5.0 Engine Life

That's odd. I lived back in the sixties and seventies, and I'd swear that 40,000 was the magic number. Beyond that, you were pushing your luck and it was definitely time to trade in the car.

Detroit was putting out garbage, from a quality control standpoint. Planned obsolescence, and all that. The rarity was the commercial about the guy with a 1,000,000-mile Mercedes or the gearheads who kept their cars in tip-top condition and could expect 250,000 miles or more. The average car didn't receive anywhere near as much attention.

The fact that TFrog has gone 170,000 miles on its original oil is a testament to the way Ford has learned to build their engines. They ASSume that no regular maintenance will take place, and they build their engines to overcome that.

dwight

Surely this is a typo. :-)

///Mike

1993 BMW 525i of all the old cars

snipped-for-privacy@aol.com (TurboMike) wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@mb-m14.aol.com:

I thought it was WF masquerading as froggy. ;)

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

I'm thinking of showing the car when it gets a little more toward the "classic" stage. Doesn't the Mustang Club take off points if you don't have the OEM oil in the car?

dwight

40,000? I had a '64 MGB that had 137,000 on it when I bought it in '72; a '68 Le Mans with the 350 that had over 90,000; and a '73 Impala wagon, also with a 350, with 66,000 when I got it. It had 210,000 on it when my son decided to drive it one August day with a bad water pump to visit a girl he had the hots for. I don't know about him, but the engine was blown.

I also had a '73 Vega with 115,000 on it when I sold it and a '76 Pinto with 95,000 before I wrecked it. Yeah, Pintos and Vegas.

I've been driving for 40 years and never had a car with a 40,000 mile engine. Most of them were used with at least twice that on the clock, and most were '50s, '60's, or '70's vintage. I've only had 3 new cars of the 30 or so I've owned, and my '94 Mustang now has 120,000. That's low mileage in my experience. Maybe you were raised on Ladas and Yugos.

Doc,

150K-200K figures are the odometer numbers I've seen on many 5.0s at the track. These numbers might not sound too impressive compared to the others you mentioned, but I doubt those engines were subjected to burnouts, drag/street racing, and constant jack rabbit starts and redline shifts that is very common in the life of a typical 5.0. I also doubt that any of your examples ever snorted NOS or ran boost like many of these old warrior 5.0s had. Bottom line: The 5.0 is an anvil.

Do you know TnT?

Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD

I really hope so, Patrick. I want my 5.0 to be around for a long, long time. Even though it's ten years old, the body is still in great shape: no rust anywhere. And when I wash and wax it, people remark about how it still looks new.

It'd be a first for me if the body outlasted the engine. Hopefully, the 5.0 will last even longer. I think it's a great car, with a great engine. I simply love the low-end torque. I don't think there's anything made today that can match it. I know it's subjective, but I just fell in love with the styling when it came out, and I didn't consider anything but that 302cc V8. When Ford went to the cammer in '96, I knew it was the end of an era for pure off-the-line muscle, so I was really glad I bought my Mustang when I did. I just want it to be around for longer than what so many people on this group say it will.

Selfish, I guess.

No, sorry, I'm not familiar with that.

Stupid me; I said 302cc when I meant 302ci. Quite a bit of difference.

BTW, I'm thinking of changing the stock 2.73s for 3.73s. With 120,000 miles on it, is that really a smart decision for someone who values engine longevity? It's a five-speed and I get about 22mpg overall. I'll never race it--street or track--but I simply love those interstate merges. Am I just being stupid? Or would 3.08s, 3.27s, or 3.55s make more sense?

The drag and street racers seem to love the 3.73s, but I think 3.55s are plenty.

Here are the general guidelines for your app:

4.10s - drag 3.73s - street/strip 3.55s - aggressive street 3.27s - street 3.08s - mild street 2.73s - econo

For what you're after, and what you're concerned most about, a jump from your 2.73s to 3.27s would be a good choice, IMO.

Patrick '93 Cobra (3.55s) '83 LTD

Econo? Hey, I just happen to like holding 1st gear to 40mph, that's all. And chugging along on the highway at 65mph and barely idling is pretty cool, too.

Second gear is my favorite - from zero to 65. Third's alright, too - about

25 to 90mph. Talk about flexibility!

dwight

93 TFrog LX 5.0 stick (w/2.73's) 93 CFrog GT convertible auto (w/3.27's)

"dwight" wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@uni-berlin.de:

dwight, ever spin the rear tires?

Joe Calypso Green '93 5.0 LX AOD hatch with a few goodies Black '03 Dakota 5.9 R/T CC

Yes, but don't blame the car. That's driver error. Spinning tires means lack of traction, means going nowhere. Generally, if I spin the rear tires in wet or dry conditions, I check the tire pressure next chance I get.

Hell, even the Princessmobile could smoke 'em.

dwight

Sorry for the delay in responding; I've been out of town for the week.

That table you posted is great. Since I have a 27 year-old who also loves the car, maybe I should compromise and go with the 3.55s. Or go with the

3.27s.

Damn! Choices!

You've been a tremendous help, Patrick. Can't tell you how much I appreciate it, especially with all the go-fasters out there saying that those higher-number gear ratios are the only way to go. You're the only one who's looked at it practically. Thanks!

doc

Doc,

If you're trying to make him happy too, then you should probably go with the 55s.

More pros and cons.

Pro - 3.55s will give your slightly heavier (than the earlier Fox bodies) S-95 a bit more pop. (Something he's probably looking for.)

55s give 3rd gear, the T-5's lazy gear, more zip.

Con - 3.55s, IMO, are not as fun to play with as 3.27s or 3.08s. With

55s you have to go to 5th gear too soon, and 5th gear kills the fun. (However, if you're sane you'll never be traveling that fast. ;-)) With my 3.08s, I loved snapping forth and being able to just let it wind up. I'm probably making your decision harder, ain't I?

To me 3.73s and the Mustang 3.35 first gear is a little much -- 1st gear becomes a tire spinning creeper gear. The 55s take a little bite out of that multiplication.

No problem. Opinions... that's what we're all here for.

Patrick '93 Cobra '83 LTD

I have a 1988 GT, bought new, currently with 235,000 miles on it. Runs like new, just change the oil every 10000 miles or so.

Using Amsoil?

-Mike

-- A happy kid behind the wheel of a 98 Mustang GT Cold air intake FRPP 3.73 gears Steeda Tri-Ax Shifter Full Boar turbo mufflers Hi-speed fan switch

255/60R-15 rear tires

Whatever synthetic is on sale that week.