2017 Ford Mustang will outperform Chevy Camaro in every way

[thePill]

Rob, I have a serious question, for anyone really.

How does this DI issue go undetected, unreported, throughout the last how many years and multiple manufacturer QC and R&D?

Did they not notice the globs on the valves at 20,000 miles?

Is Full-Throttle testing hiding this design flaw in testing? Does full-throttle or continious operation help control this event so it goes undetected or, mitigated in testing somehow?

Sponsored

 

[Mr Monte]

Man... your "facts" are very skewed here. It's not really worth the argument, as it's been discussed, Ad Nauseam.

GM applied for the exact same loan Ford got, but was denied because the law was written that... no business in bankruptcy qualified for the loan program. What you're doing is propagating a lie, whether or not you know it.

The fact is, both the things you claimed above are factually false:

A: That Ford hasn't paid back their loan(it's simply not finished). To take your words as true would assume that Ford simply isn't paying or is somehow ignoring their loan.

B: That Ford took a bailout in the 1980's... it simply didn't happen and if you're certain it did, prove your case. I'm telling you now... it didn't happen. Ford negotiated things... but got no cash, check or charge from the government in any odd term or "bailout" of any manner. ONLY Chrysler got a "bailout" in... 1980.

Not intending to propagate a lie, my bad if it comes off as such. My hat's off to Ford for being Proactive in responding to the then coming auto industry crash but too many act like Ford didn't need any government help. While the $6 billion loan was a good business decision it was also what help Ford survive the crash.

What happen with Ford in the early 80s is they worked a deal with the government to avoid what would of been the largest recall ever which would of destroyed Ford due to the transmission slipping into reverse on their own. Instead Ford was able to just mail out warning stickers. Today that wouldn't fly for any manufacture otherwise GM could of just mailed out stickers saying not to hang a bunch of crap on your key chain.

Here's the sticker instead of fixing the problem that killed around 200 people.

 

[thePill]

Not intending to propagate a lie, my bad if it comes off as such. My hat's off to Ford for being Proactive in responding to the then coming auto industry crash but too many act like Ford didn't need any government help. While the $6 billion loan was a good business decision it was also what help Ford survive the crash.

What happen with Ford in the early 80s is they worked a deal with the government to avoid what would of been the largest recall ever which would of destroyed Ford due to the transmission slipping into reverse on their own. Instead Ford was able to just mail out warning stickers. Today that wouldn't fly for any manufacture otherwise GM could of just mailed out stickers saying not to hang a bunch of crap on your key chain.

Here's the sticker instead of fixing the problem that killed around 200 people.

Who made the transmission? In today's standards, they would have went to the part manufacturer first.

Like GM's recent serial killing, the Feds went to Delphi first, in which was enough evidence to charge GM. Delphi was pretty much forgiven due to their warning Chevy that the part did not meet their specs.

 

[Rob WH]

Rob, I have a serious question, for anyone really.

How does this DI issue go undetected, unreported, throughout the last how many years and multiple manufacturer QC and R&D?

Did they not notice the globs on the valves at 20,000 miles?

Is Full-Throttle testing hiding this design flaw in testing? Does full-throttle or continious operation help control this event so it goes undetected or, mitigated in testing somehow?

I heard about it 1st from a Ford tech, regarding a 2L(I believe) and he said it was an issue for the 3.5L 1st and he mentioned that it mirrored the problem of the 3L BMW "Bi-Turbo" or whatever they call it.

He did say also: High rpm helps to "hide" the problem and in fact, it prolongs the engine to some degree because that helps blow out the carbon and the hesitation goes largely unnoticed.

20k is a notable number too... I think he said that's when most notice.

Not intending to propagate a lie, my bad if it comes off as such. My hat's off to Ford for being Proactive in responding to the then coming auto industry crash but too many act like Ford didn't need any government help. While the $6 billion loan was a good business decision it was also what help Ford survive the crash.

The point most will counter with is simply that Ford and every other major business in the nation should be expected to take loans and often do. After all, they cannot print their own money.

What happen with Ford in the early 80s is they worked a deal with the government to avoid what would of been the largest recall ever which would of destroyed Ford due to the transmission slipping into reverse on their own. Instead Ford was able to just mail out warning stickers. Today that wouldn't fly for any manufacture otherwise GM could of just mailed out stickers saying not to hang a bunch of crap on your key chain.

Here's the sticker instead of fixing the problem that killed around 200 people.

200? How about... 23...

My numbers may be off... but this is easy to find information:

Here... the actual story and it includes the letter, photo of the sticker and even the part which tells where to mount the sticker, along w/ far more than you'll usually have a chance to read, including that this stuff also happened to Chevrolet during that era.

http://www.fordification.com/tech/auto-trans_recall.htm

That story is perhaps the most complete I've seen so far and I studied it for a class I took... back in 1992(so memory's foggy). It tells that ultimately, those who pushed the case against Ford most... determined it wasn't really a problem after all.

777 crashes ... 21,000,000 vehicles... not exactly a high percentage. More died in crashes resulting in blown up fuel tanks... side saddle style used in full size GM pickups... over 2,000 died(counting stopped in 2009). That's over 1,500 more than attributed to the Pinto!

What if GM had a recall over that? http://www.autosafety.org/history-gm-side-saddle-gas-tank-defect ... did they have a recall? They negotiated!

As for the key chain thing: GM could and should have stopped offering them and told people the concerns back in 2005 or so, but didn't do a thing.

Back to the Ford transmissions: They didn't make the transmission, but they did redesign a part just to be sure the problem

 

[Mr Monte]

200? How about... 23...
My numbers may be off... but this is easy to find information:
Back to the Ford transmissions: They didn't make the transmission, but they did redesign a part just to be sure the problem

Thanks for those links. Interesting read. Depending on what article you read the numbers very way too much. Its hard to know what the actual numbers are.

Back in the 70s I saved a 4 year old from getting run over by a Ford that slipped out of park. It was a giving back then you didn't leave a Ford running in park and I grew up in a Ford family.

Instead of just laying big fines on companies when they get caught making a product with a known deadly defect the people in charge should be charge criminally.

 

[Rob WH]

Thanks for those links. Interesting read. Depending on what article you read the numbers very way too much. Its hard to know what the actual numbers are.

It is difficult to know, but thinking it over, I can't see why many would've been killed in the fashion we fretted for so long. After all, the vehicles would be stopped, then slowly moving in most cases. They'd also be turning in circles in most, if the driver has a clue about parking.

Back in the 70s I saved a 4 year old from getting run over by a Ford that slipped out of park. It was a giving back then you didn't leave a Ford running in park and I grew up in a Ford family.

Well... I see it a little differently because it just seems reasonable to shut off the engine, turn the wheels toward the curb or some other obstacle, take the key and leave... all while in PARK! I guess most folks I knew were just so broke, shutting down was all they could afford!! :doh: I didn't grow up in a Ford family, but we still shut 'em down!!

Instead of just laying big fines on companies when they get caught making a product with a known deadly defect the people in charge should be charge criminally.

I'm not sure that both wouldn't be nice, except the fines need to go to victims, not government coffers, only to be frittered away as usual. That is, if those in charge knew and chose to do nothing.

 

[ridenfish39]

It looks isolated to NA engine DI, although, we haven seen the entire lifespan of DI tech in most Fords yet.

Ford has developed Dual Injection which is supposed to have better atomization. If also heard a better, cleaner burn and better tune-ability.

We had intake valve cleaning parties in the Mazdaspeed world. A meth kit helped with the carbon build up. You wouldn't believe how bad the valves looked after 20 to 30 k miles. DI....no thanks unless they put in a secondary port injection system to keep things clean.

 

[imjuslazy]

It's a problem with almost every turbocharged DI engine BMW makes too. They offer "walnut blasting" as a part of their maintenance services.

Effects Volkwagens as well. All the 2L turbo engines.

 

[15wile]

Not intending to propagate a lie, my bad if it comes off as such. My hat's off to Ford for being Proactive in responding to the then coming auto industry crash but too many act like Ford didn't need any government help. While the $6 billion loan was a good business decision it was also what help Ford survive the crash.

Ford didn't need the help. They were NOT suffering. But if someone is offering you a cheap loan at basically cost... would you take it? Probably. Even then, if I recall correctly, they wavered on whether or not to accept it, for PR reasons. If you look at net income, you will see that Ford was profitable throughout the downturn, except in 2006, 2007 and 2008. 2007 was VERY close to even, as well. They had strong cash reserves that GM did not have, and assets on the balance sheet (like an ownership stake in Mazda). There was never any threat that they would go under.

They also didn't get a bailout in the 80s, either. I'm not sure where you got that information.

 

[15wile]

When it comes to the LT1, I don't think it's "better in every way" because one of the major variables folks are forgetting is price. The Camaro is more expensive. The motor is more expensive. In absolute terms, I'll trust people smarter than I am when it comes to the specs of the motor. But in the pony car world, it's a price/performance game, and there's no such thing as free horsepower.

That and after driving around this GT for awhile, I love this motor. I can't explain it, but it's just smooth, linear, and delivers power whenever you want it. It's balanced, refined when you want it to be, and f*cking angry when you don't. It's just a good engine overall. I don't know anything about the LT1, but it would have some big shoes to fill if it were to be labeled as "better in every way."

 

[15wile]

'Pushrod guide'? There is no 'guide'. That's a 'hole'. Guideplates are Gen I stuff.

Your Poopness,

Can I just point out that there is a lot of f*cked up humor in seeing a guy who calls himself poopsh*ts discussing holes and pushrods?

 

[thePill]

Your Poopness,

Can I just point out that there is a lot of f*cked up humor in seeing a guy who calls himself poopsh*ts discussing holes and pushrods?

He is somewhat correct though, and, it is also a fact I haven't seen an open valve train in some time... about 2002 I think...

But I'm sure he gets the point, the entire intake pushrod had to be relocated.

 

[DiMaio90]

When it comes to the LT1, I don't think it's "better in every way" because one of the major variables folks are forgetting is price. The Camaro is more expensive. The motor is more expensive. In absolute terms, I'll trust people smarter than I am when it comes to the specs of the motor. But in the pony car world, it's a price/performance game, and there's no such thing as free horsepower.

That and after driving around this GT for awhile, I love this motor. I can't explain it, but it's just smooth, linear, and delivers power whenever you want it. It's balanced, refined when you want it to be, and f*cking angry when you don't. It's just a good engine overall. I don't know anything about the LT1, but it would have some big shoes to fill if it were to be labeled as "better in every way."

I want someone with a F*CK TON of money to put an LS3 and/or and LT1 into a mustang and see which car performs better. Or put a Coyote into a Camaro. This would be finally settle the disputes in my opinion (as far as performance goes). I wont fault the LT1 for reliability issue 1 year into production and I won't fault the coyote if it is slightly underpowered in comparison considering it is about 4 years older than the LT1.

I've driven my brothers 15 GTPP and my fiancés father's ls3 GS and either way both engines are amazing and surpass the driving potential of nearly everyone on every thread on the internet. Love them both and anyone who doesn't appreciate is missing out.

 

[pietran30]

That and after driving around this GT for awhile, I love this motor. I can't explain it, but it's just smooth, linear, and delivers power whenever you want it. It's balanced, refined when you want it to be, and f*cking angry when you don't. It's just a good engine overall. I don't know anything about the LT1, but it would have some big shoes to fill if it were to be labeled as "better in every way."

I feel the same way about my 392 hemi. Especially with the A8. It's literally always in the power band, and will through you in the back of the seat so fast you'll get whiplash. (Ok I exaggerated. You won't really get whiplash.) the coyote is just a different platform. DOHC vs pushrod.

I am ordering a 2016 GTPP in either December or January, and it will definitely take some getting used to. I've driven my buddy's 2015 GTPP and it's got a completely different feeling. The best way I've been able to describe it is that upon acceleration, it's like the top of a hill on a roller coaster. You start moving faster and faster, but you don't really feel the G's until halfway down the hill. In the case of the mustang, it's like midway through first gear, towards the top end, you get sucked back in your seat.

Just a different feel to it. Still fast and fun for sure.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Mr Monte]

Ford didn't need the help. They were NOT suffering. But if someone is offering you a cheap loan at basically cost... would you take it? Probably. Even then, if I recall correctly, they wavered on whether or not to accept it, for PR reasons. If you look at net income, you will see that Ford was profitable throughout the downturn, except in 2006, 2007 and 2008. 2007 was VERY close to even, as well. They had strong cash reserves that GM did not have, and assets on the balance sheet (like an ownership stake in Mazda). There was never any threat that they would go under.

They also didn't get a bailout in the 80s, either. I'm not sure where you got that information.

Bailouts come in many forms. This was big news back in the day.
http://www.topix.com/forum/com/f/TTMDJ1SC1CVSCC916


Some tranny info.
.com/article/wait-theres-more/little-warning-label-saved-ford-23-million-vehicle-recall

http://www.autosafety.org/ford-transmissions-failure-hold-park

Sponsored