Boosted Falcon

I might have missed something but it seems no one has commented on the confirmation of a turbo four cylinder base Falcon for 2011. The claim is that performace of the 'Ecoboost' will compare with the 4.0, alongside fuel economy as low as 8 l/100 km.

The 'fuel economy war' has been interesting to watch in recent months. First Holden knocked 0.2 L/100 km from the base Commodore to something like 10.6L, then Ford announced the 9.9L Falcon XT in albeit optional 6 speed form, followed by Toyota moving the goalposts by improving the previously disappointing Camry from 9.9 to 8.8L. Holden's announced 3 litre V6/6 speed auto for the VE series II will achieve as low as 9.3L/100 km, which will probably remain a benchmark for its class until the four cylinder Falcon arrives. I've heard nothing of the forthcoming update of Toyota's Aurion, but it has been a class benchmark since its '06 introduction, combining 200kW performance with 9.9L economy that to this day Falcon and Commodore have not matched on a stock base model.

Fortunately the preoccupation with base model fuel economy has not blunted the performance car sector, with the best innovations so far being Holden's cylinder shut-down technology for its V8, and HSV's forthcoming interest in LPG liquid injection that essentially do not compromise performance. The HSV E Series 2 will include the usual kW bump up to something like 325...

That about sums up the madness.

The falcon shouldnt have a four in it. Its just not right!

Keep in mind Saab and others have successfully been using similar engines in medium and large cars for some time, and drastic action of some kind is needed because of competition from more economical cars. Otherwise Falcon would be at risk of becoming a dinosaur and dying out in a world where some makes are pushing for extraordinarily efficient diesel motors (new Mercedes E Class for example), whilst others are pushing down the electrification path.

My main desire is that the larger engines remain available for those of us who want them.

Troutman wrote:My main desire is that the larger engines remain available for those of us who want them.

Indeed. As long as we continue to have a locally built engine option (thus employing many people in the design, development, component supply, etc), any move to offer an engine which will sell more cars of the Falcon platform is a great idea. Would be great if we could assemble the engine locally too but eh.

as above, aslong as we still have the 6 and 8 available, i don't care!

I reckon it'll be great for boosting Falcon fleet sales, especially if LPG is an option. LPG + 4cyl = perfect fleet car. The turbo will keep it honest, shouldn't be too much of a slug.

Repost, but who cares.

This Turbo 4 will be a rocket, its produced up to around 210kw and has a dead flat tourqe "curve". Its not just any old 4 cylinder, not like the Starfire....

If its turbo mmm maybe/ok. if its NA then may the 4 cylinder falcon be epic fail while 6 cylinder comes through ftw

If its turbo mmm maybe/ok. if its NA then may the 4 cylinder falcon be epic fail while 6 cylinder comes through ftw

Of course it is turbo... that is the whole point of EcoBoost. There is a lot of information available online about the EcoBoost engines.

About bloody time... I mean turbo fours have been making the same power as falcon 6's for almost 20 years now (1989 legacy GT - 147kw vs 139kw for an EA-EB1, S15 sylvia 170kw (Jap Spec) vs EF-AU 157kw, EVO X 210kw vs BF 190kw), it's high time to realise that with the correct sized turbo they can make stupid low-end torque as well...

When I first heard about it it sounded strange but thinking about it more it could be a great thing.

If they come with a decent sized pump and have the internal strength to take extra boost theres no reason why you couldn't boost them to 200kw+.

Would be interesting to steer one of these 4 banger falcons through some twistys with (presumably) less weight and better weight distribution.

EFFalcon wrote:as above, aslong as we still have the 6 and 8 available, i don't care!

thats exactly right and i think its a good thing for ford anyway last ford my old man owned was an AU Fairlane used a shitload of juice (for his standards) for a sedan he said he would never buy a ford... soon as i told him about this he would actually consider getting one forgetting the 1% of hoon enthusiasts this is a good thing for the general public and might get em some decent sales... like you say john as long as they keep the 6 and 8 all the enthuisiasts still get what they your average mum and dad get what they want from a family car big and economical...

Holdens cylinder shut down is a joke... pfft if u drive the way i do i doubt you would notice the difference..ie traffic to work everyday... everytime i see the shutdown badge i cant help but laugh

If the EFI is working it would be the same..
They stop fuel delivery on deceleration anyway !!

From memory Holden's AFM operates at speeds above a certain threshold (60 km/h or thereabouts) when cruising or coasting. Holden only claims up to 1 L/100km saving, but it is at least unobtrusive. The 6.0 engine and onwards are all technically compatible with AFM so it could have been implemented some time ago.

Giving credit where it's due, the Chrysler 300C V8 featured the technology some years ago, as does the current Honda Accord V6.

PS Welcome

worgnfleamn wrote:Wall of links

I reported this as spam, but not from the original owner of the account because of the post count. But looking at the joining date they joined yesterday and have 500-ish posts so are definitely a spam-bot. How did that get past the filters?