Delayed: Ford's 4-cylinder Falcon

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by csv8

Mules about of FG2 ?????

You wont be able to pick them, thats why they are mules.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by XWGT

Falcon cannot in my opinion compete with Mondeo in the open market.

Yes we enthusiasts love the Falcon and RWD etc etc, but the Mondeo is simply too good a car for the average punter to ignore.

I cannot see Falcon without diesel too far into the future I'm afraid....and lets face it Falcon with diesel is already here, its just called Mondeo.

this is your opinion. when looking to upgrade my bf2 egas wagon, i looked at mondeo's as well as falcon, and after i'd looked at a couple, i didn't bother again. exterior looks are not bad (i prefer falcon) but the interior (in my opinion) is terrible. falcon seats are much better looking as is the whole dash design and layout.

admittedly i'm not in the position to buy new, but what you get for your money seems better value in the falcon. i ended up with a fg xr6 and for that money i was looking at same age mondeo in lx or zetec and they just didn't cut it for me.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by XWGT

Yes we enthusiasts love the Falcon and RWD etc etc, but the Mondeo is simply too good a car for the average punter to ignore.

Except for last month Mondeo has been ignored. The wagon has given it a boost but its not gonna set the world on fire.

[WOTDAH]

Originally Posted by csv8

Mules about of FG2 ?????

Yes. Some look like FG, some may have a covered front end. You won't see a complete uncovered FG2 on the road just yet.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by WOTDAH

Yes. Some look like FG, some may have a covered front end. You won't see a complete uncovered FG2 on the road just yet.

Is there really that much difference anyway?
I remember the critics of FG saying it looked like a BF, of course there is a
big difference but to the casual bystander, would they even notice or care?

[WOTDAH]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Is there really that much difference anyway?
I remember the critics of FG saying it looked like a BF, of course there is a
big difference but to the casual bystander, would they even notice or care?

No there is not that much difference. Look at the new Terry combine that with FG and you have FG2.

[tezxr8man]

Whats the big deal about changing the look so much? if you change the look every 5 mins the car loses its identity, evolution is the best way to do it, they've just got to package it right
look at porsche's 911 it never was the most perfect thing out there but after working on it for years look at what it has become, i'm not saying for a minute that they are the same but they are both flawed designs with compromises and have an identity

[FPV GTHO]

Changing it after 3 years is hardly every 5 minutes. They used to have minor changes after 2 years, in that aspect this upgrade could be considered overdue. If they leave everything 99% now as well, it soon becomes 4-6 years before they change it and by then the design is stale and becomes forgotten.

[Chilliman]

I think the time is right to update the look- afterall in the general public's eye's the FG is little different, looks wise, from the BA which first appeared almost a decade ago!

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by FPV GTHO

Changing it after 3 years is hardly every 5 minutes. They used to have minor changes after 2 years, in that aspect this upgrade could be considered overdue. If they leave everything 99% now as well, it soon becomes 4-6 years before they change it and by then the design is stale and becomes forgotten.

Plus in a way it was old before it even came out. Too predictable. Hopefully the FG2 will seem a bit fresher.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by Brazen

Plus in a way it was old before it even came out. Too predictable. Hopefully the FG2 will seem a bit fresher.

How so? The FG was a beautiful design when it came out and still is, and will stand the test of time better than the VE with its stupid flared wheelarches. The only people who bagged the look of the FG when it came out were motoring journo nitpickers who wanted to put ***** on it because there was little else to legitimately criticise.

[FPV GTHO]

I wouldnt say it looked old at launch, but assumable if BA cost half as much then FG couldve launched around 06-07, probably looking much the same it did for 08. So in that respect i guess it was older at launch than ideal.

[Brazen]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

How so? The FG was a beautiful design when it came out and still is, and will stand the test of time better than the VE with its stupid flared wheelarches. The only people who bagged the look of the FG when it came out were motoring journo nitpickers who wanted to put ***** on it because there was little else to legitimately criticise.

It looks great no question about it, but there is nothing original about it.

Its like the FG was designed by a 46 year old public servant who had to guess what a new model Falcon was going to look like after being shown a BFII.

Its just a lazy design, no matter its good looking.

At least with other Falcon generations they tried...

XF to EA







EL to AU






BFII To FG

[4.0i OHC]

With the FG, it seems like Ford took the Commodore route- styling cues from the previous model were carried over, as opposed to the radical change of previous molecules.

VS to VT:



VZ to VE:

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Paxton

Probably only in yours.

Things are changing rapidly, and Falcon is on shaky ground.

^^^^^^^^ This.

[stevz]

Found this in the Harvey Norman catalogue today. I wonder what Ford has to say about this?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

^^^^^^^^ This.

Crunch time again but ya know what?
I think FoA have done enough with TZ Territory and EcoLPI to keep the Falcon alive for now...
I would suspect that Ford would be holding fire on any future updates to see how 2011 goes,
if a revival happens I'd say we will see further upgrades but if not, we open door No. 2....

[LeadFoot81]

Originally Posted by Brazen

It looks great no question about it, but there is nothing original about it.

Its like the FG was designed by a 46 year old public servant who had to guess what a new model Falcon was going to look like after being shown a BFII.

Its just a lazy design, no matter its good looking.

BFII To FG

IMO the problem isn't that FG looks too much like BF, it's the other way around. B Series had to run a little longer than was ideal so Ford tried very hard to keep B-series fresh and ensure a smooth transition to FG by introducing FG's 'face' with BF MkII.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Crunch time again but ya know what?
I think FoA have done enough with TZ Territory and EcoLPI to keep the Falcon alive for now...
I would suspect that Ford would be holding fire on any future updates to see how 2011 goes,
if a revival happens I'd say we will see further upgrades but if not, we open door No. 2....

As Graziano said not too long ago, you can't write the Falcon off after only 2 months of lousy sales, particularly with the new engines that are coming. This LPI variant has the potential to add up to 600-800 units to the Falcon's monthly bottom line if it is as good as people say it is an is advertised well.

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

As Graziano said not too long ago, you can't write the Falcon off after only 2 months of lousy sales, particularly with the new engines that are coming. This LPI variant has the potential to add up to 600-800 units to the Falcon's monthly bottom line if it is as good as people say it is an is advertised well.

^^^^^^^^ This.

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

^^^^^^^^ This.

Why are you even here then?

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

^^^^^^^^ This.


Why are you even here then?

A bit upset are we ? Get ready for the next three months of Falcon sales !!

Don't believe everything you read, or base all of your arguments on media 'drivel'. Talk to someone that knows, or find out first hand.

Falcon is a player in a diminishing segment and it WON'T be regaining the sales it had 5 years ago - EVER. Sad but true.

Investment towards Manufacturing /Assembling a replacement here in Australia is not a prospect that Ford is going to be able to justify.

You "do the maths" if you know how much it costs to tool up and manufacture a new car.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

Investment towards Manufacturing /Assembling a replacement here in Australia is not a prospect that Ford is going to be able to justify.

You "do the maths" if you know how much it costs to tool up and manufacture a new car.

Are you saying that regardless of what is chosen for the next product cycle (+2015),
there is a real possibility or likelihood of it being built elsewhere like US or Thailand?

Is it possible that Ford can use this as a gun to the government's head,
help us by paying for some upgrade costs to Geelong and Broadmeadows
or kiss goodbye to 2000 jobs - Political dynamite just before an election.....

[Buntz]

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

A bit upset are we ? Get ready for the next three months of Falcon sales !!

Don't believe everything you read, or base all of your arguments on media 'drivel'. Talk to someone that knows, or find out first hand.

Falcon is a player in a diminishing segment and it WON'T be regaining the sales it had 5 years ago - EVER. Sad but true.

Investment towards Manufacturing /Assembling a replacement here in Australia is not a prospect that Ford is going to be able to justify.

You "do the maths" if you know how much it costs to tool up and manufacture a new car.

Well if one is a member of an Australian based ford forum... then they're likely a big fan of local products. But All you seem to do is rap on it.

I figure by the way people react to your comments you may have some insider information.... so give me a rough indication of where you work in Ford Australia, and I may start taking more of what you say with more regard.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Are you saying that regardless of what is chosen for the next product cycle (+2015),
there is a real possibility or likelihood of it being built elsewhere like US or Thailand?

Is it possible that Ford can use this as a gun to the government's head,
help us by paying for some upgrade costs to Geelong and Broadmeadows
or kiss goodbye to 2000 jobs - Political dynamite just before an election.....

I think a lot of govenment money will be required to get a positive result, or something really needs to change. A doubling / tripling of Falcon sales ?

Up until now incremental (smaller changes) have meant that Falcon is viable. As soon as the Falcon platform is 'dumped' due to 'One Ford', it would be virtually impossible to justify the investment.

It's sad but true.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

Well if one is a member of an Australian based ford forum... then they're likely a big fan of local products. But All you seem to do is rap on it.

I figure by the way people react to your comments you may have some insider information.... so give me a rough indication of where you work in Ford Australia, and I may start taking more of what you say with more regard.

And you are who ?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

I think a lot of govenment money will be required to get a positive result, or something really needs to change. A doubling / tripling of Falcon sales ?

Up until now incremental (smaller changes) have meant that Falcon is viable. As soon as the Falcon platform is 'dumped' due to 'One Ford', it would be virtually impossible to justify the investment.

It's sad but true.

And that's where the decision in August/September comes in.
I could see Ford putting a hold on post FG II and TZ Territory upgrades
until the next platform decision is known and a linkage plan between
existing and new vehicles is formulated to allow a smooth transition.

But before we even get to 2015, there is the predicament you alluded to,
FoA has production on three days a week and even though Graziano is
trying to talk up production, I think he knows its still lower than Dearborn
wants to see, I'm very nervous about this, I sense a transfer of power here....

If FoA cannot iron clad guarantee that a RWD car will have increased sales over
an existing internal product, then they are compelled to take the existing product.
FoA's infrastructure is too expensive to upgrade to another new FWD/AWD platform.

[Chilliman]

Originally Posted by jpd80

And that's where the decision in August/September comes in.
I could see Ford putting a hold on post FG II and TZ Territory upgrades
until the next platform decision is known and a linkage plan between
existing and new vehicles is formulated to allow a smooth transition.

But before we even get to 2015, there is the predicament you alluded to,
FoA has production on three days a week and even though Graziano is
trying to talk up production, I think he knows its still lower than Dearborn
wants to see, I'm very nervous about this, I sense a transfer of power here....

If FoA cannot iron clad guarantee that a RWD car will have increased sales over
an existing internal product, then they are compelled to take the existing product.
FoA's infrastructure is too expensive to upgrade to another new FWD/AWD platform.

Are you alluding to a brief period where we are subjected to a heavy D3-based car before a switch to a lighter CD4 car?

I think such a move would do more damage to Ford Austalia's large car brand than if they just stretched out current E8 prodution until the CD4 LWB car was ready.

[Fordman1]

Originally Posted by jpd80

And that's where the decision in August/September comes in.
I could see Ford putting a hold on post FG II and TZ Territory upgrades
until the next platform decision is known and a linkage plan between
existing and new vehicles is formulated to allow a smooth transition.

But before we even get to 2015, there is the predicament you alluded to,
FoA has production on three days a week and even though Graziano is
trying to talk up production, I think he knows its still lower than Dearborn
wants to see, I'm very nervous about this, I sense a transfer of power here....

If FoA cannot iron clad guarantee that a RWD car will have increased sales over
an existing internal product, then they are compelled to take the existing product.
FoA's infrastructure is too expensive to upgrade to another new FWD/AWD platform.

I think you've nailed the issue John.

[Jason[98.EL]]

Originally Posted by Barraxr8

And you are who ?

good question

i was thinking the same thing

with this comment

so give me a rough indication of where you work in Ford Australia, and I may start taking more of what you say with more regard.

but then again he has a user name of Buntz93ED so i amguessing he only drives an ed unfortunatly he has a bit of attitude and wil learn like i did over time
Lay of a tad guys everyone makes mistakes

Jason

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Are you saying that regardless of what is chosen for the next product cycle (+2015),
there is a real possibility or likelihood of it being built elsewhere like US or Thailand?

Is it possible that Ford can use this as a gun to the government's head,
help us by paying for some upgrade costs to Geelong and Broadmeadows
or kiss goodbye to 2000 jobs - Political dynamite just before an election.....

Whilst I can see Dearborn having an excuse to terminate the locally designed products (whether that excuse is justified or not), I think it is less likely (and much harder) for them to shutter the assembly plant and the rest of the associated facilities. In the entire Ford world, I would say Australia is one of only 3 or 4 locations that gives Ford the ability to design, engineer, and manufacture a car from nothing. The others of course being the US, Germany, Umm...help me out here? Many other Ford plants make cars but do not have the build in R&D function that FoA has. Especially when you consider global platforms like the T6.

I think I have alluded to it before, either in this thread or another (i'm losing track of all these doom and gloom threads), but the depth of product design and development that Ford Australia has cannot realistically be conducted without an inherent ability to manufacture cars. Dearborn quite clearly know this given the amount of product development and design work they have been rampantly throwing at Ford Australia. How many foreign market projects are they working on now?

As you have said, Ford Motor Company know how to play the game with governments and no government in power is going to be willing to let a major automotive manufacturer close the doors on its watch. Car makers like Ford are termed by the Federal Government as part of a 'strategic industry' (see: Federal Government Automotive Industry Sustainability Report) and henceforth I would suggest there are also some legislative barriers to Dearborn simply coming in here, clicking the fingers and shuttering the plant: a lot of taxpayer money has been thrown at Ford Australia and if Detroit really truly wanted the place gone, the financial fallout would be somewhat extreme (paying back the taxpayer's money and taking care of all those staff that would be laid off just for starters). I'n not saying they would be statute-barred from physically closing the plant, but I am willing to bet that those taxpayer dollars which were given to Ford to keep the lights on and keep developing cars here would have been subject to watertight agreements in which the government would have undoubtedly had clauses that protected its interests.

I would also suggest there could be some political fallout when Canberra starts complaining to the United States Government that an American corporation has just sabotaged one of Australia's strategic industries. But I'm just guessing on that one.