Kuzak to decide fate of I6

[Road_Warrior]

It all hinges on the cost v volume of making the I6 Euro 5 compliant. Apparently.

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...2576AF000270E5

By JAMES STANFORD in Detroit

FORD global product development vice-president Derrick Kuzak says he is yet to make a decision on whether to upgrade the Australian Ford six-cylinder to meet upcoming Euro 5 emission standards.

The unique I6 engine and its Geelong production facility had been scheduled to be killed off this year and be replaced by an imported V6, with 400 jobs set to be lost.

One of the main reasons for this direction, apart from the fact that the proposed V6 was expected to be cheaper, was that Ford Australia would save money by not having to develop the engine to meet the Euro 4 emission standards this July.

Incoming Ford Australia president Marin Burela was able to push to have the decision reversed and announced a $21 million upgrade for the factory.

A new deadline is looming for the venerable powerplant, with a federal government draft report prepared by the transport department recommending the Euro 5 emissions standard be introduced in Australia between 2012 and 2014. The deadline for petrol engines, including the Ford Australia I6, should the report be approved and legislated, would be 2013.

With a new Falcon due in late 2014 or 2015, which is almost certain to run on a global platform not designed for an in-line six, the long-term future of the I6 engine is bleak, although there is always a chance the plant could be re-tooled to produce new engines.

GoAuto asked Mr Kuzak about the future of the I6 engine plant in light of low volume. "These are decisions around customers and the business and we do have installed investment in terms of facility and engineering," he said.

"You are right, it is relatively low volume, so what we will do is compare the cost of upgrading to the latest emission standards versus trying to do a higher volume engine that is not installed in Australia and would obviously have to be shipped.

“We will have to look at the whole business case."

Mr Kuzak stressed he was not aware of the details of the study into introduction of Euro 5 emissions standards in Australia, which had been released just days before the interview, but added that Ford had known the new regulations would be coming up.

"As you might guess, I already started down analysis recognising that there was going to be an emissions upgrade coming," he said.

"But I can tell you that we haven’t made the decision yet because we don’t have to make it yet."

In the same interview, Mr Kuzak talked up the Asia Pacific engineering centre, based at Ford Australia's Campbellfield headquarters, which is working on the global T6 ute program, and said that it would have a long-term role for Ford globally.

Asked if this engineering centre could continue if Ford Australia ceased local production, Mr Kuzak said: "We clearly have a great deal of confidence in that team. You look at the Asia Pacific area and the most experienced product development team we have is the Australians.

"So they are already serving a role for us which I would almost call the left-hand side engineering, core engineering expertise for all systems for all of Asia Pacific.

“Australian engineering is a core product development centre for us and I see nothing in the future that is going to change that."

Nothing we didn't sort of know about anyway, the I6 is going to be gone sooner or later, especially for the next gen Falcon but its interesting to read that snippet about another application for the I6 - seems they are still talking about it.

[Wretched]

With a new Falcon due in late 2014 or 2015, which is almost certain to run on a global platform not designed for an in-line six, the long-term future of the I6 engine is bleak, although there is always a chance the plant could be re-tooled to produce new engines.

The quote there is interesting, basically the I6 was doomed long ago before Euro 5. I'd say Ford have the Duratec/EB engines ready to go and are possibly using Euro compliance as a scapegoat for the decommissioning of the I6?

[Paxton]

Originally Posted by Wretched

The quote there is interesting, basically the I6 was doomed long ago before Euro 5. I'd say Ford have the Duratec/EB engines ready to go and are possibly using Euro compliance as a scapegoat for the decommissioning of the I6?

Wouldn't be the first time, however, in principal, the I6 makes Euro IV. Whether the emissions gear it has attached to it is able to last the full 160,000 KMs is another matter.

I still have hope. Stranger things have happened - remember November 2008?

[phillyc]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...2576AF000270E5

Road Warrior. Thanks for the link.

What i did pick up was this.

Originally Posted by go auto

In the same interview, Mr Kuzak talked up the Asia Pacific engineering centre, based at Ford Australia's Campbellfield headquarters, which is working on the global T6 ute program, and said that it would have a long-term role for Ford globally.

Asked if this engineering centre could continue if Ford Australia ceased local production, Mr Kuzak said: "We clearly have a great deal of confidence in that team. You look at the Asia Pacific area and the most experienced product development team we have is the Australians."

"So they are already serving a role for us which I would almost call the left-hand side engineering, core engineering expertise for all systems for all of Asia Pacific.

“Australian engineering is a core product development centre for us and I see nothing in the future that is going to change that."

Most experienced product development team. Core product development centre. Left hand side engineering.

Was that last one a mistake or slip of the tongue about GRWD?!

[4Vman]

The way i see it is that if we want to keep a RWD Falcon type vehicle on our roads sadly the I6 cant possibly survive..

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Paxton

Wouldn't be the first time, however, in principal, the I6 makes Euro IV.

Its better then Euro IV but you already knew that.

[Paxton]

Originally Posted by vztrt

Its better then Euro IV but you already knew that.

Bugger. I meant Euro V.

Longevity will be the killer.

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Paxton

Bugger. I meant Euro V.

Longevity will be the killer.

I agree, but engines have been very good with Falcons....seems to be diffs and tranny's that were failing.

[Road_Warrior]

I find it difficult to accept that the I6 will struggle to meet 160,000klm of service. Is this because of mixtures causing problems or something to do with the actual emissions control hardware?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

I find it difficult to accept that the I6 will struggle to meet 160,000klm of service. Is this because of mixtures causing problems or something to do with the actual emissions control hardware?

I agree, I would believe it to be more with the emissions hardware.

[Nikked]

It will be sad to see the I6 go, but it must...fords global plan call for Fewer engines, the 2015 will get a V6. It will be desinged to take one, as it's almost set that the Falcon will some how be global.

All we can hope for is a limited run of 400kw F6's in celebration!

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

I find it difficult to accept that the I6 will struggle to meet 160,000klm of service. Is this because of mixtures causing problems or something to do with the actual emissions control hardware?

Under Euro 4 compliance, Ford has to guarantee emission levels for 100,000 km

Under Euro 5 and 6 compliance, Ford has to guarantee even tighter emission levels for 160,000 km

By contrast Holden's SIDI V6 engines and Ford's Duratec V6s
all comply to at least Euro 6 and US tier 2 Bin 5 regulations.

[fromBAonwards]

i want the I6 to continue and be the biggest SEDAN produced engine on Earth!
does anybody know FG series II specs? over 200kW? 400Nm+ standard? any clues?

[cosmo20btt]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

I find it difficult to accept that the I6 will struggle to meet 160,000klm of service. Is this because of mixtures causing problems or something to do with the actual emissions control hardware?

I don't think the engine is going to blow up in 160000k's, all that will happen is it will not meet the EUV that's all. It will be about tune & being able to hold it.

[jpd80]

If the Falcon teaches us anything, it's never, never, never, give up.

It will be here long after the Zeta is in the tip and GM moves onto something else....

[Mark351]

If you take what Mullaly said about not building a vehicle for one country, and Falcon does end up being a twin to the Mustang in some form, I think this would extend to the engine as well and we'll share Mustang powerplants. Ford US is unlikely to put the I6 in a US Mustang (though I'm sure they'd love the turbo version) so while the I6 was kept alive for a short time I do think it's destined for retirement soon.

[fromBAonwards]

but I6 is the engine that can last for ever? I have seen EF taxies with over 800000 on clock and still giving the same cars of similar caliber that cost four times more a go for the cash.

Why not keep the I6, it is a superior design , naturally balanced, smooth harmonics, cool engine that does not tend to have overheating issues, has lots of torque and so much room for progress?
And in relation to the I6, if an american police cruiser Ford Crown Victoria was to try and do a pit manouver on say a stock XT 4.0L DOHC which ever variant, it would have no chance with its 4.6L 2v and 3v engine ... only 5.4L would do some damage, like the new spec crown vic with 6 speed auto and 5.4L modular "BARRA220" F-150 engine.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by fromBAonwards

but I6 is the engine that can last for ever? I have seen EF taxies with over 800000 on clock and still giving the same cars of similar caliber that cost four times more a go for the cash.

Why not keep the I6, it is a superior design , naturally balanced, smooth harmonics, cool engine that does not tend to have overheating issues, has lots of torque and so much room for progress?
And in relation to the I6, if an american police cruiser Ford Crown Victoria was to try and do a pit manouver on say a stock XT 4.0L DOHC which ever variant, it would have no chance with its 4.6L 2v and 3v engine ... only 5.4L would do some damage, like the new spec crown vic with 6 speed auto and 5.4L modular "BARRA220" F-150 engine.

Packaging issues among other technology issues prevent it from being a versatile enough engine to be used in a range of vehicles within the Ford family.
They already have built a decent replacements for the I6, the Duratec and EcoBoost engines are nothing to sneeze at and are certainly showing their worth.

[Chopped]

It doesn't fit back in when you turn it sideways !!

[cosmo20btt]

Question mark will remain if service or repairs of EB motors, will parts sky rocket & service times will increase with the complex nature of EB motors. especially with twin hidden turbos people should check on nissan repair times for R&R of one or two turbos of the 300xz engines. These would be quite similar.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by cosmo20btt

Question mark will remain if service or repairs of EB motors, will parts sky rocket & service times will increase with the complex nature of EB motors. especially with twin hidden turbos people should check on nissan repair times for R&R of one or two turbos of the 300xz engines. These would be quite similar.

Apples and Oranges.

[fromBAonwards]

hmm i know, i respect what Ford has to offer , but still i think the Falcon is a car that needs to have a big motor physically. Why can't they just build a 4.0L V6?

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by fromBAonwards

hmm i know, i respect what Ford has to offer , but still i think the Falcon is a car that needs to have a big motor physically. Why can't they just build a 4.0L V6?

Why?
What is wrong with going with engines that are far more efficient, that can do the task of a larger displacement engine without the extra weight and size to go with it?

I'd rather Ford advance with the technologies that are available than to stick with the past.

[cosmo20btt]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Apples and Oranges.

I suppose it does not matter right away, how ever in say 2016 AFF will see a whole new bunch of whingers on line complaining about the telephone number at the end of their service bill, twin turbo technology has not always been popular in Australia because of our heat here & our dust, mixed with two little turbos, that is why the Japanese steered clear of Australia with certain imports.

[fromBAonwards]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Why?
What is wrong with going with engines that are far more efficient, that can do the task of a larger displacement engine without the extra weight and size to go with it?

I'd rather Ford advance with the technologies that are available than to stick with the past.

well , put it this way i do acknowledge what you're saying, it is just that it would be very difficult to separate emotionally from a car.
How would you feel to say drive the same car the same guise with an I6 in it and then all of a sudden there is an identical guise but with some 3.5 or 3.7L V6 next to ya, sure who cares its that other drivers problem, their life, their choice, it certainly wont put the food on my table, but you'd feel sorry for the poor bugger driving the same care on just 330Nm or may be 360Nm where you're in your FG I6 at 420Nm and over 200kW, well may be 10-15kW shorter of them, but hey 60Nm+.

It would be a very difficult ethical decision. So i think i might just stop worrying and settle down for something classic and rare, say EL GT 1997 5.0L, only 200kW/420Nm, but its a V8 and it sounds great.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by fromBAonwards

well , put it this way i do acknowledge what you're saying, it is just that it would be very difficult to separate emotionally from a car.
How would you feel to say drive the same car the same guise with an I6 in it and then all of a sudden there is an identical guise but with some 3.5 or 3.7L V6 next to ya, sure who cares its that other drivers problem, their life, their choice, it certainly wont put the food on my table, but you'd feel sorry for the poor bugger driving the same care on just 330Nm or may be 360Nm where you're in your FG I6 at 420Nm and over 200kW, well may be 10-15kW shorter of them, but hey 60Nm+.

It would be a very difficult ethical decision. So i think i might just stop worrying and settle down for something classic and rare, say EL GT 1997 5.0L, only 200kW/420Nm, but its a V8 and it sounds great.

I don't think the future owner would care that much. They would have purchased the car based on a test drive.

As I said with much more efficient drivetrain and lighter materials, the small power deficiency would be offset by the lighter more efficient engine/transmission.