Jump to content

Ford better wake up


coupe3w

Recommended Posts

Another thing I wonder about:

 

Ford went with a silent cam on the 4V and finger followers on all engines.

 

Both of which made the top end of the block *huge*, especially since the drive gear for the cams was on the exhaust cams, not the intake cams.

 

Why did Ford go that route? Why not DAMBs and a conventional DOHC layout---or at the very least, having the drive gear on the intake cam?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

For every one of these ^^^^^^^ there are 100 Mustangs with a Chevy motor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's something to think about:

 

 

 

Why are all these Chevy motors going into FORD products?

 

Why are there so many FORD products around? Could it be that, for the last thirty years at least, Ford's cars have been consistently better built than their GM equivalents?

 

This isn't a just a referendum on MOTORS this is a referendum on VEHICLES.

 

And if someone wants a FORD with a GM motor in it, that says a lot about the whole rest of the vehicle.

 

Go take a spin in a 1997 Taurus. Then tool around in a '97 Lumina. You'll know exactly what I'm talking about immediately.

 

Junkyards are full of LS motors. Because, for the most part, they were put in junk cars.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here's something to think about:

 

 

 

Why are all these Chevy motors going into FORD products?

 

Why are there so many FORD products around? Could it be that, for the last thirty years at least, Ford's cars have been consistently better built than their GM equivalents?

 

This isn't a just a referendum on MOTORS this is a referendum on VEHICLES.

 

And if someone wants a FORD with a GM motor in it, that says a lot about the whole rest of the vehicle.

 

Go take a spin in a 1997 Taurus. Then tool around in a '97 Lumina. You'll know exactly what I'm talking about immediately.

 

Junkyards are full of LS motors. Because, for the most part, they were put in junk cars.

 

 

That all may be true. So using that analogy does that mean the Ford motor is junk? I think not! It comes down to cost PERIOD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That all may be true. So using that analogy does that mean the Ford motor is junk? I think not! It comes down to cost PERIOD.

 

So, I buy a fox Mustang w/a V6, what's going to be the cheapest junkyard motor to put in it? An LS.

 

Why? Because GM put tons of those motors in crappy trucks and SUVs.

 

You would rather this cheapskate tune a 3.8L V6?

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your contribution.

 

 

Hey the Thread IS stupid.

 

Why would FORD care one single bit about people slapping junkyard Chebby motors in old Mustangs. If they want those Mustangs to go even slower than that's their choice.

 

As Richard said......If there are 100 good LS motors sitting in a junkyard...there must be 100 POS Chebby cars and trucks that died way before there time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Hey the Thread IS stupid.

 

Why would FORD care one single bit about people slapping junkyard Chebby motors in old Mustangs. If they want those Mustangs to go even slower than that's their choice.

 

As Richard said......If there are 100 good LS motors sitting in a junkyard...there must be 100 POS Chebby cars and trucks that died way before there time.

Again thanks for your contribution.

That would be a true statement if none of them were in the JY because of accidents. But most likely they are their because of accidents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again thanks for your contribution.

That would be a true statement if none of them were in the JY because of accidents. But most likely they are their because of accidents.

 

 

 

Please.

 

If GM vehicles are as good as Ford vehicles, then why are people going to all the hassle of jerry-rigging a Ford vehicle to hold an LS motor? Why aren't they dropping that junkyard LS into an old F-body?

 

Is it perhaps because the F-body was a simultaneously flimsy and overweight product decidedly inferior to the fox?

 

I'm not going to go poll the junkyard to see if there are disproportionately many GM products, but I can tell you from first hand experience that GM's products wear out faster than Ford products. Friend of mine and I used to laugh about the stink of old Chevy pickups. Go see for yourself. Hop into a late 90s, early 00s Silverado and notice the particular, peculiar scent of its interior materials disintegrating. Notice the squeaks and rattles and shimmying of a ten year old W-body. And there's just no point in talking about the Js and Ns. Those things were horrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Please.

 

If GM vehicles are as good as Ford vehicles, then why are people going to all the hassle of jerry-rigging a Ford vehicle to hold an LS motor? Why aren't they dropping that junkyard LS into an old F-body?

 

Is it perhaps because the F-body was a simultaneously flimsy and overweight product decidedly inferior to the fox?

 

I'm not going to go poll the junkyard to see if there are disproportionately many GM products, but I can tell you from first hand experience that GM's products wear out faster than Ford products. Friend of mine and I used to laugh about the stink of old Chevy pickups. Go see for yourself. Hop into a late 90s, early 00s Silverado and notice the particular, peculiar scent of its interior materials disintegrating. Notice the squeaks and rattles and shimmying of a ten year old W-body. And there's just no point in talking about the Js and Ns. Those things were horrible.

 

Agree on the trucks and the Fox-body cars, but the Taurus and Sable were notorious for fragile transmissions when equipped with the more powerful engine option (first the 3.8 V-6, then the ohc 3.0 V-6).

 

The GM A-bodies and W-bodies may have had inferior coachwork and cheesy interiors, but most of the drivetrains were pretty robust. The drivetrains of the J-cars were pretty reliable, too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DN101 Taurus & Sable were exceptionally reliable compared to the previous models. Their powertrains were as solid as those of the W & G(?) GMs.

 

And, of course, my whole point is that Ford's vehicles are better than GM's, which is why people would go to all the hassle of putting a GM motor in a Ford vehicle.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Agree on the trucks and the Fox-body cars, but the Taurus and Sable were notorious for fragile transmissions when equipped with the more powerful engine option (first the 3.8 V-6, then the ohc 3.0 V-6).

 

The GM A-bodies and W-bodies may have had inferior coachwork and cheesy interiors, but most of the drivetrains were pretty robust. The drivetrains of the J-cars were pretty reliable, too.

 

Yeah the Taurus transmissions aren't the most robust. Mine (97 LX with 3.0 DOHC) was rebuilt in the 130k's, transmission shop said many upgraded parts installed during the rebuild and still running good now at 197K. Rust just starting now for me but the seats (premium cloth) look almost new. These are the most comfortable auto seats I have ever sat in.

Edited by Schpark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The DN101 Taurus & Sable were exceptionally reliable compared to the previous models. Their powertrains were as solid as those of the W & G(?) GMs.

 

And, of course, my whole point is that Ford's vehicles are better than GM's, which is why people would go to all the hassle of putting a GM motor in a Ford vehicle.

No doubt that the 1996 and later Taurus and Sable were a big improvement over the first-generation models, which did have some notable flaws.

 

The GM A-bodies (Cutlass Ciera and Century) were reasonably reliable by the early 1990s. The Taurus and Sable, however, beat them on ergonomics, driver comfort, chassis composure and overall refinement (and, of course, styling).

 

The W-bodies were very problematic when first introduced, but that was as much a reflection of sloppy quality control as anything else. The only complaints I've heard about the drivetrains of the W-bodies concern the fragile intake manifold gaskets on some models built in the 2000s. Otherwise, the drivetrains are robust, and I've never heard of the GM transmissions having as many problems as the Ford transmissions.

Edited by grbeck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Yeah the Taurus transmissions aren't the most robust. Mine (97 LX with 3.0 DOHC) was rebuilt in the 130k's, transmission shop said many upgraded parts installed during the rebuild and still running good now at 197K. Rust just starting now for me but the seats (premium cloth) look almost new. These are the most comfortable auto seats I have ever sat in.

 

My, how times have changed when we say a tranny being rebuilt at 130k miles is not the most robust. FWIW, that's about the number of miles I had on my truck when the 4R70W tranny in my '99 F150 was rebuilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...