XH versus AU

dexxl · 10-04-2007, 12:18 PM

hi, i'm looking to get a ford utility trayback. i've asked on this forum before on them and from the information recieved from members here, i wouldn't get a BA or BF and thought i'd stick to an AU.

but now i've found a 1999 XH within my budget. i'm a mech !diot and got no idea about fords. so my question is: is the XH a good vehicle? in terms of reliability and generally something that is not going to fail on me for another 5 years or so, as it's already got 200k on the clock and i believe that it has been taken care of reasonably. but i will get an RACQ inspection to confirm that.

so, XH vs AU... what are the differences?

DoreSlamR · 10-04-2007, 12:30 PM

personally i would choose an AU, i prefer the styling of it over an XH, which for a 99 model is getting a bit long in the tooth whereas the Au has the more modern styling and better motor, interior etc

but each to their own
good luck with it!

dexxl · 10-04-2007, 12:37 PM

thanks for the quick reply.

i'm not really fussed about the styling. i just need to know if the XH is as reliable as the AU or delicate like the BA

Scott · 10-04-2007, 12:41 PM

No probs with the reliability of the XH at all. Great ute as is the AU. My best input would be the difference I found between them in regard to noise and ride quality. In my experience, the AU was the first to get away from the "agricultural" feel. Cabin noise and suspension made for a much more pleasant drive.

tara06 · 10-04-2007, 01:19 PM

In personal experience my 96 Xh ute has just clicked over 320000 and I would trust my life with it. I have been across Australia more times than I would like to count and not once have i had any troubles. The au's although nicer to drive seem to, well my mates utes, start falling to bits after they reach 200000. Its up to you but the XH's are tough nuts.

dexxl · 10-04-2007, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tara06

In personal experience my 96 Xh ute has just clicked over 320000 and I would trust my life with it. I have been across Australia more times than I would like to count and not once have i had any troubles. The au's although nicer to drive seem to, well my mates utes, start falling to bits after they reach 200000. Its up to you but the XH's are tough nuts.

thanks tara, i think you just filled in that emotional gap i needed to go ahead with it :P

Cooper69S · 10-04-2007, 01:46 PM

I think it really depends what you consider important in a car... I see no reason why an AU shouldn't be going strong at 320000km - theres plenty of AU's around with more k's than that. with the XH the platform is basically XD from way back in 1979 and it feels like it. If you're just wanting a strong reliable old workhorse then it might be the way to go but I'd advise strongly against buying one before driving one of each to compare. being a 20 years newer design you should expect the AU to be nicer to drive.

saber · 10-04-2007, 02:57 PM

I would go with the AU.

The AU has the ungraded motor, which produces more power and torque than the XH motor, which was carried on from the XG ute. I have also found that the AU has better road handling when carrying heavy weight (+800kg) in the tray. It has more interior space (the space behind the seats is wonderfull for putting books, bags, small eskies, tools ect in there, great idea). I have also found it to be more stable eg less tail happy when not carrying weight, and a more quiet, comfortable ride. Reliability should not be a issue, seen many with 200000km plus on them (my old mans AU series 3 has 160000km, serviced every 10000km, only changed the battery since he bought it straight off the showroom). You can also get the dedicated LPG engine for the AU, very reliable, looses a bit of power over the petrol engine, but I think it has roughly the same torque.

Just my 2c

Jesk · 10-04-2007, 04:36 PM

well the XH doesn't come in a trayback, if thats what you are needing, also in addition what saber says is good too.

T3man · 10-04-2007, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jesk

well the XH doesn't come in a trayback, if thats what you are needing, also in addition what saber says is good too.

Exactly what I was going to say ...

The AU can carry bigger loads with it's half-chassis design - the XH is straight monocoque just like the sedans. You will also find the interior space in the AU to be even more handy than the ute itself.

apolloxbgt · 10-04-2007, 08:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by T3man

Exactly what I was going to say ...

The AU can carry bigger loads with it's half-chassis design - the XH is straight monocoque just like the sedans. You will also find the interior space in the AU to be even more handy than the ute itself.

The load ratings are exactly the same,I would say the monoque is much stronger than the half chassis.

mad cow · 10-04-2007, 08:54 PM

it would have to depend on the price difference between the two. my personal preference is toward the xh as i had a simillar decision not long ago between an au ute or an xh, i chose an xh due to price and i have never looked back. (upgraded from an xe) if you do go looking for an xh dont be dissolusioned by all of the high priced/high ks examples that are around as it is possible to find a good one for not a lot of $$$ (i paid $6000 for mine with 16in alloys, tinted windows cd etc and only 120,000 ks on the clock with reg & roadworthy) this was for a ute which has never been used as a work veihcle and is in as new condition. i regard the xh as one of the best utes built as you get all of the practicallity of the older model falcons with the good running gear and comforts of a modern car. they will do many many thousands of ks and are so reliable i would reccomend and XH to anyone.

chief · 10-04-2007, 09:42 PM

Go the AU. A lot more comfortable to drive and can come in a tray back option.

Parts and servicing would be slightly cheaper as well because there are plently of AU's compared to XH's even though they source parts from a variety of different models.

b2tf · 10-04-2007, 09:45 PM

XH was outdated before it even hit showrooms - XD/EF interior and the XD body shell. The AU was a clean start.

XR Martin · 10-04-2007, 10:03 PM

In the XH the whole front end from the firewall forward was EF/EL. Last time I looked AU wasnt all that much more advanced than EL.

AussieJason · 11-04-2007, 09:41 AM

I had an XH Panelvan work car and it was pretty good. I still see it getting around today as a private car. I'd get an AU though, purely because its the newer model.

**Mechan1k** · 11-04-2007, 11:27 AM

I went from XG to AU ... and there is a world of difference ... and the AU feels to me that it can handle the workload better than the X-series utes as well.

After loading both up ... the AU was better to drive ... was more settled ... more comfortable ... and has MUCH better brakes as well.

Oh ... Supercab ... interior space is sooo much more in the AU ... it doesn't feel so claustrophobic (sp?) either like my old XG.

AU for sure.

**Polyal** · 11-04-2007, 11:37 AM

It all depends on what you are using it for.

Personally, id take a XH2 XR6/8 over a base or mid spec AU; but then again id take an AU XR6/8 over all of them.

Also depends on how much cash you have. Some people ask crazy prices for utes.

**Mechan1k** · 11-04-2007, 11:41 AM

Utes retain value better than sedans as you can "actually" make money with them. especially utes that are running LPG as well.

Always on the used car market ute values are higher than sedans.

XR_Strider_GuY · 11-04-2007, 04:15 PM

Keep in mind that a late XH2 built from end of 1998 to 1999 has basically an AU engine. Apart from minor details you get all the AU engine updates so it will be a very reliable machine.

dexxl · 12-04-2007, 08:41 AM

thanks for all the responses,.. i've taken them all into account and done more research including talking to some mechheads.

i've settled for the AU and am now a proud owner of a falcon AU II automatic colum shift with a tray back, and MOST importantly. IT'S NOT WHITE!! woOhOO

AussieJason · 12-04-2007, 03:06 PM

Good choice. Now post some pics of it !