|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
12-01-2012, 05:55 PM | #91 | ||
Ute Forum Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melb
Posts: 7,227
|
Seeing as I raised the point (and my comments were on the Fusion not the MKZ), why does it matter? Well I'd estimate that most days I would scrape the front of my (work) car on a driveway or over a speed hump despite taking reasonable care. Its not something that I enjoy, nor is slowing down to tippy-toe speeds to cross a gutter.
It's not necessarily about the length of the front end of the car, fwd cars tend to have a minimal clearance from the a pillar to axle, related to the transverse engine layout ahead of the axle. It can be reversed to have the engine behind the wheels - see Toyota iQ - which would also improve weight distribution. All for the cost of having the front wheels a bit further forward, the only downsides I can see is a slightly larger turning circle and the front suspension/wheels would be a bit more vulnerable in a crash but by that severity it doesn't really matter. For the VE Commodore they relocated the front axle on the chassis rails. (perhaps because they knew they would also be basing the Camaro off the platform?) In any case it was just an observation on the way the whole industry is going, not intended to stir up controversy! Finally I think the picture Wretched posted is fairly easily explained, the 2.0 Ecoboost is a mainstream/launch engine and the US has a large proportion of sales as AWD, it makes sense that combination is available. Also I think the hybrid model is most often seen in light blue, you can pick it by the round charging port cover on the LH front guard. |
||
12-01-2012, 06:49 PM | #92 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,331
|
Quote:
|
|||
12-01-2012, 06:56 PM | #93 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ACT
Posts: 11,647
|
Quote:
|
|||
13-01-2012, 07:55 PM | #94 | ||
Regular Member
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 102
|
The headlight treatment on the Euro model looks more aggressive, hopefully this is the version shipped down here. Put some decent wheels on it and from that angle it would look awesome.
Last edited by demondan; 05-02-2014 at 12:43 PM. |
||
14-01-2012, 01:41 AM | #95 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,398
|
New Fusion versus Taurus versus Falcon, how close can you get:
.Apart from 2" more hip and shoulder room Falcon is almost identical. Do we really need three cars this size? Fusion: First row headroom 39.2 First row legroom, maximum 44.3 First row shoulder room 57.8 First row hip room 55.0 Second row headroom 37.8 Second row legroom 38.3 Second row shoulder room 56.9 Second row hip room 54.4 Taurus: First row headroom 39.0 First row legroom, maximum 41.9 First row shoulder room 57.9 First row hip room 56.3 Second row headroom 37.8 Second row legroom 38.3 Second row shoulder room 57.8 Second row hip room 55.8 Falcon: First row headroom 39.8 First row legroom, maximum 42.4 First row shoulder room 59.9 First row hip room 58.5 Second row headroom 38.9 Second row legroom 38.9 Second row shoulder room 59.7 Second row hip room 58.0 As a note new Fusion is available as an AWD but only with 2.0 Ecoboost. Hmm, I'm thinking 179 Kw and maybe 366 nm with AWD in a 1600 kg car I wonder whether it torque biases to the rear on take off like Taurus SHO? Last edited by jpd80; 14-01-2012 at 01:59 AM. |
||
14-01-2012, 02:00 AM | #96 | ||
You dig, we stick!
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,461
|
you made that up!
If the Falcon had a rwd stablemate that was practically the same size, and was selling 5 times as much... hmmm... So... Taurus looks like it's become a niche vehicle, may as well be RWD.
__________________
"....You don't put the car through engineering" - Rod Barrett. |
||
14-01-2012, 02:30 AM | #97 | |||
Straight Eight
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,049
|
Quote:
Time for that whale carcass Taurus to be dragged out to sea. Falcon to underline next D/E segment RWD Fords. (There's your next headline Drive journos)
__________________
The Falcon is dead. Long live the Mighty Falcon. |
|||
14-01-2012, 01:12 PM | #98 | ||
Peter Car
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
|
Yeah, whats the point of the Taurus then, if the Fusion is basically as big inside as it. All the extra bodywork does is create extra weight, maybe a slightly bigger boot?
Being FWD its pointless having another one, better off ditching it and using Falcon as your large vehicle, with RWD being the point of difference. Then make a flagship Lincoln out of it too to put up against 7 series, S class and Caddillac CTS? Probably won't happen solely because of Detroits "Not Made Here Syndrome". Same reason Ranger didn't make it to the US. |
||
14-01-2012, 01:14 PM | #99 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,398
|
Quote:
If such a large vehicle is no longer needed in Australia, i can see why they passed it up.. |
|||
14-01-2012, 01:40 PM | #100 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,331
|
Ford US might do the Aurion trick and keep Taurus V6 whilst Fusion sticks to Ecoboost.
Alot of possibilities though and nobody is really talking about the SUV's that need to be supported by these platforms yet |
||
14-01-2012, 04:19 PM | #101 | |||
Saving for a Jet Car
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: richmond.nsw.au
Posts: 3,745
|
Quote:
__________________
RIDES 2011 SZ Territory Titanium TDCi - Smoke 2001 Mitsubishi "BONSAI" GSR Mirage - see thread |
|||
14-01-2012, 05:00 PM | #102 | |||
Straight Eight
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,049
|
Quote:
FoA provides the most dynamic, most versatile platform of any Ford in the empire. A RWD with sibling RWD/AWD variant. Capable for sedan and SUV. Able to take engines from the 2.0 EB (Global), 2.7 Duratorq(Widespread), 4.0 I6 (local), and 5.0 Coyote (NA and Oz). The vehicles form a balance between cars suited to Americans and Europeans... but not dead set towards either. The platform could underpin vehicles in D to E segments with multiple powertrain variations, and sedan and SUV. Cars that could spawn off of it? MKS/MKT, (Falcon and Territory obviously), Mustang... and Lincoln Mustang (Mercury Cougar comeback)
__________________
The Falcon is dead. Long live the Mighty Falcon. |
|||
14-01-2012, 05:02 PM | #103 | ||
Straight Eight
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,049
|
__________________
The Falcon is dead. Long live the Mighty Falcon. |
||
14-01-2012, 05:24 PM | #104 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,331
|
Quote:
|
|||
14-01-2012, 05:41 PM | #105 | |||
Straight Eight
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,049
|
Quote:
Which is a good thing.
__________________
The Falcon is dead. Long live the Mighty Falcon. Last edited by Buntz; 14-01-2012 at 06:03 PM. |
|||
14-01-2012, 06:39 PM | #106 | ||
B1 - J & D Services
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brim, Victoria
Posts: 1,635
|
GRWD could easily do 250,000 sales annually. How could they not do it???
__________________
Mr. Brett Johnstone. 2002 Ford Laser 2000 Ford Falcon Wagon Egas 1999 Subaru Imprezza Sportwagon 1998 Holden Suburban 2500 1995 Land Rover Discovery TDI 1994 XG XR6 Longreach 1983 Holden Rodeo 1975 Datsun 120Y wagon 1970 MG Midget 1967 Rover 2000TC Soon: Model T. |
||
14-01-2012, 07:20 PM | #107 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,331
|
Quote:
|
|||
14-01-2012, 08:51 PM | #108 | |||
Peter Car
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
|
Quote:
|
|||
14-01-2012, 09:57 PM | #109 | ||
B1 - J & D Services
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brim, Victoria
Posts: 1,635
|
Not sure I would want to step on the toes of the best selling vehicle in the country either... Imagine the $$$ at risk...
__________________
Mr. Brett Johnstone. 2002 Ford Laser 2000 Ford Falcon Wagon Egas 1999 Subaru Imprezza Sportwagon 1998 Holden Suburban 2500 1995 Land Rover Discovery TDI 1994 XG XR6 Longreach 1983 Holden Rodeo 1975 Datsun 120Y wagon 1970 MG Midget 1967 Rover 2000TC Soon: Model T. |
||
14-01-2012, 10:32 PM | #110 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,398
|
Quote:
At the moment, the Edge is on the Mazda CD3S platform and looks like a slightly wider CX-7 but is only 100 mm shorter that Territory due to its hatchback crossover look. IMO a Territory sized SUV would be a great fit and work well on a global platform. |
|||
15-01-2012, 03:28 PM | #111 | |||
Straight Eight
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,049
|
Quote:
The new Ranger gets lots of thumbs up from yankee bloggers over on autoblog. It really is a truckers nation. But I can neither agree nor disagree with Fords decision. Ford sold over 500,000 units or something silly over there last year. Anything impeding on such results... I can understand. but when it's one of your own products??? (Then again... keeping the 'F-Brand' strong is also good.) However I'd like to think that Ranger would supplement the F series for the minority of Americans that aren't obese. And the Ford brass still don't turn their nose up at having some of their line built by de Hombres.
__________________
The Falcon is dead. Long live the Mighty Falcon. |
|||
15-01-2012, 07:45 PM | #112 | |||
Peter Car
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
|
Quote:
It would be different if the Americans decided to replace Focus with an imported, European made version, to replace the US made Focus. As for the Ranger, they previously had a unique US built Ranger that was placed under F series, but when the new Ranger was built they decided not to use it cause it was too close to F series, but the previous US made Ranger was ok. One Ford (Not unless its made here) is alive an well. If the new Ranger was going to be US or Mexican made it would probably be on sale there by now. I apologize for my cynicism, but i'm a bit over the way they preach One Ford, but it still seems that Ford North America can twist things to suit themselves. But I guess being a North American company and having the sales figures to back it up provides them that. Last edited by Bossxr8; 15-01-2012 at 07:51 PM. |
|||