Replaced Voodoo Engine

[FPC]

Those with high oil consumption, do you have "carbon splats" on your exhaust tips? I'm not talking about a dry powder look, I'm talking about a black splat look. (I can upload pics later) It's mainly on the inner exhaust tip not the outside tip as much and I drive with the valves open.

I have 2300 miles on my GT350, no track time, just street driving, but I drive it hard once it's above 190 degrees and I followed the break-in procedure. I have noticed my oil move down the dip stick approaching the lower hole in the last 1k miles.... no change the first 1k. The first oil change was at 1100 miles.

Just curious if those with high oil consumption have this phenomenon on their exhaust tips.

 

[17RubyShelbyGT350]

Data & Numbers

I also don’t think it’s coincidence the Track Attack cars have had the snot beat out of them since day one and are ironically nowhere near this hypothetical 6% insinuation....or is it 6.3%?

Let's dispense with this "insinuation" nonsense now. Numbers and data, plus a description of what was counted, and how, is just data, as I carefully described in an earlier post.

How you decide to interpret those numbers other than just accepting them as a frequency count of failures against the registered number of users on this one forum, is up to you. And if you wish, subject to your opinions, wishes, predilections. If you feel it necessary to alternatively defend Ford Corporation, believe this data collection was meant to represent the universe of all GT350s sold, or believe every GT350 is going to blow-up by July 18, those are your "insinuations" or bias showing, not mine. If you view this simple frequency count as a threat to you in some way, well, that's unfortunate for you.

The frequency count (now up to 20 or 6.6%) is an accounting of documented occurrences within a population of N=303. It does not "insinuate" either correlation or causation relating to driving habits, amount of track time, or phases of the moon. Any ad hominem discussions directed against me are silly and as always, are a reflection on the initiator, not the recipient.

I have an interest in this because I own one of these cars. The data at this point is of interest to me, and I will probably continue to collect it. At this point, I have zero knowledge of how representative the data is, how widespread the problem is, what are the cause(s) of it.

For those of you who studied basic statistics, you will understand this perfectly.

 

[MrCincinnati]

I also don’t think it’s coincidence the Track Attack cars have had the snot beat out of them since day one and are ironically nowhere near this hypothetical 6% insinuation....or is it 6.3%?

I'm not suggesting the track attack cars are near 6%, but do we have hard evidence they haven't had failures, or Ford representatives/partners saying they're problem free?

 

[Austinj427]

I'm not suggesting the track attack cars are near 6%, but do we have hard evidence they haven't had failures, or Ford representatives/partners saying they're problem free?

I know a few of the guys over there, they are open that the cars are not problem free but from what I was told they haven't had any big hard parts issues.

They do admit that they are coming across small issues that they can't figure out.

Also, as interesting as a public forum poll is, it's not something I would really trust. Especially considering how easy it is for someone from a competitors forum to sign up and vote in any direction they want.

 

[MrCincinnati]

I know a few of the guys over there, they are open that the cars are not problem free but from what I was told they haven't had any big hard parts issues.

They do admit that they are coming across small issues that they can't figure out.

Also, as interesting as a public forum poll is, it's not something I would really trust. Especially considering how easy it is for someone from a competitors forum to sign up and vote in any direction they want.

Thanks -

I'm not putting my trust with a public forum poll.. but just wanted to confirm that we don't actually have data from the track attack but -- hearsay. I'm sure your relationships with those guys are solid and they're upstanding guys - but they're also employees or partners with the corporation that would be damaged with their disclosure of major failures so.. I trust their word (especially as given through the same public forum we agree shouldn't be trusted in the first place) even less since we know they have a motive to be biased.

 

[Tomster]

I know a few of the guys over there, they are open that the cars are not problem free but from what I was told they haven't had any big hard parts issues.

They do admit that they are coming across small issues that they can't figure out.

Also, as interesting as a public forum poll is, it's not something I would really trust. Especially considering how easy it is for someone from a competitors forum to sign up and vote in any direction they want.

Those cars don't see heavy track use. I was just there and they have 5k miles on them. They spend half the day on light duty and the other half driving around a small track in third gear.

 

[jvandy50]

One lost a tranny while i was there. So 60% of the time, it happens, every time.

I guess I’ll just have to sell mine if they only work correctly on the track:shrug:

 

[Tomster]

Let's dispense with this "insinuation" nonsense now. Numbers and data, plus a description of what was counted, and how, is just data, as I carefully described in an earlier post.

How you decide to interpret those numbers other than just accepting them as a frequency count of failures against the registered number of users on this one forum, is up to you. And if you wish, subject to your opinions, wishes, predilections. If you feel it necessary to alternatively defend Ford Corporation, believe this data collection was meant to represent the universe of all GT350s sold, or believe every GT350 is going to blow-up by July 18, those are your "insinuations" or bias showing, not mine. If you view this simple frequency count as a threat to you in some way, well, that's unfortunate for you.

The frequency count (now up to 20 or 6.6%) is an accounting of documented occurrences within a population of N=303. It does not "insinuate" either correlation or causation relating to driving habits, amount of track time, or phases of the moon. Any ad hominem discussions directed against me are silly and as always, are a reflection on the initiator, not the recipient.

I have an interest in this because I own one of these cars. The data at this point is of interest to me, and I will probably continue to collect it. At this point, I have zero knowledge of how representative the data is, how widespread the problem is, what are the cause(s) of it.

For those of you who studied basic statistics, you will understand this perfectly.

It's been a while since I studied statistics. We have a diverse group here and I do believe we have a valid sample. Of course, the bigger and more diverse the sample the better, but I believe we (GT350 owners of mustang 6g) is a valid sample. Again, failure rates for different reasons need to be considered, but 6.6% is unacceptable.

 

[S550VIN54]

Have you guys tried Liqui Moly oil?

I just ordered a 18 gt350 on Friday and after reading this thread, it gave me pause on my purchase... But there's no other car I want so I'm going to hope I'm one of the folks that doesn't experience misfortune.

My Audi used to burn oil like crazy. I have an A6 putting down 400 AWHP and it used to burn about 1 quart every 1000-1500 miles. My shop switched me to Liqui moly and now I burn about 1 quart every 5k miles.

I also drive my Audi super hard. It has 90k miles on it and it's still going strong. The difference here is, the Audi doesn't come with a dipstick! The computer tells you when you're low and if you get too low, it just goes into limp mode, limits your red line to 4k and says to add more oil.

I'm not sure if the oil is good for this motor, but the German motors do well with it to reduce oil consumption.

Anyway, thought I'd share.

D.

No, but I am leaning towards trying the Liqui Moly Jectron Fuel Injection Cleaner on my older car. I have heard only great things about it as well as the Lucas fuel treatment. Running a sale now. https://www.uspmotorsports.com/Liqui-Moly-Jectron-Fuel-Injection-Cleaner.html

 

[fpa1974]

No, but I am leaning towards trying the Liqui Moly Jectron Fuel Injection Cleaner on my older car. I have heard only great things about it as well as the Lucas fuel treatment. Running a sale now. https://www.uspmotorsports.com/Liqui-Moly-Jectron-Fuel-Injection-Cleaner.html

The fuel injection cleaner that works the best for me is BG44K. That stuff is amazing. I use it once a year before an oil change. Now, for direct injection cars is not reaching everywhere but no fuel additive can.

 

[Tflong24]

Let's dispense with this "insinuation" nonsense now. Numbers and data, plus a description of what was counted, and how, is just data, as I carefully described in an earlier post.

How you decide to interpret those numbers other than just accepting them as a frequency count of failures against the registered number of users on this one forum, is up to you. And if you wish, subject to your opinions, wishes, predilections. If you feel it necessary to alternatively defend Ford Corporation, believe this data collection was meant to represent the universe of all GT350s sold, or believe every GT350 is going to blow-up by July 18, those are your "insinuations" or bias showing, not mine. If you view this simple frequency count as a threat to you in some way, well, that's unfortunate for you.

The frequency count (now up to 20 or 6.6%) is an accounting of documented occurrences within a population of N=303. It does not "insinuate" either correlation or causation relating to driving habits, amount of track time, or phases of the moon. Any ad hominem discussions directed against me are silly and as always, are a reflection on the initiator, not the recipient.

I have an interest in this because I own one of these cars. The data at this point is of interest to me, and I will probably continue to collect it. At this point, I have zero knowledge of how representative the data is, how widespread the problem is, what are the cause(s) of it.

For those of you who studied basic statistics, you will understand this perfectly.

I for one appreciate the data you did gather. It is the best we can do for now and at least gives us a sample size of blown engines vs members.

 

[PP0001]

Let's dispense with this "insinuation" nonsense now. Numbers and data, plus a description of what was counted, and how, is just data, as I carefully described in an earlier post.

How you decide to interpret those numbers other than just accepting them as a frequency count of failures against the registered number of users on this one forum, is up to you. And if you wish, subject to your opinions, wishes, predilections. If you feel it necessary to alternatively defend Ford Corporation, believe this data collection was meant to represent the universe of all GT350s sold, or believe every GT350 is going to blow-up by July 18, those are your "insinuations" or bias showing, not mine. If you view this simple frequency count as a threat to you in some way, well, that's unfortunate for you.

The frequency count (now up to 20 or 6.6%) is an accounting of documented occurrences within a population of N=303. It does not "insinuate" either correlation or causation relating to driving habits, amount of track time, or phases of the moon. Any ad hominem discussions directed against me are silly and as always, are a reflection on the initiator, not the recipient.

I have an interest in this because I own one of these cars. The data at this point is of interest to me, and I will probably continue to collect it. At this point, I have zero knowledge of how representative the data is, how widespread the problem is, what are the cause(s) of it.

For those of you who studied basic statistics, you will understand this perfectly.

Let me understand this correctly as you state that you have zero knowledge of how representative the data is but with the failure frequency up to 6.6% which is based on your data the ~17,500 units built comes to a ~1155 failure rate for the GT350/R models?

I am not here to defend Ford but you are the one supplying the engine failure rate data of 6.3% and now 6.6% of the members on this forum.

Are you suggesting that my previous production numbers for the last 4 production years that I previously provided are inaccurate or false?

Just as you I have a very strong interest in this issue as I personally own a 2017 R model and a 2018 R model along with a 2015 Track Pack car.

Again I am not here to defend the Ford Motor Corporation but as someone who has owned and built a relationship with the Blue Oval Brand over ~50 years and have many Ford friends/enthusiasts in all parts of North America that presently own GT350/GT350R's I have yet to come across one that has an engine failure but if they are out there they are few and far between contrary to your insinuations.

BTW, just curious have you had a serious engine failure with your GT350/R and would like to know the details?

 

[CANTWN4LSN]

Lord I wish FMC would just relent and tell us how many voodoos have failed and why!
On the other hand with a high attrition rate this car might yet become a valuable collectible in another 20 years despite a four year run for those lucky enough to have one that doesn't burn oil or blow up.

 

[MrCincinnati]

Let me understand this correctly as you state that you have zero knowledge of how representative the data is but with the failure frequency up to 6.6% which is based on your data the ~17,500 units built comes to a ~1155 failure rate for the GT350/R models?

I am not here to defend Ford but you are the one supplying the engine failure rate data of 6.3% and now 6.6% of the members on this forum.

Are you suggesting that my previous production numbers for the last 4 production years that I previously provided are inaccurate or false?

Just as you I have a very strong interest in this issue as I personally own a 2017 R model and a 2018 R model along with a 2015 Track Pack car.

Again I am not here to defend the Ford Motor Corporation but as someone who has owned and built a relationship with the Blue Oval Brand over ~50 years and have many Ford friends/enthusiasts in all parts of North America that presently own GT350/GT350R's I have yet to come across one that has an engine failure but if they are out there they are few and far between contrary to your insinuations.

BTW, just curious have you had a serious engine failure with your GT350/R and would like to know the details?

For no other purpose than mathematical clarity to pair with your real world experience with multiple GT350 owners: 6% would mean you’d expect approx 1 out of 17 of the GT350s you have real world knowledge of to experience a failure at some point.

I’m sure you may know of 17 GT350s in the real world. I can’t come up with more than 3, including my own.

That said I believe the gentleman’s point was that his calculations based on numbers gathered on this forum should not be extrapolated beyond the scope of this site’s ownership.. given the small sample size and lack of absolute verification etc.

 

[Zitrosounds]

For no other purpose than mathematical clarity to pair with your real world experience with multiple GT350 owners: 6% would mean you’d expect approx 1 out of 17 of the GT350s you have real world knowledge of to experience a failure at some point.

I’m sure you may know of 17 GT350s in the real world. I can’t come up with more than 3, including my own.

That said I believe the gentleman’s point was that his calculations based on numbers gathered on this forum should not be extrapolated beyond the scope of this site’s ownership.. given the small sample size and lack of absolute verification etc.

I have personally met 10 individuals and their cars, two of which have R's and I only positively know of one with a failure. That's me!