Falcon XY 4WD
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
From: Ron on 20 Oct 2007 23:10 "Noddy" <me(a)home.com> wrote in news:471ab834$0$74411$c30e37c6(a)lon-reader.news.telstra.net: > > "Ron" <dodo(a)hotmail> wrote in message > news:Xns99D06B81ECDE1GPS(a)64.209.0.90... > >> Very interesting! >> >> Thanks for the story. > > Don't thank me, thank Eddie Ford. It's his story :) > > Just to add to it, I don't discount Heeler's comments that they were > available through dealers in the area, but I also don't think there > was ever any intention to put the things into production. I think what > was most *likely* is that the 432 that were made was what the > government contract called for, and that they were to be delivered > through a handful of dealers in the areas where they were to be used. > However, like all good government contracts I expect there were > probably a small number of them that weren't required and those that > were surplus were probably sold to the public/business through the > dealers that were organising their delivery to the government > departments in those areas. > > One thing that certainly doesn't make any sense to me at all is that > Ford would be seriously contemplating the idea of such a vehicle for > production when the market for them at the time would have been next > to nothing. > The variations getting around now are quite interesting. There is a green and a blue 4WD ute kicking around Brisbane, plus a 4WD wagon with a V8 in it. Why you would bother to make that, I don't know... Ron
From: DAvid on 21 Oct 2007 00:25 "Blue Heeler" <woof(a)bark.net> wrote in message news:5nvk0rFh4umiU1(a)mid.individual.net... > DAvid wrote: > >> >> "Noddy" <me(a)home.com> wrote in message >> news:47197970$0$74405$c30e37c6(a)lon-reader.news.telstra.net... >> > >> >"DAvid" <davideo(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote in message >> news:Q%cSi.2070$CN4.182(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... >> > >> > > http://www.4wdonline.com/Ford/Falcon.html > I am devloping a morbid curiosity in respect to the processes you use > instead of logic and thought, so how about you tell me why you imagine > that a vehicle with a three speed gearbox could not be a "serious" 4WD. > Are you an idiot or just plain stupid? Any 3 speed gearbox fitted to a serious 4WD is asking for clutch trouble in heavy going and that doesn't mean driving around only in suburbia. Now unless it had an extra low (Hi-Lo) range transfer as part of the equation, it would be a totally different story whereby it would then be a serious 4WD. Still don't know what I'm talking about? Ask any single range Subaru owner how many clutches they've burnt out in heavy going....Fraser Island eg. Don't forget they're a four speed as well. Now can you understand what I'm on about? As for the Ford and Jeep that I was talking to Noddy about, there was no mention of an extra low range which, if it did have, I wouldn't have made the comment. DAVO
From: DAvid on 21 Oct 2007 00:35 "Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message news:13hlbbtros03333(a)corp.supernews.com... > Noddy wrote: >> "DAvid" <davideo(a)bigpond.net.au> wrote in message >> news:MlvSi.2380$CN4.1937(a)news-server.bigpond.net.au... >> >>> They couldn't have been too serious a 4WD vehicle with a 3sp gearbox >>> fitted. Unbelievable! I can imagine there were a few burnt out clutches. >> >> The original jeep had a three speed gearbox, and as far as four wheel >> drives go they were pretty good :) > > Most likely they had a selectable low range so effectively they had a 6 > speed gearbox the same as the Ford. > > > > Daryl Thank you Daryl. DAVO
From: DAvid on 21 Oct 2007 00:38 "Noddy" <me(a)home.com> wrote in message news:471ab84d$0$74411$c30e37c6(a)lon-reader.news.telstra.net... > > "Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message > news:13hlbbtros03333(a)corp.supernews.com... > >> Most likely they had a selectable low range so effectively they had a 6 >> speed gearbox the same as the Ford. > > They did, but you couldn't use low range without engaging the front axle. > > I think the Falcon ute was the same, although I never tried it. > > -- > Regards, > Noddy. Well that puts a whole new perspective on what I said earlier. Unless you engaged the front axle, it wouldn't be 4WD. Putting it into low range gives it another gear or three. Now it's a serious 4WD. DAVO
From: RainbowWarrior on 21 Oct 2007 01:39
"Noddy" <me(a)home.com> wrote in message news:471ab84d$0$74411$c30e37c6(a)lon-reader.news.telstra.net... > > "Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message > news:13hlbbtros03333(a)corp.supernews.com... > >> Most likely they had a selectable low range so effectively they had a 6 >> speed gearbox the same as the Ford. > > They did, but you couldn't use low range without engaging the front axle. > > I think the Falcon ute was the same, although I never tried it. > > Regards, > Noddy. The only way to select lowrange with RWD only is leave the hubs unlocked or some Yank cases can do it, sa recipe for snapping rear axles most of the time really, very rarely ever use lowrange 2wd unless reversing a trailer or something. |