How many cylinders? Lincoln LS

Engine displacment will be on a decal under the hood... This is a good thing.... VIN 8 is engine displacement (this is the 8th digit of the VIN)... This is a good thing....

I'm a top posting bastuhd... this is a good thing....

What's a bastuhd? I heard of a bastard before, but not a bastuhd. Either way, top-posting is not good. However, your understanding that you're a bastard is a good start. Now, you need to understand that top posting is rude and only idiots do it.

More accurately, the 8th digit specifies the particular engine, not engine displacement. For example, the Taurus had different engines with the same displacementment (Vulcan and Duratec). They had different 8th digits. You can find out more by entering a particular VIN here:

Tell him to go to ebay, search Lincoln LS and look at the engine pictures in a few of the ads.

for instance, this one shows the engine in a V6

snipped-for-privacy@mailcity.com wrote:

If the car has a manual transmissions, it's a Duratec V6. IIRC, both the V6 and V8 were available with the automatic transmission.

Jeff

That's easy, count the plugs. TheV6 and the V8 are they same modular engine that can be of a number of differnt cylinders

So, by that metric,how many cylinders is a 1994 Ranger with a 2.3 liter engine?

One is a 60* V-6 the other is a 90* V-8.

There is no way they can be "they same modular engine."

All2.3s are 4cyl, even though some rangers would appear to be VERY narrow V8s

It is obvious to the observer that the engine has two plugs per cylinder

If you are correct than the information I was given was not correct. ;)

Really? The OP states; "So, my son bought a Lincoln LS. He lives an hour away. He does not KNOW what type of engine it has."

If he can't manage to look at the VECI sticker, how could one suppose that he could determine one plug per cylinder from two?

Feel free to prove me wrong.

Apparently, you have a lot of questionable sources.

I'm not sure, does he go a public school?

I got a great education at a public school. There are many excellent public schools like Mastermin in Philly and Advancements in NYC. So, a public school does not mean a bad education. (Of course, teaching in Harlem, I know that it does not necessarily mean a good one, either.)

Jeff

That should be Stuyvesant in NYC. Bad spell checker.

Where do you see an indication that the OPs son is in any school at all?

Etto Brute? LOL

If I knew that I would not have ask the question, right? ;)

NYC has some excellent inner city schools, like the Bronx Science HS (I forget the formal name of the school). In addition, Detroit has the Renaissance HS and Washington DC has Dubnar High School. Both cities, as well as New York City and Philadelphia have other excellent high schools.

Unfortunately, the real problem, IMHO, in NYC and other big cities is that the parents, for multiple reasons, are not nearly as involved in their community and schools as they should be. The Upper West Side (UPS) has many excellent schools (in NYC). Just north of UPS has many crappy schools and a few good ones.

Suburban and rural schools run from crappy to excellent, too.

Jeff

You are correct it is not the teacher but the conditions under which the must work, the administrators, the conditions at home and the help or lack of it for them and the kids, from the parents. Union contracts that require all teachers with equal training to be paid the same, without regard to WHERE they have to work or how well or badly they teach. Teachers are not like line workers, putting nuts on bolts.

My local schools graduate 98 percent of the students, most with h>> I know, two of my draughters are teachers. I should have said inner

And the relevancy is?