It wasn't a bad design...as long as it had the right gasket. Mike's right...it WAS a good engine, a good trade between power and efficiency. But again, regulation killed it.
And I found something else interesting. In the mid-late 90's they switched to a plastic intake. Heard many horror stories of the intakes melting! Stupidity?
Nah...here in New England a lot of states require Ethanol in the fuel. The intake was not designed for this, so, in Mass particularly, there were a lot of meltdowns of the intakes.
I'd blame that on the State before Ford. Ford reaponded to the problem and altered the material.
When I was working at the CarQuest, there was a small grocery across the street. And older gentleman parked his Continental outside, and left it running because it was about 25 degrees out. While he was in the store, there was a white puff...and another..then a few more...then a light stream. By the time he came out 7 minutes after parking, there was quite a trail of white smoke behind his car. He stopped a passer-by, pointed to the tailpipe, and the other guy shrugged his shoulders. The guy got in his car, and took off with a CLOUD behind him. Hope he headed for the Ford dealer down the street...
Shame...this was in 2003, the car was a '97 or '98 in MINT shape!
Those EVIL regulators, telling manufacturers they can't use toxic materials!
You could do that but you would be wrong. "Gasohol" dates back the late '70's. I was using it in my '79 Monza. Every Ford built after that date should have been prepared to deal with sizeable amounts of alcohol in the fuel.
I've only seen a couple in my life. And those that do, are equipped to deal with it.
And I was using Gasahol in my '80 Corolla SR-5. Against all the warnings that it would burn the valves, melt components, yada yada yada. Ran it for two years until it disappeared from this part of the country for 17+ years.
Funny thing...the motor in that car only got to 244,000 miles...by me. Then I traded it and saw it around the area for another 4 years.
It is advisable that before one comments on a subject, they might want to do some research first, or at least say in my opinion.
The history of asbestos and gaskets, as well as break, problems is well documented. Ford did NOT change the design of the gasket. The gasket manufactures were forced to change the material without being given enough time to develop a replacement material, that was the cause and everybody in the industry knows it.
Toyota, Honda GM, Chrysler and Ford ALL had some engines that had gasket and other problems as the result of the asbestos ban . There was four different materials used to replace asbestos, two worked and two didn't. If you used one of the two you had problems. One that failed, went quickly and the other much later. Toyota and Chrysler had some that went in the first 25K or less and were handled under warranty. GM and Ford used the one that went out around 75K, after thousands had been sold, and were out of warranty. That is why Ford sued and won a court settlement with the gasket manufacturers, for all users.. Ford extend the warranty on the effected 3.8L to 100K
Modern Ford engines do not distribute any fuel via the manifold, just air. The fuel is injected into each cylinder. Nearly every manufacturer now uses composite manifolds. Composite manifolds cost the engine manufacturer more than iron manifold, but lees than aluminum, so cost is not the factor, its weight. Weight is ALWAYS a factor in todays cars.
And, why are you here if you're such a cheerleader for GM?
There are lots of GM groups. Go find one and start talking about Toyotas.
You should have learned enough from being here for so long by now...
If GM built a good vehicle, I'd be right beside you. But after seeing cars of all kinds taken apart and put back together again, I'd buy a Ford LONG before any GM product...
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.