|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
16-10-2011, 09:42 AM
|
#32 | |||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 11,412
|
Quote:
If Ford did put the V6 diesel in Falcon, achieved 6.8 l/100 klm and all the I-6 buyers switched, that would be a disaster. Now the knee jerk response would be"WTF? a 6.8 l/100 km Falcon has to be great for business" but perhaps not so..... Ford's goal has to be adding products, not to replace them and cause the I-6 to become redundant, not yet anyway..... That's why I understand Ford punting for EcoLPI and Ecoboost 2.0, they both add to production, not replace I-6 petrol. It's just so alluring to see something like Jaguar XF with a version of T6's 2.2 diesel and stop start getting 5.5 l/100 km and know FoA could do that too... Last edited by jpd80; 16-10-2011 at 09:49 AM. |
|||
|
|
Re: Uncomfortably accurate...
Threaded Mode