New Amarok

[EBSXR6]

You have to love the spin of the Car Makers.
I remember reading a spokesperson from VW spinning on how different the Amarok will be from the Ranger.

According to two articles I have read the 2 and 3 Litre Diesels are Ford engines.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by EBSXR6

You have to love the spin of the Car Makers.
I remember reading a spokesperson from VW spinning on how different the Amarok will be from the Ranger.

According to two articles I have read the 2 and 3 Litre Diesels are Ford engines.

They are and as discussed here several times, Amorok is all Ranger under the skin,
the Germans loved what Ford was doing, signed up because it saved them lots of money.

[simon varley]

to a customer they will be different. Visually the interior is unique and the exterior trim even if most body panels are common. I imagine there will also be a unique tune for steering and suspension too, so the driving feel will be different.

if you can't see it, it will be common. all the touchy feely stuff will be unique.

[Vesper Martini]

Carmakers are getting very good at doing this, the Heart & bones of the car will be the same but otherwise they will appear and feel different.

The BMW Z4 & Toyota Supra is an example of how it can be done, it probably wont be that extreme but this Amarok will be a different car to drive than the Ranger.

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by simon varley

to a customer they will be different. Visually the interior is unique and the exterior trim even if most body panels are common. I imagine there will also be a unique tune for steering and suspension too, so the driving feel will be different.

if you can't see it, it will be common. all the touchy feely stuff will be unique.

I'm more curious on how VW price it....unlike their German cousins at MB they have hindsight to learn from however just charging more because the badge has German heritage will be difficult if there isn't much to justify it

It's not like their servicing will be cheaper, dealership numbers greater, rear tubs in both will hold a standard Aussie pallet and while the X-class had a V6 and the donor Navara didn't, this is a case of the donor vehicle probably going to be best in class until all new models from the competition arrive.. and even then Ranger outshone most in the last few years anyway when newer opposition came to the market.

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

I'm more curious on how VW price it....unlike their German cousins at MB they have hindsight to learn from however just charging more because the badge has German heritage will be difficult if there isn't much to justify it

It's not like their servicing will be cheaper, dealership numbers greater, rear tubs in both will hold a standard Aussie pallet and while the X-class had a V6 and the donor Navara didn't, this is a case of the donor vehicle probably going to be best in class until all new models from the competition arrive.. and even then Ranger outshone most in the last few years anyway when newer opposition came to the market.

It will be interesting to see how the Amarok goes. Especially if it looks better than the Ranger.

[naddis01]

[Franco Cozzo]

Buy Amarok, take to Ford dealership for half price dealership servicing

[EBSXR6]

Originally Posted by Franco Cozzo

Buy Amarok, take to Ford dealership for half price dealership servicing

A mate used to work for a Ford Dealer during the Nissan Model Sharing era.
He told me Nissan Owners were buying some Ford boxed parts for their Patrols as they were cheaper than Nissan boxed parts.

[FTE217]

I have to say and we all know the previous shared platform IMO the outgoing Rok Highlines V6 etc was the pick of the crop incl the W580 were great bit of kit to me.
The interior was the best looking of all the dual cabs.
I look forward seeing the Ranger based one, made in Fords Sth African plant.
I reckon it will look great.

[Cobra]

It's a shame VW didn't use their existing V6 with the 8-speed transmission. I think the Ranger driveline will be great, however, the previous model Amarok will remain every bit as capable, and the company's own running gear would have provided a point of difference.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Cobra

It's a shame VW didn't use their existing V6 with the 8-speed transmission. I think the Ranger driveline will be great, however, the previous model Amarok will remain every bit as capable, and the company's own running gear would have provided a point of difference.

This isn’t a VW program, so there was no option to “use their existing V6 with the 8 speed Transmission”.

This is a Ford Program, run here in Australia, with Ford Engineers.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Cobra

It's a shame VW didn't use their existing V6 with the 8-speed transmission. I think the Ranger driveline will be great, however, the previous model Amarok will remain every bit as capable, and the company's own running gear would have provided a point of difference.

The best part is taking your new T6 Amorok to a Ford dealership and get the services done for half or third price.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by Cobra

It's a shame VW didn't use their existing V6 with the 8-speed transmission. I think the Ranger driveline will be great, however, the previous model Amarok will remain every bit as capable, and the company's own running gear would have provided a point of difference.

Why?
The Ford has more power & with 10 speed will just be better.
or are you saying the car will sell better if it has an engine wearing the same badge as the bodywork?

PS the V6 in the Amarok was an Audi engine.

point being not many care or would even notice

[Dr Smith]

Originally Posted by Vesper Martini

Why?
The Ford has more power & with 10 speed will just be better.
or are you saying the car will sell better if it has an engine wearing the same badge as the bodywork?

PS the V6 in the Amarok was an Audi engine.

point being not many care or would even notice

I think part of this is the VW V6 tdi/8-speed auto was a really well matched and calibrated powertrain.

I've read in recent reviews of Ford US SUV'S on their MY23 releases like the upgraded Expedition that the Ford 10-speed auto has improved smoothness/calibrations after continuous tweaking so hopefully the Ford Aust. engineers, having had much more time have also been able to improve calibrations for the Ranger & Everest.

Plus IIRC, the VW Amarok had overboost so technically it can hit 190kW and so is slightly more powerful ...not that you would notice unless you had a backside sensitive enough.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

I think part of this is the VW V6 tdi/8-speed auto was a really well matched and calibrated powertrain.

I've read in recent reviews of Ford US SUV'S on their MY23 releases like the upgraded Expedition that the Ford 10-speed auto has improved smoothness/calibrations after continuous tweaking so hopefully the Ford Aust. engineers, having had much more time have also been able to improve calibrations for the Ranger & Everest.

Plus IIRC, the VW Amarok had overboost so technically it can hit 190kW and so is slightly more powerful ...not that you would notice unless you had a backside sensitive enough.

Wasn’t there two calibrations, the normal 165Kw/550 nm and the 190Kw/580 nm only available on the top trim?

[Hulsty]

One thing I never knew if you could get a manual behind the Amarok V6, bloke at work has one.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Vesper Martini

Why?
The Ford has more power & with 10 speed will just be better.
or are you saying the car will sell better if it has an engine wearing the same badge as the bodywork?

PS the V6 in the Amarok was an Audi engine.

point being not many care or would even notice

With VAG going all in on EV’s, their v6 tdi is probably not long for this world anyway.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

I think part of this is the VW V6 tdi/8-speed auto was a really well matched and calibrated powertrain.

I've read in recent reviews of Ford US SUV'S on their MY23 releases like the upgraded Expedition that the Ford 10-speed auto has improved smoothness/calibrations after continuous tweaking so hopefully the Ford Aust. engineers, having had much more time have also been able to improve calibrations for the Ranger & Everest.

Plus IIRC, the VW Amarok had overboost so technically it can hit 190kW and so is slightly more powerful ...not that you would notice unless you had a backside sensitive enough.

I think the 10 speed will work well with the V6. I actually don't mind it behind the 2.0 Bi-Turbo but with the extra grunt from the V6, I imagine it will be calibrated to hold gears and use the torque rather than down shifting to keep the smaller engine on boost.

I think another thing in favor of the Ford diesel V6 over the VW version is that it was tailored for heavy duty use in the F-150.

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by Hulsty

One thing I never knew if you could get a manual behind the Amarok V6, bloke at work has one.

again why?, I mean I love a manual in a sports car but

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Wasn’t there two calibrations, the normal 165Kw/550 nm and the 190Kw/580 nm only available on the top trim?

and the Ranger will have 600NM which is everything in a diesel plus the 10 speed to keep it in that power band.
its the Kilowatts produced at Peak torque that is relevant.

for example the Territory I had supposedly had 140KW but you had to wring its neck to reach that, in reality you only using 120KW at gear shifts

[GT2]

Will the new Amarok be constant AWD?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Vesper Martini

and the Ranger will have 600NM which is everything in a diesel plus the 10 speed to keep it in that power band.
its the Kilowatts produced at Peak torque that is relevant.

for example the Territory I had supposedly had 140KW but you had to wring its neck to reach that, in reality you only using 120KW at gear shifts

The 2.7 in Territory was an early Lion V6 (17.3:1) before they went to higher pressure injection
and higher boost, it made 140 Kw at a lowly 3250 rpm and peak torque 440 nm at just 1900 rpm..
Honestly, the biturbo 2.0 diesel puts the early 2.7 Lion and 3.2 Puma to shame
with 147 Kw @ 3,000 / 470 nm @ 1,750-2,500. Even the base 2.0 is 135 Kw/430 nm.

Could you imagine a 3.0 I-6 turbo built on the Puma I-4 with 220 kw and 700 nm…
(pretty much what the GM 3.0 I-6 diesel is)



By comparison,
Amorok - 165 Kw @ 3,250 / 550 nm @ 1400
Amorok - 190 Kw @ 3,250 / 580 nm @ 1400

Ford 3.0 Powerstroke (16.4:1)
- 184 Kw @ 3250 / 600 nm @ 1750

I agree, the 184 Kw Powerstroke V6 is a more usable engine and will easily replace Amorok’s 190 kw V6.
With an effective rev range from 1,200 to 3,200, the diesels show their real worth in 1,500 to 2,500 zone.

As a foot note,
Years ago J/LR had a twin turbo 3.0 V6 that was 225 Kw @ 4,000 /700 nm @ 1,500-1,750
I’m sure that a tune on the 3.0 Powerstroke would see near those figures…

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by GT2

Will the new Amarok be constant AWD?

I’m sure there will be a choice just like the new Ranger will offer,

Ford adds that buyers will have a choice of two four-wheel drive systems: a part-time electronic shift-on-the-fly system like the current model, or a new full-time 4×4 system with a set-and-forget mode.

[DFB FGXR6]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The 2.7 in Territory was an early Lion V6 (17.3:1) before they went to higher pressure injection
and higher boost, it made 140 Kw at a lowly 3250 rpm and peak torque 440 nm at just 1900 rpm..
Honestly, the biturbo 2.0 diesel puts the early 2.7 Lion and 3.2 Puma to shame
with 147 Kw @ 3,000 / 470 nm @ 1,750-2,500. Even the base 2.0 is 135 Kw/430 nm.

Having driven a 2.7, I know which engine I would prefer, even with it's low power output. That engine was so refined.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

Having driven a 2.7, I know which engine I would prefer, even with it's low power output. That engine was so refined.

The 3.0 is even better. Seriously, it’s hard to even pick it as a diesel. Diesel clatter is nearly non existent. It’s almost hilarious the racket a 3.2 puts out compared to the 3.0.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by DFB FGXR6

Having driven a 2.7, I know which engine I would prefer, even with it's low power output. That engine was so refined.

Back then, there was nothing like the 2.0 biturbo diesel engine in the current Ranger, just an example of increased efficiency. Heck, Ranger is only just getting a V6 diesel now, imagine the 2.7 in it back in 2011, everyone would have called it a car because of the smoothness of that engine.

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The 3.0 is even better. Seriously, it’s hard to even pick it as a diesel. Diesel clatter is nearly non existent. It’s almost hilarious the racket a 3.2 puts out compared to the 3.0.

And I’m so glad that Terry got the V6 diesel for the refinement, a Ranger truck engine wouldn’t have done justice…
Sad in a way that Ford went the lpg and 2.0 Ecoboost in Falcon as I have a hunch the V6 diesel woulda been better
in oh so many ways that would have meant more to sedan Ute and station wagon sales, a better fit IMO…..

[GT2]

Originally Posted by jpd80

The 2.7 in Territory was an early Lion V6 (17.3:1) before they went to higher pressure injection
and higher boost, it made 140 Kw at a lowly 3250 rpm and peak torque 440 nm at just 1900 rpm..
Honestly, the biturbo 2.0 diesel puts the early 2.7 Lion and 3.2 Puma to shame
with 147 Kw @ 3,000 / 470 nm @ 1,750-2,500. Even the base 2.0 is 135 Kw/430 nm.

Could you imagine a 3.0 I-6 turbo built on the Puma I-4 with 220 kw and 700 nm…
(pretty much what the GM 3.0 I-6 diesel is)



By comparison,
Amorok - 165 Kw @ 3,250 / 550 nm @ 1400
Amorok - 190 Kw @ 3,250 / 580 nm @ 1400

Ford 3.0 Powerstroke (16.4:1)
- 184 Kw @ 3250 / 600 nm @ 1750

I agree, the 184 Kw Powerstroke V6 is a more usable engine and will easily replace Amorok’s 190 kw V6.
With an effective rev range from 1,200 to 3,200, the diesels show their real worth in 1,500 to 2,500 zone.

As a foot note,
Years ago J/LR had a twin turbo 3.0 V6 that was 225 Kw @ 4,000 /700 nm @ 1,500-1,750
I’m sure that a tune on the 3.0 Powerstroke would see near those figures…

I currently have a 165kw Amarok and a 225kw Range Rover Sport. I drive both regularly and use both to tow a 2.5t car trailer. Range Rover is obviously smoother and quieter. Engine wise they are quite different but I just can’t seem to favour engine over the other.

[EDManual]

VW also have pretty much the Amarok V6 in the a few VW group cars as a twin turbo. 240kw 650 to 700odd nm.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by EDManual

VW also have pretty much the Amarok V6 in the a few VW group cars as a twin turbo. 240kw 650 to 700odd nm.

The truth is that it was actually an Audi V6 that was installed in the Amorok Ute but yeah,
Jaguar/Land Rover did similar years ago with a 300 hp TT version of the Lion V6.
I’m waiting for the first balls out twin turbo set up on a Ranger to put the wind up
unsuspecting Ranger Raptors…..