2008 Ford Falcon Fpv

[LTHLRB]

bam.. hsv made their big power range minimum 285kw

as for ford, their xr6 turbo competes with the hsv's and thats not even an FPV.. the typhoon is way ahead of anything else.

[BAMR33]

Yes, lets have a look at past makes and models.

The last generation of Audi S4 and RS4 were twin turbo V6's. I'm pretty sure the Mitsubishi Galant / Legnum were running twin turbo V6s for a while (I haven't looked into them since 2000 or so), if not currently. Saab runs single turbo V6's in their range. Nissan also has a VQ30DET in its JDM range.

Since you've also named dedicated sports car, lets see what we have in that space. Porsche runs a boxer 6 with twin turbos in their 911. Noble runs a twin turbo Ford V6 in their M12. And the last spy photos of the GT-R engine bay I saw had a pair of blow-off valves under the hood.

Its true that Nissan dropped a lot of its turbos from its range because of emissions, but that was also due to the age of the engines they were on. The SR, VG and RB engines were well over 10 years old when they got dropped, and were showing their age. Plenty of companies still get around with big bore forced induction cars. If Mercedes Benz can make a 6.5L V12 with twin turbos meet European emissions requirements, making a 4L V6 with forced induction do so isn't impossible.

I'd say the main reason why Nissan didn't twin turbocharge the VQ35DE in the Z33 (and, by extension, the V35, since they're both the same platform) is because of the stigma the Z32 TT had. It'd be a tough marketing job to sell another twin turbo after that debacle, and in 2002 the 350Z was "fast enough". Without spreading the R&D costs across both models it wouldn't have been financially viable.

Audi's are hardly cheap cars and are aimed more at performance and luxury with cost not being such a factor same with porsche, merc etc. Mitsubshi Galant running v6 turbo's for a while, why did they stop making them.... hmmm maybe because they were expensive for a little peice of crap and required engine out to change an oil filter.

[BAMR33]

bam.. hsv made their big power range minimum 285kw

as for ford, their xr6 turbo competes with the hsv's and thats not even an FPV.. the typhoon is way ahead of anything else.

Not sure what you're getting there, I agree the typhoon is a great car.

[KISIN]

its a transformer

[scathing]

If it was so easy to turbo charge a v6, holden would have done it to compete with the turb falcons.

That's if they even wanted to. They could have also supercharged the new engine (and its not like they don't have the knowledge from the old engine), but they chose not to. It appears to me that Holden has decided to cede the 6 cylinder performance market. They're still dominating the Fords in the V8 space, which is where most of their buyers come in.

if was easily possible and Nissan thought it was profitable I'm sure they would have been turbo'd.

There's a VQ30DET. They've turbocharged the block already. They've just chosen not to do it with the VQ35DE (but we'll see what engine the GT-R is running when it comes out). Its easily possible, from an OEM perspective, to run forced induction on that engine and still package it.

As for whether its profitable or not, its irrelevant to the discussion. Your original assertion was that its not actually possible. And making a TT 350Z would put its straightline performance very close to the GT-R, which from a marketing (not a technical or a profitability) perspective would be unacceptable. As an aside, the APS TT kit fors for AUD$15K fitted (you can buy them in the US, as a package to self-install, for USD$6K). Now bear in mind that this is on very low economies of scale, and they don't have direct access to Nissan engineers. If Nissan were to have done it from the factory, with their R&D resources and ability to recoup the costs over a larger number of cars sold, I doubt the added cost on top of the Z or Skyline (to Nissan) would be more than AUD$6K. It would need a stronger clutch and wider rims (nominal costs over the existing hardware, since you don't have to pay for the NA components and then discard them) and an oil cooler, but you wouldn't be looking at more than a couple of grand for that.

If Nissan had released a twin turbo 350Z coupe back in 2003 for $10-15K more than the NA cars, I would have bought it. 280rwkW, with NA response, for AUD$75-80K? I don't doubt it would have sold like hotcakes. Even if they'd detuned it down to around 260rwkW so it could continue running on 95RON that would still give it the performance to beat anything short of a track day special or a 911 Turbo.

Hmm, don't know when I ever said v35 is bigger than a falcon, but proportionally they'd have about the same amount of room under the bonnet. Smaller car, smaller motor only needs smaller turbos...

You didn't specifically say the V35, but you did assert that V6's don't allow enough room under the engine bay for turbos. Clearly, they do. I used the 350Z / Skyline as an example, since the physical sizes are comparable (if not smaller), and as Nissans people on this forum might be a bit more familiar with them.

I know of a couple of daily driven APS TT, Power Enterprise TT, HKS Supercharged and HKS Single Turbo'ed 350Zs in this country, most of which get taken to the track, and there are plenty more in the US. None of them have had major overheating problems. Since the Falcon is the same size, if Ford's new V6 is approximately the same dimensions as the VQ then packaging and heat management are not major issues.

Come on, you can't seriously think a 4WD applies to this situation... Under bonnet is huge

Your inability to extrapolate never ceases to amaze me.

I only mentioned the Pathfinder because it has a V6 with the same displacement as Ford's current I6. The VQ40DE in the Pathfinder is the same block as the VQ35DE in the V35 / Z33, which means it has the same length and width. If the VQ35DE fits in the V35 / Z33 engine bay and has the room for turbos, so does the VQ40DE. The extra displacement from the VQ40 comes from being stroked, so the engine sits a bit higher, but that's not going to stop you from hanging turbos out the side of the engine if the VQ35 can do it.

[LTHLRB]

Not sure what you're getting there, I agree the typhoon is a great car.

on the road or anywhere else, the BF xr6 turbo will be better than the VZ or VY GTS or even clubsport R8... holden produce massive engines and big power, but their useless and overpriced...

The BF GT and GT-P are a great car but lack bottem end power (i have personally driven many gt's, typhoon's and xr6 turbos aswell as xr8s)

all cars are excellent with the 6speed auto gearbox

moral of my story... the ford is the better car than the hsv.. copy or not copy whatever ford produces is a better product even though i wont own one.

[BAMR33]

Your original assertion was that its not actually possible.

Wrong you were just intent on being a smart ass.

[MK2]

Yeah it's interesting that Holden pulled out of the 6cyl performance market, the VY V6 supercharged commo's where not that bad a car at all and much easier to live with than the V8's. At least they seemed to blow up less than XR6's.

[scathing]

Wrong you were just intent on being a smart ass.

You can't be a smart ass without being smart, which still puts me a step ahead of you.

[BAMR33]

You can't be a smart ass without being smart, which still puts me a step ahead of you.

hero

[Mulkers]

You keep telling yourself that. If it wasn't practical to turbocharge a V6, they wouldn't have turbocharged an I6 either. Its just as "practical" as each other for a family car. They didn't turbo the I6 to make it a better towing vehicle.

As for the size, it depends on how big they make the V6's block. The V35 twin turbocharges just fine with a pretty cramped engine bay, and the VQ block goes up to 4.0L (as per the Pathfinder) so the size of the engine is only an issue if they make it one.

They could just run a big single if the plumbing for twins is too much of an issue. There are also some single turbo kits for the V35 that have good drivability and flow reasonably well.

You can't reasonably tell me that a V35 is bigger than a Falcon, but then being able to use reason doesn't seem to be one of your attributes.

there are so many other issues. aftermarkte kits don't have to deal with large warranties.

aftermarket kits don't require ongoing support, replacement parts etc.

they are c\/nts for people to work on. if you have a single turbo (normall in front of motor) you lose one of the main reasons for changing to a v6; room.

Ever worked on a commodore 6? absoulte cops. easily the worst motor ever. (http://www.calaisturbo.com.au/showthread.php?t=111116)

twins sound like a cool idea, but new cars are getting uglier and uglier, with shorter and shorter noeses; ie, less room.

VE's have the battery in the boot AND no room in the engine bay.

banging twins down near the gearbox is a cool idea. so is auto trans lines bulging and splitting.

my bro's hachi melts passenger side shoes and that is na. turboes get way hotter.

servicabilty jsut goes up the $hit.

on an inline six, the difference between a turbo and a non turbo, design wise, is a matter of free space. on a new v6 car, there is none.

if you think there is, replace the banjo bolt washers on 300zx turbos, with the motor still in the car, until you see differently.

i hate v6s.

That's if they even wanted to.

they did want to. hsv abandonded the plan after discovering how small the engine bay was going to be. but like was stated, most of the holden performance market have v8 stamped on their heads.

an australian car company wouldn't have anywhere near the engineering capabilites of nissan. (see calais turbo link:)

holden's alloygay, (and previous ecogay, and pre-ecogay) are all bastard variants of the 1953 buick v6, with each less potential than the other (much like the 308/304s)

Camshaft overlap of the v6 proves much less boost friendly than the venerable falcon 6 aswell.

the ford 6 is a much better motor, from almost every perspective.

Edited July 15, 2007 by Mulkers

[scathing]

From the Drive subsection of Fairfax newspapers:

Ford Australia says dwindling large-car sales have forced it to replace its locally built in-line six-cylinder engine in 2010 with an imported V6, reports IAN PORTER.

Ford Australia has confirmed rampant speculation by announcing it will cease manufacture of its Barra inline six cylinder engine at Geelong in 2010.

Ford president Tom Gorman said the decision to close the engine plant was not completely locked in yet as the company had agreed to a State Government request to conduct a feasibility study into assembling or even manufacturing the Duratec V6 engine it wants to use after 2010.

So, it looks like its confirmed. One of the last inline 6s on the market has had its death knell sounded. Looks like BMW will be the only one carrying the inline 6 flag forward, but that's not necessarily a bad thing since they build nice engines and good cars.

However, on the basis of prior....conversations I had in this thread, I found this quote interesting:

The decision to adopt a US-made engine came only days after respected US industry newsletter Edmunds Inside Line reported that Ford of the US was planning to emulate General Motors by using its Australian operation to do the basic engineering work on a new range of rear wheel drive cars for the US market.

"I did see that report,'' Mr Gorman said. ``We want to play a strong role in the global rear wheel drive program going forward, but that's a long way out.''

The Duratec V6 comes in various sizes, petrol and diesel and turbocharged

[MK2]

Suprised that it hadn't come sooner for Ford, don't think GMH have used local product since the mid 80's aside from an assembly line for the V6's to put them together. Neither company is doing well financially though.

[scathing]

The Duratec isn't a bad engine either.

An obviously modified version powers the Noble M12, and it has sik flutter.