i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Topic: i HATE ford and their piss poor designs.. (Read 6933 times) previous topic - next topic

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #15 – February 15, 2012, 12:49:50 PM

Quote from: TOM Renzo;380720

Sorry chuck just got me the wrong way. I will bow out again and i do enjoy the site 99% of you guys are great. SORRY AGAIN.

It was directed at all involved, not just you. I'm tired of all the nastiness, from everyone.

I'll be glad when winter's over...

Quote from: Shadow;380723

the 1 thing i don't get, is the fan shroud is massive.. remove it and you'll see there's plenty of room to move the motor forward 5-6 inches.. the fan is about 8-10" from the radiator, so it's not really crammed in there, they just shoved it against the firewall for god knows what reason

The reason would be better weight distribution. Bet the newer trucks handle better (less like trucks) than the old ones do.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #16 – February 15, 2012, 12:59:17 PM

Good point Chuck i agree100%.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #17 – February 15, 2012, 01:26:35 PM

Quote from: Chuck W;380726

The reason would be better weight distribution. Bet the newer trucks handle better (less like trucks) than the old ones do.

didn't really take that into consideration, because it's a truck and the 2 don't normally go together.. at least not in the older stuff i like/own.. wouldn't have hurt them to pull the motor an inch forward, since 2/3 of the motor is even with or behind the wheel centerline

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #18 – February 15, 2012, 02:04:43 PM

Weight distribution is the main thing. Ford had planned on the Lightning from the get-go with the '97+ up trucks, and it didn't make much sense to have 2 sets of frame/engine mounts, so the engine placement was common, and in the interest of better handling, well, that's how it ended up. Chevy did it years past with the Big Montes, I remember those having a fan shroud that would do a wind tunnel at McDonnell-Douglas proud..

As fast as the E4od goes in the '96 and older Ford, it's really no better than the AOD...get a lot of miles and too many heavy right feet, and it'll die as fast as anything else.
And the TTB doesn't need to be lifted to give problems, even running tires 2 or 3 inches taller than stock will make it go haywire. Add in a few hundred thousand miles with questionable maintenance, and you're probably going to need new ball joints right off the bat.

With that said, I'm kicking my own ass for ever getting rid of my '92. It as beat, dented, and looked like hell, but it still ran as hard as the day it was made. I just wish I'd done as much for the rest of the truck as I did in preventative measures for the 5.0. I literally wouldn't have hesitated to drive it to either coast.

And..when the GM guys ballyhoo the LS-whatever's greatness...just remember....ole Robert Yates and crew had the Windsor in mind when they helped the General. A dose of NASCAR expertise sure didn't hurt either.

Leave the egos at the door...if it's mechanical in nature, it WILL break down...sometime...

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #19 – February 15, 2012, 06:23:55 PM

you complain like its new, yet its 8 model years old. its going to break sometime.

whine about how its designed, but yet you have no way of making it better. i just dont get it.

i work on these things day after day as a career. it's really not as bad as people make it out to be.

please don't even start on the ls1 lsx whatever you call it bs. the debate of ford vs chevy is really childish and pretty old. they both have there good and bad points. and they all build JUNK!

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #20 – February 15, 2012, 06:46:34 PM

Quote

So GROW UP and dont use my name in your RANTS about the engine that is the best power plant on this PLANET. YES THAT WOULD BE THE LSX PLAIN AND SIMPLE. Thank you !!!!!!!! Now hold your breath stomp your feet and fire back at me i am waiting!!!!!

:rollin:There really IS something um, off, so to speak with you. Entertaining though.

Quote from: Shadow;380729

didn't really take that into consideration, because it's a truck and the 2 don't normally go together.. at least not in the older stuff i like/own.. wouldn't have hurt them to pull the motor an inch forward, since 2/3 of the motor is even with or behind the wheel centerline

These days people want trucks to feel more like cars. More daily driveable. I see more ladies driving them than ever. It's clear to see. Fords fit in finish across the board the last 10 years really shows and proves this. The earlier 97 up "new body style" trucks were freaking awful until Ford fixed them. Ditto for expedition.

Head replacement probably 6-8 hours by the seasoned tech.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #21 – February 15, 2012, 07:15:05 PM

When doing major engine work on these trucks it is easier to pull the body.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #22 – February 15, 2012, 08:02:27 PM

Tom and Chuck, I agree 100% that Tom's name should have not been used in that post. It was just rude and un-called for.

Shadow, I hate these modular engines with a passion. Yes, we have to grin and bear it when we have to work on the PITAs, but the original breakage was stupid. Spark plugs blowing out is a problem we used to never have. Ford is doing something way wrong with their head design. Yes, they have to follow government regulations for emissions and fuel consumption, however, Chevy and Dodge are not having these issues. I for one, do not want to own a truck with a 5.4, and sure will not own one with a 4.6. Glad I don't have to work on the stupid things anymore. I do not see it nessesary to pull the body on a gas engine. After pulling the shroud and accessories, there is plenty of room to stand in the engine compartment to work.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #23 – February 15, 2012, 08:05:58 PM

Quote from: shame302;380750

These days people want trucks to feel more like cars. More daily driveable. I see more ladies driving them than ever. It's clear to see. Fords fit in finish across the board the last 10 years really shows and proves this. The earlier 97 up "new body style" trucks were freaking awful until Ford fixed them. Ditto for expedition.

Head replacement probably 6-8 hours by the seasoned tech.

i prefer the good ol' days when a truck was a truck, car was a car.. kudos to improving the handling, but take away major points for the design flaws.. but i believe it'd probably be more in the 10-12 hour range, because of the work involved.. this was the first 1 i ever had to tackle, so i know it took me longer than it normally would..

Quote from: SLEEPER T-BIRD 87;380756

When doing major engine work on these trucks it is easier to pull the body.

the manual actually suggests pulling the motor, but i can't see that helping at all.. all i did was the passenger side head and that took long enough.. to remove, tuck away and remove all the necessary to pull the whole motor, you're probably looking at a day and a half for a first timer..

but i do have an idea to fix the head slug problem.. COARSE THREAD.. coarse thread bolts have a much deeper, stronger thread.. the fine threads in the head are easy to strip, because they're so small.. i came to think of this, because we had similar problems with the micros and fine thread bolts/slugs for the radius rods and shocks.. luckily it happened on my test car and not on a customer's.. we drilled out the old slugs, tossed new 1's in, tapped them for coarse thread 7/16" bolts and whala, fixed.. ford could do the same by re-tapping the heads for a thicker spark plug stud with a coarse thread and the problem would be far less common.. at least by my train of thought, anyway lol

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #24 – February 15, 2012, 08:09:40 PM

They just didn't use enough threads. The material probably sucks as well. Took them till 04 to fix it. NEVER attempt to remove the plugs from a warm modular engine. As specially the aluminum 4 valve cars. They must be cold. Like over night cold. They never got anti seize from the factory. Should be one of the first things done when purchasing one. None of the modular engines are well suited for truck use. 4.6, 5.4 V10. They all suck in that application. The Raptors 6.2 liter is okay but the Coyote out performs it. Fact of the matter is, Trucks aren't race cars.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #25 – February 15, 2012, 08:11:48 PM

Quote from: shame302;380764

Fact of the matter is, Trucks aren't race cars.

that's what i told the owner LOL his wife said he does 90 down the PA turnpike with it every day on the way to work lmao

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #26 – February 15, 2012, 08:28:58 PM

Quote from: Shadow;380761

ford could do the same by re-tapping the heads for a thicker spark plug stud with a coarse thread and the problem would be far less common.. at least by my train of thought, anyway lol

Probably. But to do that Ford would have to acknowledged there was a problem. Likely there is a TSB on it but I doubt a recall ever happened. But yeah, one would have thought to beef that up a little somewhere along the production time line. Every manufacturer has their issues, defects or design flaws. Many of them exist for assembly line reasons, logistics, bean counters, or the engineer just plain wanted things a certain way. To be honest, those plugs probably weren't intended to have to be serviced for 100,000 miles either.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #27 – February 15, 2012, 08:44:09 PM

Ford would not recall that unless they absolutely had to. It would cost them way to much to recall that many vehicles for that much of a repair. Somebody would have to prove it a safety concern.

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #28 – February 15, 2012, 08:54:49 PM

it is a TSB, but never made it as a recall.. it should have been, but like chrome said, they wouldn't/won't because of the cost.. but changing the thread design could really benefit the problem.. but i guess ford just figures they'll make their money replacing heads on the customer's dime..

i HATE ford and their piss poor designs..

Reply #29 – February 15, 2012, 09:35:42 PM

The whole blow out problem is because there are only five threads in the heads to secure the plugs, if there had been eight or so there would have never been a problem... Emissions has zip to do with the problem, it's a $hitty design plain and simple but Ford won't admit to it... They blame loose or over torqued plugs as the problem, but many of the trucks have blown out the original plugs...

I posted this same info over on the Crown Vic board this morning as there were some members whining about the same in the Vic 4.6...