diesel cars in decline...

[1TUFFUTE]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Yeah mate, Falcon is going awesome, less than 1000 sales last month, EcoLPI which doesn't sell and was late to the market, 7 years until the Territory got diesel, local cars which don't even have auto up/down on all windows which is the least of the tech features everything else has had since Jesus was playing full back for Jerusalem.

Or introducing the run out model Kuga, with the outgoing engine, with no diesel option in a segment which diesel has a significant market share, with a 5sp auto when everyone else has 6sp much like Yellow Festiva mentioned in the other thread.

Look at how long it took to get the Focus over here, they persisted on the Laser for all that time when there was a clearly better product.

To me the Ecoboost has potential, its all about perception though.

Its all good having "the greatest sedan in the world", how much use is that when its part of a segment which barely anyone is buying and has been on the decline for a while now?

Maybe Ford Australia should stop making cars, just do what we do best which seems to be design and become an importer selling the Europe/American Fords, which are 10x better equipped and have a chance of standing up to the competition.

To me Ford is always behind the others, they seem to be late to the party on introducing stuff in their range, they'd be late to their own funeral. When they come out with something it is generally good though, look at the I6, thats a fairly good engine even if it is a bit of a dinosaur with an iron block and no direct injection, too bad its a goner though.

you look at it like all the other sheep my friend.....just because a car company has a model that doesnt sell well it does not mean THAT CAR is behind the others in its class. How is the falcon behind lets say the commadore......the leading car it compeats with.Ill make it easy for you...it isnt...the falcon has been a better car on all levels of model except the upper HSV v FPV cars which is arguable lately.
And the kuga isnt even here yet and probably isnt a ford aus call at all.
And if you think that ford descisions to put the zf ...the 5.0... and so on are bad then id hate to see what u think about the asthmatic holden engines and there new dinosaur catch up gas technology. Pushrod v8s and cheap designed tinsel lights to warrant competition with the big euros.
man theres is just so many questions i have of people who seriously doubt ford...i mean look at holdens model management...sucking in taxpayers money for cruze saying theyd sell trillions then selling way less...and the car itself is a FARR worse car then the focus or mondeo it competes with(and ford sells those beasts by the way)

Im sick of people who look at things with non biased views.If your going to criticise something...first check the competition and see what the standard is...then whinge its not good enough.
sorry rant over

[jpd80]

We need to stop comparing Falcon to Commodore, Holden is arguably in as much trouble with their big car as Ford.
Ecoboost is a great start to doing things differently to the General, hopefully they can't follow as quickly
and Ecoboost buys Ford time to regroup sales. I can't help feeling that given a choice, most fleets would
rather a fuel efficient petrol car over a LPG vehicle, maybe that's what fleets are waiting for...

[1TUFFUTE]

one thing id love answered...why doesnt holden make the commadore with twice as many gadgets...twice as fast...twice as economic...twice as tough and twice as good. They certainly sell twice as many. So if the falcon keeps up even slightly in anyway to the billion dollar baby then KUDOS to FORD tHEY MUST BE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT HUH

[music189]

with diesel 13 cents a litre more than petrol at the moment in Melbourne why would you bother with it

[Nic85]

Originally Posted by music189

with diesel 13 cents a litre more than petrol at the moment in Melbourne why would you bother with it

Because it's generally 30% or more fuel efficient, has fewer emissions and has a better and more usable torque band?

[.FoMoCo.]

Originally Posted by Nic85

Because it's generally 30% or more fuel efficient, has fewer emissions and has a better and more usable torque band?

It could be argued that the next generation of DI small capacity turbo engines like EB4, and the ecoboost V6 in the f150 achieve all these things. The ecoboost V6 for example shunts out 420 ft lbs of torque with 90% of that usable from 1700 rpm, with a very flat curve. It returns economy of 23 mpg or 10.2 l/100 km! That is very diesel-like, and a big game changer in my opinion.

This is the whole crux of it all, New petrol technology is closing the gap, and diesel customers can see it coming.

[duaned]

Yet all this talk about diesel etc. and the stupid servos usually only have 1 or 2 diesel pumps available? I can deal with that, but when they put them in the same pump as unleaded I am usually 3 or 4 cars back waiting for my turn at the pump. Then there is the smelly, oily pump itself.....

[Kryton]

Originally Posted by .FoMoCo.

It could be argued that the next generation of DI small capacity turbo engines like EB4, and the ecoboost V6 in the f150 achieve all these things. The ecoboost V6 for example shunts out 420 ft lbs of torque with 90% of that usable from 1700 rpm, with a very flat curve. It returns economy of 23 mpg or 10.2 l/100 km! That is very diesel-like, and a big game changer in my opinion.

This is the whole crux of it all, New petrol technology is closing the gap, and diesel customers can see it coming.

Thats awesome - until you factor in paying for PREMIUM fuel, which is what is required to run these engines.
A quick look at the prices would show that PULP is the same price as Diesel and in a lot of areas, its even more expensive.
So no, it isnt a game changer at all.

http://www.fuelwatch.wa.gov.au/fuelw...ages/home.jspx
http://motormouth.com.au/

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Thats not what I meant, I was mentioning how everyone thinks because of emissions laws something will die, then used the 70s and 80s to compare when emissions laws hit hard and it forced the manufacturers to do their research. We still have V8s today, hell we've got a 5L supercharged one. I think Ford made a bad move back then dropping the V8 rather than spending money on R&D to further it, whch brings me back to diesel.

So without goin to off topic,
Why spend money on an engine, like a V8 , when the 6 cylinder option only XF was the biggest selling model falcon ???
Now i do understand why they didnt , but from memory the holden V8 at the time only stayed in production by the skin of its teeth
So IF the V8 was an option in the XF would it have been as big as seller or bigger ???

[302 XC]

Originally Posted by music189

with diesel 13 cents a litre more than petrol at the moment in Melbourne why would you bother with it

This is the exact reason i drive a petrol 4x4

Not only is it cheaper at the pump,but i need a seriously tuff turbo diesel to come anywhere near the power the petrol puts out
Not just compared on paper, and we all know on paper means nothin, i live in real world not paper world

Yes there are turbo diesels that have more boost run intercoolers , bigger zorst all the bells and whistles,but theres nothin better than reliable power day in day out
Let alone the costs for rebuilding associated diesel gear
Yes diesels are cheaper to run on a K/L stake, but throw in more service costs , usually 5,000Ks as apposed to 10K for a petrol,some diesels run 2 oil filters as apposed to 1 on a petrol
Now the extra at the pump, you really have to wonder with the ecobomy some petrol engines are getting Vs the cars ownership life span,that diesel in a 3 to 5 year ownership is worth the extra cost

[Mr Hardware]

Just like the diesel gemini's and mercs of the 80s, diesel for passenger cars is only ever a fad.

[Rodge]

Originally Posted by jpd80

There is a flaw in the OP article's argument and I can prove it, thanks to Russell's Technical Resources Data.


The argument that diesel sales in cars are falling is premised on diesel car sales only
and not what the total car sales volume is for the year. More cars were sold in 2010
as compared to last year, therefore sales of diesels fell ever so slightly as viewed in the first chart:

If anything, diesel and hybrid car sales numbers remained fairly solid
Diesel sales fell about 1,000,
Hybrid sales fell about 700
LPG sales falling about 3,000
petrol sales fell around 28,000

image


In real terms, the percentage of diesel cars is has risen to 8% last year as evidenced by the second chart:


image


Also, ten times as many diesel cars are sold than LPG cars, i think the fact that Ford has EcoLPI
is blinding them to the possibilities with a diesel Falcon and Ute, not everyone wants LPG...

Well said. Plenty of mid size diesel cars are now into the 5's in terms of litres per 100 km's with heaps of readily available torque making them a pleasure to drive. Comparing apples with apples Mondeo Ecoboost 8.0 litres per 100 km's uses 43% more fuel than its diesel powered sibling at 5.6 litres per 100 km's and the diesel has more torque. Add in the fact that the Ecoboost requires premium fuel and as long as you use your vehicle on the open road a fair bit to burn out the diesel particulate filter, the diesel choice is a no brainer.

[.FoMoCo.]

Originally Posted by davway

Thats awesome - until you factor in paying for PREMIUM fuel, which is what is required to run these engines.
A quick look at the prices would show that PULP is the same price as Diesel and in a lot of areas, its even more expensive.
So no, it isnt a game changer at all.

http://www.fuelwatch.wa.gov.au/fuelw...ages/home.jspx
http://motormouth.com.au/

I'm not sure i understand your argument....

The ecoboost engines are returning diesel-like economy, and the fuel prices are the same? Where's the advantage to diesel there?

Also, the 3.5 litre ecoboost is designed to run on 87 Ron. Not premium. All the power, torque, and mpg figures are based on 87 Ron.

As well, the eb4 cam be run on 91 Ron according to ford itself.

So if those engines behave like diesels, but at the same cost, if not cheaper, how is that a win for diesel technology over New di turbos?

[prydey]

i wonder what the breakdown is in sales between petrol and diesel mondeo. logic doesn't always enter into car buying and perception.

with sales of diesel cars increasing, and sales of large passenger cars on the slide and sales of suv/4wd on the increase, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that the increase isn't due to diesel in large sedans.

IF diesel was available in large sedans, you could argue that it would have the same popularity, but personally, its all speculation. as far as ford is concerned, they don't have the funds to 'test' the market, and its obvious ford US want to push their ecoboost engines.

it just gets frustrating when a handful of members use it as another opportunity to stick the boots into ford as though they have some limitless money tree out the back. most of the time the comments are said with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight.

[jpd80]

I'll agree that Ecoboost should do well in Falcon because it achieves most of the economy goals
a diesel would without the $3,000 premium, the I-4 also gives buyers changed perspective of Falcon.

So it's not as though Ford is doing nothing, far from it and Ecoboost supporters may have the last laugh....

[b0son]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

How is the falcon behind lets say the commadore......the leading car it compeats with.Ill make it easy for you...it isnt...the falcon has been a better car on all levels of model except the upper HSV v FPV cars which is arguable lately.

I dont know what the story is across the rest of the model range, but when I was thinking of going a V8, for the same price, the SSV redline was way better equipped than the only V8 Ford offered, the FPV GS. yes, Ford's V8 may be superior, but this seems to be the problem with Ford - they work on one area to the detriment of all others. Holden OTOH has understood for some time that you dont need to be the best in any one area, but the total package needs to be compelling.

And even if Ford do now offer what the competition does, how many months/years did it take to catch up? You cant just compare them against what Holden are doing. People no longer buy either a Falcon or a Commodore. They're just as likely to buy another brand or different vehicle style altogether. Pretty hard to go past a slightly smaller car that offers almost all the performance and way more of the gadgets.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by 302 XC

This is the exact reason i drive a petrol 4x4

Not only is it cheaper at the pump,but i need a seriously tuff turbo diesel to come anywhere near the power the petrol puts out
Not just compared on paper, and we all know on paper means nothin, i live in real world not paper world

Yes there are turbo diesels that have more boost run intercoolers , bigger zorst all the bells and whistles,but theres nothin better than reliable power day in day out
Let alone the costs for rebuilding associated diesel gear
Yes diesels are cheaper to run on a K/L stake, but throw in more service costs , usually 5,000Ks as apposed to 10K for a petrol,some diesels run 2 oil filters as apposed to 1 on a petrol
Now the extra at the pump, you really have to wonder with the ecobomy some petrol engines are getting Vs the cars ownership life span,that diesel in a 3 to 5 year ownership is worth the extra cost

turbo diesels generate twice the torque at half the fuel rate..
the sevice intervals are 15,000k and is the same price for oil and filter,
air filter is the same aswell.

Originally Posted by .FoMoCo.

I'm not sure i understand your argument....

The ecoboost engines are returning diesel-like economy, and the fuel prices are the same? Where's the advantage to diesel there?

Also, the 3.5 litre ecoboost is designed to run on 87 Ron. Not premium. All the power, torque, and mpg figures are based on 87 Ron.

As well, the eb4 cam be run on 91 Ron according to ford itself.

So if those engines behave like diesels, but at the same cost, if not cheaper, how is that a win for diesel technology over New di turbos?

this 87 ron AKI that the usa uses is around 95 ron.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by burnz

turbo diesels generate twice the torque at half the fuel rate..
the sevice intervals are 15,000k and is the same price for oil and filter,
air filter is the same aswell.

this 87 ron AKI that the usa uses is around 95 ron.

Correction USA uses Pump Ocatane number, their 87 equals our 91 RON but you are right on a number of other points.

Hidden in F150 towing details, the power/torque was achieved on premium fuel (95 RON)
as was the figures for our Ecoboost Falcon.

Also, the EB 20 makes 366nm on temporary overboost with 95 RON fuel.
Under continuous load and with use of 91RON, the torque will be much less...

So with Ecoboost, the power and torque comes from 95 RON fuel,
even though you don't have to use it, the result will be less without.

[.FoMoCo.]

But with premium fuel costing the same as diesel, the argument stands, does it not?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by .FoMoCo.

But with premium fuel costing the same as diesel, the argument stands, does it not?

Hmmm, petrol is just starting down the road of Direct Injection and turbocharging,
and at the moment, we have 530,000 petrol cars a year sold versus 45,000 diesels.
So there's a great opportunity to catch a much greater volume of vehicles with "Ecoboost"
than say diesel oriented buyers ... BUT, if fuel prices begin to spike, we may well see both
Ecoboost and diesel cars take off and naturally aspirated petrol engines become museum pieces.

It depends on demand, that burning desire from the buyer to get more fuel economy BUT if the petrol variant is
already pretty fuel efficient, I think the diesel has much less chance of making an impact with buyers wanting savings.

The difference going from 12.5 l/100 km petrol to say 8.2 l/100 km diesel has far more impact
than an 8.2 l/100 km petrol to say a 5.5 l/100 km diesel. Fuel savings are much greater in the latter.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by 1TUFFUTE

How is the falcon behind lets say the commadore......the leading car it compeats with.Ill make it easy for you...it isnt...the falcon has been a better car on all levels of model except the upper HSV v FPV cars which is arguable lately.

I'm not comparing the Falcon with the Commodore, I don't really like the Commodore in the first place, except for its touch screen techy crap, thats about it.

I'm comparing it with cars in the same price range, not class.

You can get an base model XR6 with barely any features (lets face it XR6 is now the base model), or a small car with all the goods for the same price.

The reason I went with diesel in my Focus is that I could get a 2L petrol one with 115Kw or there abouts and like 200nm of torque with a 5sp manual, or get a diesel one with 100Kw and 340nm of torque and an extra gear, the diesel drives a hell of a lot better in daily driving situations and as a bonus, uses slightly less fuel.

Service intervals are 15,000km and an oil filter is like $25, though I service every 10,000km just to be sure. The oil is the same price as the 5W-30 in my petrol Fiesta, about $85 for 5L of the good stuff.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

I'm not comparing the Falcon with the Commodore, I don't really like the Commodore in the first place, except for its touch screen techy crap, thats about it.

I'm comparing it with cars in the same price range, not class.

You can get an base model XR6 with barely any features (lets face it XR6 is now the base model), or a small car with all the goods for the same price.

The reason I went with diesel in my Focus is that I could get a 2L petrol one with 115Kw or there abouts and like 200nm of torque with a 5sp manual, or get a diesel one with 100Kw and 340nm of torque and an extra gear, the diesel drives a hell of a lot better in daily driving situations.

At the moment, a Ecoboost Zetec Mondeo is $34,990 drive away,
I wonder how many XR6 buyers are tempted by that..

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by jpd80

At the moment, a Ecoboost Zetec Mondeo is $34,990 drive away,
I wonder how many XR6 buyers are tempted by that..

Thats right, and look at all the features that comes with, and the thing actually has more leg room than the Falcon because its FWD and very similar in size.

Average joe doesn't give a rats *** about FWD and RWD, and either do I.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by .FoMoCo.

But with premium fuel costing the same as diesel, the argument stands, does it not?

E10 is $1.45 cpl
95 ron is on par with diesel $1.50 per litre.
98 ron is around $1.62 per litre.

central coast and sydney prices.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Thats right, and look at all the features that comes with, and the thing actually has more leg room than the Falcon because its FWD and very similar in size.

Average joe doesn't give a rats *** about FWD and RWD, and either do I.

And why I'd like to see head office back FoA and fund local manufacture of Mondeo/Fusion here,
cut out waiting time and shorten distance between supplier and dealership...
Mondeo is a global platform, costs slightly more than Focus to build but asks a much higher price.

[naddis01]

At the end of the day Ford won't be bringing out a diesel Falcon any day soon. I feel that the diesel out of the Territory wouldn't acheive the goals needed in the Falcon to make it successful. Comparing the petrol and diesel Territory's I would estimate that a 2.7L diesel Falcon would achieve around 7.5L/100km. I feel it would need to be in the 6's to be of benefit.

I think something like the 2.2L diesel out of the Mondeo (that we don't get) would achieve better results (if it is possible for RWD). 147kw and 450Nm using around 6.5L/100km.

I wouldn't be disappointed if the Falcon line up was the following...
2L Ecoboost
2.2L diesel
5.0L Coyote

[burnz]

Originally Posted by naddis01

At the end of the day Ford won't be bringing out a diesel Falcon any day soon. I feel that the diesel out of the Territory wouldn't acheive the goals needed in the Falcon to make it successful. Comparing the petrol and diesel Territory's I would estimate that a 2.7L diesel Falcon would achieve around 7.5L/100km. I feel it would need to be in the 6's to be of benefit.

I think something like the 2.2L diesel out of the Mondeo (that we don't get) would achieve better results (if it is possible for RWD). 147kw and 450Nm using around 6.5L/100km.

I wouldn't be disappointed if the Falcon line up was the following...
2L Ecoboost
2.2L diesel
5.0L Coyote

i have personally got a terry diesel down to 6.0/100 and i was very suppriesed..

[Nic85]

I don't understand why people are saying that sedans don't have diesel engines and / or they're a fad?? The local 3 might not, but pretty much the rest of the world do.

Renault - Lattitude.
BMW - 1, 3, 5, 6 & 7 series.
Mercedes - C, E & S class.
Ford - Mondeo.
Citroen - C5 & C6.
Audi - A4, A5, A6, A7 & A8.
Hyundai - i40.
Jaguar - XF, XK, XJ.
Mazda - 3 & 6.
Skoda - Superb, Octavia.
Volvo - C30.
Volkswagen - Jetta, Passat.

[.FoMoCo.]

Originally Posted by burnz

E10 is $1.45 cpl
95 ron is on par with diesel $1.50 per litre.
98 ron is around $1.62 per litre.

central coast and sydney prices.

95 is the "premium" referred to in previous posts needed to obtain maximum performance and economy from the ecoboost engines. Both the engines run quite well on 87 or 91.

So no advantage to diesel in fuel prices, I think we can put that issue to bed now.

But we are splitting hairs here, the move to low capacity DI turbo engines instead of diesel is no accident by FOA. I believe they have seen the potential in the technology, still in relatively early stage of development. It can only get better.

How far have we come? The ED falcon's 5.0 litre efi V8 from 1993 had 165 KW. EB4 for the falcon will be 179 KW.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by burnz

i have personally got a terry diesel down to 6.0/100 and i was very suppriesed..

Indeed, I think a lot of owners are seeing SZ Territory RWD as a quazi Falcon diesel stationwagon,
so I'll get off the Falcon diesel band wagon and just say that if people want diesel, buy a Territory.

Territory TDCI V6:
Combined 8.2 l/100 km
Urban 11.3 l/100 km
Extra Urban 6.5 l/100 km

Falcon XT Ecoboost:
Combined 8.1 l/100 km
Urban 11.8 l/100 km
Extra Urban 6.0 l/100 km

Holden Omega 3.0 SIDIt:
Combined 8.9 l/100 km
Urban 12.5 l/100 km
Extra Urban 6.9 l/100 km