BrentS

I agree Mondie. For the past 15 years ford have paid severely for dropping the V8, and only now have they really redeemed themselves with the BA. Technology is always changing, and whilst the XR6 has the edge on the XR8 at the moment, that may change as the cars and technology progress. 5 years ago everybody would have laughed at the prospect of a Falcon with a double overhead cam 6 and a quad cam V8. Things change. Just look at how companies such as Mercedes, Jaguar, BMW etc have put more and more V8s into their range of cars, all thanks to ongoing development. Sooner or later, Ford Australia may be able to source an all-alloy V8 block which would go a long way to fixing the nose-heavy characteritics of the XR8. Imagine 50kgs less over the front wheels, plus a V8 that revs cleanly to 6,500rpm thanks to a more modern bottom end??? Ford would be crazy to forego that sort of future potential. I reckon the current BA performance car range is fantastic, and gives us choice like we've never had before. It'll only get better with time.

Thanks guys. I realise my only leverage is the fleet discount, and already I've seen that quite a few members of this forum have had varying success in negotiating fleet prices on their XR6Ts after originally being told "no discount". I suppose if Ford want to build some brand image, they should be keen to get a few GTs out on the road, so I might just test the water with a few dealers and see how I go.

Hi all, I've been tentatively looking at both the XR6T and the GT, and trying to do the financial sums for each. Whilst I qualify for fleet discount, the demand and waiting list on the XR6T is already well-known, and I don't hold a great deal of hope for much of a discount on the T. That leaves the GT. Does anybody know if Ford are actually selling any? Is there a waiting list, and if not, I wonder if Ford may be more willing to do a decent deal on a GT, and opposed to the "take a number and stand in line" mentality of the dealers when it comes to the XR6T??? Feedback on any personal experiences you may have had (or heard about) in this regard would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks. Brent.

New review on the GT-P from Autoweb: http://www.autoweb.com.au/cms/A_1805/article.html

I agree MercTurbo. The XR8 got a great review when it was put up against the SS and the Clubsport a few months ago in another article. I suppose that the GT shows the Ford V8 at its best, and the XR6T illustrates the excitement, refinement & nimble handling of the turbo, so the lesser-powered XR8 is only ever going to fall somewhere in between. To me, it still rates pretty highly as a competent competitor to the SS, even if its no GT. The XR8 was criticised for having a too soft front end which was tuned too much for comfort. However, I'd bet that if Ford stiffened the front springs up, you'd read in another article how the car rides roughly, bangs over potholes, and skips nervously over bumps. Tough to please everyone I suppose.

Had a full read of the Motor Mag article last night (couldn't wait till I got home so read most of it on the train!!!). It was a great read having all those cars effectively tested back-to-back. The article confirmed what we already know in that the T is an awesome car that lifts the bar to a higher level in terms of all round performance, sophistication and value. I can't remember the exact numbers, but I was astounded (and quietly pleased) by the massive variation in rear wheel power by supposedly identical Gen III engines. Seems that its a complete lottery as to whether you get a rabbit or a slug with those things. I noted in the commentary that Motor would have liked to run this test a few months ago, but wanted the Ford V8s to be run in a bit more, and I think that these engines are showing a bit more of their real world potential with some pretty impressive rear wheel output figures, especially the GT which pipped the 300kw GTS by 3kw at the rears. That's more like it!!! A pretty impressive effort by Ford to get 1st and 2nd place with the T and GT respectively. The Blue Oval's back, at last!!!!!!

I'll definitely be racing out to grab a copy too! I agree with the other posts so far re: the poor rating of the XR8. I haven't driven one so I'm probably talking a little out of school, but from what I can ascertain, the XR8 in itself is a good car, but squashed between the XR6 T and the GT which are better value at their price points. Personally, I think the XR8 should be say, $1,500-2,000 more than the "T" in recognition that it's no better in performance, but simply offers a V8 for those who want the engine note or feel of a V8. However, given the hand-built nature of the engine and different transmission its probably more expensive to build than the T, so there'll always probably have to be some price premium. However, by the time you whack leather seats, 18 inch wheels and premium sound into it, the GT comes tantalisingly close. If I was in the market for an 8, I reckon I'd go without eating for a few more months and stretch for the GT.

Sounds fantastic, and no doubt there's a fair bit of potential in all this. However, for all those not fortunate enough to own their own professional workshop, I think we need to tread a little carefully here. 330+kw and 500+Nm of torque represents a massive amount of internal stress on the engine. I'm no automotive engineer, but obvious weak points may be the rings, pistons, conrods, main bearings, crank, tailshaft, and diff. The durability of even just the stock engine really hasn't been tested by average owners yet, so for all we know there may be issues with the stock engine after 80,000kms (although I'd hope not!!!). I realise there are many variables affecting engine reliability, but I think lots of folks out there should just err a little on the side of caution until some real durability issues are sorted. Then again, if you're only going to keep the car for 2 years, then GO CRAZY!!!!!!

Turbo6man, I take your point, and hey, at the end of the day my point is just an opinion. When I thought about this topic, the overwhelming thing in my mind was that for the last 12 or so years since I've been driving, locally made performance cars have had a bloody pathetic resale history (especially Ford), and it's always been us, the poor customer, who has had to wear it. Why is this the case?.....stuffed if I know. Maybe they build too many XRs for all I know, or maybe they're too cheap!!! Who really knows??? All I was saying was that a proliferation of hybrid cars which consist of a mix and match of engines, transmissions, body stying etc from performance and non-performance models may not exactly help the resale problem we have faced for the last two decades. I hope you are indeed correct and XR values will not be effected at all. Time will tell.

Guys, Hang on, wait a moment here. I never said that people should stop modding their cars to make them individual..........if some guy's idea of a great car is a Hyundai Excel with 3 inch exhaust, Oakley stickers & a rear wing as big as a malibu surfboard, then so be it, each to their own. I too love the idea of whacking on 17 inch wheels or leather seats in a car to make it a bit individual. What I'm saying is that a few personal mods is a little different to the uncontrolled swapping of genuine factory equipment onto other models, especially engines or bodywork that is supposedly exclusive to certain models, in this case XRs or GTs. I'm going to be harsh here, but let's face it.......like most owners of locally produced cars, I've had a gutful of having cars that have some of the worst resale values around (Leyland P76s and Lada Nivas possibly excluded!!!), and I reckon that Ford has some responsibility in protecting the damn customer for once, and actually doing something to help protect the value of cars like the XRs and GTs. In this regard, when people like us shell out an extra $10, $20 $30K or whatever for an XR or GT, we're paying for a bit of exclusivity as much as better 0-100 times, and this element needs to be nurtured and protected by Ford more than it probably has been in the past, as they've done stuff-all for the customer in the last 10-15 years. Brent.

Irrespective of any other little quality or technical glitches you may have along the way, the best thing you can do to keep your "T" in good health is to change the oil regularly, and use good quality oils. Dirty oil will kill a turbo quicker than thousands of kms of hard driving, so don't skimp on the oil changes. Personally, I think 15,000 kms is too long for any car, let alone a turbo..........if you change it every 10,000km you'll be better off in the long run, and long after your warranty has expired. Brent.

I think the Ford V8s (both the XR8 and GT) are still not showing their full potential at the moment, mainly as most of the road test articles are based on near new cars with minimal kms on them. I remember an article in Wheels magazine I think from about 2 years ago when a couple of the engineers at Tickford were interviewed about the T Series cars. Apparently they said that due to the hand-built nature of the engine (admittedly the old Windsor motor), the engine was extremely tight when new, and takes up to 20,000kms to properly run-in. I know the Boss V8 is a different engine, but it is hand built also, and I've already heard some people say that it too feels very tight at the moment. I wouldn't be surprised if those engines were a good 10kw or so down on their peak when brand new. Personally, I think the Boss V8s are a bit of a sleeper at the moment, and I'd like to see them re-tested on the standing 400m when they've got 10-20,000kms on them. Brent.

I think that all this "interchangeability" regarding XR front ends, swaping engines etc is a real concern. There's a difference between adding on factory approved options such as leather seats, 17 inch wheels etc, as opposed to swaping parts of a car that should be exclusive to XRs onto an XT or whatever. I really think the danger is that the XR "brand" becomes diluted and loses its exclusivity if this sort of thing becomes commonplace. As some of you have already questioned, I don't know if this is being sanctioned by the factory or not, but I'll go out on a limb here and say that Ford could take a leaf out of HSV's book in this instance. One of the reasons for the strength of the HSV brand is that if you want the fully worked V8 and the HSV design.........you had to buy a HSV, as you can't option-up an Executive with HSV bits. Simple. That way, the brand is protected from bastardisation. I don't own a BA yet, but I think we've all been bitten at some stage with Ford's terrible resale value over the years, and to me, if this practice of interchangeability becomes commonplace, it'll be a problem. Brent.

Thanks for all your replies & info guys. I'd be going the auto regardless of whether it's in the form of the XR6 or V8, so the towing restriction on the manual won't be a problem. I'm just keen to size up all the various options. Sounds like the sports exhaust is the way to go though, both to liberate a few extra kws & get a nice sound from it. There's always someone somewhere with a faster car, and although I've never been a fan of the old traffic light derby (too responsible!!!), so long as I don't get hosed by a V8 Calais & can keep up with an SS I'll be pretty happy.

Bazza, Thanks for the info. Sounds like you have got a good setup there. If you don't mind me asking, how much did Herrods sting you for the exhaust and headers? Was that the only modification you did to the engine, or did you put a chip etc in? More importantly, what's the engine note like??? I love the idea of having a pretty stock-looking car, but then being able to put the foot down to hear that sensational V8 note. All the best. Brent.

Yeah OK, I know this is an XR6T forum, but due to budget constraints and the fact that I do a bit of towing, I am playing with the idea of getting a new XT but with the 5.4 litre 3-valve V8 option. I've heard almost nothing about this engine and how good (or otherwise) it is. Has anybody had any experience with it? Also, is there much to be gained from putting a decent exhaust on it to raise the power a bit? The "stock" output of 220kw is nothing special, and with a 3-valve head, surely it couldn't be too hard to get it breathing a little better. If I could get say another 10-15kw from it, that would close the gap between it and the 235kw Expensive Daewoo oil burner which would be pretty handy. I know it wouldn't be as good as a "T", but with 17 inch alloys and the sports suspension pack, it would be a bit of a wolf in sheeps clothing which I quite like the idea of. Any feedback would be great. Thanks guys. Brent.

I've got no problems with foggies when there are genuine visibility issues at stake, as it's only common sense to make sure you're seen. Just that IMO foggies are more susceptible to misalignment than regular headlights, and this is amplified on wet roads owing to the light beam being positioned closer to the surface of the road where it can reflect back upwards at eye level. It appears that a lot of these lights on other cars are more like low-mount flood lights than "real" foggies. Real foggies have a sharp cut-off at the top edge of the beam which helps to stop the light from spreading too far, and also penetrates fog better than a standard-spread lens. The rear foggies can really be bright though when you've followed them for the last 10 kms, so these should definitely be saved for snowy/foggy conditions on the way to Mt Hotham........

Sorry guys, but I have to have a bit of a whinge here. The use of fog lights in the absence of fog, let alone in daylight hours is a real pet hate of mine. Often they are poorly adjusted and shine directly into your eyes in the case of oncoming traffic, and on wet roads at night the reflection off the road can also have a dazzling effect. As for the use of rear fog lights that light the back of the car up like a christmas tree, well, I don't want to offend anyone, so I'll just leave it at that. OK, I admit that it was a little trendy to have them on, but maybe back in 1987 when they were few and far between. Every man and his god has them now, so to me, the constant use of them when there is no fog speaks a bit of a "hey, look at me too" attitude which, as adults, I thought we'd all be a little bit over by now. Guys, you have a great car that speaks volumes by itself......you don't need your lights on like the WRX brigade to get noticed!!! I'm off my soapbox now.

I currently own a cobalt blue ED XR6. It looks great, but shows scratches and stone chips very badly. Also have a black Expensive Daewoo Vectra in the family (please forgive me!), and although I love that colour, it is even worse than the cobalt blue XR6. Personally, I'm considering the Mercury, as it looks great if you get the windows tinted, and won't show the chips and scratches that you'll invariably get. Also, I'll probably be keeping my car for more than 3 years, so my only fear is that the dark colours may start to show their age. That said, the Phantom does look great though!

Interesting question CDM. I'm yet to take the plunge an order an XR6T, but if a Series II was only a few months away I'd tend to wait for it. However, with the current one selling so fast, Ford is probably more interested in getting some of its $500m development cost back rather than worrying about a Series II for the minute! I agree that any power increase would be minimal, especially as this would eat into XR8 sales even more than is the case now. As you said, new wheels and a few pinstripes would be about it externally. Mechanically they'll just replace or modify all those little fiddly washers, bolts, clips etc which have given trouble in the Series I. As for a weight reduction, I mentioned in a previous thread that any serious weight reduction (I.e. more than say 75kg) would most likely require some serious re-engineering of the chassis, especially if torsional rigidity is to be maintained. That's expensive stuff, so although I hear lots of people carrying on about it, I'd think its a bloody good question from an engineering point of view. I really hope that the Series II isn't going to be the victim of "cheap" weight redcutions (I.e. more use of plastics as opposed to metal; reduced sound deadening material; lighter under-bonnet components etc). At the end of the day, we have to remember that the Falcon is a big, 5-seater, 4-door sedan that has to be built to withstand outback corrugated roads as much as city streets, and if you want the car to be refined as well as strong, then weight is an inevitable by-product. Unfortunately for us performance fans, the extra kilos take a slight edge off what is already a rapid car. Then again, I'd rather a few extra kilos than a rattly bodyshell any day.

I've got to admit that I've found all the discussion about the FPV vehicles to very interesting reading. I hadn't really thought about it that much until now, but I concur with the point that the GT could have a bit more individual styling, as from a distance, you'd struggle to pick it from an XR8. Haven't had a close look at the interior yet, but I suppose styling themes are a very emotive and individual thing...........some people think that GT stipes are true to the heritage, whereas others think they are a tacky add-on from a bygone era. I do believe though, that if you're building a volume-selling XT model for mum & dad, then best to be conservative in the styling. If you're building a GT for a target market, they should have styled it a little more aggressively. Irrespective of this, the BA's across the range are a quantum jump over the AUs in many ways, and from all reports, the refinement seems to trump the Commodre quite comprehensively. Can't help but think that if the BA was 100-150kg lighter, and the GT was running consistent high 13-something's down the quarter on a tight engine, we would all be running down to the dealership to whack on a deposit and saying to hell with the lack of an oil pressure guage! That brings me to another point. If the Series II is going to be a lighter car, then that's great. However, given financial considerations, I wonder just how they will attempt to lighten it? From an engineering viewpoint, it's a big & expensive job to lighten a car's chassis without compromising structural integrity. If Ford want to lighten the car without re-engineering it, but maintain body body strength, the weight's got to come from somewhere. Smaller radiators? Less sound insulation? Thinner carpets? Lighter underbonnet components? A bit of food for thought!

Not sure if this relates to the problems that you guys are having with your diffs, but my auto ED XR6 started to downchange with a thump, particularly when going down to 1st when pulling up at a set of lights, or when jumping off the throttle after accelerating. Also, it developed some sort of grinding vibration in the diff when driving very slowly, like into a driveway. I feared the worst, but I got an auto transmission service with new oil, and had the auto adjusted somehow (I think something to do with the electronic shift protocol), and it's now genuinely as smooth as if brand new. As for the diff, the same guys who did the auto drained the diff oil and replaced it with a special synthetic limited slip diff oil. The diff oil was bloody pricey ($40 or so), but the diff is now as smooth a silk. Can't remember the exact brand of oil, but I can probably find out if anybody is interested. The whole job cost me only $200 also. I realise these problems may be a bit different to simple driveline backlash, but I just thought it was worth a mention. So, if your cars have similar problems to the above, don't despair.........it may be simpler than you thought.

That picture of the low-mount boost guage is one of the most ridiculous things I've seen in a long time. I'd like to see your insurance statement when you try to explain how you smacked into the back of an old Camira at 130kms because you were looking between your legs whilst driving at full throttle.......... Seriously though, any sort of hard-mounted device that intrudes down into the driver's leg area is a massive danger in the event of a prang...... sure recipe for a knee-capping.

I've just read the "Wheels" article about the XR8 & GT too, and in real world terms, it looks like there is virtually nothing to separate the SS Late model camira and the XR8, or the Clubsport and the GT for that matter. It would have been nice if the XR8 easily hosed the SS, and if the GT did the same to the Clubsport, but not to be. May be clutching at straws here, but I'm tipping the XR8 and GT engines would be pretty tight when new, with significant frictional losses for the first few thousand kays. This may be in contrast to the loose piston rings in the Gen IIIs which seem to be the source of all the problems regarding oil bypass and piston slap. Where the Gen III may be fully bedded-in at 1,500kms, the Falcon may need a good 5,000+kms to show their best. This may be worth a couple of tenths over the standing quarter.....then again, I suppose that's sheer speculation. Would be interesting to do a back-to-back between the 4 cars after 10,000kms...........

CDAA, I share your agonising decision! At first I was set on the XR8, as there's a fair chance I'll be keeping the car for 5 years or more, and I still have questions about the reliability of turbos long-term. However, I was initially disappointed that the extra $6K doesn't buy me any faster times than the XR6 Turbo. The odd traffic light derby is fun from time to time, but I still have a soft spot for the wave of torque you get from a V8, and that magnificent sound when you give it a push......even if it is no faster on the clock. Similar story with the GT. On paper it appears no faster, but there's more to performance than 0-100 and I have a sneaking suspicion that on a rolling start, say in the critical 80-120kms bracket, the GT will absolutely fly. It almost harks back to the days of the big old V12 Jags. They were nothing specical in 0-100 times, but once moving, there wasn't much around that could catch them. As you said, if you option the XR8 a bit, you get tantalisingly close to the entry price of the GT which would be far preferable. Decisions, decisions.