jpd80 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 (edited) LINK Ford Australia has shelved plans to replace the Falcon's ageing in-line six-cylinder enginewith an imported V6 in 2010, guaranteeing the jobs of 600 workers at its Geelong engine plant until at least 2013. The plant was scheduled to close in 2010, but Ford has instead opted to upgrade the existing engine to Euro IV emissions standards, extending the lifespan of the decades-old engine. The announcement is a rare piece of good news for the beleagured manufacturer, which is reeling from poor sales of its all-new Falcon and a dramatic slump in the new car market since June. Just last month, the manufacturer announced plans to axe 450 jobs from its Victorian operations. The cuts, which affected both factory workers and office staff, followed the August axeing of 350 jobs in manufacturing as the company slowed its daily production rate to better match the downturn in car sales. That production slowdown came into effect this month, with the company cutting its manufacturing output by a quarter, or roughly 18,000 cars a year. In July last year, Ford announced that 600 jobs would be shed from its Geelong operations when its engine plant closed in 2010 to make way for an imported V6 engine in its Falcon sedan and ute and Territory offroader. That decision has now been overturned. Ford Australia president Marin Burela told a press conference this morning that the announcement was about investment and job security, as well as "taking the rights steps forward in terms of environmental stewardship". "I'm very proud to advise that we will not be closing the Geelong operations. We will continue to invest to make sure the facilities are viable into the next decade." he said. "This is a great, great day for the people of Geelong, a great day for the people of Ford and a great day for the people of Australia generally," he said. "We've worked very very hard over the last few months on the technical advances we need to make this a reality. It was the right thing to do and this was the time to do it. "It's time that we consider our business in a slightly different way. Let's look at that glass and say ... it's half full. Our job and our responsibility is to look at ways to fill it. I'm absolutely confident that here in Australia we have the knowledge, the understanding ... to do that." Victorian Premier John Brumby called the Ford decision "an extraordinarily positive announcement". "Over the last year there have been extraordinarily difficult circumstances. This decision today is the first step - a big first step - in turning things around," he said. He said Victoria accounted for 57 per cent of Australia's total automotive production. "We want to be the heart of manufacturing in Australia and we want to be the heart of the autolmotive industry. "It's a $21 million investment. In comes on top of a $200 million investment by the Ford Motor Company. "This announcement today couldn't have occurred without the Federal Goverment's car plan and discussion between Federal and State governments. This is such a positive step." Ford employs 4500 people in Geelong and Broadmeadows, with about 2500 in manufacturing. The Federal Government recently unveiled a $6 billion rescue plan for the local industry, which is feeling the effects of a shift from locally-built large cars to more economical, imported alternatives. New car sales in October were down 11 per cent on the same month last year, with large cars feeling the effects more than most. :happy feet: Edited November 20, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Cheaper to slap a band aid on it for now ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 20, 2008 Author Share Posted November 20, 2008 (edited) At the time in July 2007, FoA thought upgrading the Inline six to Euro IV would cost too much but with new technology, it only costs $21 million which is covered by an Australian Government grant, that was deactivated when Geelong Engine closure was announced. That grant is now reactivated. Although the engine has never been considered for F150, Mustang or Crown Victoria, it would make a superb addition both in naturally aspirated and Turbo versions. From goauto.com.auThe changes needed to bring the I6 engine up to Euro IV standard were largely locked in place when Ford Australia announced its decision to kill off the engine. Those plans have now been dusted-off, while some new technology that has come to light in the last year from elsewhere in the Ford world will be incorporated into the design. No major changes will be made to the existing engine for it to comply with the new environmental standard. GoAuto understands the upgrade will focus on injection, calibration and exhaust, and company sources have confirmed the work will not involve moving to a direct injection system. From carpoint.com.au Firstly, there was the obvious question -- what changes are necessary for the six to achieve Euro IV certification? "There [is] a whole range of improvements in engine technology that have allowed us to do this, including the implementation of latest catalyst technology. Also we now have the availability of optimised engine control software and calibrations. And we've also significantly invested in upgrading our CAE (Computer-Aided Engineering) modelling techniques -- all of which have brought us to the conclusion that we can engineer this engine for Euro IV, whereas back in July 2007, we thought that was going to be too difficult to do and would require too much investment." From what McAlary says then, the technology has advanced so quickly in just the short time since the original announcement, what was not viable 18 months ago is now. That suggests that the immediate near future could have been foreseen at the time, but the company went ahead with the decision to close the plant nonetheless. Was there more at play than just the question of cost? Does having a new President who is a Geelong native make a difference? We may never know... "It was a very difficult decision [last year] and it was one that everyone wrestled with for a long time, but we really thought at that time last year it was the right option and we obviously communicated that to our employees accordingly," says McAlary. "At the time, we also said to our employees that we're not going to give up; 'We're going to keep working and if we can come up with a way to do this, we will'. That's what we've managed to do." It's tempting to presume that the Green Car Innovation Fund was a major motivating force in the decision to persevere with the inline six, but that's no so. "Keeping the engine plant and engineering it for Euro IV, Ford is investing $21 million..." McAlary explains. Edited November 20, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemiman Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 :happy feet: AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Best move Ive seen out of Ford in months. Now let's ship them here as an option in the Stang! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Best move Ive seen out of Ford in months. Now let's ship them here as an option in the Stang! Doubt they would fit without some reworking. I've got no problems with the 3.5 Duratec that will be in it next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemiman Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Doubt they would fit without some reworking. I've got no problems with the 3.5 Duratec that will be in it next year. 3.5 is a great engine. I'm just a big fan of the I-6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White99GT Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Man, this company is so erratic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Knowing what we know about the Aus 4.0L I-6, it will be interesting to see what happens if they can get the new low oil volume cam phasing system applied to its head and also possibly move it to GDI at some point in the future. I'm afraid that GDI would likely be quite expensive since it would involve almost completely redisigning the combustion chamber for optimum burn and placing the injector into the chamber roof. However, in doing so, it would make an already great engine phenomenal. Currently, its at 261 HP and 288 lbs of torque N/A. That torque number is especially good for a 6 cylinder of that displacement. In comparison, the 4.2L GM I6 in the Trailblazer is a newer design and doesn't make the same torque to displacement ratio, though, it does slightly better in the HP department. Using good GDI design and tuning principles, a GDI Barra 4.0L would make about 290 HP and 315 lbs of torque without making any other breathing modifications. Optimizing for HP a bit more in the tune could make it a 300 HP / 305 tq engine, which would be great for marketing purposes. If they are happy with the existing power levels for the base engine, a destroked version of the GDI setup at around 3.5L could make the same power and, when combined with the low oil volume Cam phasing tech, likely result in an engine that is 7-10% more efficient. If they are planning to keep the engine for another half decade and possibly longer, though, it seems sensible to at least investigate what it would take to apply the EcoBoost design and layout principles to the engine and see if something like that is possible. The existing turbo setup is 329 HP and 354 tq. A full ecoboost setup could likely achieve 350+ hp, 375+ tq and improve on the laready good gas mileage of the existing setup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Doubt they would fit without some reworking. I've got no problems with the 3.5 Duratec that will be in it next year. Are we positive at this point that it will be the 3.5? I was really hoping for the 3.7 myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Are we positive at this point that it will be the 3.5? I was really hoping for the 3.7 myself. You're not talking about a whole lot of difference in power or fuel economy either way. I don't really care which one they go with. Either of them are a marked improvement over the V6's Ford has shoved into it for the past several decades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 You're not talking about a whole lot of difference in power or fuel economy either way. I don't really care which one they go with. Either of them are a marked improvement over the V6's Ford has shoved into it for the past several decades. Big difference in torque... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 Big difference in torque... It's noticable, but I don't think using the 3.5 instead of the 3.7 would be a deal-breaker for too many people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Versa-Tech Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 It's noticable, but I don't think using the 3.5 instead of the 3.7 would be a deal-breaker for too many people. Good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 20, 2008 Author Share Posted November 20, 2008 (edited) Falcon V6 validation prototype was a 3.7 and Ford 6-speed auto - ZF is incompatible with V6. I guess some Ford exec will have a unique car......... Fitting the V6 and then changing their mind was all FoA's idea - Mulally and Kuzak played no part. FoA honestly thought the upgrade on the cold start cycle on the I-6 was going to be very expensive. Turns out the new cam phasers can work down at idle which really helps, slight changes to calibration and injection mapping does the rest. Aussie Government grant picks up the bulk of the cost - $21M. For those of you thinking direct injection is needed, FoA have ruled that one out - for now. Side entry DI like FNA uses is possible and feasible but until then, we'll make do with 360/400 hp turbo. Aussie I-6 has 290 lbft of torque available from 2500 rpm and punches all the way to 260 hp @6000, mid range torque is like a 4.6, and fuel economy is slightly better than GM HF V6 Commodore (G8) Edited November 20, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_the_limey Posted November 20, 2008 Share Posted November 20, 2008 I guess the Aussie Dollar's fall has played a large part in the decision to resurrect it. Anyway definitely good news for FoA and all those I6 fans, it might just make Euro 5 yet! Old_fairmont_wagon: Unfortunately those BorgWarner Cam-Torque-Actuated (low-oil flow) cam phasers don't work very well with I6's. The CTA system needs a "lumpy" camshaft to create enough hydraulic pressure to swap the oil in the cam-phaser chambers. A V6 will have this because it two banks of three cylinders, but the the torque fluctuations in an I6 is just too smooth for it to work effectively. BorgWarner do have a "Torsional-Assist" cam-phaser, which helps reduce oil demand over conventional VCTs, but it's not quite in the same ballpark as the CTA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 (edited) Seems the only problem with meeting Euro 4 ( presumably 5 and 6) was the cold start cycle. FoA had originally laid out what ws needed but thought it might have been very expensive: LINKFirstly, there was the obvious question -- what changes are necessary for the six to achieve Euro IV certification? "There [is] a whole range of improvements in engine technology that have allowed us to do this, including the implementation of latest catalyst technology. Also we now have the availability of optimised engine control software and calibrations. And we've also significantly invested in upgrading our CAE (Computer-Aided Engineering) modelling techniques -- all of which have brought us to the conclusion that we can engineer this engine for Euro IV, whereas back in July 2007, we thought that was going to be too difficult to do and would require too much investment." From what McAlary says then, the technology has advanced so quickly in just the short time since the original announcement, what was not viable 18 months ago is now. That suggests that the immediate near future could have been foreseen at the time, but the company went ahead with the decision to close the plant nonetheless. Was there more at play than just the question of cost? Does having a new President who is a Geelong native make a difference? We may never know... Edited November 21, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 This is all very interesting. I like that idea about the F150 and Mustang. What are the dimensions of the Falcon I6 versus the D3x? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 (edited) This is all very interesting. I like that idea about the F150 and Mustang. What are the dimensions of the Falcon I6 versus the D3x? Not sure what you mean but the Falcon is engineered to take the I-6 and the 5.4 4V engines. So by inference, the Falcon could be built with the Mustang V6 and V8 engines if Ford wanted to. A V6 Diesel is on the way for the Territory CUV and a Prototype 3.7 V6 Falcon was made recently. Now that the V6 Falcon that's not happening in Australia, it could be handed over to FNA to complete as a LHD for domestic production there - I hope is they will do something with it, easy engineering!!! Edited November 21, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
papilgee4evaeva Posted November 21, 2008 Share Posted November 21, 2008 Not sure what you mean but the Falcon is engineered to take the I-6 and the 5.4 4V engines.So by inference, the Falcon could be built with the Mustang V6 and V8 engines if Ford wanted to. A V6 Diesel is on the way for the Territory CUV and a Prototype 3.7 V6 Falcon was made recently. Now that the V6 Falcon that's not happening in Australia, it could be handed over to FNA to complete as a LHD for domestic production there - I hope is they will do something with it, easy engineering!!! I figured that a V8 could fit in the space for an I6 (see BMW, and even Volvo S80). But I was thinking the other way around... could a Mustang possibly fit the I6? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 21, 2008 Author Share Posted November 21, 2008 (edited) I figured that a V8 could fit in the space for an I6 (see BMW, and even Volvo S80). But I was thinking the other way around... could a Mustang possibly fit the I6? Mustang fitted with the XR6 Turbo engine - a vision harboured by a few diehard Aussie Ford fans. This clip will give you a bit of a look under the Falcon's hood FG XR6 TURBO DYNO TUNED BY BTA MOTORSPORTS Edited November 21, 2008 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.