Have we come forward much in the last 12-15 years?

[BENT_8]

I tend to agree with the OP.
From a progressive point of view.

From XC to EF we received, EFI, OHC, unleaded engines, 4sp auto, coil sprung rear, plastic fuel cells, Climate control air, Air bags, cruise control, ABS, LPG, power mirrors, remote central locking, trip computers.
None of these things were available before this period in a Falcon.

Since EF we have received, DOHC, forced induction, VCT, semi auto, 5 and 6sp transmissions, IRS, Traction control, and a few gizmos which are evolutions of existing tech, ie; dual zone air, Bluetooth, DSC.

The last 18 years has been about refining/advancing the existing tech.

[burnz]

Originally Posted by BENT_8

I tend to agree with the OP.
From a progressive point of view.

From XC to EF we received, EFI, OHC, unleaded engines, 4sp auto, coil sprung rear, plastic fuel cells, Climate control air, Air bags, cruise control, ABS, LPG, power mirrors, remote central locking, trip computers.
None of these things were available before this period in a Falcon.

Since EF we have received, DOHC, forced induction, VCT, semi auto, 5 and 6sp transmissions, IRS, Traction control, and a few gizmos which are evolutions of existing tech, ie; dual zone air, Bluetooth, DSC.

The last 18 years has been about refining/advancing the existing tech.

well whats left to create on an internal combustion engine?
we are rehashing 1940 tech..

man hasn't invented anything of late, were just improving/over engineering it.

[blackf6]

The worst aspect is the increases in weight. Drop the weight down.

[malazn mafia]

Originally Posted by burnz

well whats left to create on an internal combustion engine?
we are rehashing 1940 tech..

man hasn't invented anything of late, were just improving/over engineering it.

And to come to think of it, cars are still using wheels. Stone Age technology how boring . We should have levitating cars, or cars with legs by now

[Yellow_Festiva]

Originally Posted by zilo

Looks to me like we've put on hundreds of kilograms in the last 20 years.

The VL commodore (with the Nissan engine) was the last of the good commodores in my opinion.

Weighed in at around 1270 kilos.

The current offering is around 1600 kilos.


Such is progress?

Mostly gone into creature comforts and safety systems. I can't remember the exact numbers but my diesel Focus was on par with or slightly heavier than my dads old XF. More electronics, more motors for those electronics, more hardware that you can't see like the air bags etc.

More emphasis on safety, so probably more steel where it counts to achieve that all important 5 star rating so heavily desired.

[burnz]

in the early years of motoring, GM made a 4 speed O/D auto.
people complained so they invented the 2 speed as a stop gap.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by burnz

man hasn't invented anything of late, were just improving/over engineering it.

I wouldn't say that, man has invented/discovered much in the last 10 - 15 years (automotive and non automotive), you only need to google it to see. Yes much ICE related is just improving the technology but at the same time there have been a lot of advancements.

Unfortunately the motoring industry is held back by political agendas, available technology (sometimes linked to the former) and $$.

[Franco Cozzo]

Diesel has come a long way in the last 15 years, common rail etc.

[Crazy Dazz]

I think I understand what the OP is getting at. I kinda feel the same, (and it’s not just about cars.)
I think the perception is somewhat aged based, in that items we saw as luxury (or even aspirational) items growing up are perceived to add value, whereas newer innovations are often lost on the older gen.
So for someone like me who grew up in the 70’s and whose first real car was from that decade. If you asked me then “what is your ‘dream car’ in term s of features?” I would have said aircon, power steer, power windows, decent stereo, EFI OHC, 4sp electronic gearbox, cloth or leather seats, and maybe those new-fangled air-bags the yanks are fitting. FFWD 15~20 years and I have all that in my car and I'm satisfied.
BUT ask a teenager then what they wanted and it would have been multiple air-bags, traction control, stability control, satnav, voice command, Bluetooth, and a bunch of other stuff I don’t even notice.

I do wonder if some things do hit a “ceiling”? 4 valve twin cams are obviously a step up, but will we ever see 8 valves or triple cams? Do we REALLY need 8spd automatic transmissions? How many speakers does a stereo really need? What functions are left that can be power assisted?

[GREGL]

He hasn't made mention of a " B.B.Q. " . It can't be the Hulk surely ?

[HULK_I6T]

Anyways that's my view on the progression of recent times, interested in yours.

[Ford_The_Win]

For the record, the EF was quite a nice car back in it's day. No Falcon has actually outsold it since - 86,000 EF Falcons sold back in 1995, bettered only by 98,000 VT's sold in 1998. I have an EL Futura and an FG XR6. The EL is not a patch on the FG in ANY way shape or form, but having driven a lot of cars from the same era, it was probably the pick of the bunch.

[SPArKy_Dave]

The cars of today, will not age nearly as well as the earlier ones.

For instance -

In 20yrs time, ZF 6 speeds will still cost a motza to rebuild, and near on $1k, just to service/flush.
The Falcon/Territory rear ends, will still be flogging out the bushes every 20,000km.
Territories will continue to rust tailgates and drop front ball joints.

The ICC units will still be failing, and the FG aircon will always be crap.
Ford's load sensing alternators will still cost a ridiculous amount to rebuild.
Territory interior plastics will still be falling apart.

IMO, more cars will be written off a lot earlier in their life, by comparably trivial things.

[SPArKy_Dave]

I agree, the refinement is there, but at what cost to maintain it?
Personally, I think the EF/EL era, is a sweet spot in Ford's history. The balance of refinement, to safety and technology is just right.

Yes, the EF/EL front calipers warp the discs after 100,000 - 150,000km's - BUT, only because that's their rebuild point.
The EF/EL interior's have lasted quite well. (except for the non-leather steering wheels)
Head gaskets typically lasted 150,000 - 200,000km........ again, rebuilds are cheap. Throw in a set of ARP head studs, and the problem is gone.


Move into DOHC six era, 6spd auto's, and IRS rears, and the cost increase is quite significant.
Have to start worrying about crap radiators, torquing up wheel nuts - to prevent DTV warping,
climate control blend door issues, boot seams rusting on the BA-FG's.

one example -
ZF 6 speed rebuild - $4-6k
BTR 4 speed rebuild - $1.5-2.5k.
Borgwarner 3 speed rebuild - $500-1k...

Lifeguard non-gen/gen - $20-40/ltr
TQ95 - $10-20/ltr
Dextron 3 - $5-10/ltr


And just on the Holden front -
VE commodore timing chain and sludging problems in the Alloytec V6's.
Big dollars to fix I've been told.

[RJx307]

There have been great advances, some people will probably want to kill me for mentioning it but now also look at the modern euros...aids to keep the driver awake when they sense you falling asleep, auto braking systems when it senses a collision adaptive cruise control...nightvision....adaptive hids that move with the steering wheel(sure the nf/nl had cornering lamps :P).

This is looking at worldwide though and the leaps we've come not just from an australian only perspective.

[b0son]

Safety ...

Compare ANCAP results for the 5-star VF with the VX

http://www.mynrma.com.au/motoring/re...m-mid-2013.htm
http://www.mynrma.com.au/motoring/re...2000-sedan.htm

Specifically, look at the injury measurements. Head injury scores/acceleration are substantially lower, forces on chest/abdomen/pelvis are also substantially lower.

These have a huge impact on occupant safety, and manufacturers simply don't get near enough credit for these sorts of advances when it comes to analyses of the road toll.

[NX74205]

In a way, I agree with the OP, although I think that's partly because the FGII Falcon isn't the last word in technology. There are better equipped cars for the money, and in terms of equipment levels, I don't think the FGII is as far ahead of an AU as the AU is ahead of the XE (going by 15 year intervals as per thread title). I've never driven an XE so I can't rate how far its driving dynamics are behind the AU's, but while the FGII is vastly superior to an AU, so too is the BA, which I think is somewhat comparable in that sense to the FGII.

Originally Posted by RedHotGT

Wow - really?

So - lets look at this another way...
In 1995 there was a new movie released called Toy Story - you might have heard of it....
It was quite an amazing film at the time, totally rendered digital graphics, Pixar was right at the forefront of the development at the time. It was the first digitally animated box-office film ever made.
It cost them about $30,000,000 to make it.

Fast forward to 2010 - when Toy Story 3 came out...
Just the same right? Animated Kids movie about a Cowboy and a Spaceman.
On screen - it's still animated... but it is way more fluid... It has 'gimmicks' like 3D, and a more in-depth sound experience...
It also cost them about $200,000,000 to make it.

What I'm getting at - is at the end user, the perception is that it's pretty much the same... Sure - a couple of new things like 'real' looking water, and more detailed animations, but has it come REALLY that far in 15 years?
I'll bet the guys in the production area would say YES...

How about Windows 95?? Also made it big in 1995. What's that like compared to Windows 8 today?? You can still type word documents, browse the internet, log in to forums... Not that much more advanced right??

The humble toilet hasn't changed a whole lot over the years either...
What do you expect - when you've got the general concept right... why change it???

Oh - and you say that they've been mostly 'gimmick' style additions...
Ask anyone that's been in a sticky situation on the road who has used the benefits of stability control, EBFD, or all those pesky airbags... I reckon they like advances in those 'gimmicks'...

All well and good, but we're not talking about movies or computers. We're talking about cars, and in particular, Falcons. I'll stipulate to the vast improvement in computer technology - that much is obvious, but the FGII isn't the last word in what is technologically possible with cars. I'm eyeing off the new Mondeo as my next car, and in terms of equipment level, that is leaps and bounds ahead of the FGII. I think that Falcons in the last 15 years haven't come as far forward as it could/should have.

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

I would suggest there has been even greater development in automotive design, manufacturing and marketing over the last 10 years then the earlier period the OP identified.

JP

I'm not sure I agree with that. 10 years ago, we had the magnificent BA Falcon which was the reigning Wheels Car of the Year, and as a driver's car, it's still a damn fine car to drive. I also don't think the FGII is as far ahead of the BA in equipment levels or driving dynamics as the BA was over an EBII.

[Crazy Dazz]

One interesting question is just how much more can we flog from the reciprocating internal combustion engine? It’s an inherently flawed and compromised design.
We have to make the fuel less effective in order to make the engine more effective.
The more efficient an engine, the dirtier it becomes,
And most of the energy still goes out the exhaust pipe.

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by SPArKy_Dave

The EF/EL interior's have lasted quite well. (except for the non-leather steering wheels)

You don't notice things falling off when they were only half put together in the first place...

[FTE]

I currently own a 1997 XH XR8 manual ute and a 1998 AU XR8 manual I can see progress in leaps and bounds for that period. XH represents a combination in my opinion of 70s architecture gelled with a 90s feel yet it isn't close in terms of what years of technology has done in design.
XH is a very good car and apart from the cramped cabin it offers much the same as the AU. What it doesn't have is the 20 years of refinement the newer car has and that is a huge negative if it were an every day drive car.
Vision is good in the old car for blind spots but so is the AU, the AU is much better in the wet and night driving by a long way yet there is only 1 year difference in age.
FG would be much more advanced in safety over both my cars and that's where those extra years of development and design would show.

[mik]

I can think of a couple of other things the modern falcon has, the recent variable steering rack in the current falcons, not forgetting the vast array of engines that far exceed anything in the old cars as far as efficiency or power goes, look at the Egas, look at the 4 potter eco boost, who would have thought years ago a 4 cylinder could push a big falcon to 14 ish second quarter mile and still get decent economy, as for increased servicing costs for the falcon , these are still peanuts compared to some makes, but of course an old simple car will cheaper for major repairs..

[xbxd351]

The progression of technology in general from the late 70s to the early 90s was phenomenal and it will be a long time before that sort of progression happens again The last 15 or so years has been more about refinement. Having a car that lets you update your facebook status and send out tweets while you drive could be seen as a step backwards

[gtfpv]

im going to come forward here and say . no we havent advanced much in cars since the 90's . tape decks to blue tooth is not an advancement . they are just standards of the times . safety wise we have come a little forward , especially with small cars

where we have advanced if i were to compare my fg xr6 against my el futura .

2 things come to mind , everything else being the same . the only advancements the fg has over the EL IS .
ECONOMY EL 450KM - 60 LITRES FG 600- 60 LITRES
AND AIRCON - FG WORKS WELL .
SAFETY - STABILITY CONTROL . SAFER IN WET . THE REST IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME .


SIT IN THE BACK OF AN FG , no headrest means broken necks on rear impact . now bang on about 5 star ratings all you like

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by gtfpv

im going to come forward here and say . no we havent advanced much in cars since the 90's . tape decks to blue tooth is not an advancement . they are just standards of the times . safety wise we have come a little forward , especially with small cars

where we have advanced if i were to compare my fg xr6 against my el futura .

2 things come to mind , everything else being the same . the only advancements the fg has over the EL IS .
ECONOMY EL 450KM - 60 LITRES FG 600- 60 LITRES
AND AIRCON - FG WORKS WELL .
SAFETY - STABILITY CONTROL . SAFER IN WET . THE REST IS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME .


SIT IN THE BACK OF AN FG , no headrest means broken necks on rear impact . now bang on about 5 star ratings all you like

I would argue that A/C has gone backwards in performance. I remember my dad's EAII that had the CFC A/C. So frigidly cold! He had an EF later on that had CFC-free A/C. Nowhere near as good! So that became compromised in performance for the good of the planet. I feel that's where cars have gone now. Compromised in size, comfort, and performance for gains in other areas. I'm not saying that's bad, especially for the areas of improvement, but that's why cars are generally boring and expensive these days.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by chevypower

cars are generally boring and expensive these days.

I may not disagree with you regarding boring, but cars are cheaper/ mor affordable today than they have been for three plus decades. When compared to the average income. Report Was released recently.
http://www.allianz.com.au/car-insura...le-in-35-years

and this is another area where there has been leaps and bounds made in the last 10-20 years. cost to manufacture

JP

[JG66ME]

Originally Posted by RedHotGT

Wow - I actually thought you were taking the p!ss when you wrote that...

So - XC/HX was 1977 - compared to 1995 EF so we're talking 18 years...

Now - to compare the EF 1995 to the FG 2013 thats another 18 years...

So lets think about this:
EF GLi sold new for $30k
It had window winders, a tape deck, a drivers airbag, and was only available to drink petrol.
The brakes weren't that flash, the cup holders were the worst design ever, the knobs would fall off the radio.
In the EF range you did have the option for a station wagon, even a sporty XR6 (which is a positive - and I used to own one!) though the most powerful car in the whole range was the XR8 that rolled out a massive 170kw (where the standard GLi had 157kw).
It was still competing with the VS Commodore - though sold poorly for a number of reasons. Wasn't exactly the Falcon's best car range or shining moment in history.

Let's now talk about the FG XT
Retails for $37k (a $7,000 increase in 18 years is basically NOTHING - I bet you've had a bigger pay rise over all that time)
Standard equipment includes 16" Alloys, LOTS of airbags (not just for the driver), technology options like Bluetooth, Ipod connectivity, CD player, Cruise Control, Traction Control, Dynamic Stability Control, Rear parking sensors, power windows all round, Independent Rear Suspension, ABS, Electronic Brake Force Distribution, plus more...
(all those new technologies seem simple now - because they've been around forever - but developing them wasn't free and were big achievements)
The FG range also includes the option to buy a turbo 4cylinder (Ecoboost), the EcoLPI (LPG), and your regular fuel sipper.
195kw from the Petrol 6cyl (a 25% increase in power) plus better handling and braking performance.
And - the range is quite large with the FG, sure you can't buy the XR8, but you have the option for FPV with the GS/GT range (there was never a true special/collectable model from the EF) and yes - you can't buy a station wagon.

You still reckon there is nothing substantially different after 18 years?
Drive one after the other, and then let me know if you still feel the same......

Agree, don't forget we now have a 6 speed auto and manual trans as well. We have a 97 Fairmont Ghia, had it since 2002 and it has only done 130,000km. It is our second car. I hate driving it. Compared to my FG it is plain awfull. When they where new I loved them but now

Steve

[FNQracing]

The power/fuel economy equation alone has been massive improvement from EF vintage to FG. EF was what, 157kW and made a *LOT* of noise doing it. FG you're close to 200kW (exotic car figures back in the mid 90's) and used appreciably less fuel.

I drive a EF and BF on a regular basis and yes we've come a long way.

When you think about it, Fords biggest leap was BA. AU was really using EL mechanicals (mostly) and was not a big leap. BA was the first Falcon that was equal to its contemporaries in the marketplace as far as the "technology" employed in its drive train and suspension. You could get away (almost) with a live rear end int he mid 90's, but to be pushing that barrow up to 2002-3 in AU was an embarrassment, as was SOHC and oohhh ahhh "VCT" on the old AU lump.

BUT - I sincerely believe that the "better" cars get, they also become more boring. FG's are a great car, but I have more fun driving an old XD.

[Bobman]

EF: Better quality materials in the interior, but the worst problem was the notorious head gasket issue. Once fixed right, was fine. Much smoother car to drive than an FG and tidy Fairmont Ghia & XR models still sought after today.

FG: Faulty HIMs that require dash-out, tailshafts that snap in half, brittle and cheap plastics, thin carpet, heat exchangers that ruin gearboxes, diff bushes that require a whole cradle to come out. All problems that happen inside and outside of warranty regularly.

Owning a new EF in 1994-1996 was much less stressful time than owning an FG now.

In 1999, EF ex cabs were selling for $5000. Now you can't even give away a BF2 ex cab (which normally sell for $1000) and presume FGs will be the same in a couple years.

Cost-cutting and poor design team have been responsible for what was the best selling Falcon in the 90s to a somewhat nice car but too little too late, once most buyers switched across.

[2011G6E]

Fuel economy would be my pick as a staggering advance.

The G6E we used to own regularly got around 8 to maybe 9ltr/100km on the highway. Our current vehicle, a Triton 4x4 twin cab ute with canopy, four cylinder turbo diesel and five speed auto, gets around the 8 to 9ltr/100km on the highway as well...not bad for a heavy four wheel drive.

Then, our 1982 Celica, still pretty much factory standard under the hood except for the anti-pollution which tragically fell off and a foam element ram Flo air cleaner, has a five speed manual and out of it's SOHC two liter gets pretty much what you could expect out of a "normal" four cylinder car in it's day...10ltr/100km. That used to be the magic number for an average four cylinder, 10lt/100. If a four cylinder got that, it was "a good thing" and "economical".

Nowadays if a four cylinder could only just manage that figure, it would be laughed at...come to that, if a six cylinder Falcon couldn't break that figure, it would be pretty sad.

[zilo]

Originally Posted by 2011G6E

Fuel economy would be my pick as a staggering advance.

The G6E we used to own regularly got around 8 to maybe 9ltr/100km on the highway. Our current vehicle, a Triton 4x4 twin cab ute with canopy, four cylinder turbo diesel and five speed auto, gets around the 8 to 9ltr/100km on the highway as well...not bad for a heavy four wheel drive.

You are obviously not comparing apples with apples.
Your new Triton is a diesel and you compare it to a petrol predecessor.

The petrol version of your Triton uses 15-17L/100km on a good day.
Sometimes 25l/100km on a bad day.

Have a read here matey

http://www.4wdaction.com.au/forum/vi...?f=99&t=113929