|
|
|
|
|
|
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 |
12-08-2010, 08:42 PM
|
#1 | ||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Round Corner Dural
Posts: 121
|
Just been checking out the 50th Anniversary range at my local dealer. Very nice.
I noticed that the sedan fuel sticker was 9.9l/100kms, whereas the ute was rated at 10.6. Wouldn't the sedan be heavier than the ute and therefore use more fuel rather than less? I guess a sedan would be more aerodynamic, but surely enough to make that much difference. Surely weight is a bigger factor in this case. Do the utes have different gear or diff ratios? Can some of you Falcon experts out there please explain why is it so. |
||
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 08:43 PM
|
#2 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canberra Region
Posts: 8,890
|
Ute is heavier.
Seperate rear chassis, and also longer.
__________________
2016 FGX XR8 Sprint, 6speed manual, Kinetic Blue #170 2004 BA wagon RTV project. 1998 EL XR8, Auto, Hot Chilli Red 1993 ED XR6, 5speed, Polynesian Green. 1 of 329. Retired 1968 XT Falcon 500 wagon, 3 on the tree, 3.6L. Patina project. |
||
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 08:44 PM
|
#3 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ...in the shed
Posts: 3,386
|
Larger tank though
|
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 09:07 PM
|
#4 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: whitsundays
Posts: 1,340
|
cause there full of tools,esky,dog,gum boots and gravel and leaves that you didn't quite clean out last time you loaded it up
|
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 09:24 PM
|
#5 | ||
|
sucksqueezebangblow
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 748
|
the utes square *** would be as aerodynamic either.
__________________
previous:-> 74 KE20 4AGTE, 04 RZN149R, 01 AE112R, 01 KR42R, 84 E30 318i, 67 MINI DELUX, 06 BF XR6T, 08 V50 T5 AWD , MY13 ISUZU D-MAX 4X4 current:-> 16 SS Sportwagon, 19 Everest BiTurbo 4WD |
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 10:33 PM
|
#6 | ||
|
BLUE OVAL INC.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,625
|
Final Drive...?
|
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 10:36 PM
|
#7 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: brisbane
Posts: 509
|
same final drive they are just heavier and probably less aerodynamic
|
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 10:39 PM
|
#8 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 545
|
Tuned a bit richer i suppose, because of the work it would do.
|
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 10:53 PM
|
#9 | ||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Round Corner Dural
Posts: 121
|
You're right - the ute is heavier, but only just - 1685 for the sedan v 1745 for the ute - a difference of 60 kgs or about 3.5% heavier.
But the fuel use is about 7% more. So it still doesn't add up to me based soley on weight. Any other theories? |
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 11:18 PM
|
#10 | ||||
|
Life begins at 40
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Melbourne. Socialist capital of Victoriastan.
Posts: 3,715
|
Quote:
__________________
Quote:
Justice is what you get when you run out of money.
|
||||
|
|
|
| This user likes this post: |
|
12-08-2010, 11:32 PM
|
#11 | ||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 42
|
ute drivers have a heavier foot?
Glad you started this topic, I had always thought my ute uses more fuel |
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 11:33 PM
|
#12 | |||
|
Falcon RTV - FG G6ET
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: In Da Bush, QLD
Posts: 31,156
|
Quote:
Mmmm, sounds good!
__________________
 BAII RTV - with Raptor V S/C. RTV Power FG G6ET 50th Anniversary in Sensation. While the basic Ford Six was code named Barra, the Turbo version clearly deserved its very own moniker – again enter Gordon Barfield.
We asked him if the engine had actually been called “Seagull” and how that came about. “Actually it was just call “Gull”, because I named it that. Because we knew it was going to poo on everything”. |
|||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 11:36 PM
|
#13 | ||
|
Getting it done.....
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 2,219
|
Yes, there is a weight difference. But really, this is all about aero, aero, aero. Illustrates just how much gain manufacturers have put into this area in the last 5-10 years especially. The sedan may have a bigger cab but its much superior aerodynamics mean it burns less esp on the highway. Its all about 'boundary layer' air etc. Bit beyond my understanding but basically behind the ute cab is a large rolling mass of air (think of an edy behind a wave at the beach or jetty) which in itself imparts drag. The sedan has a smooth cabin/boot in this area and the air just sticks to the body of the car till it smoothly exits behind the rear. Hence no imparted drag. Therefore lower fuel burn...
__________________
Dynamic White 1995 EF XR6 Auto Now with: Pacemaker 4499s Lukey Catback Exhaust Chrome BA XR-style tip Airdam Mounted CAI with modified (bellmouth) airbox Trip Computer install KYB shocks Bridgestone Adrenalin tyres Coming Soon: Exhaust Overhaul..... |
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 11:43 PM
|
#14 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Perth
Posts: 619
|
put the tailgate down and the economy should improve a little, either that or get a soft/hard lid for the tray.
But yeah, basically comes down to aero, if the ute were lighter it'd probably still use more fuel.. Isn't that why holden fans put big wings on the back of commonwhore utes? to take full advantage of any tail winds?
__________________
Shed cleanout.. Pictures and prices here Dynamat type product Group Buy Here(Round 2) |
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 11:49 PM
|
#15 | |||
|
I was correct - AGAIN
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Third rock from the sun
Posts: 1,801
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 11:50 PM
|
#16 | ||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 42
|
I have always got my toneau cover on and its just as bad really.
Sooooo would that mean the power bulge hard covers would improve the fuel efficiency or even a canopy? The horrible aerodynamics makes a lot of sense now, more fuel is simply required to move the vehicle through the air. *goes off to look for wind tunnel tests* edit: found something on this forum http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11237213 |
||
|
|
|
|
12-08-2010, 11:59 PM
|
#17 | ||
|
Starter Motor
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Gunalda Qld
Posts: 11
|
my 77 F250 4x4 averages 11.5 / 100, hwy plus city, it has a style side and canopy
|
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 12:04 AM
|
#18 | ||
|
Formally kotevski22
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Shellharbour
Posts: 696
|
They carry a lot more tons,that is the reason it uses 0.7L\100km more fuel.
|
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 01:36 AM
|
#19 | ||
|
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ipswich QLD
Posts: 4,697
|
my guess is the extra percentage un accounted for with the weight gains is made up with the heavier foot...or more confident drivind style of a ute with so much more vision available. Dont forget the ford guys who worked these numbers out test drove them aswell...lol
|
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 10:24 AM
|
#20 | |||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Melbourne, Vic
Posts: 421
|
Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 10:54 AM
|
#21 | ||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: tweed heads nsw
Posts: 90
|
i can pull better full economy out of my ute than a sedan ive got 04 ba xls with a cannopy on the back ive had it around .08/100ks loaded
|
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 11:12 AM
|
#22 | |||
|
More money would be great
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Capalaba, Brisbane
Posts: 278
|
Quote:
__________________
NOTHIN' AT THE MOMENT! |
|||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 11:20 AM
|
#23 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,215
|
I would say that there is really bugger all in it, sedan vs ute. but the tray back is were they use a lot more fuel on the highway.
|
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 12:31 PM
|
#24 | |||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,312
|
Quote:
__________________
My ride: 2007 Falcon Ute BF XR8 Orange, MTO. |
|||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 03:06 PM
|
#25 | |||
|
Greys tuf too :-)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Perth, SOR
Posts: 596
|
Quote:
Well i can say BA's were not designed that way. My old XLS with soft cover, out on the highway you could see the wind push the cover down into the tray just in front of the tailgate. I know with the BA series there was defianetly different Diff ratios between sedan and XL ute which will contibute to economy differences, also up until recently the bases model utes were only available with the 4spd auto not the 6 so perhaps thats also a contributing factor. |
|||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 05:12 PM
|
#26 | ||
|
Starter Motor
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 19
|
Does the ute sit higher off the ground(aero drag)? or maybe they test the ute with a load in the tray? plus do the utes still have the radio antenna on the roof(aero drag)?
sorry I can't answer any questions, just making more. |
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 05:50 PM
|
#27 | ||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NSW Central Coast
Posts: 114
|
The fuel consumption tests are carried out in a Lab by the vehicle's manufacturer and the data is then passed onto the relevant government authority, The Dept of Transport and Regional Services. The "urban" part of the test is simulated by stop - start type driving as you would expect in any city type driving. The "Extra Urban" (Highway) part is simulated by a constant smooth type of driving as you would expect on any motorway. Environmental factors play no part (wind etc), nor do aerodynamic features (Eg. tailgate down) factor into the test. Picture your car sitting in a workshop being driven on a device similar to a dyno (but not a dyno) and that is how the test is conducted. With that in mind, barring any gearing differences between the ute and the sedan, I imagine you'd have to look at the different weight issues. Maybe this can explain the economy differences?
The other possibility/variable would be the manufacturer's standard tune for the ute compare to the standard tune for the sedan? Last edited by GYRKIN GT; 13-08-2010 at 06:06 PM. |
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 06:04 PM
|
#28 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Golden Grove, SA
Posts: 1,333
|
Are you looking at N/A or turbo? Becuase as far as im aware in the N/A's the sedan comes in both 5 and 6 speed auto, and the ute only comes in 5 speed auto. This could be why? Your looking at the specs for a 6 speed sedan and a 5 speed ute? I could be wrong though.
__________________
'96 EL Fairmont Ghia 5L |
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 06:39 PM
|
#29 | ||
|
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Round Corner Dural
Posts: 121
|
I was comparing a 50th anniversary XR6 normally aspirated six speed auto ute with a 50th anniversary XR6 normally aspirated six speed auto sedan. The only difference was one was a ute and one was a sedan. Heck they were even the same colour!!!!(so no one come back and tell me the red one uses more fuel because red cars go faster)
|
||
|
|
|
|
13-08-2010, 09:31 PM
|
#30 | ||
|
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 3,246
|
Well, I've got two AU and the Ute uses more fuel on the highway. Yes there is a some weight difference. But the real issue as pointed to by many is the aero.
Tske a look at the smoothness of the underside of the sedan and it's not too bad. Under the rear of the Ute it is all over the shop with massive rises and falls. Under vehicle aero is much more important than people give credit for! To the OP, if your looking to buy, now is a really good time to get into a new Falcon! I've just started looking myself.
__________________
BA2 XR8 Rapid M6 Ute - Lid - Tint -18s 226.8rwkW@178kmh/537Nm@140kmh 1/9/2013 14.2@163kmh 23/10/2013 Boss349 built. Not yet run. Waiting on a shell. Retrotech thread http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...1363569&page=6 |
||
|
|
|
Why do utes use more fuel than sedans?
Linear Mode
