Ford Falcon BA XR6 Mark 11 Road Test

[motorsportnerd]

I was in Wellington, New Zealand last week, and come Saturday I had a free day. I decided to pop down to Hertz and rent a car for the day. They reserved me a Falcon XR6 - though I was also tempted to try the new Focus. However, XR6 it was, and I'm glad I did rent it. I have driven many kilometres in base model, rental Falcon BA XTs, so I was most interested to see how much better than an XT the XR6 was.
Firstly, the XR6 shares the same 4.0 litre 24 valve DOHC Barra180 engine as the XT. No extra power. In fact, the XR6 is a little bit heavier than the XT thanks to the extra weight of the body kit, and equipment upgrades.
Equipment levels between the XT and the XR6 are similar - both have power steering, trip computer, dual airbags, ABS, electric front seat adjustment, electric windows, remote locking, CD player, four speed tiptronic auto, auto lights on/off function and air conditioning. On top of this the XR6 gets cruise control (an option on the XT, but all I've driven had cruise), traction control, sports-style bucket seats and sports trim, special XR instruments (speed shows increments up to 280km/h, which is ludricous since the car is limited to 180km/h), body kit (comprising side skirts, front and rear spoilers, XR graphics and the four XR style round headlights), 17 inch alloys shod with 235/35 R17 tyres and sports suspension.
Brand new, an BF XT is A$35,880 and the BF XR6 is $39,710, both with a four-speed auto. The sports kit and equipment upgrades easily justify the price difference between the XT and XR6 when considering brand new prices. However, when considering second hand prices, a good lowish mileage (say 45,000km) 2003 XT costs about $15,000, while a similar mileage 2003 XR6 costs $24,000. So,obviously the XR6 holds value somewhat better, but is it really worth $9,000 more than the $15K BA?? After all, you get the same engine (ie: no extra performance) and some equipment upgrades, which are probably easily worth the $4,000 difference when the two cars are brand new, but after three years, the difference has blown out to $9K.
I may be in the market for one of these cars very soon (I want to get a different car this year), and an XR6 is very appealing to me. So, time to find out if it is really worth my effort to fund the $9K price difference between a second hand XT and XR6.
So, after picking up the car, I headed south out of Wellington on the motorway, heading for the suburbs and a nearby mountain range (for those who know the lower North Island, the Rimutaka range). On the motorway, the XR6 displays all the attributes I know and like from the XT. Smooth, refined engine, plenty of power with a decent spread of torque all the way up the rev range to about 5,500 rpm, solid, well weighted steering, comfortable seats and a smooth, compliant ride. I'm impressed with the ride, considering the sports suspension and very low profile tyres. Only the occasional thump gets through, and the ride is firmish, but overall, the XR6's sports suspension is only marginally less comfortable than the comfort-oriented XT's suspension. Certainly, the ride is still very comfortable for long trips. So far, so good. But the XR6 is doing nothing that the XT doesn't do. Sure, I like the XR's instrument graphics, but while it looks good, the rear spoiler is rather annoying in the rear view mirror.
So as I drive down the motorway and through suburbia, I'm thinking - I'll save the $9K and buy an XT. I can always find one with alloys and spoilers if I want that.
Then I reach the Rimutaka range. The road is step and twisty - its a fantastic driver's road. I clear a couple of slower cars on the passing lanes at the bottom of the ranges, and turn into the first few corners carrying speed somewhat higher than the recommended limits for the corners. NOW I understand what the XR6 is all about. Boy, does this thing handle. For such a big, heavy car, it has minimal body roll, exceptional grip, fantastic turn in, excellent feel through the steering and it is, simply put, an absolute joy to drive reasonably hard up a step, winding road. The four speed auto has very long ratios, so charging up-hill, one just leaves it in second on the tiptronic mode (to prevent the computer hunting the transmission between 2nd and 3rd) and you just use the immense reserves of torque to power between corners. Now, I was well under the 100 km/h speed limit over this road, but often twice the recommended speed through a number of 25-35km/h corners. So, I wasn't breaking any laws of physics or driving dangerously. But I was going much faster than I would have been in many other cars. At one point, while passing another Falcon on a passing lane at more than double the suggested 35km/h on one tight right hand corner, I did reach the start of the XR6's handling limits. The right rear tyre smoked and gave notice that the limit had been reached. One of the advantages of rear wheel drive - wheelspin from the rear tyres at the limit .The traction control probably helped keep it all safe, but it didn't flash, so there was probably another 10km/h left before it was dangerous.
I returned to Wellington, happy to cruise back on the motorway and enjoy the car's refinement. Knowing that the XR6 is up to more than a little bit of play when the road starts to twist and turn. There is the secret to the XR6 - immense cornering ability. The XR6T would no doubt be even more fun, but then that's even more expensive than the XR6 and to be honest, I think the Barra180 is plenty powerful enough for most circumstances.
So, would I buy one over an XT? I'd love to, if I can get the difference between the two down to about $6 or $7K. Especially as the XR6's second trump card over the XT other than handling is its much better resale value.

[motorsportnerd]

Some of you may remember that I posted my impressions on driving a rental Mitsubishi 380 VRX a few months back.
So, comparisons between the the Mitsubishi and the Ford are inevitable. Which is better? I'd say it depends on which badge you prefer, and whether you really hate FWD or not. In absolute terms, the Mitsubishi is the marginally better car. The 380 is a bit more refined - especially in terms of body strength and solidity - than the XR6. The 380's engine also sounds much more sporty and hard edged than the XR6s. And the 380 actually has slightly better steering feel and the handling is technically on par with the XR6. You can certainly corner as fast in the 380 as you can in the XR6, though the XR6 has less body roll. But I wrote in the 380 test: "The only issue I had was that while the steering is well weighted and offers some feel, it doesn’t offer as much information as I’d like and doesn’t feel as alive as the steering in the Mazda6. The VRX goes exactly where pointed, feels good, but doesn’t excite in the way that the Mazda6 does through the twisty bits." Replace "Mazda6" with "Falcon XR6" and you can probably tell that I actually had more fun in the XR6 than in the 380. The 380 is technically the marginally better car, but the Falcon is a much more fun car and I have a long time preference for Fords, so personally I'd buy the XR6.
One issue I had with both cars was quality issues. In the 380, which was brand new, the stereo speakers rattled and the dashboard trim looked second rate. On the Falcon, which had done only 9,000km, the problem was a noisy diff - a long tem bug bear of big Fords. The diff groaned every time I accelerated gently. It didn't do it when accelarating hard though. The diff noise was annoying and worrying and if it was my car I'd want the dealer to check it. Aussie manufacturers have a long way to go yet in quality terms. I recently rented a Mazda6 with 35,000km on the clock, and dispite the higher mileage, was much better put together than either the 380 or the Falcon.

To finish up on the Falcon, a quick summary.

Likes: Handling, ride, refinement, power, acceleration, looks, comfort.
Dislikes: Rear spoiler impinges on visibility, quality issues.

[SlickHolden]

I thought you bought one I was going to say congrats on the buy.
My brother is the same with his car if he bought a XT he would be as happy with that over a XR6.
He bought the BA Fairmont and hasn't stopped complain about it, It's got the cop suspension and i have been in back and front and it feels like a luxury suspension not a sporty one, But it's lower and corners well but the wheels do scream some. Strong engine but it's a slug off the mark and comes into it's own on the freeways.
Did you hate the drive by wire throttle?? I can't get anyone other then my brother and his wife to agree with me that it's so delayed, The Terra wasn't as bad as his Fairmont but it's still not great, If Holden has got the same thing I'll cry

[motorsportnerd]

Don't own one yet. Seriously have to weigh up the price difference between the XT and XR6 plus the fact that I'm single and don't need a big car and don't use a car during the week much, so a mid-size Mazda6 is probably a more sensible purchase. And the Mazda6 will give me 95% of the fun, 99% of the performance and much better fuel economy, refinement, reliablity, quality and resale than the Ford. And its much easier to find a manual transmission Mazda6, which I prefer. So, go with the heart (XR6) or the head (Mazda6)?

[motorsportnerd]

Did you hate the drive by wire throttle?? I can't get anyone other then my brother and his wife to agree with me that it's so delayed, The Terra wasn't as bad as his Fairmont but it's still not great, If Holden has got the same thing I'll cry

I don't mind the drive by wire throttle. Most new cars have them, you just get used to it. Probably only real sensitive drivers notice it. My boss told me he tested a Mazda6 with the drive by wire throttle, and got just 10 metres before he stopped, got out and said he hated the throttle. Whereas when I drove the Mazda I didn't notice any problem with the throttle. Different drivers I guess.

[charged]

have you driven a Honda Accord Euro, they are meant to be one of the best mid size fwd on the market, I certainly like the look of them. The Japanese still seem to have the edge with quality, I just hired a Toyota Tarago, it had 28000 kays on the clock and was tight as a drum. My wife absolutely loved it, just cant see myself driving a Tarago ,also a little on the gutless side with eight people in it.

[SlickHolden]

I don't mind the drive by wire throttle. Most new cars have them, you just get used to it. Probably only real sensitive drivers notice it. My boss told me he tested a Mazda6 with the drive by wire throttle, and got just 10 metres before he stopped, got out and said he hated the throttle. Whereas when I drove the Mazda I didn't notice any problem with the throttle. Different drivers I guess.

I also wouldn't help that my accelerator is heavy But after driving all the way to Bathurst and half the way back you would have thought i would have got used to it but i just couldn't come to like it very much, The thing that i hated most was sitting at the light my brother was flooring it up and down and you couldn't here the engine response to his foot input was funny. But on the freeway you don't think about it at all

[Cyco]

Another great review motorsportnerd.

[motorsportnerd]

have you driven a Honda Accord Euro, they are meant to be one of the best mid size fwd on the market, I certainly like the look of them. The Japanese still seem to have the edge with quality, I just hired a Toyota Tarago, it had 28000 kays on the clock and was tight as a drum. My wife absolutely loved it, just cant see myself driving a Tarago ,also a little on the gutless side with eight people in it.

Haven't driven the Accord Euro, but I do like them. Unfortunately, at present even second hand examples are above the outer limits of what I'd consider spending.

[Clivey]

You've captured the difference between the typical "European & Japanese" cars and "American and Australian" cars right there in your review...

...a 4.0V8 in the Falcon vs >2.5 litre engines in the Mazda and Honda. Why should you need a 4.0 in a family car? I've not seen the performance figures but if you need a 250 odd BHP V8 to equal an I4 or V6 (is it around 8 seconds to 60?), what is that saying? And we wonder how we can stop global warming...! Also, why is it limited to 180km/h?

In the UK, a car in that market with a 4.0 would be laughed at for being a backwards-thinking person's barge. for around 250 BHP most manufacturers would use something like a 2.0 Turbo or a 3 litre V6, not add another 2 cylinders and another litre of displacement...that just adds to weight, and the "lardass factor". I've got the image of a car cornering sideways like in so many '70s American films. Does the standard XT handle at all without the stiffened suspension?

You also mentioned the build quality...there is no way I'd buy family car with strange noises coming from the diff. From all of the pictures I've seen of the Falcon, it looks like it's already 5 years old with an interior made from the cheapest plastic available. Then get into the Accord. If it's anything like the version we get here in the UK I'd strongly urge you to go for that.

I can imagine where the design and manufacture of the 2001 Mondeo we had to endure for a year went wrong - it's taking cues and thinking from overweight 70's American barges!

EDIT: By the way, can I have an example of an Australian post code so that I can view Honda's Australian website (it asks to find a dealer before it lets you see details on the cars)?

[Cyco]

EDIT: By the way, can I have an example of an Australian post code so that I can view Honda's Australian website (it asks to find a dealer before it lets you see details on the cars)?

All Australian post codes are 4 didget. Try 2000 (Central Sydney) to get in.

[nota]

Brand new, an BF XT is A$35,880 and the BF XR6 is $39,710, both with a four-speed auto. The sports kit and equipment upgrades easily justify the price difference between the XT and XR6 when considering brand new prices. However, when considering second hand prices, a good lowish mileage (say 45,000km) 2003 XT costs about $15,000, while a similar mileage 2003 XR6 costs $24,000.

Good reading!

To mention, in recent weeks you might have seen Sydney dealers advertising new (old stock) MkII Falcon SR with sports susp, tiptronic, 17"s air CD etc for under $28k driveaway. New MkII XR8 (leather & 5speed) are $38k driveaway - a not inconsiderable $20k off list price!

[motorsportnerd]

Good reading!

To mention, in recent weeks you might have seen Sydney dealers advertising new (old stock) MkII Falcon SR with sports susp, tiptronic, 17"s air CD etc for under $28k driveaway. New MkII XR8 (leather & 5speed) are $38k driveaway - a not inconsiderable $20k off list price!

Seen those ads. In fact the SR is probably a good compromise between the XT and the XR6.

[nota]

You've captured the difference between the typical "European & Japanese" cars and "American and Australian" cars right there in your review...

Nah, your post demonstrates your ignorance of Falcon - understandable from afar imo, but these biased prejudices you (unwashed?) Poms still need to believe in, do differ from reality

...a 4.0V8 in the Falcon vs >2.5 litre engines in the Mazda and Honda. Why should you need a 4.0 in a family car? I've not seen the performance figures but if you need a 250 odd BHP V8 to equal an I4 or V6 (is it around 8 seconds to 60?), what is that saying? And we wonder how we can stop global warming...! Also, why is it limited to 180km/h?

In the UK, a car in that market with a 4.0 would be laughed at for being a backwards-thinking person's barge. for around 250 BHP most manufacturers would use something like a 2.0 Turbo or a 3 litre V6, not add another 2 cylinders and another litre of displacement...that just adds to weight, and the "lardass factor". I've got the image of a car cornering sideways like in so many '70s American films. Does the standard XT handle at all without the stiffened suspension?

(a) Falcon DOHC 4.0 is straight-six, the 5.4 SOHC & Quadcam are V8s

(b) Many "backward-thinking" Aussie buyers still consider they 'need' a reasonably-sized engine, after laughing at gutless euro & jap twee-engined :gay: alternatives which can't pull the skin off a rice pudding - particularly if auto

(c) 99.9% of buyers here never attempt Global-Warming speeds of over 180km/h. A more pertinent factor for family car buyers is that insurance rates are likely reduced via limiters

In the UK, a car in that market with a 4.0 would be laughed at for being a backwards-thinking person's barge. for around 250 BHP most manufacturers would use something like a 2.0 Turbo or a 3 litre V6, not add another 2 cylinders and another litre of displacement...that just adds to weight, and the "lardass factor". I've got the image of a car cornering sideways like in so many '70s American films. Does the standard XT handle at all without the stiffened suspension?

Despite MSN's positive impressions of Falcon handling, your seem desperate to hang on to your stereotypes. Do yourself a favour and look at these test results of the "backward-thinking lardass" Falcon XT 6cyl auto of your imaginings, against reality via this same-day comparison from our leading Wheels magazine

nb: XT = Falcon's slowest, least-expensive, worst handling sedan model on mediocre Goodyear Infinity fleet-spec tyres. Yes XT has plastic hubcaps on narrow steel wheels

Dry Lateral

0.832g: BMW 330Ci
0.832g: Accord Euro
0.827g: Falcon XT
0.826g: Mazda3 Maxx Sport
0.815g: Ford Territory (SUV)
0.800g: Opel/Holden Astra CD (new-gen)
0.788g: Corolla Levin

Wet Lateral

0.826g: Mazda3
0.806g: Euro
0.800g: Falcon
0.800g: Astra
0.788g: Corolla
0.781g: BMW
0.768g: Territory

Wet Transient (in seconds)

24.48 Falcon
24.60: BMW
25.49: Euro
25.81: Mazda3
25.89: Corolla
25.98: Astra
26.28: Territory

Overtaking Exposure 60-120km/h in seconds

6.84: Falcon
7.52: BMW 330 Ci < 300% of Falcon list price, btw
9.88: Territory
10.02: Mazda3
11.39: Mazda6 Classic
11.59: Corolla
12.69: Astra

Wheels summation: Falcon XT
This result makes the case for the big Aussie car. If it's slung together right it can save your bacon. Add its mass advantage over the more diminutive competition and you add another layer not addressed by NCAP test results - when big cars and small cars collide, physics favours the heavyweight

When its good, its sensational. Blistering acceleration slashes wrong-side exposure during overtaking, and it carries copious lateral G-loads into corners both wet and dry. If you need to swerve and recover in the wet, Falcon out-points all but the mighty Mazda6 - and in doing so puts the smaller, notionally more nimble, cars in this field to shame

A similarly credible result in highway braking, with less than half a car's length separating Falcon in 6th from Mazda3 in first slot (a full car's length in front of wodden-spooner Lancer) sees Falcon earn a decent score in this test, even though it ranks at just inside the front half of the field. A similar spread separated the wet stoppers. Falcon placed fifth, but stopped within half a car's length of Corolla in first place

If it were to lift its game in the stopping department, this might have been enough to capture top position overall. Less than two percent separates the winner [Mazda6] from second [Falcon XT]

nb: Falcon XT brakes are improved on '06-spec models

[Edit] Wheels: BMW 330Ci
.. its magnificent 3.0-litre 170kw straight-six was no match for Falcon, which has an extra litre and packs 12kw/80Nm more, despite the Ford's 200kg greater mass. The fleet-spec Ford just out-grunts it.

[charged]

Australia is quite unique compared to England, its much larger compared to your postage stamp sized country . We actually go outside and tow boats trailers etc. Case in point was up the river the other day retrieving my boat from the ramp 1600kg, try pulling that out with you Mondeo no chance .
Aussies have grown up with large vehichles and the latest crop are great value for money and dynamically very good.If we are a backward country with our open spaces, blue skies ,temperate climate,sandy beaches and big cars. I wouldnt have it any other way. Now put on some sunscreen you white, pastey pom and keep out of that sun. Youre probably tanned and fit, but those generalisations can be quite cruel and incorrect.