehicle.

I think the tide turned when VT came out against the droopy AU series. However, I think the current lineup is definitely Falcon > Commodore. Ford small cars are so much better than Holden's Daewoo lineup currently it's embarassing for them. Ford needs to go after the quality benchmarks like the Golf & Passat with it's Focus & Mondeo. Fiesta is already best of the bunch and just needs more diesel models with auto to make it more appealing. ie. the Zetec looks great but you can only get it in petrol.

Ford just needs to stay profitable and keep leading the way with engineering. I'd like to see the following models come out ASAP.

Territory 2 - 3.0 V6 TDi & 3.5 ecoboost
FG Falcon - 2.0 ecoboost ~ 170kwatt & 8l/100, 4.0 LiLPG, 3.5 ecoboost 250kwatt, 5.0 Coyote 300kwatt
Mondeo - 2.0 ecoboost ~ 150kwatt & 7l/100, 2.2 TDi
S-Max - as per mondeo.
Focus 3 - 1.6 ecoboost 120kwatt & 2.0 ecoboost (XR4) 170 kwatt, 2.2 TDi
C-Max - as per Focus
Fiesta - auto for the 1.6TDci, 1.6 ecoboost (XR4) 120 kwatt

**Luke Plaizier** · 25-01-2010, 11:39 AM

So how much profit can you project on sales of those after the R&D of all that is factored in..... ?

Lukeyson

sd1800 · 25-01-2010, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 351capri

the au years hurt the brand in a big way, the cars werent that bad, but the styling was. compared to a vt the au was hideous. we were also getting flogged on the racetrack and holden made sure everyone knew about it. with the later models coming through and improved styling and on track success ford are clawing there way back.what they need is someone like j clarkson to tell 30-50 odd million viewers just how good the fg series is.. has he driven one? even as a guest on the aussie show. could be something to think about? anyone?..... bueller???

I think in hindsight the AU was well ahead of it's time styling wise. Whike the front end of the non-XR models(esp series 1) is still quite lacking, I think that when you compare it back-to-back with a VT Commo, the Commordore has aged terribly. It actually looks older than 1997, looks like something from the early 90's whereas the AU still passes as a semi-modern car with sharper styling.

Unfortunetely the LS1 just walked all over the 302, and the AU's performance in the V8 Supercar championships were a disgrace as you said. These two points along with the styling of the Futura and Forte in series 1 is what I believe caused the most damage.

I definetely agree the Top Gear would be great exposure to further show the rest of the world, especially the Amercian public how truly great the product is. The F6 typhoon would surely have to be better than anything <US$100,000 the americans produce?

cosmo20btt · 25-01-2010, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 351capri

the au years hurt the brand in a big way, the cars werent that bad, but the styling was. compared to a vt the au was hideous. we were also getting flogged on the racetrack and holden made sure everyone knew about it. with the later models coming through and improved styling and on track success ford are clawing there way back.what they need is someone like j clarkson to tell 30-50 odd million viewers just how good the fg series is.. has he driven one? even as a guest on the aussie show. could be something to think about? anyone?..... bueller???

A few years ago I had friends that always updated to the next new Ford, well the VT came out instead of buying the AU they got a VT because they said they did not like the taillights on the AU. Some time later I was talking to his wife & she that they should of got the AU because from where they sat they could not see the taillights, there comment on the VT was bad ride & it rattled unlike any Ford they owned before.

On another point my perception is that some Aussies buy Holden simply because it was considered "to be Australian" but it is a myth that is perpetuated by this company, and is some thing that Ford has to over come, maybe by starting a whole new subsidiary that Australians can link to being more Aussie & less Yankee.

BrisVegas · 25-01-2010, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

So how much profit can you project on sales of those after the R&D of all that is factored in..... ?

Lukeyson

they're pretty much all existing vehicles and engines already running in Ford vehicles elsewhere in the world. It's just that they're not sold here.

Are you saying Ford should just make Falcons and pay lipservice to the other size/types of cars? Yes, ford is profitable right now. I'd like to see ford remain profitable, but grow market share in other categories.

**Luke Plaizier** · 25-01-2010, 07:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrisVegas

Are you saying Ford should just make Falcons and pay lipservice to the other size/types of cars? Yes, ford is profitable right now. I'd like to see ford remain profitable, but grow market share in other categories.

Er, well, I'm not saying anything than what I said to be honest..

I thought you were saying that you wanted to see Ford remain profitable by deploying the models that you had suggested. I was curious to find out why you thought those models would be more profitable than what they have now or are actually proposing.

There are interesting little anomalies in your list. Like how you put the 3.5 Ecoboost in place of the current I6 - when Ford have done the sums themselves and reversed that idea. And you put a 3.0 TDi in place of the 2.7. I'm not saying I don't like them - in fact I do. It worries me that a 2.7 Territory will be up against a 3.0 Prado for example. The 2.7 selection is obviously a bean-counter decision. But since the Prado is a 3.0 will that put it at a disadvantage in the market?

Putting the profitability of a model into real numbers would certainly lend us all a new perspective and vision on why these decisions are being made.

Lukeyson

BrisVegas · 25-01-2010, 09:53 PM

I'd like access to the fords available elsewhere in the world.

If you want a 7seat ford now, you have 1 choice.... Territory. A smaller, more efficient car like the s-max or c-max would be perfect. Ford has the cars and/or the engines etc already, I'd just like to have a ford choice in aus. Why should we get a limited and low spec range here? Other manufacturers like vw and BMW etc will sell you their entire range here.

phillyc · 25-01-2010, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luke Plaizier

It worries me that a 2.7 Territory will be up against a 3.0 Prado for example. The 2.7 selection is obviously a bean-counter decision. But since the Prado is a 3.0 will that put it at a disadvantage in the market?
Lukeyson

Territory 2.7L V6 TD has 140kW/440Nm and had a 11.5L/100 city figure in the 2750kg Discovery.
Prado 3.0L V6 TD has 127kW/410Nm
Captiva 2.0L i4 TD has 110Nm/320Nm.

Swordsman88 · 25-01-2010, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by phillyc

Territory 2.7L V6 TD has 140kW/440Nm and had a 11.5L/100 city figure in the 2750kg Discovery.
Prado 3.0L V6 TD has 127kW/410Nm
Captiva 2.0L i4 TD has 110Nm/320Nm.

beat me to it again phill!!! I hadn't checked the numbers but my gut said that a toyota 3.0 D (shared with hilux) built for commercial vehicles was never going to take out a ex jag advanced 2.7V6 diesel.....

Seems i was right. FFS a 3.0 prado/hilux diesel is hardly that impressive versus ford's own 3.0 I4 Diesel in the ranger. It makes 380nm i think (and lower down??)....not sure of its power though but it can't be far off....

Paxton · 25-01-2010, 11:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

beat me to it again phill!!! I hadn't checked the numbers but my gut said that a toyota 3.0 D (shared with hilux) built for commercial vehicles was never going to take out a ex jag advanced 2.7V6 diesel.....

Seems i was right. FFS a 3.0 prado/hilux diesel is hardly that impressive versus ford's own 3.0 I4 Diesel in the ranger. It makes 380nm i think (and lower down??)....not sure of its power though but it can't be far off....

The Prado's Diesel is actually an I4, not a V6. This goes some way to explaining why it isn't all that impressive compared to the Ranger's Diesel.

Don't forget that the original Diesel in the Prado/HiLux was only at about 90 Kilowatts. The new engine was a huge step up from the first Diesel.

jpd80 · 26-01-2010, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paxton

The Prado's Diesel is actually an I4, not a V6. This goes some way to explaining why it isn't all that impressive compared to the Ranger's Diesel.

Don't forget that the original Diesel in the Prado/HiLux was only at about 90 Kilowatts. The new engine was a huge step up from the first Diesel.

Good catch Andrew,
The Poor NVH of I-4 diesel excludes it from Territory, Ford wants it to be a cut above the rest and you
can't blame them for wanting that, it will be a damned fine car and rival many imports for quietness

Paxton · 26-01-2010, 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

Good catch Andrew,
The Poor NVH of I-4 diesel excludes it from Territory, Ford wants it to be a cut above the rest and you can't blame them for wanting that, it will be a damned fine car and rival many imports for quietness

You want poor NVH John - drive a Pajero diesel. I'm amazed that people buy them.

jpd80 · 26-01-2010, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paxton

You want poor NVH John - drive a Pajero diesel. I'm amazed that people buy them.

Ya know, a pesant like me would probably be happy to see a fleet based I-4 diesel Falcon,
I always thought the 3.0 with auto out of the Ranger would have been an interesting vehicle...
I guess it's customer expectations, Territory must have a good smooth diesel and that means V6.

Swordsman88 · 26-01-2010, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paxton

You want poor NVH John - drive a Pajero diesel. I'm amazed that people buy them.

Didn't they change diesel engines recently andrew? I know the pajero was very muh let down by poor diesel tech but i think they went over to the same one in the latest update triton..... Still, its a commerical diesel donk and that means it is never quite the same. The jag/lr diesel is designed for passenger cars first and formest. In fact LR did a bunch of work making sure it woudl run on 'dodgy diesel' etc. and bush proofing it in effect. The commerical diesels have some real grunt (read a review recently where the 3.0 ranger donk impressed) but they are not up to speed for NVH in an on road passenger car and their power is also often down......

I agree the prado diesel is a big stup up from what the had before but i doubt it would be up to the level of the one Ford is going to use Especially when you throw in the fact the prado is heavier than a territory....

Windsor220 · 26-01-2010, 12:29 PM

Yeh the Pajeros had NVH issues with the NM/NP but converted to the common rail unit which was a lot quieter with the latest NS/NT

Paxton · 26-01-2010, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Windsor220

Yeh the Pajeros had NVH issues with the NM/NP but converted to the common rail unit which was a lot quieter with the latest NS/NT

The 2.8 (NM/NP) was an interesting motor, as it was based on the Astron petrol engines. At least one Mitsubishi engine burned oil when it was supposed to. I am actually talking about the 'common rail' 3.2 4 Cylinder diesel which is in the Current Pajero and Triton. It goes like stink, but isn't quiet or really refined in the process. I looked hard at a Pajero before I bought my Territory, but decided I couldn't live with the Diesel, especially after having a 2.8 'Intercooled' GU Patrol, which sounded more like a petrol than a Diesel.

jpd80 · 26-01-2010, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paxton

At least one Mitsubishi engine burned oil when it was supposed to.

Astrons.

Windsor220 · 26-01-2010, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paxton

The 2.8 (NM/NP) was an interesting motor

The 2.8 (4M40) was ended halfway through NM. 3.2 DID(4M41) took over in around 2001.
If you think the new ones are bad you must of really hated the older ones. Mitsubishi had to pack the engine in sound deadening material to try and shut it up.