![]() |
|
![]() |
#31 | |||
Peter Car
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
|
Quote:
How accurate is your info? |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#32 | ||
Peter Car
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
|
Seems to be what they did to the FG in June, a retune and a new cat.
Strange that the old Copperhead engine goes Euro 4 before the Orion does. Makes a mockery of the plan to switch to a V6 because it was so expensive to make the I6 Euro 4 compliant when the about to be superseeded engine can so easily make Euro 4. |
||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#33 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 3,246
|
Quote:
__________________
BA2 XR8 Rapid M6 Ute - Lid - Tint -18s 226.8rwkW@178kmh/537Nm@140kmh 1/9/2013 14.2@163kmh 23/10/2013 Boss349 built. Not yet run. Waiting on a shell. Retrotech thread http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...1363569&page=6 |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#34 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 3,246
|
Quote:
__________________
BA2 XR8 Rapid M6 Ute - Lid - Tint -18s 226.8rwkW@178kmh/537Nm@140kmh 1/9/2013 14.2@163kmh 23/10/2013 Boss349 built. Not yet run. Waiting on a shell. Retrotech thread http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...1363569&page=6 |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#35 | |||
Peter Car
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
|
Quote:
The reason they wanted the I6 gone was due to the fact they wanted to cut the number of different Ford/PAG 6 cylinder variants down from 9 to just 2, the V6 and the Volvo/LR 3.2 I6. But I guess now that LR is gone and Volvo isn't far off being sold that they will only have 2 6 cylinders soon, the V6 and I6. |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#36 | ||
Pity the fool
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Wait Awhile
Posts: 8,997
|
Still makes me wonder what is in store for the I6 in 2011...E4 is just the start of it.
__________________
Fords I own or have owned: 1970 XW Falcon GT replica ![]() Proud to buy Australian and support Ford Australia through thick and thin |
||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 2,296
|
Quote:
Regards, Dave
__________________
PoweredByCNG: Sick and tired of all the ignorant 'gas is crap' comments out there. |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#38 | |||
IWCMOGTVM Club Supporter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern Suburbs Melbourne
Posts: 17,798
|
Quote:
As has been said in many threads E5 is actually a small step from E4. I wouldn't be surprised if Ford could do it with port injection and the cast iron block.
__________________
Daniel |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#39 | ||
Lukeyson
![]() Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maitland, NSW
Posts: 2,580
|
To me, the step from SOHC to DOHC with VCT seems a MUCH bigger engineering task than the step from port injection to direct injection. 230Mil is a lot of money to spend on the engineering QA of fitting just 3 engines, so I reckon we'll either see Direct Injection on the I6 (although I expect they'll have to retain port-injection heads for the Liquid LPG variant), different body panels for the Falcon I4T (like Camry vs Aurion) OR Local assembly of the I4T engine.
But are we talking 3 x 16 engines here? ie, the original non-E4 190kW I6, the Orion upgraded plastic-intake non-E4 195kW I6, and now a single E4 compliant I6? Seems to me that the E4 barrier to putting a new engines in either existing or new models would be removed, and if I were running Ford, I would seek to converge the engine-line as soon as was possible. I have it in my head that E5 didn't have much of an impact on Spark Ignition engines, but was focussed on improvements in Compression Ignition vehicles. Lukeyson
__________________
If the human brain was simple enough to understand, we'd be too simple to understand it. |
||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#40 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 2,296
|
Quote:
Problem is, the Euro emissions norms do not take fuel consumption (read: CO2 emissions) into consideration and therefore, with the increase in stringency comes an increase in fuel consumption (claimed to be 10% per level on average). Regards, Dave
__________________
PoweredByCNG: Sick and tired of all the ignorant 'gas is crap' comments out there. |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#41 | ||||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,504
|
Quote:
See my previous post: Quote:
|
||||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#42 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 2,296
|
Like I said, the SINGLE biggest problem with diesel and direct petrol injection is emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx). Because spark ignition engines with direct injection run with a very lean air/fuel ratio, three-way catalytic converters (as used on indirect injection engines) on these engines would be inefficient at oxidising NOx due to the presence of oxygen in the exhaust.
While pre-cat NOx might be lower in these ultra-lean conditions due to lower combustion temperatures, post-cat NOx levels are higher. Regards, Dave
__________________
PoweredByCNG: Sick and tired of all the ignorant 'gas is crap' comments out there. |
||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |
![]() |
#43 | |||
Peter Car
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: geelong
Posts: 23,145
|
Quote:
So Ford will still need to engineer it for the different engine if they want to continue with it, as well as the 5 speed auto cause the 4 speed is most likely finished too. Not too much effort required but R&D costs Vs sales will decide wether it happens or not. Petrol engine could be made Euro 4 like the Territory as its practically the same, but fleets want LPG, not petrol, and LPG is the volume seller. |
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() |