jpd80

The free market always gave the US a free pass on cheap fuel while everyone else developed far more fuel efficient cars. Americans still buy gas guzzlers, they've just changed shape. rather than big passenger cars, people buy SUVs and F Trucks and CUVs, Ford Alone 150K/month Trucks and SUVs Vs 60K/month Cars a and CUVs. No other country on the planet has a production mix like that. i'll agree, averaging you 30+ MPG is so hard that Ford, GM, Chrysler and Toyota were lobbying against any such proposal in congress. For all that, most manufacturers struggle with the 27.5 MPG CAFE Limit because domestic and imported cars from the same manufacturer are in seperate groups. Ford NA admits building the Focus to off set its other thirsty vehicles, it even loses $3,000/car doing it. Bob Lutz was squealling about getting CAFE up to 34 MPG so to the big four, this is a mighty mountain to climb corporate wise. Plans laid down four years ago need to be adjusted or scrapped completely.

More like wizzard of OZ, This ain't Kansas Toto.

It confirms that an outsider like Alan Mulally was needed to unravel all the self serving beaurocracy built up in Ford. Hard to imagine a place where "Captain Obvious" would save billions. Staggering beyond belief!

Funny thing about intertwined beaurocracy, if you get rid of the right parts, the rest withers and dies too. We'll never know just how much Ford sabotaged itself internally, maybe the light at the end of the tunnel has been switched on again.

While Ford Australia will be out to impress Derrick Kuzack with the next Falcon, rumors are also flying about supplimenting the Brodmeadow's production line with another vehicle The hot tip is the Focus, which along with the Falcon and Territory ranges make up the bulk of FoA's sale. This biased Aussie hopes for both an export contract for the Falcon to the Middle East and local Focus production.

It's no wonder Ford takes so long to bring models to production, it seems like one big meeting-a-thon where engineers have to justify every move they make. How many good minds gave up over the years and left, tired of beaurocratic bungling. It sounds very much like what old Henry Ford used to do, his failing to relinquish to control of everything, all stemming from not trusting subordinates. It's good to see both Mulally and Kuzack are getting to the heart of problems in Ford, there's nothing worse than a superficial gloss over problems - that would be an inspiration killer. Funny how we can see it's vital to let engineers engineer but Ford needs to stop all of these silly time and resource wasting processes. Another good move would be to revisit the design and engineering philosophy initiated during the early 1980s on the original Taurus project. Ford could find no better model than what those guys did, it showed in their product being well designed, engineered and ahead of the competition.

China is going through a massive infrastructure build up that will continue for years, why? because the have the cash to sustain the development, underpinned by masssive private citizen savings. The way they're consuming coal, oil, producing steel, building cities and factories, they must be pouring out CO2 like crazy.

The restriction only applies if an export model has the I6. If a US engine like the Duratec 35 and Mod V8s were speced, I'm sure the front would be shortened to look like the Commodore. It still does well in crash tests. Derrick Kuzak is coming to Melbourne this week, he not dropping by for tea and scones.

IIRC that's the Holden ute (pickup) and it's due out sometime this year, soon I think. Our models are prefixed by two digit reference as they can span several years with minor updates. Currently Holden has the VE Commodore debuted last year, all this year and a series II VE planned to coincide with the Orion Falcon. This photo illustrates the difference between the shorter nosed Commodore and the current Falcon. Notice how the Falcon needs extra lenght for the inline 6 Courtesy of : www.webwombat.com.au That doesn't mean the Falcon loses anything in handling though. When the 5.4 4V is installed not much of the engine sits forward of the front axle. John

Ford’s global product development chief Derrick Kuzak is visiting Australia next week. It’s he who needs to be convinced that the E8 platform should be Ford’s next large global RWD platform. http://www.caradvice.com.au/3107/2008-ford...6-turbo-sprung/

Link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/g8/story/0,,2098250,00.html I guess the important thing about setting targets is to include all major CO2 nations so everybody plays by the same rules and there's there's no economic advantage/disadvantage in trade agreements. We still have to see if China and India want to play ball yet.

You're trying to interpret camoflage. It's designed to give you false impressions. What you said about the nose you cant see in the black of the gas station shots.

The same way the did in 1975 when the CAFE was 13.5 MPG, producers were given 10 years to halve fuel usage with similar vehicles. What I'm suggesting is a 10% improvement in 4 years, that is quite achievable with current technology and without sacrificing vehicle size. I wouldn't plan on seeing gas going down any time soon if ever, besides US gas prices are cheaper than most other developed countries irrespective of taxation regimes. Also back in 1982, the focus was on gas shortages and smog control. The US law makers went to sleep on fuel efficiency when they thought they had smog production beat.

Since 1985, No manufacturer has voluntarily raised their CAFE fuel economy number, 20 years and nothing. Changes have to be brutal and forced upon manufacturers, bring the CAFE up to 30 mpg by 2012 and keep ramping it up every couple of years. Force older cars to comply with the respective emissions for year of manufacture or junk them.

Exactly, better to set targets for vehicles in size/weight divisions. That way, the public can get perspective on improvements in efficiency. For example, if the D3/Duratec 35 works out OK, Ford should elect to CAFE that it replaces panther retail sales. In a few years, the engines could drop to the FoE 3.2 I6 with DI, that should improve efficiency again with no performance drop. A further step would be adding a passive hybrid feature like the GM BAS system.

Yeah, it will be interesting to see what they have come up with. Already, our insiders have told us the CGIs are only generally correct and that FoA has stayed away from the GM zeta's flat nose and oversized flares. I'm certain the styling will follow themes in most other mid/large Fords so let's hope the mix is favourable. The interiors are said to be far above what we're used to and should help put the Falcon over the top of the Commodore. Ford has worked hard to get even more internal room in the Falcon, I suspect they're trying to rival the Taurus and might do it! These two have been leap frogging each other for near on 28 years so the battle continues.

These shots were taken in Central Australia so reliability testing is now well advanced. Look at all the fake panels, even on the door skins and door top ledge. Will keep you guys posted, John

Pease understand FAF are showing it on their site and have stamped it same. The magazine has just gone on sale so for me to put it here infringes copywrite laws big time. Just think big Mondeo. Actuay, I can understand how the Falcon woud look a bit plain/less radical, FoA wanting to broaden its appeal. What I woud like to see is someone (Mustang or FoA) have a go at the MKR, now that shoud turn heads!

Potential buyers test driving the Grand Marquis and 2008 Sable are probably going to go with better equipped Sable. That will leave the Grand Marquis with an even higher percentage ging to daily rentals, it's over 40% now.

Tell the truth, that extra star was for roll over protection. The Taurus has DST, something that will allow most owners to avoid roll overs in the first instance. Will the Grand Marquis get DST? Now, that's the big question you shoud be asking.

I think Ford should be proud of their efforts in raising the quality of sedan safety. You can see that Ford has spent their money wisely, developing a sedan for all conditions and providing it with stability control which will avoid many of those potential roll over conditions that some older makes are more prone to. The car now seems to to have all the right mix of performance and features to be a real winner with buyers. Internally, the cabin space floors many larger older style sedans whilst providing an efficient engine gearbox package. I'll be interested to see feedback on how the fit and finish quality is after 6 months ownership, if that is positive then I think Taurus sales may really take of as word of mouth spreads.

We don't get much of that over here. That distance between the the front of the door and the edge of the Front gaurd is about 8". The current Falcon isn't nose heavy and it's available with the iron block 5.4. I've driven a 2003 BA V8 example and they handle great. The handling is on par with the so called brilliant Zeta Commodores and soon to be released G8 - so there! OK, what I'll stop doing is justigfying a car to someone who hasn't driven it. That's what Ford salesman are for.

Bear in mind that is a CGI heavily influenced by the Mondeo, Insiders say, overall shape is right, details are different around lights and missing on door sides

I suppose you must be right MOTOR CGI

That's good to hear because we down here know what to expect and most will like it. Without seeing the intricate body details, it's hard to form an opinion, the car could be anything at the moment.