Ford plans to have a four-cylinder engine available on every car it sells by 2013.

[csv8]

Ford plans to have a four-cylinder engine available on every car it sells by 2013. By RICHARD BLACKBURN.

The Ford Falcon and Territory will be sold with four-cylinder engines within four years as part of a wide-ranging plan by the Blue Oval to reduce its environmental footprint.

Ford’s global product boss Derek Kuzak has told US-based trade publication Automotive News that the company intends to have a four-cylinder engine available in every car in its line-up by 2013.

Kuzak told the publication that even the company’s hulking F-150 pick-up truck and Mustang sports car could be in line for the smaller, more efficient engines.

Ford plans to rely heavily on turbocharged, smaller-capacity engines, matched to dual-clutch transmissions, to reduce its fleet’s average fuel consumption in coming years.

For trucks and sports cars, that is likely to mean the twin-turbo V6 that was originally planned for the Falcon but scrapped recently in favour of retaining the Geelong-built in-line six-cylinder.

But for everything else, it will mean a turbocharged four-cylinder.

Ford claims the turbo four can produce the power of a normal V6 with four-cylinder fuel consumption, while the V6 can match V8 performance while delivering V6-rivalling consumption.

Ford plans to sell 500,000 four-cylinder turbos and 250,000 twin-turbo sixes a year by 2013.

“We’re all about the smaller displacement as a way to drive significant fuel economy without sacrificing performance,” Kuzak told Automotive News.

Ford spokeswoman Sinead McAlary says the local operation is looking at a number of alternative engine options for its locally produced vehicles.

“There are lots of things we are looking at. These smaller (turbo) engines deliver similar power and performance to six-cylinder engines, so they’re obviously an attractive option, but we’re looking at a number of alternatives,” she says.

However, Ford Australia is likely to come under increasing pressure to fall into line with Detroit, as Ford boss Alan Mulally has made it clear he wants to build global products.


That makes the future less than rosy for the Falcon and Territory, whose rear-wheel-drive underpinnings and dated straight-six engines have little in common with the rest of the Ford line-up.

Mulally has already flagged that the next Falcon could be front-wheel drive, and with Kuzak confirming the four-cylinder engine plans, it seems that the post-2013 Falcon and Territory will be very different beasts to their 2009 predecessors, if they exist at all.

McAlary dismisses suggestions the four-cylinder push is another nail in the Falcon’s coffin.

“It isn’t past its use-by date yet,” she says.

[Black F6]

Thats not very good at all, no way i would buy a front wheel drive, 4cyl falcon, they have got to be kidding, dont they????

[Fairlane]

Why would anyone buy a 4cylinder Falcon?

If you wanted a 4 cylinder big Ford you would just buy a Mondeo.

[nugget378]

Its a good idea IMO, and would open up falcon/territory to buyers that wouldnt normally consider one.
Not everyone cares whats under the bonnet, most people just want an economical daily drive.

[CSV_LS1]

4cyl turbo is a good move i think. With all the technology they can put together in a small engine these days a 200kw 4 with a flat torque curve is possible. Merc and BMW have been running small engines in their E's and 5's for a long time. I think it will be a winner, especially with fleet.
Also i would think if ford had to use a global platform and went FWD, they would likely have it on base models and have AWD for the higher models like the Taurus SHO is.

[Serial_Fool]

Every lower displacemnt engine introduced into locally made Falcadores has been a failure with the buying public. Think of the 4 cyclinder early Commodores or the 3.2 CFI EA.

People wanting a 4 cylinder sized car would buy a Mondeo/Focus.

[CSV_LS1]

Times change and these new engine won't be gutless wonders either.

[Cappy_Hamper]

Holden tried and failed with the starfire (misfire) in the Dunnydore years ago, Aussie blokes want big sixes and V8's.
Imagine a 4 banga revving its turbo'ed ring out to keep up with an 8. "Whats that on the floor back there? oh just my crank shaft......"

[Dezza]

It's not displacement that makes the biggest impact on fuel economy. It's the weight of the car. That's why the Camry uses as much fuel if not more than a 6 cylinder Falcon. The straight 6 is just such a torquey engine, it doesn't really have to work hard to get to speed. This is great for fuel economy. A little 4 banger on the other hand needs to be worked a lot harder to get to speed. This is why the Starfire was such a failure. It had no power, and drained the juice. A 3.2 litre EA was the same.

[Mr Hardware]

It's not displacement that makes the biggest impact on fuel economy. It's the weight of the car. That's why the Camry uses as much fuel if not more than a 6 cylinder Falcon. The straight 6 is just such a torquey engine, it doesn't really have to work hard to get to speed. This is great for fuel economy. A little 4 banger on the other hand needs to be worked a lot harder to get to speed. This is why the Starfire was such a failure. It had no power, and drained the juice. A 3.2 litre EA was the same.

Quoted for absolute truth.
The only 4-cyl they should drop in is a massive 3L+ Turbo Diesel 4-cyl with pistons the size of 44-gallon drums. That's the only time a 4cyl will be viable in a falc/tezza.

[CSV_LS1]

Having a 4cyl in the front end will no boubt reduce it's kerb weight a bit.

For comparison. A falcon XT currently weighs in @1704kg. Compared to a Merc E200 Compressor at 1580kg featuring a 1.8 litre supercharged 4cyl.

Combined cycle on the Merc is 8.6L p/100km compared to the Ford of 10.1@ p/100km. Although the Merc does only have 135kw. While their 3 litre averages 9.7 with 170kw and weighs 1660kg

[blueoval]

turbo diesel 4 or turbo petrol 6 is a good option IMO.

The people that will disagree will be us enthusiasts. Most of the general public dont care about big donks anymore sadly.

[Road_Warrior]

How about a low-boost, de-stroked turbo I6? Say de-stroked to 3.2L (hurrr) with a low boost version of the XR6T's setup?

[dave289]

While I personally dont like the idea of a 4 cylinder falcon, I think in general it is probably is a good idea. times change ,as nugget said this would open up to buyers that would not have bought before because of fuel consumption mainly.you can have big fours of 3.0 turbo diesel as mentioned would put out way more power than some of yesteryears v8,s, like the vl 5.0 which put out a measley 125kw. If it means more sales for ford then I'm all for it.

[jphanna]

There are a few factors why a 4CYL Falc is being contemplated today. We all know that based on previous experience (and current if you include the camry..) that it doesn’t save any fuel and crappy to drive. But when holden (GM) tried it with the commodore, they were not on the brink of collapse as they are now. The Big 2 are in trouble like never before and desperate times call for desperate measures

Reaons for trying it again

1. Green vote (perceived saving of greenhouse gasses etc)
2. Fuel usage (perceived saving of fuel….like hell it is)

The Prius uses all this amazing hybrid technology to get down to 5.9 LP100 Kms
Take away all the electrics and batteries etc and it would be that much lighter and use less fuel just as a 1500cc petrol engine car.

[eyes87]

i think parts of it are a good idea. i like the sound of the ttv6 but couldn't stand the idea of a fwd falcon. would they still have a v8 version available? it would be terrible if they got rid of that.

[blueoval]

If they kept a FWD base model, and introduced a AWD performance model, I think this could work. But FWD thru-out the whole line up is collapse waiting to happen.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by blueoval

If they kept a FWD base model, and introduced a AWD performance model, I think this could work.

You mean like the new Taurus? Oh wai -

[blueoval]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

You mean like the new Taurus? Oh wai -

lol. hmm yeah I know what your saying. But lets face it, what other viable options are there that will keep ford continuing on?

[dsyfer]

I'm waiting for the XRe

Hydrogen fuel-cell electric Falcon.

[alter_EGOXR]

Originally Posted by Dezza!

It's not displacement that makes the biggest impact on fuel economy. It's the weight of the car. That's why the Camry uses as much fuel if not more than a 6 cylinder Falcon. The straight 6 is just such a torquey engine, it doesn't really have to work hard to get to speed. This is great for fuel economy. A little 4 banger on the other hand needs to be worked a lot harder to get to speed. This is why the Starfire was such a failure. It had no power, and drained the juice. A 3.2 litre EA was the same.

Well said.. Thats exactly what they need to take into consideration..and i can second that :P..mums 2.2L camry is less economical compared to my 4L falcon...i say keep the inline six and whatever you do..Ford please dont make the falcon a FWD car...I think it would be wise if they offered a 4cyl option ...

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by hemank

Well said.. Thats exactly what they need to take into consideration..and i can second that :P..mums 2.2L camry is less economical compared to my 4L falcon...i say keep the inline six and whatever you do..Ford please dont make the falcon a FWD car...I think it would be wise if they offered a 4cyl option ...

As long as that 4cyl option is a diesel.

[nugget378]

A 4cyl falcon should have some decent weight savings, and would have to,to be worthwhile, while the current turbo six is nice, geez it sucks some fuel during city cycle driving.


if you could cut this fuel usage in half with a smaller engine and weight savings, it would go a long way to help make it more appealling to the general non car enthusiast public..This would have to be a positive for future sales.

[Kieron]

I don't see any issues with a 4 potter Falcon, i'd suggest this would be the stock engine and optional 6's/blown 6's and maybe V8's will still be around for us car types.

Its probably not right to bring up the Starfire, this was a knee jerk reaction to the energy crisis back then. A 4 pot Falc will have a well thought out, modern world 4 pot motor.

The EA 3.2 was just as good as the outgoing 4.1 Falcon IIRC, the reason why it wasn't successful is Holden lifted the bar with the MPEFI 3.8 and Ford essentially had to match.

[Ghiadude]

a 4L 6cyl with 2 cylinders cut off will be 2.67lts in capacity. (4000x0.6666) Ideal i reckon..........

[Nikked]

This is only a good thing. That is, if the 4cyl is A turbo deisel

[Fairlane]

Originally Posted by tx3dude

a 4L 6cyl with 2 cylinders cut off will be 2.67lts in capacity. (4000x0.6666) Ideal i reckon..........

Big Pot 4's are bloody awful. There is yet to be made any 4cylinder over 2.4l in capacity that is any good- the balance is just off and they can never be made to run smooth or revvy. You'd end with with something like the Astron 2.6l ie bloody awful, the power of a 4 with the economy of a 6.

Personally id prefer Ford do a destroked 6 cylinder, i think its time to revisit a 2.6l or 2.8l I6 Falcon, after all the original falcons were only 140cu and 170cu, and with todays Direct Injection technology you could actually make them torquey and economical. The 4 just wouldnt work youd need a 2.5l 4 just to move a Falcon, it would be rough, gruff and would save sod all fuel.

[blueoval]

what about as turbo diesel? Could a 2.4-2.5L 4cyl be good in boosted diesel platform? Could Ford do something similar to that of a TD Navara/Pathfinder?

[Nikked]

I don't buy the rumours of the FWD thing, One of the main points of the falcon is that it's RWD. The option of a 4cly is there to open up the scope of the car.

Some people make comments about "gutless wonders" but the person who wants a 4cyl falcon arn't really looking for a powerful car arn't they? Only Single minded people will see this as a stupid move

Given that ford have some good technology now. The TDCi 16v 2.5 L Puma engine from the ranger series would be perfect for the falcon 105 kW and 330 N·m.

*Edit
The PSA DW 2.2 TDCi has 129 kW 400 N·m, cant argue with that!

[vztrt]

Just a thought, the XR5 Volvo engine might be an option.