Ford Is Debating.....

[jman_07]

I have a friend he is a huge ford fan Anyway he showed me what the f-150 forum community is up to there having a debate right now about Chevy vs ford Engines Claiming fords 4.0LSOHC in the explorer Blows the 4.3L vortec out of the water.

 

Now as unproud as i am to say this i had a 4.0SOHC Explorer those engines are absolute junk. As well as the truck itself i put more money into the thing than i bought it for.

 

Also in the statements they are claiming the new improved 4.6L v8 will blow the doors off of chevys 4.8L i have also drove a 4.6L f-150 they perform as well as 4 cylinders as far as im concerned very weak V8

 

Just thought i would let everyone know What Yall think? Idk Honestly but i dont believe Ford can build a v6 Enough said.

 

 

However the ford community is claiming our vortecs are junk.

[P71_CrownVic]

I have a friend he is a huge ford fan Anyway he showed me what the f-150 forum community is up to there having a debate right now about Chevy vs ford Engines Claiming fords 4.0LSOHC in the explorer Blows the 4.3L vortec out of the water.

 

Now as unproud as i am to say this i had a 4.0SOHC Explorer those engines are absolute junk. As well as the truck itself i put more money into the thing than i bought it for.

 

Also in the statements they are claiming the new improved 4.6L v8 will blow the doors off of chevys 4.8L i have also drove a 4.6L f-150 they perform as well as 4 cylinders as far as im concerned very weak V8

 

Just thought i would let everyone know What Yall think? Idk Honestly but i dont believe Ford can build a v6 Enough said.

 

 

However the ford community is claiming our vortecs are junk.

 

If you like spark plugs blowing out of the head...a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that is physically massive (modulars) but has horrid power (224HP in a Grand Marquis) a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that are nicknamed 'boat anchors', a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that have been attacked by the bean counters resulting in faulty intake manifolds that will leave you stranded in 4 degree weather, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that, with only 38K miles on it, had only TWO spark plugs come out like they should...and the other 6 BROKE in the head resulting in an expensive repair, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that makes a lot of (horrible) noise, but really is sluggish, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that drink like a fish, a Ford modular is for you. (An F-150 SFE with the 4.6 got the same mileage as a Silverado XFE with the 5.3)

 

If you like an engine that eats through the timing chain guides resulting in aluminum shavings in the oil eventually clogging the pickup screen, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that leaks oil with only 9K miles on it, a Ford modular is for you.

 

Basically, all the Ford cheerleaders can do is lie about their engines. Even they are in denial as to how bad their engines really are. The modulars are terrible engines. I OWNED a 4.6 Crown Vic...so a lot of those are first hand experiences.

 

I also routinely drive:

 

-a 2004 Expedition with a 4-speed...can hardly get out of it's way

 

 

-a 2007 Expedition with the 5.4 and a 6-speed. Just as slow and anemic as the 2004

 

 

-a 2004-ish Super Duty with the V10...not any faster than our 1988 Chevy with the 454. And that V10 sounds like a diesel...what a horrid engine.

 

[[email protected]]

Ford is doing a few things right, i wouldnt count the 4.0 among them. but the 4.3 is a boat anchor. Its a leaky, underperforming pile of junk. personally, the 3.6 d.i. is a much better motor. I dont care for any of the older chevy stuff before they came out with the oil-less intake and the distributorless ignition. also, who cares about gm's 4.8. its not supposed to be anything fancy. lets compare our 5.3 to their 5.4 or anything they have against the 6.2. GM rules when it comes to power out of their v8. Im almost positive even MOPAR cant compete with the 6.2 and hp is all dodge has going for them

[fbachman]

Having owned several F250SDs, I have to agree with everything said above.

 

Drank gas like a fish (5.4), slower than crap, and many reliability issues.

 

Had an explorer with a 4.6. The sorriest excuse for a V8 I have ever seen. 12-13mpg is as good as it got. My 5.3 Sierra gets 15 around town AND runs like a tractor on crack compared with that cruddy 4.6.

 

Ford ACs don't work worth a crap. the QC has cratered over the past 5 years, and the aggressive warranty concession control that Ford implemented makes EVERY trip to the dealer under warranty (and, believe me there are/will be MANY) a fight and a half.

 

I am embarrassed I didn't make the switch to GM much sooner. I am a brand loyalty type to a fault. But, I admit when I was wrong.

 

Now, my 91 F150 was a tank (302 V8), ran well, and went 150,000 problem free miles. Try THAT with a 4.6/5.4. Good luck.

 

To be fair, the mods are early 90s tech. BUT, Ford chose not to put a new V8 in the pipeline for 20 years. Let them live with it now.

 

Let them rave. Those who have owned both know the truth,

[P71_CrownVic]

I have only seen one Ford A/C system that was worth it's weight. It was in my grandma's 1996 4.0 (pushrod) Explorer. The engine was gutless...but was bullet proof. IN the 10 years that she owned it, it needed ONE thermostat, and I had to clean the IAC valve (5 min job). That was it.

 

My grandparents also had two Taurus SHOs (the real ones). One was a 1989 and the other was a 1994. A/C worked for about a year and that was it.

 

My mom's 2001 Escape has lukewarm AC as well. And the lower intake manifold gaskets are causing it to sputter at idle. This past winter, the neglected Ford Escort that sits outside NEVER had a problem starting. My mom's 10 year newer Escape did.

 

Bold moves.

[ZZ327]

I have a friend he is a huge ford fan Anyway he showed me what the f-150 forum community is up to there having a debate right now about Chevy vs ford Engines Claiming fords 4.0LSOHC in the explorer Blows the 4.3L vortec out of the water.

 

Now as unproud as i am to say this i had a 4.0SOHC Explorer those engines are absolute junk. As well as the truck itself i put more money into the thing than i bought it for.

 

Also in the statements they are claiming the new improved 4.6L v8 will blow the doors off of chevys 4.8L i have also drove a 4.6L f-150 they perform as well as 4 cylinders as far as im concerned very weak V8

 

Just thought i would let everyone know What Yall think? Idk Honestly but i dont believe Ford can build a v6 Enough said.

 

 

However the ford community is claiming our vortecs are junk.

 

If you like spark plugs blowing out of the head...a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that is physically massive (modulars) but has horrid power (224HP in a Grand Marquis) a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that are nicknamed 'boat anchors', a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that have been attacked by the bean counters resulting in faulty intake manifolds that will leave you stranded in 4 degree weather, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that, with only 38K miles on it, had only TWO spark plugs come out like they should...and the other 6 BROKE in the head resulting in an expensive repair, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that makes a lot of (horrible) noise, but really is sluggish, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that drink like a fish, a Ford modular is for you. (An F-150 SFE with the 4.6 got the same mileage as a Silverado XFE with the 5.3)

 

If you like an engine that eats through the timing chain guides resulting in aluminum shavings in the oil eventually clogging the pickup screen, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that leaks oil with only 9K miles on it, a Ford modular is for you.

 

Basically, all the Ford cheerleaders can do is lie about their engines. Even they are in denial as to how bad their engines really are. The modulars are terrible engines. I OWNED a 4.6 Crown Vic...so a lot of those are first hand experiences.

 

I also routinely drive:

 

-a 2004 Expedition with a 4-speed...can hardly get out of it's way

 

 

-a 2007 Expedition with the 5.4 and a 6-speed. Just as slow and anemic as the 2004

 

 

-a 2004-ish Super Duty with the V10...not any faster than our 1988 Chevy with the 454. And that V10 sounds like a diesel...what a horrid engine.

 

 

 

LOL thats true about those v10s. They might as well have a v6 emblem on the fenders! Ive driven a 3/4 ton van with one that I coulda beat it on foot in a acceleration race!

[ColeTrains03]

i have a '00 Silverado 4.8 5 speed regular cab stepside and it can tow just as much and with as much ease as my cousings 5.4 '06 F150. It would blow his doors off if we lined them up too. He admitted he wsa suprised by it's gitty up. I towed back my '03 Silverado Z71 quad cab on a 26' hydraulic dove tail trailer with little issue. Only thing it didn't like was a REALLY steap hill but it got up it fine. It didn't like it much. The new truck(Z71) has probably the same low end pep that my 4.8 did only because of the weight difference. But when i want to pass or tow the Z is better in every way. I've owned a few 4.3's before and they weren't anything special but did the job fine for me. I've had a few friends with 4.0 and 4.6 Explorers with nothing but issues from them. JUNK...

[gave20]

We have the 5.4 for our work trucks and those engines suck BIG time. I never drove a truck so gutless, no power whatsoever. Definitely wouldn't even consider a F-150.

[fbachman]

I have a friend he is a huge ford fan Anyway he showed me what the f-150 forum community is up to there having a debate right now about Chevy vs ford Engines Claiming fords 4.0LSOHC in the explorer Blows the 4.3L vortec out of the water.

 

Now as unproud as i am to say this i had a 4.0SOHC Explorer those engines are absolute junk. As well as the truck itself i put more money into the thing than i bought it for.

 

Also in the statements they are claiming the new improved 4.6L v8 will blow the doors off of chevys 4.8L i have also drove a 4.6L f-150 they perform as well as 4 cylinders as far as im concerned very weak V8

 

Just thought i would let everyone know What Yall think? Idk Honestly but i dont believe Ford can build a v6 Enough said.

 

 

However the ford community is claiming our vortecs are junk.

 

If you like spark plugs blowing out of the head...a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that is physically massive (modulars) but has horrid power (224HP in a Grand Marquis) a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that are nicknamed 'boat anchors', a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that have been attacked by the bean counters resulting in faulty intake manifolds that will leave you stranded in 4 degree weather, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that, with only 38K miles on it, had only TWO spark plugs come out like they should...and the other 6 BROKE in the head resulting in an expensive repair, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that makes a lot of (horrible) noise, but really is sluggish, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like engines that drink like a fish, a Ford modular is for you. (An F-150 SFE with the 4.6 got the same mileage as a Silverado XFE with the 5.3)

 

If you like an engine that eats through the timing chain guides resulting in aluminum shavings in the oil eventually clogging the pickup screen, a Ford modular is for you.

 

If you like an engine that leaks oil with only 9K miles on it, a Ford modular is for you.

 

Basically, all the Ford cheerleaders can do is lie about their engines. Even they are in denial as to how bad their engines really are. The modulars are terrible engines. I OWNED a 4.6 Crown Vic...so a lot of those are first hand experiences.

 

I also routinely drive:

 

-a 2004 Expedition with a 4-speed...can hardly get out of it's way

 

 

-a 2007 Expedition with the 5.4 and a 6-speed. Just as slow and anemic as the 2004

 

 

-a 2004-ish Super Duty with the V10...not any faster than our 1988 Chevy with the 454. And that V10 sounds like a diesel...what a horrid engine.

 

 

 

My old department used to run E350/450 chassis with Ford powertrains. Couldn't keep them on the line. Finally, a command decision to buy medium duty Internationals.

 

We had Expedition command vehicles and a suburban command vehicle. The Expi drank gas, couldn't get out of its own way and had lots of little mechanical problems.

 

The suburban, went 150,000 problem free miles with little more than oil, brakes and trans fluid. Of course, our mechanic took good care of all of them all.

 

To be fair, the suburban wasn't fuel efficient wither, as both vehicles were quite heavy when outfitted. Heck, those moto 800 trunked radios weighed 30-40 pounds when everything was said and done, and we had 3 of them in there alone.

 

BUT, the GM held up waaaaay better.

 

LOL, I like the strobes on the side-view mirrors. Back in my day, I used to install the Code-3 headlight flashers, back when that wouldn't screw up the electrical system. Fire department allowed to use blue lights where you are? Here in OH Fire gets red and white, police use blue and red.

[Nick The Great]

My Dad's 92 F150 with a 302 really goes. The truck is rusty and has been knocking for 25,000 miles, but it still goes.

 

The company truck is an F150 with the 5.4. It is a real pooch. The truck just feels heavy and sluggish. Nothing compared to my 5.3

 

Never driven a 4.0, but my old RCSB with the 4.3 was a quick truck!

[P71_CrownVic]

 

 

My old department used to run E350/450 chassis with Ford powertrains. Couldn't keep them on the line. Finally, a command decision to buy medium duty Internationals.

 

We had Expedition command vehicles and a suburban command vehicle. The Expi drank gas, couldn't get out of its own way and had lots of little mechanical problems.

 

The suburban, went 150,000 problem free miles with little more than oil, brakes and trans fluid. Of course, our mechanic took good care of all of them all.

 

To be fair, the suburban wasn't fuel efficient wither, as both vehicles were quite heavy when outfitted. Heck, those moto 800 trunked radios weighed 30-40 pounds when everything was said and done, and we had 3 of them in there alone.

 

BUT, the GM held up waaaaay better.

 

LOL, I like the strobes on the side-view mirrors. Back in my day, I used to install the Code-3 headlight flashers, back when that wouldn't screw up the electrical system. Fire department allowed to use blue lights where you are? Here in OH Fire gets red and white, police use blue and red.

 

 

Yeah...the Expedition I left quoted above is a lite command vehicle. Basically it has a slide out tray in back and a radio. We just (3-4 months ago) converted to 800 MHz.

 

That Expedition now has a couple new radios and a full size LED lightbar. Oh, and the tranny WAS SHOT at 34K miles..and the truck was out of the three year warranty. This is what it looks like now:

 

 

As for the lighting, Minnesota state statute says that emergency vehicles can have blue lights on the RIGHT side of the vehicle to the front...and anywhere in the rear:

 

<h2 class="subd_no">Subd. 4.Blue light.</h2> (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) to (d), blue lights are prohibited on all vehicles except road maintenance equipment and snow removal equipment operated by or under contract to the state or a political subdivision thereof.

 

(b) Authorized emergency vehicles may display flashing blue lights to the rear of the vehicle as a warning signal in combination with other lights permitted or required by this chapter. In addition, authorized emergency vehicles may display, mounted on the passenger side only, flashing blue lights to the front of the vehicle as a warning signal in combination with other lights permitted or required by this chapter.

[fbachman]

 

My old department used to run E350/450 chassis with Ford powertrains. Couldn't keep them on the line. Finally, a command decision to buy medium duty Internationals.

 

We had Expedition command vehicles and a suburban command vehicle. The Expi drank gas, couldn't get out of its own way and had lots of little mechanical problems.

 

The suburban, went 150,000 problem free miles with little more than oil, brakes and trans fluid. Of course, our mechanic took good care of all of them all.

 

To be fair, the suburban wasn't fuel efficient wither, as both vehicles were quite heavy when outfitted. Heck, those moto 800 trunked radios weighed 30-40 pounds when everything was said and done, and we had 3 of them in there alone.

 

BUT, the GM held up waaaaay better.

 

LOL, I like the strobes on the side-view mirrors. Back in my day, I used to install the Code-3 headlight flashers, back when that wouldn't screw up the electrical system. Fire department allowed to use blue lights where you are? Here in OH Fire gets red and white, police use blue and red.

 

 

Yeah...the Expedition I left quoted above is a lite command vehicle. Basically it has a slide out tray in back and a radio. We just (3-4 months ago) converted to 800 MHz.

 

That Expedition now has a couple new radios and a full size LED lightbar. Oh, and the tranny WAS SHOT at 34K miles..and the truck was out of the three year warranty. This is what it looks like now:

 

 

 

As for the lighting, Minnesota state statute says that emergency vehicles can have blue lights on the RIGHT side of the vehicle to the front...and anywhere in the rear:

 

<h2 class="subd_no">Subd. 4.Blue light.</h2> (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) to (d), blue lights are prohibited on all vehicles except road maintenance equipment and snow removal equipment operated by or under contract to the state or a political subdivision thereof.

 

(b) Authorized emergency vehicles may display flashing blue lights to the rear of the vehicle as a warning signal in combination with other lights permitted or required by this chapter. In addition, authorized emergency vehicles may display, mounted on the passenger side only, flashing blue lights to the front of the vehicle as a warning signal in combination with other lights permitted or required by this chapter.

 

 

 

Interesting. 34k and the trannie shot? Damn....

 

The old-style Crown Vics (still had 302s in em --- the old square ones) ran like tanks. We had some that we took out of active duty and made them station cars, and they ran a looooong time afterwards. One finally got surplussed after it passed 200,000 miles and had the AC go out. The PS was pretty noisy too.

 

The OLD-SCHOOL fords seemed pretty good. When the newer body styles arrived with the mod V8s, it seemed the QC took a dive, and they were not nearly as robust.

 

We had a Chevy Blazer medic unit that turned 200k before it left active duty. I don't think ANY of the new Expis or Explorers could come close to matching that. When everything else wouldn't start in the Winter, the chevy always did. It was an old war-horse favorite before it was retired.

 

Here in OH, Ford is very aggressive in their offering of fixed state-bid pricing on their vehicles for government use. GM never really got into it that big, so, in the era of $$$ watching, it is hard to beat the state-bid price on the Fords...

 

EVERYONE around here runs Fords as duty vehicles...probably for the reason stated above.

[99silveradoz71]

That Expy looks like the 06 I drive at work. It too has issues getting out of its way. Wish we had Hoes.

[mr_bots]

I don't have much experience with Fords. My dad has an (I think) 06 F150 with the 5.4 as a work truck and a 08 Sierra 5.3 as a personal truck. He can't stand the Ford, last I checked he called it a "gutless piece of shit." Before that they had F250s with the V10. They had suspension problems galore and most of the engines were smoking by 70k. They ended up parking all of the 3/4 ton Fords until the company they lease them came and got them and gave them Chevy HDs instead. My dad got stuck with the F150 because his 3/4 Ford was one of the worse so they just replaced it with what they could get the fasted. The few F150s they got are starting to blow their rearends now. He has a new Chevy HD coming within the next few months. They had mostly Ford until Ford screwed the SuperDutys up for 05 after that they refuse to lease anymore Fords.

 

On-Topic: I'd take the 4.3 any day. Slow as hell but you can't kill them.

[P71_CrownVic]

That Expy looks like the 06 I drive at work. It too has issues getting out of its way. Wish we had Hoes.

 

Yeah, our sergeants have a Expy like that they drive. I cabnnot imagine how slow it is with all of the police stuff in it.

 

I don't have much experience with Fords. My dad has an (I think) 06 F150 with the 5.4 as a work truck and a 08 Sierra 5.3 as a personal truck. He can't stand the Ford, last I checked he called it a "gutless piece of shit."

 

He must have read the Ford press release.