FG Falcon XR6 Turbo Ute Wins Motors Magazine's Bang for Your Bucks Award

[russellw]

Ford's new FG Falcon continues to set new standards for the Australian auto industry, following an announcement today by MOTOR Magazine declaring the FG Falcon XR6 Turbo Ute as the outright winner in its annual 'Bang For Your Bucks' award.

The FG Falcon XR6 Turbo Ute's victory is the first time a ute has won Bang For Your Bucks in the award's 15-year history, beating 16 of the best performance cars available in Australia this year for under $80,000, including the best on offer from Europe and Japan.

MOTOR Magazine applauded the engine in Falcon XR6 Turbo Ute, saying "…its stonking 270kW 4.0-litre turbocharged six is a gem of an engine – and the reason why it wins 2008's Bang For Your Bucks."

The Falcon XR6 Turbo Ute also won its class, the $38-50K category, beating last year's outright competition winner in the process as well as finishing ahead of its stablemate, the Falcon XR6 Turbo sedan, which finished third in class and fifth outright.

"As the first Ford model to win this award, today's announcement stands as further testament to the outstanding performance and value-for-money offered by the all-new FG Falcon, in this particular case the FG Falcon XR6 Turbo Ute," Ford Australia President Bill Osborne said.

Adding to the performance credentials of Ford's XR brand, the Fiesta XR4 once again finished third outright and first in class – this year in the Sub-$38K category after taking out the Sub-$30K category in 2007 – building on its impressive debut result to reinforce its classic hot-hatch appeal. The judges commended the XR4 saying it "lives up to its legendary reputation" and is "still one of the best front-drivers out there", as well as crediting its back-to-back win by saying "victory against a tougher field in 2008 dwarfs last year's win".

The Fiesta XR4 was also the only 2007 category winner to defend its crown in 2008, holding out newer, more fancied rivals to deliver "great thrills for minimal bills".

Source: Ford Media

[Brute6]

I hope the so-called Marketing department at Ford gets onto this!!!! Push the product guys.......
Considering I've got one of these on order, I'm a pretty happy chappy at the moment!!!!
Even though it wasn't the judges favourite, the numbers told a different story. Sensational result, not just for the Turbo Ute but also the Fiesty Fiesta!! Back to back!! : : :
Great job Ford, now market your success properly......

[Supercharged]

I ordered a Turbo FG Ute in Nitro on 23-04-08 and it was delivered on 01-08-08. After driving it for 100 km I decided to order a second one (my business vehicles) and that one is in Breeze and due in about 5 weeks (pre-ordered dealer stock).

[zetec]

Mine just ticked over 11,000km and loving every second... just an amazing vehicle!

[Ives]

Reading from the judges & Warren Luff's comments, it sounded like the performance model FG Falcons are under-tyred. I'm interested to see what they think of the Falcons when they're fitted with identical tyres that are on the SS (Bridgestone Potenza RE050A).

I've read and heard from a lot of sources (and un-biased pro drivers) that the Potenza RE050A are superior to the SP Sport Maxx, and personally that's not hard to believe.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Ives

Reading from the judges & Warren Luff's comments, it sounded like the performance model FG Falcons are under-tyred. I'm interested to see what they think of the Falcons when they're fitted with identical tyres that are on the SS (Bridgestone Potenza RE050A).

I've read and heard from a lot of sources (and un-biased pro drivers) that the Potenza RE050A are superior to the SP Sport Maxx, and personally that's not hard to believe.

I agree Ives.....the falcon has been undertyred for years....accross various models from base through to sports. The RE050 are said to be better than and Sp Sport max....i tested a mondeo with RE050 (wide range of tyres come on that car....the ford company cars at the preview drive had three different tyres on various cars???) and they were great. Good feedback and excellent lateral grip....i heard they wear out fast though. I have RE001 and they are bad enough for wear with higher tread wear number than RE050 so.....

Either way, its an easy upgrade then isn't it. Put on your favourite rubber and your done...can't make an aurion drive like that just by wacking on new boots now can you.....

[FPV8U]

Fords performance models have suffered from the dunlops since the BA was released.

[Rodp]

Why exactly did the ute pip the sedan? Was it a matter of a few bucks less with similar performance times?

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Why exactly did the ute pip the sedan? Was it a matter of a few bucks less with similar performance times?

Yes, purely on price. All the judges were surprised that it won, and you'll find most of their individual remarks were negative towards it. None of them personally thought it deserved it but it won purely on sheer grunt and that low price.

The silly part is when they said the XR6T sedan should NOT be $7k costlier than the ute... the more I read a Motor mag the more I ask myself why I even bothered buying it. :togo:

According to this system of points the XR4, which finished behind the SS sedan last year, now finished ahead of the SS sedan, and the XR6T sedan as well?!?!?! :togo:

Why did they even bother with the utes? Not enough cars eligible for this year's contest?

[Romulus]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Yes, purely on price. All the judges were surprised that it won, and you'll find most of their individual remarks were negative towards it. None of them personally thought it deserved it but it won purely on sheer grunt and that low price.

The silly part is when they said the XR6T sedan should NOT be $7k costlier than the ute... the more I read a Motor mag the more I ask myself why I even bothered buying it. :togo:

According to this system of points the XR4, which finished behind the SS sedan last year, now finished ahead of the SS sedan, and the XR6T sedan as well?!?!?! :togo:

Why did they even bother with the utes? Not enough cars eligible for this year's contest?

WTF??? Are they having difficulties understanding the BFYB catagory? Perhaps they need to reasses the definition of the word Bang For Your Buck. My understanding is the vehicle which wins provides the most amount of performance, for the lowest outlay. The XR6T ute won.

Pretty simple isn't it? Or am I missing something with the BFYB catagory. Perhaps they are confusing it with PCOTY???

[T3-STROKER]

good on ford & I think thay deserve the win,iam thinking of geting one me self for that reason,bang for your bucks + the fg looks good to.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Yes, purely on price. All the judges were surprised that it won, and you'll find most of their individual remarks were negative towards it. None of them personally thought it deserved it but it won purely on sheer grunt and that low price.

The silly part is when they said the XR6T sedan should NOT be $7k costlier than the ute... the more I read a Motor mag the more I ask myself why I even bothered buying it. :togo:

According to this system of points the XR4, which finished behind the SS sedan last year, now finished ahead of the SS sedan, and the XR6T sedan as well?!?!?! :togo:

Why did they even bother with the utes? Not enough cars eligible for this year's contest?

I have to agree with your comments Falc'man....i'm starting to be very unimpressed with the motoring media at the moment (well media in general). Lazy and uniformed, or potentially biased and inconsistent. Not much of a choice.

I always preferred wheels to motor....no i don't take what the journos take as gospel but based on my own assessment of the cars, i find reading up on cars this way to be at least somewhat helpful. However, with the continual qualifications and hedging of wheels (probably due to immense pressure from all the car makers via advertising) and the sheer irrelevance and stupidity of motor i'm struggling to find a decent read. Maybe that new Top Gear mag will be worth it..... Don't even get me started on drive.com etc. (go auto is still good though).

I think that while Ford did well generally, such as with the XR4, this was largely due to keen pricing and raw numbers (hence the shock of the journos involved). Motor continues to have too much 'on track' bias. While i'm all for that where appropriate (e.g. PCOTY) BFYB is about getting good bang for buck...and this happens IN MOST CASES on public roads....not a track. Ford tunes the cars to make this happen...hence they are generally softer then the holdens etc. I would say more weight on the journos views, but make those views REAL WORLD RELEVANT (i.e. great mountain roads etc.). The motor review of the XR6T, XR8 and SS recently was great as an example of that (still had the track stuff available as well).

Finally, some consistency would be nice. I haven't even read it properly yet and i note that in one section i see many complaints about the brakes on the falcon XR6T....saying they were rubbish etc. yet it stopped 100km/h-0 in like 2 m less than the Holden stuff??? In fact they stopped in the same distance as a renault clio!!!!

I'm not saying the Ford stuff was perfect (you'd certainly want better tyres/brakes for weekend warrior stuff), and maybe motor just doesn't suit me personally, but i'm returning to my original view of that mag. Totally about pub arguments and who has the biggest apendage......little real world relevance, flawed judgements and too much ranting about track definciencies. Oh and Holden commie after commie on the front cover......i think motor mag has too many LS1 readers.....no wonder its rubbish.
:

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Swordsman88

I have to agree with your comments Falc'man....i'm starting to be very unimpressed with the motoring media at the moment (well media in general). Lazy and uniformed, or potentially biased and inconsistent. Not much of a choice.

I always preferred wheels to motor....no i don't take what the journos take as gospel but based on my own assessment of the cars, i find reading up on cars this way to be at least somewhat helpful. However, with the continual qualifications and hedging of wheels (probably due to immense pressure from all the car makers via advertising) and the sheer irrelevance and stupidity of motor i'm struggling to find a decent read. Maybe that new Top Gear mag will be worth it..... Don't even get me started on drive.com etc. (go auto is still good though).

I think that while Ford did well generally, such as with the XR4, this was largely due to keen pricing and raw numbers (hence the shock of the journos involved). Motor continues to have too much 'on track' bias. While i'm all for that where appropriate (e.g. PCOTY) BFYB is about getting good bang for buck...and this happens IN MOST CASES on public roads....not a track. Ford tunes the cars to make this happen...hence they are generally softer then the holdens etc. I would say more weight on the journos views, but make those views REAL WORLD RELEVANT (i.e. great mountain roads etc.). The motor review of the XR6T, XR8 and SS recently was great as an example of that (still had the track stuff available as well).

Finally, some consistency would be nice. I haven't even read it properly yet and i note that in one section i see many complaints about the brakes on the falcon XR6T....saying they were rubbish etc. yet it stopped 100km/h-0 in like 2 m less than the Holden stuff??? In fact they stopped in the same distance as a renault clio!!!!

I'm not saying the Ford stuff was perfect (you'd certainly want better tyres/brakes for weekend warrior stuff), and maybe motor just doesn't suit me personally, but i'm returning to my original view of that mag. Totally about pub arguments and who has the biggest apendage......little real world relevance, flawed judgements and too much ranting about track definciencies. Oh and Holden commie after commie on the front cover......i think motor mag has too many LS1 readers.....no wonder its rubbish.
:

Very true Swordsman88. Yep, don't get me started about the track lol. You're
exactly right, these things are designed for our very substandard roads so I
would rather a car that behaved well at the limit on such roads, than be
bounced off said roads.

LOL, case in point, did you read the part about the R8 tramping under heavy
braking and thus losing control? They said it was a COMMON trait with the VE
(funny how it's the first time I've read that) but this particular example was far
worse. "This problem was ironed out in the '70s" they said. "This problem would
be exaggerated with substandard roads" is what I say, so one wonders what
the point of so much track bias is. Bah.

Another case in point, the XR6T, appalling understeer!! Motor recognised that
Ford's engineers purposely tuned the understeer in to stop "farmer Joe" from
ending up off the road. What was that? Designed for the ROAD!

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

LOL, case in point, did you read the part about the R8 tramping under heavy
braking and thus losing control? They said it was a COMMON trait with the VE
(funny how it's the first time I've read that) but this particular example was far
worse. "This problem was ironed out in the '70s" they said. "This problem would
be exaggerated with substandard roads" is what I say, so one wonders what
the point of so much track bias is. Bah.

Another case in point, the XR6T, appalling understeer!! Motor recognised that
Ford's engineers purposely tuned the understeer in to stop "farmer Joe" from
ending up off the road. What was that? Designed for the ROAD!

Yes i'm not that surprised about the VE tramping issues....these things come out later after launch upon further investigation (though i hadn't heard about it before...if it is so common, why haven't they ever mentioned it before???). I've always had much respect for Holden's engineers....i just view them as beign hobbled by poor parts sourcing (having to work with that 4speed auto must be fun...not) and misguided aims. They make great cars for the track but to live with everyday you can do much better (NVH, ease of use, ride etc.). When i first went as a passenger in a VE i thought...damn this chassis is stiff, car feels pointy....race-car like - drivetrain though rubbish and ride quality far from great on 16s.

I don't view having 2-5km/h more cornering speed on a racetrack i'm probably never going to drive on (sadly : ) as noteworthy.....when a tramping under firm braking over undulations (funny...one of my favourite bits of mountain road here in brisbane has lots of this) can cause instability. Motor knows about this stuff full well....hell they discussed issues with the XR8 verus the XR6T with mid corner bumps etc. in a previous review. BFYB is not PCOTY.....it is about which car gives the most bang (this being a euphemism for fun!) for your dollar, simple. Anyone who says an XR6T sedan doesn't do this at least as well as an SS is a tool, simple as that. Sure one is faster around the track, the other better ride quality etc., but they are both fun. Do the performance numbers and track work, just give that a total worth of 50%, the other 50% put down to judges scores in a range of areas on challenging public roads etc. (fun, stability at limits etc.).

[XR6_190]

Pretty much, yeah the $7000 odd price difference makes the ute a much the same bang for a lot less of the bucks if you know what I mean

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by XR6_190

Pretty much, yeah the $7000 odd price difference makes the ute a much the same bang for a lot less of the bucks if you know what I mean

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Yes, purely on price. All the judges were surprised that it won, and you'll find most of their individual remarks were negative towards it. None of them personally thought it deserved it but it won purely on sheer grunt and that low price.

The silly part is when they said the XR6T sedan should NOT be $7k costlier than the ute... the more I read a Motor mag the more I ask myself why I even bothered buying it. :togo:

That's fair enough. If they're unhappy with the result then it shows either it's a flawed contest to begin with, or the contest is above board and those who are conducting it are clowns. Tough to mark the sedan #5 and not expect a ute with the same internals and $7k off to be better 'bang for your buck'.

Impressive result for the XR4. If I decide in a couple of years time that the Golf is drinking too much juice than an XR4 will definitely be on the shopping list - maybe I should start looking at hairdressing courses at TAFE just in case.

[Airmon]

Dammit, there goes the surprise :(

[loltastic]

EVO creamed them all. Drivers saying it was the best car they drove out of all the cars with the best chassis and road holding ability.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by loltastic

EVO creamed them all. Drivers saying it was the best car they drove out of all the cars with the best chassis and road holding ability.

It's tough finding someone who doesn't like the EVO X. However, on several reviews I've seen and read, when put against the STi, the handling is miles ahead but the STi is just that smidge quicker around the track - and they're both putting out around the same figures.

The two TV reviews, Stig on Top Gear and this weeks Fifth Gear (still find it tough to watch but I'm hanging in there...) pretty much saw the same thing.

[SSbaby]

Originally Posted by Rodp

It's tough finding someone who doesn't like the EVO X. However, on several reviews I've seen and read, when put against the STi, the handling is miles ahead but the STi is just that smidge quicker around the track - and they're both putting out around the same figures.

The two TV reviews, Stig on Top Gear and this weeks Fifth Gear (still find it tough to watch but I'm hanging in there...) pretty much saw the same thing.

In CarsGuide today, comparions between the two pocket rockets... both are firmly sprung and bitches to drive everyday (especially if you have a sensitive back). The interior of the STi was rated as cheap, the EVO even cheaper. The EVO used 1L/100km more fuel than the STi because it only had a 5spd box vs STi's 6 spd. The STi had more torque and was quicker in a straight line but the EVO is the better handler. EVO a sedan, STi a hatch. Horses for courses and you can't go wrong in either... if that's your style.

I'd choose the EVO but only because I wouldn't be want to be seen in a hatch.

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by SSbaby

In CarsGuide today, comparions between the two pocket rockets... both are firmly sprung and bitches to drive everyday (especially if you have a sensitive back). The interior of the STi was rated as cheap, the EVO even cheaper. The EVO used 1L/100km more fuel than the STi because it only had a 5spd box vs STi's 6 spd. The STi had more torque and was quicker in a straight line but the EVO is the better handler. EVO a sedan, STi a hatch. Horses for courses and you can't go wrong in either... if that's your style.

I'd choose the EVO but only because I wouldn't be want to be seen in a hatch.

So that's no wagons and no hatches.

I'm often asked why I went for the R32 over an EVO or STi - well, not asked, it's more.. you idiot, why did you get an R32, why not an EVO or STi!? It was a toss between the ride comfort and the insurance costs as the #1 killer then there's many minor reasons why.

For a daily driver/track weapon, I'd choose the XR6T or the F6 over the EVO or STi, and that's not based just on BFYB. I'd have to live with it during the day and I'm on target to do ~45k this year. Ford have put together a very nice, quick and streetable package. Just don't get busted with it on the track otherwise it will be a nice, quick and out of warranty package. :P

[Cobra]

I can't find the mag in the shops or newsagents. Maybe it will be there in the next couple of days. Was the new M3 in there? I'd be keen to see what it does round a racetrack.

[steve.zissou]

I am eagerly awaiting my new xr6T ute M6 (hopefully today). I test drove both SS ute and xr6T and for me the decision was relatively easy (although the V8 sound and looks of the SS went a long way).
After buying Motor and seeing the xr6t win BFYB i was stoked, however, after reading the reviews it left me with a sour taste in my mouth (and i hadn't finished drinking a corona). I respect their comments but after reading i thought maybe i stuffed up not buying the ss.
So i went and test drove both again. and all I can say, is that they are both great cars but the xr6t still wins. The xr6T not only feels faster and has a gob full more torque down low, it is faster (as i conveniently - wink nod- found a ss ute also on a test drive do a "side by side" test (hehehe poor sales guys).

I was also worried about the excessive understeer (there is a reason i bought a M6 rwd 270kw ute). now at anything close to legal speeds I could get oversteer any time I wanted and consequently, I could dial out any understeer with the throtle (maybe not the case when doing 170kmh on a sweeping bend but funnily enough I don't get those opportunities much). Regarding oversteer, I found the xr6 much more predictable than the SS.

Then you also have a better gearbox , interior ,dash, fuel consumption and rugged rear-end (dont forget the handbrake).
So in the end I would love either car and with no deep seeded brand loyalties I chose the ford.

I then have to question the relevance of Bang for your buck. As I read it, Motor a saying, if you want to buy a new car to race on a track the best value for money is the xr6t ute - get f%^#ked. Who would do that - no one. Actually, I wouldn't buy any of the cars tested except for the evo - maybe, for track work - So why test them in a way that they will almost never be used.
Track work = http://newcarsales.drive.com.au/nct/...001/index.html

but only once you have spent some time learning in an old sh%tter (I use a mirage) because .... well you can guess the reason.

(and all this before the $1000 edit and approx 270 rwkw :

Moral of the story - test the cars yourself

[steve.zissou]

forgot to mention - the xr6t had 18" wheels which are an option ($1000 as part of a sports kit i think) and the sports bar which would have pushed the price up a bit - I cant be stuufed doing the calcs because any one that buys a car "to a formulae" will buy a camry becuase you would have to be an accountant (and all accountants buy carmy's : )
but this may have changed the result.

[stockel]

Originally Posted by jrckelley

forgot to mention - the xr6t had 18" wheels which are an option ($1000 as part of a sports kit i think) and the sports bar which would have pushed the price up a bit - I cant be stuufed doing the calcs because any one that buys a car "to a formulae" will buy a camry becuase you would have to be an accountant (and all accountants buy carmy's : )
but this may have changed the result.

Haha my auntie and uncle are accountants, they have plenty of money but they still bought.... a Camry

[XR6_190]

Originally Posted by jrckelley

forgot to mention - the xr6t had 18" wheels which are an option ($1000 as part of a sports kit i think) and the sports bar which would have pushed the price up a bit - I cant be stuufed doing the calcs because any one that buys a car "to a formulae" will buy a camry becuase you would have to be an accountant (and all accountants buy carmy's : )
but this may have changed the result.

Their must be something wrong with my accountant then, he drives a Chrysler 300C SRT8

[Rev28K]

$80K ceiling on BFYB so therefore no M3, or Lambo’s, Porsches, etc (The 3 door manual M3 did do a 1:37.78 at Winton in PCOTY which is fast).

The “bang” part of the formula is an amalgam of results from various criteria (have a look in the mag it’s got the weighting criteria on one of the sidebars) 0-60, 400m, lap times, apex speed, v-max on the circuit, etc. So it doesn’t rely purely on the weighting of subjective driver’s opinions. They didn’t sound liked they enjoyed driving the thing on the circuit – but all of it’s measured performance criteria were pretty close to the front and with a cheaper price that meant that the XR6T ute one using their formula. They were testing at Wakefield which is a twisty track that would reward the cheaper cars that have more handling then straight line grunt.

Change their formula and something else could win, but I’m happy enough with the results and their justification.

One interesting thing is that the FPV F6 is listed as a manual in the specs sheet and they write it up (and criticize it’s track performance) as an auto – which would prob be slower than a manual around a track.

Some of the above posts are dumb – Motor has been bitching about the VE’s (SS and HSV) “axle tramp” under brakes for a long time.