Raptor

Pics of JETXR here; http://fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=5181

Try checking your first post. What Repco specials? Are these available for $99 in NSW?

.....and Territory hehehe Premium is standard in BOTH the mid-spec TS and hi-spec Ghia Territory. Prestige is an option in the base-spec TX. Go figure. Made me happy with a TS! Now for the turbo

I guess it all depends on who you are! No pics at this page http://www.uteman.com/articles/pdf/Trekka.pdf but it's listed in the specs and I have seen the article in Australian Ute magazine. It definitely has the Premium ICC with dual zone climate control. So yes, it can be done.

Is lack of a turbo option considered a driveline problem ?

There's even in XR6 owner on this board that lives there!

My plan exactly, though I'm holding off until next year. I'm 39 too.

Yes and No Falchoon. Yes, an auto will have a greater loss than a manual throughout the range but it may vary depending on load/revs etc. No, in the sense that power is produced as a response to load. It is not produced (independant of load) for any given rpm. Consider your car at say 2500rpm on a flat open highway. Is it producing what ever a dyno graph says it should at 2500rpm (where it is under full load) or is it only producing enough power to maintain a given speed, overcome road/wind/mechanical losses etc. Naturally the latter. Now under load (heavy acceleration for example) the car will produce the maximum power that it can, lets say up to the limit of adhesion of the wheels (assuming that much power is available). A MANUAL car which has fixed gearing (per gear) at a given road speed will have a defined rpm and the power available could be read from a dyno chart. Now an AUTO at that same speed may have a different gear ratio in play (g/box &/or diff) but could also have some convertor slippage occuring (likely under hard acceleration) so could well be higher in the rev range than the manual car at the same speed. So the nett power available (at the wheels at that speed) to accelerate the car could be the same (or higher or lower), than the manuals. It is only at the revs where peak power occurs that the manual will always have more available to the wheels than an auto. Highly theoretical but I hope that makes some sense. Drag racers use auto's for a reason. Road racers use manuals for a reason. I rarely drive my road car (note:- it's not a race car) under max load conditions at peak power revs so I'd much rather the convenience of an auto for the 99.95% of the time that I'm somewhere else in the rev range. Plus, I'll probably be faster away from the lights than an equivalent manual car (or at least surge my nose ahead when they change into 2nd).

You young blokes love your manuals don't you. With an auto it's pointless looking at the gear ratios because there is a fluid coupling (torque convertor) between the engine and the box not a normal clutch that basically acts like an on/off switch once you are moving. What all this means is that the effective ratio between the engine and the rear wheels can be much lower than a manual 1st gear as the torque convertor allows some slip. Also, the engine is able to stay on boost as there is no disengaging of the power flow between the gears as the torque convertor handles that step changes. 10-15kw less at the wheels for an auto. Sure if you only want to look at PEAK power. Through the rest of the rev range the auto will be doing just as good a job (if not better) at putting any available power to the ground. I used to despise auto too when I was younger. But provided I'm in a reasonable torquey car I'd never get a manual again for a road car. Manuals are yesterdays technology (let the flaming begin), Auto are Today's technology, especially with SSS or whatever they are calling it, CVT is the future.

Gimme a break, the country has been metric for longer than that. Still HP and mpg means as much to me as kW and l/100kms. 5250 seems to ring some bells but I never could make much sense of imperial conversions and I don't have any reference books handy. Yes XFwannaBA. It has something to do with that circle thing (Pi).

Power(watts) = Torque (Nm) x revs (radians/second) Lets see if I can work this through; 1 revolution = 2xPi (Pi=3.142 etc), therefore RPM = 2x3.142/60 (rads/sec) = 0.104733333 Power (kW) = Torque (Nm) x RPM x 0.1047333/1000 OR Power (kW) = Torque (Nm) x RPM / 9548 and Torque (Nm) = Power (kW) x 9548 / RPM QED! (Yes, I did do an engineering degree back in the mid 80's. Amazing what stays in the memory)

1984......................in 1984 I was earning my own wage and had moved out of mum & dad place a few years ago. None of this living at home doing SFA well into your 20's or 30's. Now when I was ....................

F*&% Marketing. Am I too old for a career change into Product Development, you should have made this at least 5 years ago. (When you had the cash instead of making AU)

Raptor was the vehicle codename before it had been officially approved. Once approved the internal Ford Code of E265 was applied. The R7 concept vehicle is probably something like what it will be, testing public reaction. Modified Falcon platform and drivetrains, RWD and AWD likely to be offered. Its due in 2004. The US are doing something similar called the Freestyle. (Do a Google search for the concept vehicle just released at the Detroit show last month, called "Freestyle FX" (it was going to be called CrossTrainer initially). Compare that to our R7 concept, similar or what, even a bit of R5 with that opening back. To probably mis-quote Mr Polites; It takes the best from the currently available configurations of; sedan, hatch, people mover, 4wd wagon and ute without accepting too many compromises. He also said no one else has one yet. Is that a better description harasn? Glad to know that it's nothing like the SSX.

Yes, I know. It was a concept car. I loved it, very classy. It had 6 cylinder and forced induction (amongst other things)! Where's the production version FPV?

I agree with those that think this isn't going to happen, for all of the reasons posted above. It would be nice though, those Ghias ooze class. Slime, your giving this sales guy waaayyyy too much credit. They wouldn't have a clue what the factory has coming. He probably went quiet and got sheepish cause he was thinking " ...bloody hell, another potential customer that knows more than me about the product, I wonder which bulletin this bit of news was in that I didn't bother reading..."

Poor form I reckon. My 1994 ED Falcon has a nice glossy coat of body colour in the engine bay. How hard is that to do Ford.

I certainly consider the XR6T a Ford Performance Vehicle and don't really care for badges at all. If it was to wear FPV badges it would probably cost more so I'm voting No. Clean = Class!

Out of those choices Pepsi. But I'd rather a Scotch & Dry.

Well, while I'm not a buyer (Yet! oh the temptation) I must say that in the Phantom XR6T that I was lucky enough to score a ride in the Plexis pattern was a bit loud for my tastes. This seems to be becoming a common theme here. Has the BA team got something wrong? Also not a great fan of leather - is there any other option?

Me too, I'm holding out for Raptor(E265). I REALLY hope it comes out with the turbo. Thou the temptation to get into an XR6T (sedan) is hard to resist.

Well the Engineering degree doesn't explain that one. Mr Plow, why the change in pressures? Why 40+psi in the 17's but lower pressures in 19's. What am I missing here? Aren't these higher pressures just to protect the rim from impact damage. I need some large diameter wheel/tyre education. I feel I'm being left behind on my 15's. Help!

Yep, I've got one of them too!

I don't think you can call that a naming convention! They have three models GT, GT-P and Pursuit. If it happens I would like it to be called ........ PREDATOR!

Sad but true - Fleet sales (bread & butter models) will take production priority. Besides what's more important to Ford right now - making a profit or catching Expensive Daewoo in the sales race? That'll come in time. Interesting article in the latest Motor Mag from the guy that used to run redbook or something. Claims the AU sales failure has as much or more to do with EL discounting (when EL was sold alongside VT for ~18mnths) than it did on the AU looks. This destroyed resale value and fleet managers and anyone else on a salary package who chose Ford got burnt at changeover time. So they swapped camps. The trick for Ford now is to convince these people that resale values will recover with BA and hope that all has been forgiven. This guy states that whoever discounts first to win sales now will ultimately be the loser. So who's discounting and who has buyers waiting months for deliveries? Interesting!