6 cylinder Petrol Multi-point injected 4.0L (3984cc) (1994 EF Fairmont)
verses
6 cylinder Petrol Multi-point injected 3.0L (2972cc) (1994 KS Ei Verada)

Ok, it's pretty clear the falcon would put out more power, but really, I don't care about that. I know it depends on condition of them, so, lets say for egsample, they've both been used as a daily driver (to and from work, taknig the kids around, etc.) and travelled 190 000 kms.

What engine would;
a) Last longer - overall life.
b) Be more fuel economic
c) Be cheapest to repair
d) likly have alot of problems

Also, What car would be better in your opinions? Aside from loyalty, why should I get one over the other? Oh, and if you havn't realised, I'm looking at either buying the verada or fairmont, but, i think are nice cars, however the fairmonts seem to always be more expensive. I'm only looking to spend about 6 grand. I've found a few verada's at sub 6k, but all the fairmonts are 6.5+. So, voice your opinions!

Now, lets here honest answers, i'll be posting the same thing on a ford forum, I'm assuming each one is going to stay true to their brand, but I thought it was worth a try anyway. I'm a loyal ford fan, but dad's got a '99 verada and it's been the best car we've ever had, it's help up ALOT better than the commodore (about the same kms (260 000) but 96 model vacationer), and from what I hear, build wise, the comms adn falcs are very similar, however, I don't know a great deal about magna/verada's. Thats what brings me here :)

Well i have never driven a ford but i have owned 2 94 veradas and both just kept going and going with minimal cost but maybe i just got good ones, i also love how they drive very comfortable, but like i said i have never driven a ford so i cant really say if it would drive any better.

Wouldnt the fairmont use up more fuel? Bieng bigger and heavier.. And that thing is HUGE isnt it? or is that the fairlane im thinking of?..

Your gonna get the Magna fan boys saying magna and ford saying falcon. Honstly I'm gonna have to say the fairmont. I really do like the EFs. It will probably use more fuel tho. But over all id say its a better car. if you where conpairing an EL to a TF then id be more inclined to say the TF but with the 2nd gen i rekon the EF was a more modern car for the time.

Repair wise the falcon is common as mud so nnot really going to cost much more than anything else but you could almost say the same about the verada. Fairmont will hold its value more than the verada but by that age they tend to have taken most of the hit already.

My parents have a fairmont and i drive it a fair bit. It is a big car, but does have enough power to make it decent. To be honest, we havnt really had many problems with it, just general wear and tear stuff, apart from that its been good. Fuel economy, the trip is showing 11.2L/100k but not sure if it is, probs more like in teh 12's. Not too sure on teh KS, but hey i'm biased towards this :P

Wouldnt the fairmont use up more fuel? Bieng bigger and heavier.. And that thing is HUGE isnt it? or is that the fairlane im thinking of?..
Yeh, I'm pretty sure you're thinking of the fairlane.
So far, from both the forums, i'm leaning towards the fairmont, but the problem is, they're more expencive. Going by just adds that i've seen, the cheapest verada(in good condition) is 6k and fairmont is 6.6k.. Now, when we're low on funds such as myself, 600 makes a big difference :P
But thansk for the feedback guys, appreciated :)

This is a very good comparison as both cars are very similar to terms of their value. I would however definitely choose the EF Fairmont above the Verada, especially since the Verada is only an Ei, the Fairmont is RWD, has 37kw more power, 122Nm more torque. The EF is a big, spacious, comfortable, powerful and smooth car. It does however lack precise steering. I would choose it over a KS Ei Verada.

Heheh, it's one of those questions that I have had to think about as well :P

Well we had both an EF and EL Fairmont when it was new back then and they were really good cars. The EL had a lot more chrome then on the EF, and I would rather go for the updated model because of it :D (ie. the EL).

I guess it comes to the issue of how much $$$ you can spend each week on fuel. The Verada is better then the Fairmont in fuel economy, unless u end up LPG'ing it.

If you think u'd be towing huge rigs, then i'd suggest the Fairmont, but the Verada can also handle them quite well, just ask TZABOY about it.

Take note that there were a couple of Falcon/Fairmont's that were produced had failing head gaskets, our EL and a mates EF were one of the few that buggered up, costing $$$. On that issue, the Falcon once again wins hands down to ease of maintenance due to the RWD setup, and of course theres an abundance of parts for it.

hmm, this is looking bad, why am i trying to sell a falcon here? :nuts:

hmm more negatives on the falcon: you may find backlights on the LCD displays blown, remote door locking had issues...

positives on the Verada: It doesn't feel like a big car when driving it, whilst it is the opposite for the Fairmont. A V6 Verada is fairly reliable if the owner takes care of it, but the same case with the Falcons.

forgot to mention that you do get fake woodgrain in the Verada's :D

those EF's were the most fuel economical cars of that time, they are really good on then fuel for a big 6.

Our EF has had no real problems, but neither has my magna.

the EF's are more modern in their look and shape tho

Having looked at both, done the research and driven both I can answer those questions.

A) The Falcon engine will out live the Magnas V6 any day.
B) Falcon by a bit.
C) Falcon parts are cheaper as there's more of them. Parts availablity is easier and they are a darn sight easier to work on.
D) Be about the same

I still wouldn't buy any day. The build quality on the Verada pisses all over ANY Falcon. They are quieter, nicer inside, have better features etc etc.

It's also easier to find a good Magna /Verada than a good Falcon as they fall apart easier. Oh and my Ford mad neighbours ALL agree with the above.

basically the falcon will use more fuel, but it will be cheaper parts wise, as for reliability.. really comes down to the individual car when your talking about a 10 year old car..

As for which is a better car, with the model falcon you are talking about, the VR commodore **** all over it in terms of noise, build, handling, ride and economy (i owned a VR and my dad owned a 94 falcon, so talkin from experience) and i am here to tell you that my TR magna i had **** all over the commodore in every respect except for power... so obviously the magna is the better car

mate what about a 94 V6 galant? probably worth a look in my opinion...

One thing i may add if it hasn't already been said is that the tr/ts Magnas have alot more potential to look better than the Falcons. The falcons just don't look like a shape you can do much with body styling wise and anything you do will just look tacky and not right.

Just my fidy cents.

basically the falcon will use more fuel, but it will be cheaper parts wise, as for reliability.. really comes down to the individual car when your talking about a 10 year old car.. ...

Well said however the Falcon is better on fuel for driving long distances on highways etc.

Around town I found nothing in it.

[/QUOTE]
mate what about a 94 V6 galant? probably worth a look in my opinion...[/QUOTE]

Good point. Saw a 94 Galant V6 for $5900 in a local yard. They are fully loaded and look great, esp. if you going to rice it up with wheels and suspension.

galant V6 manual, 17" mags, lowered, exhaust.. be nice, very nice.

Go the Verada pal, the Ford is a smoother ride but who wants to drive a Ford half of the southern Hemisphere owns one I think if you put a few bob into it you'd find yourself flogging alot of ef's aswell as they are rather heavy haha