Customers to decide Falcon ute future - Page 6

Buntz · 08-07-2011, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

My dad was talking to another engineer he worked with, on the Ford stand at the AIMS today, and he did the prelimanary design work on the Territory LPG package back in 2004.

Low petrol prices killed it off back then, and it was never bought back even when petrol prices soared a few years later. And the diesel was shelved in 2008, only to be bought back this year.

Way to shoot yourself in the foot Ford.

I think the problem is... just being hired as an executive for Ford... or any company.... but they don't hire people who love cars.

010 f6 ute · 08-07-2011, 08:38 PM

The day they cut the falcon ute mine will be put up for sale and I'll be at the closest hsv dealer buying a maloo.

jed · 08-07-2011, 08:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 010 f6 ute

The day they cut the falcon ute mine will be put up for sale and I'll be at the closest hsv dealer buying a maloo.

after holden put the price up $10k cos they've cornered the market

Supercharged · 08-07-2011, 11:19 PM

The game is changed and the commodore and falcon utes will in time disappear. You can put your hand on your heart but Ford and Holden are in the business of selling cars and although we would like them to continue making them but without buyers there is no reason to make them. Tradies mostly but the 4x4 types and is not common to see them in a Ford or a Holden now with most being sports utes now but that is a limited market as the diesels get more powerful.

naddis01 · 08-07-2011, 11:31 PM

I am going to borrow a line from the AU boys, but does anyone think the Crewman 'was ahead of its time'? Yes it was poorly executed with its nonexistent legroom and a vertical back seat but since then sales of dual cabs seems to have taken off.

If there was a car based dual cab now that had similar interior space to the likes of the ML Triton and T6 Ranger etc which also had the clearance of an RTV, do you think it would sell in better numbers than the Crewman did?

vztrt · 08-07-2011, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by naddis01

I am going to borrow a line from the AU boys, but does anyone think the Crewman 'was ahead of its time'? Yes it was poorly executed with its nonexistent legroom and a vertical back seat but since then sales of dual cabs seems to have taken off.

If there was a car based dual cab now that had similar interior space to the likes of the ML Triton and T6 Ranger etc which also had the clearance of an RTV, do you think it would sell in better numbers than the Crewman did?

The crewman (like the adventera) didn't have the ground clearance. That's were it fell over. This is why I wonder if the RTV should have been updated (or even kept on like the wagon) as its numbers might have grown.

But they have the Ranger so it will never happen.

jpd80 · 09-07-2011, 03:18 AM

Ford has to decide whether Falcon Ute will be a play thing with IRS like the Commodore Ute
or a dedicated work truck with leaf springs, sufficient ground clearance and LPG option,
the latter was nearly half of ute sales a few years ago.
I don't believe a properly configured Falcon work Ute would tread on the RWD Ranger's toes
as I think the market needs of the two are quite different, if you're looking for a soft rider
the ute is king over a Ranger any day, especially on rough roads....

Road_Warrior · 09-07-2011, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpd80

Ford has to decide whether Falcon Ute will be a play thing with IRS like the Commodore Ute
or a dedicated work truck with leaf springs, sufficient ground clearance and LPG option,
the latter was nearly half of ute sales a few years ago.
I don't believe a properly configured Falcon work Ute would tread on the RWD Ranger's toes
as I think the market needs of the two are quite different, if you're looking for a soft rider
the ute is king over a Ranger any day, especially on rough roads....

Inner city courier drivers and tradesmen who need low running costs (LPG) and a 1 tonne payload with decent driving dynamics (no kidney smashers) should be the LPi ute's target audience. Forget the show pony market; Holden can have that to themselves.

roberts · 09-07-2011, 11:51 AM

i think holden drivers like the idea, that there is no big gap between the cab and tub, and have had ifs for the last 20 years.
I mean hard is it to put the ifs cradle out of sedan into a ute chassis, your only have to look at what the consumer uses these utes for, nearly every one has a hardlid that carries no load. Could even go one up and have coil over strut rear which would open the aftermarket for coilovers front and rear.

Extra cab, barra 6 turbo with short tub/wheel base and coilover strut all round please, the drift boys will buy them for the next 20 years.
Sports car with a big boot, alright.

Bossxr8 · 09-07-2011, 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5.0

The carrying capacity argument is a myth..SV6 and SS IRS utes can carry a heavier load than the XR6/XR8 sports suspension utes. Sure you can buy a 1 tonne Falcon..Commodore Omega ute is about 800kg IIRC..much of a muchness really.

Falcon can carry 1.2 tonne, but the load rating on the XR's really comes down to the load rating of the tyres more than anything, the Dunlop sports tyres aren't designed to carry big loads.

Thats why when the XR6 had a one tonne option it was downgraded to 16 inch wheels and Cargo tyres.

Bossxr8 · 09-07-2011, 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roberts

i think holden drivers like the idea, that there is no big gap between the cab and tub, and have had ifs for the last 20 years.
I mean hard is it to put the ifs cradle out of sedan into a ute chassis, your only have to look at what the consumer uses these utes for, nearly every one has a hardlid that carries no load. Could even go one up and have coil over strut rear which would open the aftermarket for coilovers front and rear.

Extra cab, barra 6 turbo with short tub/wheel base and coilover strut all round please, the drift boys will buy them for the next 20 years.
Sports car with a big boot, alright.

IFS?

Don't you mean IRS, and the Holden ute has only had IRS since VE.

And its not easy to fit IRS from the sedan to Falcon ute as the rear sections are completely different.

roberts · 09-07-2011, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

IFS?

Don't you mean IRS, and the Holden ute has only had IRS since VE.

And its not easy to fit IRS from the sedan to Falcon ute as the rear sections are completely different.

spelling mistake noted

chevypower · 10-07-2011, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roberts

i think holden drivers like the idea, that there is no big gap between the cab and tub

They probably think it's a new, clever idea. Ford had it back in 1961.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/02...y-pickups.html
There are a couple of reasons why it is a bad idea.
1. The body does not allow for any chassis flexing with an increased payload. (If/When the chassis does flex, the body will take the stress).
2. beds are no longer interchangeable.

SteveJH · 10-07-2011, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevypower

They probably think it's a new, clever idea. Ford had it back in 1961.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/02...y-pickups.html
There are a couple of reasons why it is a bad idea.
1. The body does not allow for any chassis flexing with an increased payload. (If/When the chassis does flex, the body will take the stress).
2. beds are no longer interchangeable.

Falcon ute was unibody from 1961 when it was introduced until 1998 when the AU Falcon ute was introduced.

chevypower · 10-07-2011, 03:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveJH

Falcon ute was unibody from 1961 when it was introduced until 1998 when the AU Falcon ute was introduced.

This wasn't a true "unibody" as in a monocoque chassis, just the design of a integrated bed with the cab like the new Commodore ute and Honda Ridgeline.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pickuptrucks.com

Ford originally referred to them as the “integrated pickup,” but calling them “unibodies” is a bit of a misnomer. The nickname derives from the fact that the cab and box are one continuous piece, with no gap between them. The same stamping forming the back of the cab was also the leading edge of the bed, and the single-wall bed sides were spot-welded directly to the door sills. The one-piece body was then set atop a traditional frame-style chassis, making the unibody pickup more similar to a body-on-frame car than a true unitized assembly

The article goes on to say why it was a bad idea and why Ford stopped making them like that in 1963.

GS608 · 10-07-2011, 06:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

IFS?

Don't you mean IRS, and the Holden ute has only had IRS since VE.

And its not easy to fit IRS from the sedan to Falcon ute as the rear sections are completely different.

Since VU/VX you mean?

Noted the carrying capacity to do with tyres, didn't think of that.

Gobes32 · 10-07-2011, 11:01 AM

Does anybody remember the AU Ute ad with all the different bodies on the back of the utes?

Bossxr8 · 10-07-2011, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 5.0

Since VU/VX you mean?

Noted the carrying capacity to do with tyres, didn't think of that.

The VU ute had coil springs and a live axle didn't it, not IRS?

Road_Warrior · 10-07-2011, 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

The VU ute had coil springs and a live axle didn't it, not IRS?

Nah trailing arm IRS.

outback_ute · 10-07-2011, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevypower

This wasn't a true "unibody" as in a monocoque chassis, just the design of a integrated bed with the cab like the new Commodore ute and Honda Ridgeline.

The Commodore ute is a monocoque, does not have a separate chassis. It was only the VY/VZ one-tonne & Crewman versions that had chassis rails similar to what the current Falcon has.

We are seeing a repeat of the 1980s except this time it is the removal of import tariffs that has seen the cost of imported Thai pickups slide downwards compared to the Aussie ute, as well as the rise in dual cabs that happened during the 1990's.

If Ford wanted to maximise the commonality of the Falcon ute and sedan for the next generation they would be going back to the XK-XY style and basing it on the standard wheelbase and IRS, 800kg load would have to do otherwise go for a Ranger. Mind you I think the current style has more potential, and designing from scratch I'm sure they could incorporate IRS if they wanted to. I also think that a Falcon cab-chassis type ute would have potential in the US as buyers downsize from the F150.

SpoolMan · 10-07-2011, 09:14 PM

Need more of this, few years of Ute commercials..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xZzi8...eature=related
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_McyQ...eature=related
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eScJN...eature=related
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tulXEux6eDk
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kd2mMa0KqE

Brazen · 11-07-2011, 09:00 PM

For Oh&S reasons, fleets default to the T-bar auto XL base ute. Yet, the private buyer who typically opts for the XR and is likely to have kids cant option the 3 seater... that needs to change!

Also the XL needs more ground clearance. Nearly 14,000 high riding utes are bought a month, yet Ford thinks tradies and fleets want a ute with less ground clearance than a Hyundai...stupid!

roberts · 11-07-2011, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by outback_ute

I also think that a Falcon cab-chassis type ute would have potential in the US as buyers downsize from the F150.

very good point about the Americans down sizing to a falcon ute, I like where your logic is at.

Buntz · 12-07-2011, 10:58 AM

I think it's time the ute was built off the territory platform.

EgoFG · 12-07-2011, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buntz93ED

I think it's time the ute was built off the territory platform.

It has me beat as to why the Ranger wasn't.

Jim5_0 · 12-07-2011, 12:31 PM

The Falcon platform is one of the best platforms that Ford have anywhere in the world. Ditto for the 4 litre inline 6.

When are Ford going to wake up and realise that they can use the Falcon platform worldwide instead of thinking inwards and presuming that we will buy Taurus' .

They already tried selling the Taurus Ghia here against the Fairmont Ghia back in the mid 1990's and the Taurus failed miserably. Failing miserably is exactly what a Falcon would do if the engine was fitted sideways.

The XK Falcon fell apart on Aussie roads leading Ford Australia to develop the Falcon into something considerably stronger and hurting their reputation in the meantime.

Buntz · 12-07-2011, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EgoFG

It has me beat as to why the Ranger wasn't.

Probably because they wanted Ranger to be a world platform/car. And building it off the Territory platform would mean re-fitting every factory from here to China to build the thing.

Territory and Falcon themselves are better off as exports. Not the platform.

ghostwhowalks · 12-07-2011, 02:46 PM

The mighty falcon ute has carried (pardon the pun!) Ford Australia for many years consistantly selling well over many years and models. I think the problem is that the customers are being told what they can buy and not what they want to buy. No xr8 ute, no wagons (Yet every falcon wagon you see has a telstra sticker on the side) let alone a choice of engine for it. I have owned an xg falcon ute that faithfully carried me all over our great country from melbourne to perth to darwin to sydney and back without missing a beat. Ford need to widen their variety of models and options for them, not just ditching it when they fail to sell in their current set up. It will be a sad day if the falcon ute is killed off because the same can be said for Ford Australia!

Buntz · 12-07-2011, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghostwhowalks

Ford need to widen their variety of models and options for them, not just ditching it when they fail to sell in their current set up. It will be a sad day if the falcon ute is killed off because the same can be said for Ford Australia!

They seem to be adopting the methods of the Ford NA exec's that would just kill off and roll out new ones.

Oh god! I hope they haven't been exiled here when Mullaly cleaned house.

EgoFG · 12-07-2011, 03:58 PM

You know, I can see why Ford NA like the Taurus. Just use Cars.com to compare a Caddy DTS (the flagship) to the Lincoln Version of the Taurus the MKS.

The real problem is that the Falcon would kill either.

and I think it was in this thread that I prev stated the deleted CrownVic sold withing 10% of the Taurus both Monthly and YTD.

It is truly sad that the execs dont see the Aust Falc as the way forward for Lincoln, and as a CrownVicr replacement.
Yeah we (aust Ford) would loose control of it, but it would be worth it to actually have a Ford I want to buy.

On a Side note - I drove the predecessor to the current Taurus (the Ford 500) and it was an excellent car - but they pushed it up one class in the current iteration, and I do not believe it scaled as well as the Ford Execs think it did.