98 GT intake/thermostat housing

It wasn't likely over pressure that cracked it, but molding process variation that put a weld line (where 2 or more flows of plastic come together in the mold.) in that stressed area. Over time and heat cycling weld lines get weaker and develop cracks when the area is stressed.

My guess is that the processing when the manifold was molded was not what it should have been.

As far as a fix goes, epoxy like JB weld is about all that can be done. Maybe reinforce it by puting epoxy over the outside and metal on top of that. Or epoxy a metal tube on the inside (if possible). It will reduce the ID somewhat, but it couldn't be smaller than the thermostat itself.

Got another idea, maybe put some random fibers from a fiber glass mat into the epoxy. over the area of the crack on the outside of the manifold. That could add some strength as well.

Or you can get a used manifold. Every person who does a headswap has one left over. I have one in the garage. If he wants it, it's cheap plus shipping. You define cheap.

Wow, that would be cool. I'll pass it on to him tomorrow. I noticed your sig had '96 GT. There's no difference between those model years? Or do you have one from another car?

kevin

I have a 96' GT and about a year after I had it...the head cracked right behind the thermostat inlet. I called my local Ford Authorized Mechanic and once towed in...they check online with Ford Motor Co. for me....turns out that certain model had a defective Intake and they replace mine at NO CHARGE...and even picked up the tab for towing. You should have your friend check to see if his may fall in that category before doing anything. I've included a link to Fords Recall Information site where all he needs to do is type in the VIN number and see what recalls should be performed on his stang.

Hope it works out for him.

Lord-Mustang

It was a silent recall for '96-'97 model years. Probably wouldn't show in the recall database. Also, it was a seven year waranty on that item, so it's no longer under warrantee for most '96 cars.

They're the same on the '96-'98 cars. While this one would be cheap and is in good condition, for somewhere near $300 Ford sells a new manfold "kit" that is still plastic for the most part, but that coolant passage that cracked is now aluminum.

Kevin,

I have a 98 Mustang GT and recently I had the intake manifold replaced due to that exact problem. There is a new revised model out now... costed $270 with tax. It's metal at the thermostat housing now where it had cracked before. And no... they won't replace it for free. i fought with them for close to a month. It just ain't happening. Labor was $200 at a local reliable shop. Total cost: $470 (with tax--AR).

-Mike

JB Weld should hold it plenty good. I had a split in my radiator ('67 Galaxie 289) on the seam where the upper hose connection meets the radiator. Also I broke the drain plug off, and JB Welded it back on. JB Weld has held both fine for 2 years now, even in 110* weather.

Since the failures are due to shoddy craftsmanship Ford ought to replace any manifolds that crack free of charge. I mean honestly. If I were to blow

20-30 grand on a new car (ludicrous price) it damned well better last 15-20 years /150,000-200,000 miles without any major failures.

LOL! Fifteen to twenty years with no problems? You're kidding right? It's a man-made machine. It'll never happen. BTW...they did extend the warranty to seven years from the start of the original manufacturer's warranty. What more do you want? The car is eight years old. PS...it's s Ford, not a Benz.

I said _major problems_. That is to say that if the car is not abused nothing should go wrong that takes obscene amounts of labor, pulling the engine or transmission, or any otehr deeply internal problems. I expect normal stuff like a carb rebuild, alternator, timing chain, etc... The severity of the problems depends on your location and how/when/how often you drive the car, but under normal use there should be no major failures.

It took until just shy of 200,000 miles and 25 years for my '67 289 Galaxie to have a major engine failure (broken rocker arm stud from unevenly worn valve tips), and just now the transmission is only _starting_ to show signs of its age. During the winter months (cold weather) the transmission will slip on the 2-3 shift if I don't let the thing warm up long enough. For the most part things that have broken on it are normal wear items one would expect to replace after 35+ years and 200,000+ miles. If they made cars in

1967 that could go that long without premature major mechanical failures then I see no reason why they can't do it today with all the technology and such put into designing cars. If I'm plunking down some obscene amount of moeny for a brand new car with 0 miles on it (well okay, maybe 10-20 miles at the most from transportation) it damned well better last me and I damned well better get the full life out of the car. If I am going to have to be paying for major mechanical failures in 5-10 years I may as well buy used. If something fails prematurely due to a manufacturing/design flaw then I expect it to be replaced free of charge. A new car costs a lot of money, and should I ever buy one I expect to get my money's worth out of it.

Cory

Cory...it takes about two hours to swap the manifold. Nothing too major.

Thanks for all the tips and info guys! I'll pass it on!

Kevin

you do have a point regarding how long cars can last if properly maintained. i also would expect my new car to last 15-20 years, provided i drive it without beating on it too much, and take care of it well. i believe they are designed to last that long too... especially domestic v-8 cars from the sixties that had very durable drivetrains. Actually I believe so do the v-8 cars today, even with the federally mandated crap added on.

the difference though, is when you are talking performance cars, that most people are gonna beat the $hit out if most of the time, you lose that longevity. i just bought a new cobra, and while it probably could last 20 years if i drove it like my grandma, that ain't gonna happen... =)

i used to be into the mopar scene. how many original hemi's and 440-6 cars were still driving around after the 70's? not too many... just like your

289 galaxie, which sounds like a nice car btw, i was usually able to find 273/318 mopars in great shape and had a very long life ahead - but they were probably driven to the grocery store for most of their lives.

i think that most people in this group who are into stangs are looking for the most bang for the buck out of the v-8's and that is when it costs $$

"Christopher Shea" wrote in message news:nJ6db.160493$ snipped-for-privacy@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

I'd heard those 4.6 engines typically go for a long time, 150,000+ miles if treated right.

That does play a big factor in longevity. However, I feel if the engine is a good design it will last a long time even if you beat on it now and again, assuming it's left stock. Of course if you blatantly beat the snot out of it with no regard whatsoever for the engine or transmission you can manage to break anything, no matter how well designed.

Yeah, I definitely understand why so few of those are still around, at least in original condition. However, part of it is because there were so few produced compared to the more tame versions. I got my '67 with ~189,500 miles on what I believe is the original engine and transmission. It hadn't been taken the best care of before me as it had sat for quite some time without proper care taken to preserve it while not used. The frame is rotted out under the doors, and has rot in the rear quarters.

But anyway, I beat the snot out of that thing when I first got it. The first time I drove it legally (had taken it out alone around town with no registration or insurance) I took it straight out to the highway and took her up to about 110 MPH, that was with my dad in the passenger seat as I didn't even have my license yet, only a permit. I stomped on it on the back roads back home. I used to go out and cruise along the expressway at 100 MPH with occasional bursts up to 115 (top speed) all the time with my friends. I've ridden that thing down a bumpy dirt and sand road at 40-50 MPH. After that I had to replace the idler arm, which was just about shot to hell before the dirt road adventure anyway. 190,000+ miles on an idler arm isn't bad, at least I would think not.

I once ran from the cops, sliding it sideways and whipping the back around turns. WOT practically the whole time. The open manifolds sure added to the excitement. I eventually ended up hiding in some strangers back yard in the middle of the night until the cops were content that I had gotten away. I used to ride it up to 60 MPH in first gear when merging onto the highway (took me a while to figure out that if I manually selected first gear I could hold it there and the engine had plenty of room to rev). When I got it the valve tips were mostly worn unevenly so the rocker arm geometry wasn't the best as it put a lot of sideways stress on the studs. Hell, it's no wonder after two years of loyal service it's major failure was a rocker stud snapping (when I break 'em I break 'em good!). Now I've got a pair of beat '68 closed chamber heads with rail-rockers on it. Needless to say it doesn't rev like it used to with the 289 closed chamber heads with slotted pushrod holes and normal rocker arms. Now it's just tame transportation. I can't afford the time or money to restore it, and I don't even have the skills to do it right, with the amount of body work and such that thing needs. I'm much more comfortable with mechanicals.

I guess my point is that my '67 was so damned durable. I took good care of it though, as I stayed on top of the mechanicals and such. I did plenty of preventative maintenance. After about a year of beating the hell out of it with no major failures I became much more tame. I would only do the occasional race at a stop light, and even then I would only go to 60-65 MPH and back off. So I've put that car through a whole hell of a lot of abuse, but no neglect. That's why it took it, in my opinion anyway. I have a friend who is into cars but he just blatantly beats the shit out of cars, without any consideration for what he is doing, or deeper thought of what goes on inside the mechanicals of the car when he does certain things. In the time I've been driving my '67 he's been through 2 cars and also broke his girlfriends first car. He's spent a _lot_ of time without a car as he just keeps breaking them. The difference between me and him is that although I may beat on my cars a good bit I am not just hearing the exhaust and squealing tires and smiling (I mean, I'm doing that *too*), but I also visualize everything that's happening inside the engine, transmission, and other mechanicals. Because of that I learn my cars limits and know what will happen if I exceed them.

When things break I usually know what it is without even popping the hoop or looking under the car. Some of my 'good luck' with my car may very well be from having a 289, which many people around here call "the forever engine" because it just doesn't wanna die. While that may be true to a point, I think the main reason I'm still driving my '67 after all that abuse is because I took care of it.

My '68s 302 is shot with only 97,000 miles on it (it's just a baby). The 302 and 289 are nearly identical as I'm sure you know. The difference is that my uncle drove the '68 for about 6-7 years before my grandmother gave it to me, and in that time he never was hard on it like I was on my '67, but he just didn't take care of it. There was never much oil or transmission fluid in it (or brake fluid for that matter), and he would jsut drive it until it positively wouldn't go anymore before taking it anywhere to be fixed. He also too kit to a questionable shop instead of doing the work himself and knowing it was done right (though knowing my uncle that's probably a good thing that he din't do the work himself). When I got the car it had no front brake pad left on the shoes and deep grooves in the drums, both front wheel cylidners and one rear cylinder leaked, the master cylinder wouldn't hold pressure and the cap gasket was all rotted away, as well as one rubber brake line having a cut thorugh the outer rubber layer and partially into the braided portion. To top it off his parking brake was way out of adjustment so if he kept driving it when the back brakes would have finally gave out on him he would have had no way to stop, aside from the Fred Flintstone way that is. That will give you an idea of how badly he neglected the car... Rest assured he treated the rest of the car just as bad as the brakes (the most important part of a car!).

I believe any car can last a good long time if taken care of. Of course if you drive it like I drove my '67 that first year the car won't last as long before a major failure, but I would still expect at least 100,000 miles from the car so long as it isn't blatantly abused without any regard for the vehicle and is maintained. I would expect failures that are appropriate to how the car is treated, and if subjected to severe duty like my '67 was at first I would not consider things like bent pushrods an unexpected or major failure given that the valve tips were worn so that some rocker arms didn't sit straight but instead were canted to the side.

Do it right, or do it again. :)

Sorry about being so long-winded, but once I get going I suppose I really get going. :)

How many cars from the '50s '60s or '70s have you ever heard of having an _intake manifold_ fail? Not a single one I bet. If by some remote chance someone managed to break an intake manifold (i.e. not snap the carb studs or some other user error) it was surely not in typical service that these cars were put through. That's because they made simple components simply. In intake manifold is about as simple a component as there is on a car. When you get down to it all it is is a hunk of metal with some holes bored through it. Try to dream up some way for one to fail, I bet you can't. Even home-made manifolds from sheet metal probably never failed. They just don't break... Unless you make them out of plastic. Ask anyone what are things that break on a car, no one will say an *intake manifold* (before this whole plastic thing anyway). It's job is simple, route fuel+air or just air, as well as water in many designs. It just sits there and does it's job. it doesn't even have any moving parts for heaven's sake! FFor someone to f*ck up an intake manifold design so that it breaks you much have to be dumber than a rock. It's easy enough to make a manifold that performs poorly, but one that cracks? I'd love to know what the moron who approved a plastic intake manifold was thinking when he gave it the "okay". What *will* they think of next? Plastic *exhaust* manifolds?

I'm just going to stop now... I can go on forever and ever about someone screwing up a simple piece of an engine that is older than dirt, so to speak, and _never breaks_.

Bingo. Not only are the intakes for the 4.6's made of plastic, coolant is routed through one of the runners. Hot coolant under 14+ lbs. of pressure running through a long plastic tube is bound to create problems. My next mod will be the replacement of the OEM intake, with the newer plastic/aluminum unit. I don't fancy waiting for mine to burst out the middle of nowhere.

My condolences to those who have suffered this fate. To others here, I suggest you replace the plastic intake manifold on your pre-99 4.6 before it bursts and possibly destroys your entire engine. I've heard enough horror stories - I am just going to do it.

-JD

_________________________________ JD's Locally-Famous Mustang Page: http://207.13.104.8/users/jdadams Please note: UCE is deleted at the ISP server level. Unless your address is on my 'accept list', your mail will never reach me. See my website for more information.

While you're at it, it may be worthwhile to get a better performing manifold, and perhaps a larger throttle body. I don't know anything about the new 4.6 engines and what their strengths and weaknesses are in stock form, so you may be a better judge at what are worthwhile upgrades than me. Just saying that while you've got it apart you may as well do some upgrades if better performing parts are affordable (again, I don't know anything about the aftermarket for the 4.6). Food for thoguht I suppose.

So... What makes the 4.6 so 'modular' anyway? The 260-351W engines are modular, everything comes off them and many parts easily swap between the engines in the family. Same goes for the FE engines and the 385 series. Hell, as far as I know the 4.6 is the only engine in that family, so what's so modular about it if nothing even swaps off of it to another engine?

Cory

A better performing manifold cost mucho dinero. And unles it's supercharged or turbocharged, it's not going to do much unless your after every last fraction of a mph. Throttle bodies...don't waste the money unless, again, you're running forced induction. They actually will cause a loss of torque due to lower air velocity. And, FYI, plastic is a great thing to make an intake manifold of. It's lightweight, non-conductive for heat, and relatively inexpensive. Somebody made a mistake when designing the coolant crossover in this one (have you ever made a mistake?), but that's not a reason to write off the entire idea. Got news for ya...plastics are going into more and more places that you'd have never thought. Get used to it. PS...I'm sure there have been a few failures in metal parts due to a faulty design. That's why there is a warranty, and for this particular case, Ford extended it to seven years from the start of the original warranty.

They're modular for the very reasons you list. Parts are shared among the

4.6 V8s (2V and 4V), 5.4 V8, and 6.8 V10.