Yeah, that's right, no other company can make V8's as bad as Ford. I mean come on, a 4.6L V8 only makes 300hp, and in the past it only made like 260hp? Nissan makes a 3.5L V6 with 300hp, and BMW made a 4.0L V8 with 290hp, and both of those get better gas mileage and performance then the Fords as well.oscarc said:I've always said that if you are gonna go big stick to GM or Ford V8's. Stay away from 4 and 6 cyclinders. For 4 bangers, stay away from any domestic. Go with Toyota, Mazda, etc. but not all the import are good. They also can't make the the big V8's like we do.
Yeah said:Sorry, no disrespect meant, but I always have to laugh when people talk about horsepower. Auto companys have learned that most people can identify with horsepower so it is used as a marketing gimic. More HP must be better...The horsepower doesn't mean anything if you don't have torque and can't put the power to the wheels. Torque is what makes the car move, accellerate or better carry loads. For example, a 180 hp vehicle with 200 lbs. of torque is going to out accellerate a vehicle with 200HP and 180lbs. of torque. Look up a bunch of cars and you'll see that most will have a wide range of torques vs HP, there's a bunch with torque values up 100 lbs. less than HP. The better proportioned cars will have a peak torque almost equal to or higher than the HP.
My initial statement is in general...for example 8 out of 10 what evers that I or other techs worked on had similar pros or cons. I've been under just about everymake and model out there bumper to bumper. I used to drop engines in and out of cars all the time, brakes, front end, you name it. But I hated doing electrical, what a pain, VW Jettas come to mind...Hyundai, dispose of after 20K miles, Ford trucks, can't get that twin "I" beam suspension out of my head and that horible front tire wear, good that they redesigned. Hondas and Toyota great, next in line was Mazda.
Of course there are personal experiences, not everybody has a bad one. BMW, they always had better build tolerances. I can't remember what company it was but does anyone remember the commercial with a car that was suspended in air. In the commercial, they rotatated the car around with a marble that rolled along the hood gap. The purpose was to show that the gaps on both sides of the hood and fender had even spacing. Of course most people don't get that as they don't have that attention to detail. Of course you paid more for that attention.
As far as trucks go, I'll take a Ford or GM over Nissan or Toyota any day.
I think the EcoTech engine is a Saab design (unfortunately also owned by GM).mtnbiker72 said:I would disagree somewhat with the 4 and 6 cylinder statement
I have a Saturn Vue with the EcoTech 4 cylinder and there is nothing wrong with that engine. It has been reliable and durable.
I'd like to add too that the HP rating on alot of those engines are at or near the upper end of the RPM range.oscarc said:For example, a 180 hp vehicle with 200 lbs. of torque is going to out accellerate a vehicle with 200HP and 180lbs. of torque. Look up a bunch of cars and you'll see that most will have a wide range of torques vs HP, there's a bunch with torque values up 100 lbs. less than HP. The better proportioned cars will have a peak torque almost equal to or higher than the HP.
What folks fail to remember (or to know in the first place) is that the UAW HAS been making concessions for many years now And what have these workers got in return? The very real possibility that their jobs are going away anyhow.mtnbiker72 said:They also need to get rid of the UAW and all the stupid benefits they pay. I'm all for standard benefits like health care and retirement...but paying for workers who aren't working...dumb. The Japanese companies don't do that in their US factories. The big three will not be competitive until they get their labor cost down. Either the UAW needs to conceed a little or US cars will all be made in Mexico (where Ford already has plants).