2010 Falcon/Territory (speculation)

[Bobman]

That's some impressive economy gains with 9.9L/100km.

Article says there won't be any cosmetic changes. Wonder if that will definitely be the case. They could at least change the wheels on the FPV range & drop the "chrome" headlights on the G6E & G6ET models.

Thanks for posting the article.

[Road_Warrior]

Ding ding! 2011 Territory mule with an FG-style front has been spied:

http://www.caradvice.com.au/65572/20...usted-testing/



Whilst its hard to make out detail with the front all covered up, I'm a little bit concerned at how the FG front is going to 'flow' with the squarish shape of the body. We don't want the Territory looking like the XH :

[Bobman]

Yeah, there has to be some change to the rear as well!

[Road_Warrior]

Obviously there will be, because that car there is only a half-build mule, but my concern was more blending the FG front with the 'old' Territory body.

[JPFS1]

What if it looked like this...??? Thanks to Baji from CA.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by JPFS1

What if it looked like this...??? Thanks to Baji from CA.

I think that looks quite good. Obviously a knockoff of the new Focus front end was used in that CG but i think it works quite well.

Question is, have you seen some early renderings JP? You wouldn't be implying this CG is close to the money would you??

[JPFS1]

I'm not implying anything Swordsman. I just thought it was a great effort and thought we needed some more of this talent showcased! ;)

What I will say about the new Territory is that it will have a much sportier appearance, quite aggressive, and should be viewed as being quite a bit more 'refreshed' that some are suggesting. This is of course on the assumption that they have gone through with the things I knew about early on in the program. Tomorrow I should know more.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by JPFS1

I'm not implying anything Swordsman. I just thought it was a great effort and thought we needed some more of this talent showcased! ;)

What I will say about the new Territory is that it will have a much sportier appearance, quite aggressive, and should be viewed as being quite a bit more 'refreshed' that some are suggesting. This is of course on the assumption that they have gone through with the things I knew about early on in the program. Tomorrow I should know more.

As if you would admit you were implying anything even if you were ha ha!!!

Either way, i see your point RE the 'agressive' nature of the new look. I think alot of people who have the car now would go for any change at all that is more subtantial....whereas some of the owners of rival cars (perhaps who have/will consider territory) have told me the current 'body' is too 'conservative', even terms like 'boxy' and 'square'. I dont' totally agree with this but i see their point. Its a bit BA-esque given its vintage obviously.

The spy photos don't reveal much (as usual) but i still remain concerned that whiel the interior and nose will be quite differnet (it obviously has totally diff lights etc.) maybe the rest of the car won't change that much. Are we talking a 'update' alal AU/BA or a total top hat setup?? Some of the rival cars are a bit bigger and while i think terri is a good size now interior dimensions have become a bit on the 'small' size.

I think with the delay to the program so far Ford has to bite the bullet on this and do a total overhaul. IF those photos are accurate (sans rear end) then i fear it may not be enough to convince some of the swing buyers to take a look.

[Road_Warrior]

Yeah I saw that render on CA. Looks good.

I think the key concern with the new Territory will be whether or not it looks fresh and whether or not the issues of the current model have been addressed.

Swordsman I think you'll find that this is a major mid-cycle revision ala AU to BA. If my thinking is correct, all that will be carried over (in terms of sheetmetal) is the passenger cell and doors. A new top hat would cost more than the $4-500 Million they were allocated for this revision.

We should be lucky we are even getting this revision at all - there must have been a pretty compelling plan or argument put to the beancounters at Dearborn to release the funds for it in the face of the all new Explorer which for all intents and purposes serves the same demographic and market segment.

[Swordsman88]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

We should be lucky we are even getting this revision at all - there must have been a pretty compelling plan or argument put to the beancounters at Dearborn to release the funds for it in the face of the all new Explorer which for all intents and purposes serves the same demographic and market segment.

Yes i think that is part of the issue. With the GRWD/falcon platform situation comign to a head sometime in teh near future decision wise this is almost certainly the last sizeable upgrade to the exisiting aussie platform. After this it will all be one ford related then we shall see what happens RE explorer/territory etc.

[trendkill555666]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Ding ding! 2011 Territory mule with an FG-style front has been spied:

http://www.caradvice.com.au/65572/20...usted-testing/



Whilst its hard to make out detail with the front all covered up, I'm a little bit concerned at how the FG front is going to 'flow' with the squarish shape of the body. We don't want the Territory looking like the XH :

what's wrong with the XH?? :ticking:

i like the CGI but I can't see it coming out with the XR lights, maybe if someone could chop the normal lights on and tone down the front end about I think it would be pretty close.

[BigAL_250]

or maybe add a bonnet scoop and call it a Territory Titanium Turbo or a Territory G6ET

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by trendkill555666

what's wrong with the XH?? :ticking:

Nothing if you're a ute buyer in 1996, but SUV buyers forking out 50 large for a family wagon in 2010 don't want a Frankenstein. Which is why I'm concerned about how well it will all "go together" - new front and rear ends being married up to the existing passenger cell and doors. I'm sure the rear end treatment will look pretty good though.

[superroo]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

I think the key concern with the new Territory will be whether or not it looks fresh and whether or not the issues of the current model have been addressed.

Yes it does look very fresh, and brings it under the "one ford" banner

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Swordsman I think you'll find that this is a major mid-cycle revision ala AU to BA. If my thinking is correct, all that will be carried over (in terms of sheetmetal) is the passenger cell and doors. A new top hat would cost more than the $4-500 Million they were allocated for this revision.

Correct. With that mule shot, it does not have the updated rear sheet metal (it's development/production was delayed). My sources reckon it will be on the next build, which will be end of the year-ish

Cheers

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Nothing if you're a ute buyer in 1996, but SUV buyers forking out 50 large for a family wagon in 2010 don't want a Frankenstein. Which is why I'm concerned about how well it will all "go together" - new front and rear ends being married up to the existing passenger cell and doors. I'm sure the rear end treatment will look pretty good though.

Think about what's being retained and what's being changed.
Except for roof line, pillars and rear hatch frame, almost everything else seen is being changed...

Even if that happens, we should be prepared for the chorus of whingers
proclaiming that is looks little changed from the old one (sound familiar?)

[prydey]

Originally Posted by HSE2

The way FPV work via the supposed mantra suggests that a FPV product must contain or do three things.

One of which includes the term "substantial" power increase over the donor product or words to that effect.

Since the Xr8 has had a bigger brother, that "substantial" has meant 30kws 30kws and 25 kws.

If history is a guide and that’s no certainty the GT will be somewhere around 340 to 345ish or perhaps a version of it will be.

As the F6 is based on the Xr6T the first series enjoyed 30 kws which was the norm, but the second series received 40 kws. There is no real pattern that is usable to predict the F6 power over the GT or under the GT. It started life 20 kws down and is now only 5 kws down. You could suggest that it might surpass the GT at that rate ;)
If the assumption is correct and that the new XR8 is taking off when the current GT sits then it’s probably reasonable to assume the current F6 becomes the XR6 spec engine. Possibly not accurate though.

is there any law that says the car manufacturers have to accurately advertise power figures. obviously the manufacturer will want it to be enticing and accurate but if they are worried that the ever increasing output numbers might get some unwanted attention from the govt, could they 'underate' it in the brochures and badging?

i get the feeling they may have already gone down this path with the fg f6, as there are a lot of stock standard ones spitting out numbers on a dyno that would mean they have a lot more than 310kw at the fly.

just wondering if there were laws governing this or can ford say the new gt will have xxx power, knowing full well it is more than that.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by prydey

is there any law that says the car manufacturers have to accurately advertise power figures. obviously the manufacturer will want it to be enticing and accurate but if they are worried that the ever increasing output numbers might get some unwanted attention from the govt, could they 'underate' it in the brochures and badging?

i get the feeling they may have already gone down this path with the fg f6, as there are a lot of stock standard ones spitting out numbers on a dyno that would mean they have a lot more than 310kw at the fly.

just wondering if there were laws governing this or can ford say the new gt will have xxx power, knowing full well it is more than that.

There's nothing wrong with manufacturers understating the power/torque of their engines,
the problems usually only occur when figures are overstated and they get caught out....

[Gaz]

Just say it's 330kw@6000rpm and be accurate, just forget to mention that it produces 350kw@6800rpm :monkes:

Your quoting an accurate power figure, just not the max power figure. (However I think DOT would want the max power figure)

[Trendseeker]

One of the guys who commented in the blog at the end of the article posted his own design for the new Territory.



What do you reckon?

[Brazen]

I think that front end would be perfect for a car built in 2010. Toyota sells cars not because they look good but because they look new. A 5 year old Yaris could have been released yesterday, a 3 year old Camry looks like it could have come out yesterday.

No more pussyfooting around with designs from the 90s. I love that concept picture.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by 2008WhiteSR

What do you reckon?

i reckon you should have looked on the previous page. pic already posted.

[prydey]

Originally Posted by jpd80

There's nothing wrong with manufacturers understating the power/torque of their engines,

the reason i ask, is because if ford and holden continue to try to outdo each other, i do reckon the govt will step in, given the increase in nanny laws of late.

i realise you have many euro's with more power but ford's and holden's are well within the reach (financially) of a lot of people, whereas the euro's are not.

the other thing the manufacturers will do, which they have already started doing, is as they raise the engine power, they alter the gearing. there is a small performance increase time wise along with an economy gain. we'll see final drives well back in the 2.xx range with a tallish 6th for cheap cruising.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by prydey

the reason i ask, is because if ford and holden continue to try to outdo each other, i do reckon the govt will step in, given the increase in nanny laws of late.

The government is quite comfortable with Ford and Holden, most of their High performance vehicles are priced high enough not to atract that many people. Last year Ford/FPV sold 2,500 V8s and 4,600 I-6Ts, that's a drop in the bucket of total cars sales...

[Gaz]

Originally Posted by prydey

the reason i ask, is because if ford and holden continue to try to outdo each other, i do reckon the govt will step in, given the increase in nanny laws of late.

i realise you have many euro's with more power but ford's and holden's are well within the reach (financially) of a lot of people, whereas the euro's are not.

Given the Govt has approved all sorts of exotics with stupid power figures as long as the Ford's and Holden's meet ADR's theres bugger all the Govt can do. In these times they would be very bloody brave to even attempt to go there.

[phillyc]

If the new Territory ended up looking something like the Mercedes M-Class, then I reckon it would be a winner, particularly with an FG interior and good diesel.

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Even if that happens, we should be prepared for the chorus of whingers
proclaiming that is looks little changed from the old one (sound familiar?)

Yep, and that's exactly why I'm concerned. Because some of those whingers write columns for some "motoring" websites that feed into Australia's major news papers.

[Chopped]

[XR8putts]

Originally Posted by Chopped

I dont think it will look anything like that..

[block58]

Originally Posted by puts99

I dont think it will look anything like that..

Yes, while it is a good photochop, that wouldnt be different enough for consumers.

[R-Design]

Looking at the spy shot in post 272 I think you'll find post 297 is a lot more likely than 275. It will be interesting to see how much (if any) 'post FG Falcon' Ford Kinetic Design (Kuga / Fiesta / Focus) is incorporated though.