Replaced Voodoo Engine

[johnny1]

What I've read on this and other forums there no rime or reason. Some use oil driven on streets and after a few thousand miles stop. Some track theirs and do/do not use oil. Some driven only on streets use oil then a few thousand miles later it stops. It just goes on and on. So far I've seen no consistent way of driving these cars with oil consumption or not no matter how its driven.

 

[AdamIsAdam]

Found it.
https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/blown-engine-thread.104010/page-37#post-2317129

 

[Joecool1965]

My 2017 GT350 H0601 had its engine replaced at Golf Mill Ford due to Excessive Oil Consumption Issues.

It started before 11k miles.

If someone is keeping a spreadsheet feel free to add me to it.

Joe

I tried to look around to see if there was a count of engines that have been replaced due to catastrophic failure. Is there not a thread for this?

My local dealer has 2 gt350's that are having engines replaced. Was told that they were exhibiting major oil consumption due to out of round cylinders. No details on the year, mileage or if it was an "R".

17

 

[AdamIsAdam]

My 2017 GT350 H0601 had its engine replaced at Golf Mill Ford due to Excessive Oil Consumption Issues.

It started before 11k miles.

If someone is keeping a spreadsheet feel free to add me to it.

Joe

Joe,
See the link above that I posted. In his signature, is a google docs link. I guess PM 300blackout (Jason) to update the spreadsheet.

 

[Tomster]

I brought up oil consumption to the guys I was hanging out with @track attack in august - no one had excessive consumption to report. I wish I would've asked the instructors if the school had lost any motors, that would be interesting. None of the cars in our class had problems during the day.

I did ask and was told no. The only problem reported was the oil cooler line that was covered under the recall.

 

[Atlas1]

See, it didn’t even take an hour for someone to make my point for me. This engine, to best that we’ve been able to account for, has a greater than 95% success rate. Would you ever apply that logic to any other consumer product or item in your life? When else would you avoid something that has less than an 5% chance offailure? And now you’re making a decision on something that’s important to you based solely on the placebo effect from this thread and others. I am not attacking you or you’re logic at all torque, but moreso the effects of this stupid thread that had goodwill in the beginning, but has since waned in that department. If I was in the market for an R (or this car in general), there’s no way on earth I’d pass with these odds. This is what’s pathetic.

greater than 95% rate. quite a claim considering the limited number of gt350's represented on this site and the size of the spreadsheet, which does not seem to have been updated with the latest failures.........dont forget to ask for that excel sheet to be closed down with this thread to protect your cars value.

Since I have been away for a while and obviously not up to speed and since I don't want to read through much of this thread again please provide me with some of your recent data which will substantiate the alarming rate of engine failures based on the actual number of cases reported or percentages of engine failures in relation to the number of cars built over the last 3 MY's.

you being away for some time has no effect on whether you are up to speed or not. no amount of data is going to influence certain 350 owners on here, that much is painfully obvious. since my last post that you quoted, there are MULTIPLE posts of engine failures covering only the last couple days. this does not at all raise red flags for you? a 46 page thread devoted to blown engines and oil consumption just randomly appeared on this forum without any cause? i sure hope you change your alarm batteries on a regular basis because even with a house full of smoke you are not going to see the fire. the existence of this thread is alarming on its own and if you do not recognize that, no substantiated data, cases reported, or percentages will open your eyes.
from some of the recent posts i understand that protecting your shelby investment is the top concern for some here and that every new post about an engine issue potentially hurts this. at this point i dont have a car's value to worry about so i lack the bias that many of you have. i simply want to buy a gt350 and use this forum as a place to learn. an issue with the gt350 does not hurt me in any way other than to push me potentially towards another car.

 

[Lurker_350]

I did ask and was told no. The only problem reported was the oil cooler line that was covered under the recall.

I saw a school Mustang GT lose an engine though - he missed a downshift coming into Black Rock Hairpin on the West Track. Made quite the cloud of smoke. Can't be blamed on the car.......

 

[Caballus]

Sorry I offended your sensitivities. It was short for Japanese. Any insult was only in your mind. I respect the Japs greatly.

I will apply your advice: “Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.”
― Mark Twain

 

[MulhollandMonster]

Lemon law moving forward. I forgive, but at least play nice Ford management.

I betcha the Russians have something to do with this.

According to the latest rumors, an updated version of the 2014 Ford Shelby GT500's 5.8-liter supercharged V-8 is under the hood of the next-gen Mustang GT500. The V-8 reportedly features a Ferrari-like flat-plane crank, a 7000 rpm redline, and probably Dodge Challenger Hellcat-trumping horsepower figures north of 660-hp. Ford is rumored to having a bit of difficultly developing the updated 5.8-liter mill, with several of the new mills "suffering catastrophic engine failures," according to our source.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/2017-ford-mustang-svt-gt500-successor-spied/

 

[madlag]

Likely many of the engine replacements were done unnecessarily due to “oil consumption”, which is normal and to be expected. How many have actually blown? Few I’m guessing. The thread is 46 pages not bc it’s a wide spread problem but bc it’s controversial lol

 

[MulhollandMonster]

Likely many of the engine replacements were done unnecessarily due to “oil consumption”, which is normal and to be expected. How many have actually blown? Few I’m guessing. The thread is 46 pages not bc it’s a wide spread problem but bc it’s controversial lol

Read my last post.

 

[Minn19]

Likely many of the engine replacements were done unnecessarily due to “oil consumption”, which is normal and to be expected. How many have actually blown? Few I’m guessing. The thread is 46 pages not bc it’s a wide spread problem but bc it’s controversial lol

Unnecessary? A quart every 300 miles or worse................

 

[J_Maher_AMG]

Unnecessary? A quart every 300 miles or worse................

Yes, unnecessary. As mentioned earlier, if the cause of the oil usage was known, be it a valve seal for example, the engine is not blown, nor needing to be replaced... a part within the engine has to be replaced yes.

Blown = unrepairable/catastrophic/major internal damage. At least 90% of the cases here are instances where parts could have been replaced instead of the entire engine, if Ford were only to let the dealer examine the actual cause.

 

[Minn19]

Yes, unnecessary. As mentioned earlier, if the cause of the oil usage was known, be it a valve seal for example, the engine is not blown, nor needing to be replaced... a part within the engine has to be replaced yes.

Blown = unrepairable/catastrophic/major internal damage. At least 90% of the cases here are instances where parts could have been replaced instead of the entire engine, if Ford were only to let the dealer examine the actual cause.

Then it is on Ford as they are the ones making bad decisions all over the place. They don’t let the dealer dig into it in most cases (mine). They say they are going to send a a rep to check it out, they don’t and then (in my case again) after a couple of months of dicking around they say replace it out of the blue without doing anything. Except for frustrating good dealer service departments and most importantly the customer.

So to the customer necessary or unnecessary doesn’t mean shit when they go about their business like this. Trust me, I would’ve preferred a repair to a replacement for many reasons.

 

[J_Maher_AMG]

Then it is on Ford as they are the ones making bad decisions all over the place. They don’t let the dealer dig into it in most cases (mine). They say they are going to send a a rep to check it out, they don’t and then (in my case again) after a couple of months of dicking around they say replace it out of the blue without doing anything. Except for frustrating good dealer service departments and most importantly the customer.

So to the customer necessary or unnecessary doesn’t mean shit when they go about their business like this. Trust me, I would’ve preferred a repair to a replacement for many reasons.

I completely agree with you, and it is a shame it is being handled the way it is. That being said, from a technical perspective, the "Blown engine disaster" that so many have become enamored and paranoid with, is... BLOWN... way out of proportion and does not reflect the actual number of engines that experienced catastrophic failure.