|
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
|||||||
| The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
07-08-2009, 07:39 PM
|
#16 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 514
|
Hang on. Only 0.6L (AS2877 ave) better per hundred k than a much torquier, quicker ford?
Even at a high 1.50 a litre, that is only 90cents more per hundred k. At 20,000km per year that is only $180 more per year (or $3.60 per week). Add Me (102kg) , the wife (51kg) , two kids (30kg combined) a double stroller (about a million kilos)and endless supplies of kids stuff and I reckon the 3.0 would have to work that much harder to keep up that the six speed falc would be more economical. My old 351 xy (stocko 2v) ute used to tow our old bonwood caravan more economically than the wife's 250 2v xy fairmont. The smaller six had to be worked so much harder. Maybe this isn't relevant but, i thought it might be of interest |
||
|
|
Threaded Mode