Hard Choice of Engine

**cowpoos** · 6th December 2005, 13:53

Originally Posted by scumdog

Turbo? another gizmo to possibly go wrong, part of the slide downhill since over-hade valves came in....too many complicated gubbins a-whizzing around.

you scared of technology harley rider...?????

**Drunken Monkey** · 6th December 2005, 16:01

Originally Posted by cowpoos

I'll bite your arse.....if you nibble on my nuts a little

Save the pillow talk for tonight, dear.

**Drunken Monkey** · 6th December 2005, 16:03

Originally Posted by Yokai

Lighter weight = less fuel. Less fuel = more money. Buy the Turbo. Also has better resale to the DumpValve posse!

It's all relative. You'd be lucky if you run less than 17L per 100km around town in the XR6 Turbo. The mileage is a lot better on the open road, but then the XR8 does that better again anyway. They're both thirsty buggers, actually.

**Motu** · 6th December 2005, 17:32

These 2 motors have been around nearly as long as I have,that inline six is the same block as what was originaly in the first 170 Falcon in 1632AD,with a Swedish massage.Tane knows how many heads it's had...about 8 I think,maybe more.Anyway,back in 197? an XB 302 V8 was more economical than the 250 6cyl - nothing else has changed,why should the economy?

**RiderInBlack** · 6th December 2005, 20:09

Originally Posted by Motu

These 2 motors have been around nearly as long as I have,that inline six is the same block as what was originaly in the first 170 Falcon in 1632AD,with a Swedish massage.Tane knows how many heads it's had...about 8 I think,maybe more.Anyway,back in 197? an XB 302 V8 was more economical than the 250 6cyl - nothing else has changed,why should the economy?

Is that the same as the one that was in my old XA Fell-Coon? Had the 200 straight 6 but swapped to the 250 when I did the short-block (cheaper). The head, cams, sump, and even the bore size and pistons were the same. All ford had done was lengthen the stroke. Should have stayed with the 200. It was the better motor (better power and less fuel).

**scumdog** · 6th December 2005, 23:14

Originally Posted by RiderInBlack

Is that the same as the one that was in my old XA Fell-Coon? Had the 200 straight 6 but swapped to the 250 when I did the short-block (cheaper). The head, cams, sump, and even the bore size and pistons were the same. All ford had done was lengthen the stroke. Should have stayed with the 200. It was the better motor (better power and less fuel).

Nah, 250 pre-crossflow had HEAPS more torque than a 200, even more at real low revs than a 302 Cleveland.

250 was the last 6 cylinder car engine with a stroke bigger than its bore, hence its torque - and inability to rev.

**Motu** · 7th December 2005, 06:43

The old red rocker cover 250 was fucking orsome,I had one in my '79 XC wagon rather than the stupid Xflow.The old 250 made max torque at 1600 rpm - that's converter stall speed....floor the throttle at the lights and it's doing 1600rpm,it'd be across the intersection before anything else started to move,but by then the show would be over and anything could pass it.But for sheer bottom end punch not much can out pull a 250.

**cowpoos** · 7th December 2005, 09:45

Originally Posted by Drunken Monkey

Save the pillow talk for tonight, dear.

oh...your just so naughty....Te He He He He....

**StoneChucker** · 7th December 2005, 21:08

You guys are supposed to unanimously agree on one choice. It's damn well 50/50 now. Shit, I still have no idea. XR6-T is lighter yes, but I'm not worried about fuel economy. If I were, I'd buy a Toyota Prius.

The impression I have so far is that the XR6-T is better balanced and easier to drive. It out performs the XR8 off the line, and everywhere else they are so similar there's no real distinguishable difference. I don't plan to use the XR8 top end power, as I've had my days of being the fastest thing on the road. I do like the rumble of the V8, but I prefer being quicker off the line. While the bonnet bulge is seriously macho, I can live with out it.

There is no real answer. I've only test ridden them as a passenger. When I'm ready I'll go back and have a go, and try deciding after that.

Unfortunately I suspect Ford will seriously bitch slap me if I come back with a mechanical problem, after I've modified it on the sly. So no, I'm not going to modify it while it's in the warranty period. I wonder if I can speak to people who have bought from Ford, and ask them what their feeling is now (like if they wished they'd bought the other one.)

And, I don't know when, and even if I'm buying. I hope so, but ACC might say nope, you gotta get a Mondeo or Astra, which is fine too I guess.
Cheers.

**Cookie** · 7th December 2005, 21:37

StoneChucker, Here is my 2 cents worth as the owner of an AU Fairmont Ghia VCT 6.

If you are after "bang for your buck", buy a Ford and ignore the crowing of the Holden owners after every Bathhust win. Under the body, the super cars are nothing like the ones we buy at the local dealer so in my opinion, the whole Ford vs Holden thing is based on vehicles I could never own anyway - so who gives a monkeys?

These guys are pleasant to talk to: http://www.trueblueford.com/

If you want to be thrown seriously back in your seat on demand, buy a turbo.

If you like the V8 noise, buy a V8.

Drive and decide. I have driven the BA 6 (non-turbo) and didn't like it. Felt like driving a sewing machine.

Oh and get a loan for the petrol you are going to be guzzling.

Buy the way - I owned a 2 litre twin-turbo Supra which could thrash my 4 litre Ford any day - but I know which one I would rather tow a trailor with. It all depends on what you want.

Enjoy.

**Motu** · 7th December 2005, 22:22

Taxi drivers won't go near a Holden,but from my end fixing cars....we do 10 Falcons to one Commodore....

**Cookie** · 7th December 2005, 22:41

For the AU, a few Taxi divers have told me the two things that need replacing the most are brake disks (makes sense - all autos in that model and they are not what I would call "light" vehicles), and the transmission (some reporting the need for a reconditioned one at less than 200K).

I have 170K on the clock (most of it done by the previous lease owner). I have replaced the front disks but the transmission seems okay - mind you I don't hammer it much...

What are your experiences Motu?

**Motu** · 8th December 2005, 06:34

Falcons are real hard on brakes,at 70,000km it's rotors and pads all round,$1000 worth or more,then you get to do it all again at 140,000km.Some of the taxi drivers put in soft pads to save the rotors and replace every 15,000km,just a few weeks running.Some not very happy Ford owners and us garages often get the blame for doing shoddy work....