Replaced Voodoo Engine

[17RubyShelbyGT350]

Transparency Once Again

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?

Sigh... Hate to be repetitive, but in some cases, in response - suppose I must be, despite the fact that I have tried to be painstakingly clear re what the frequency count data I gathered was about and what it was not about.

Your point #1: The data I collected is from the group of GT350 owners (N=303) on this forum. I have been quite clear that this data represents only this particular group. There is no claim that it is representative of the much larger group of all units sold, and I have said that clearly. It may or may not have any relevance to that larger group. You are the only one here alleging that I may be doing that.

Your Point #2: Yes, I collected the frequency count, that much is obvious. Not sure what your point is???

Your Point #3: I am not now, and have not in the past, stated that anyone's provided information re production numbers are false. In fact, I don't think I even ever discussed the subject of total production numbers at all? Again, I am not sure what your point is?

Your point #4: Again with the "insinuations" word? Really? Geez, thought I had dispensed with that nonsense in my prior thread. A frequency count against an identified population sample is a statistical exercise, not anything else. I realize you are a self identified Ford fan, and its obvious that this simple statistical exercise has left you butt-hurt. And to answer further, I have also been building, competing with many performance cars (primarily GM) over several decades. And, before you twist that statement - I am not a GM fan boi. And yes, I raised hell with GM about some of the crap they pulled - many of us sought relief from the infamous "LS7 dropped valve syndrome." I know of many, many people from that side of the coin, several of which bought GT350s. And one of them has had a blown motor which was eventually replaced. Of course, since he is not a member of this forum, his car was not counted in my data exercise.

Your point #5: I have not had an engine failure in my GT350 - bought new. Just poured in a second quart of oil to restore oil to full line after 2500 miles. Oil change done at Ford dealer at 1000 miles. Needed a quart before the first oil change. All break-in processes were dutifully followed and car not tracked until after 1000 miles, once after. All recommended warm-up procedures followed every time I use the car, minimal engine braking, no lugging, no "empty RPMs." Never had oil usage in any of the 20 or so high performance cars, some with very high output motors - that rivaled what I am seeing now.

I am ok with this now, hope I will be in the future. I gave kudos to Ford for having the ballz to build this car. Now we will see what the future will bring for my car. I have never had to check oil, or been advised to check oil so frequently as with this car.

And now MY point #1: Its clear that some people here get what I did, understand it, and appreciate it. It's clear you don't. Perhaps it is a matter that you need to understand more about what a basic statistical frequency count against a subset of data is, or perhaps it is another thing with you. Whatever the cause, throwing inane insinuations my way will not go either unnoticed or un-responded to by me.

 

[Tflong24]

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!

Wow, that’s 10%. It gets worse.

 

[rick81721]

Your point #1: The data I collected is from the group of GT350 owners (N=303) on this forum. I have been quite clear that this data represents only this particular group. There is no claim that it is representative of the much larger group of all units sold, and I have said that clearly. It may or may not have any relevance to that larger group. You are the only one here alleging that I may be doing that.

I think this is valid information, and at least gives us some sense of the magnitude of the issue. One question tho - where did you get the N=303 from? How do you get an accurate count of every GT350/R that is represented on this board?

 

[Zitrosounds]

I think this is valid information, and at least gives us some sense of the magnitude of the issue. One question tho - where did you get the N=303 from? How do you get an accurate count of every GT350/R that is represented on this board?

Magnitude? This data is plagued and only represents this forum. I think that's what Harry is getting at. Most people don't read into statistical analysis and small samples are normally misleading and inaccurate. In this case, the data is accurate of the forum but not of the entire production of the GT350's.

 

[17RubyShelbyGT350]

NO!

Wow, that’s 10%. It gets worse.

I hope you were kidding? This is NOT representative of anything except happenstance. Using a sample of 10 cars is absolutely non-representative of the population. Using the total population here on this forum MAY or MAY NOT be representative, given it is over 300 cars.

Thanks!

 

[Zitrosounds]

Sigh... Hate to be repetitive, but in some cases, in response - suppose I must be, despite the fact that I have tried to be painstakingly clear re what the frequency count data I gathered was about and what it was not about.

Your point #1: The data I collected is from the group of GT350 owners (N=303) on this forum. I have been quite clear that this data represents only this particular group. There is no claim that it is representative of the much larger group of all units sold, and I have said that clearly. It may or may not have any relevance to that larger group. You are the only one here alleging that I may be doing that.

Your Point #2: Yes, I collected the frequency count, that much is obvious. Not sure what your point is???

Your Point #3: I am not now, and have not in the past, stated that anyone's provided information re production numbers are false. In fact, I don't think I even ever discussed the subject of total production numbers at all? Again, I am not sure what your point is?

Your point #4: Again with the "insinuations" word? Really? Geez, thought I had dispensed with that nonsense in my prior thread. A frequency count against an identified population sample is a statistical exercise, not anything else. I realize you are a self identified Ford fan, and its obvious that this simple statistical exercise has left you butt-hurt. And to answer further, I have also been building, competing with many performance cars (primarily GM) over several decades. And, before you twist that statement - I am not a GM fan boi. And yes, I raised hell with GM about some of the crap they pulled - many of us sought relief from the infamous "LS7 dropped valve syndrome." I know of many, many people from that side of the coin, several of which bought GT350s. And one of them has had a blown motor which was eventually replaced. Of course, since he is not a member of this forum, his car was not counted in my data exercise.

Your point #5: I have not had an engine failure in my GT350 - bought new. Just poured in a second quart of oil to restore oil to full line after 2500 miles. Oil change done at Ford dealer at 1000 miles. Needed a quart before the first oil change. All break-in processes were dutifully followed and car not tracked until after 1000 miles, once after. All recommended warm-up procedures followed every time I use the car, minimal engine braking, no lugging, no "empty RPMs." Never had oil usage in any of the 20 or so high performance cars, some with very high output motors - that rivaled what I am seeing now.

I am ok with this now, hope I will be in the future. I gave kudos to Ford for having the ballz to build this car. Now we will see what the future will bring for my car. I have never had to check oil, or been advised to check oil so frequently as with this car.

And now MY point #1: Its clear that some people here get what I did, understand it, and appreciate it. It's clear you don't. Perhaps it is a matter that you need to understand more about what a basic statistical frequency count against a subset of data is, or perhaps it is another thing with you. Whatever the cause, throwing inane insinuations my way will not go either unnoticed or un-responded to by me.

I have also owned a variety of performance vehicles and my experience differs from yours drastically. In fact, most BMW, Audi, Porshe manuals mention oil consumption as normal and provide an amount by mileage. My experience with performance cars is in line with the manufacturer's manuals. Although we may not find it the norm for the average joe blow car, oil engines consume oil, some more than others.

 

[17RubyShelbyGT350]

Data is "Plagued?"

Magnitude? This data is plagued and only represents this forum. I think that's what Harry is getting at. Most people don't read into statistical analysis and small samples are normally misleading and inaccurate. In this case, the data is accurate of the forum but not of the entire production of the GT350's.

Not sure what "plagued" means? Samples are not "normally misleading" but can be. In fact, some here might aver that the owners in this forum would be very representative. And yes, as I had stated over and over again, the data is just from this forum - and MAY or MAY NOT be representative of the universe of GT350s.

 

[17RubyShelbyGT350]

Hmmm

I have also owned a variety of performance vehicles and my experience differs from yours drastically. In fact, most BMW, Audi, Porshe manuals mention oil consumption as normal and provide an amount by mileage. My experience with performance cars is in line with the manufacturer's manuals. Although we may not find it the norm for the average joe blow car, oil engines consume oil, some more than others.

Have had no Porsche's or BMWs but two Audis, including the current '16 SQ5 in my driveway. Never had to add a quart to that one between scheduled oil changes and it has some APR tuning on it. No problems with either, or no other cars that I have had - to the extent of the usage of my Shelby to-date.

Different strokes..

YRMV

 

[17RubyShelbyGT350]

Forum Tools

I think this is valid information, and at least gives us some sense of the magnitude of the issue. One question tho - where did you get the N=303 from? How do you get an accurate count of every GT350/R that is represented on this board?

The count changes, but at the time I originally did this, I went to use Forum tools to search sub groups for GT350 owners, then went through all the pages and deleted those that said they wanted one, or may order one, or something which indicated they may not currently own one. I just looked again, and 314 total showed up, some of those are not owners at this time based on their comments... Too tired tonight to count again, but number should be pretty close to 303....

 

[Minn19]

The count changes, but at the time I originally did this, I went to use Forum tools to search sub groups for GT350 owners, then went through all the pages and deleted those that said they wanted one, or may order one, or something which indicated they may not currently own one. I just looked again, and 314 total showed up, some of those are not owners at this time based on their comments... Too tired tonight to count again, but number should be pretty close to 303....

There are also a few others that are members that have had engine replacements that are no longer active and have not chimed in. Kairoja I think is his board name and couple of others I can’t quite remember, but haven’t seen post in this thread.

Any way, I give you credit and I thought about starting a thread like this last year when a lot of people (including me) were getting engine replacements, but ran into what you are right now. There will always be fan boys of any brand and they can’t even handle a simple count to member ratio such as this one.

Also, I’ve had a number of different brands of cars plus six BMWs (two of them M cars) and I’ve never experienced oil consumption such as this either. Nor the need to check it as often as you need to with this motor either.

 

[Zitrosounds]

The count changes, but at the time I originally did this, I went to use Forum tools to search sub groups for GT350 owners, then went through all the pages and deleted those that said they wanted one, or may order one, or something which indicated they may not currently own one. I just looked again, and 314 total showed up, some of those are not owners at this time based on their comments... Too tired tonight to count again, but number should be pretty close to 303....

I wanted my wife to get the 18 SQ5 but she said she wanted the 18 Q5 premier.
Every Audi I have owned has listed in it's manual a chapter on oil consumption. In fact, the 2016 Q5/SQ5 operator manual says, "up to a 1/2 quart per 600miles".
As you mentioned, YRMV.

 

[CSL]

Magnitude? This data is plagued and only represents this forum. I think that's what Harry is getting at. Most people don't read into statistical analysis and small samples are normally misleading and inaccurate. In this case, the data is accurate of the forum but not of the entire production of the GT350's.

Thanks for the post. Think I need to be retired to have the time to engage in this banter battle. Sample size here is just a bit on the light side. I personally don’t draw any theories/hypotheses/conclusions from this analysis because of the sample size, but to each his own. A fan boy I am not, so kick that jab down the road. I am also not a keyboard racer.

Bottom line is I track my car regularly so I pay attention to this type of stuff. Anecdotal suppositions don’t offer much insight or value to those who can view the world through an objective lens. I know 20+ 350 owners in the region, most of whom track their car, and none have had engine problems. I know of one in the region, who I don’t know, who lost his motor on track. I don’t draw any conclusions from this first-hand knowledge either.

I will listen if Ford, or some other reliable entity, starts talking about reasons for engine failure and/or percentages of failed units. Until then, I’ll keep enjoying the hell out tracking my 350 and all the visceral fun that brings. Life is too short to fret about an unreliably small sample size. Have fun gents!

 

[Zitrosounds]

There are also a few others that are members that have had engine replacements that are no longer active and have not chimed in. Kairoja I think is his board name and couple of others I can’t quite remember, but haven’t seen post in this thread.

Any way, I give you credit and I thought about starting a thread like this last year when a lot of people (including me) were getting engine replacements, but ran into what you are right now. There will always be fan boys of any brand and they can’t even handle a simple count to member ratio such as this one.

Also, I’ve had a number of different brands of cars plus six BMWs (two of them M cars) and I’ve never experienced oil consumption such as this either. Nor the need to check it as often as you need to with this motor either.

I don't think it's fanboyism. I just think it is a small sample of the total production line and why I mentioned the 1 in 10 statistic that I personally took, plagued, data is skewed, not accurate. Why? There are almost 16k cars produced. the majority of owners are not on this forum or any forum. I am a silent member on a variety of forums and FB pages and we are talking small group of owners that are actually speaking out about anything. Sure you could argue that this number is a good representation but I could argue the contrary and say most owners are not enthusiasts, have not had failures and are not forum members. I personally do not care what the number is, I have gone through this before on a GT350 and on a few other vehicles. It happens. nothing to get all worked up about. Don't like it? Sell the car and get a Toyota which celebrates a 1in 140 something engine failure rate. By the way, German cars are on the top of the list for engine failures and oil consumption.

 

[Zitrosounds]

Thanks for the post. Think I need to be retired to have the time to engage in this banter battle. Sample size here is just a bit on the light side. I personally don’t draw any theories/hypotheses/conclusions from this analysis because of the sample size, but to each his own. A fan boy I am not, so kick that jab down the road. I am also not a keyboard racer.

Bottom line is I track my car regularly so I pay attention to this type of stuff. Anecdotal suppositions don’t offer much insight or value to those who can view the world through an objective lens. I know 20+ 350 owners in the region, most of whom track their car, and none have had engine problems. I know of one in the region, who I don’t know, who lost his motor on track. I don’t draw any conclusions from this first-hand knowledge either.

I will listen if Ford, or some other reliable entity, starts talking about reasons for engine failure and/or percentages of failed units. Until then, I’ll keep enjoying the hell out tracking my 350 and all the visceral fun that brings. Life is too short to fret about an unreliably small sample size. Have fun gents!

I think that's just it! It is information to stay in the know but not to freak out about.

I looked up Ford's engine reliability and the are ranked in the top ten, 1 out of every 80 engines fails.

 

[rick81721]

I will listen if Ford, or some other reliable entity, starts talking about reasons for engine failure and/or percentages of failed units. Until then, I’ll keep enjoying the hell out tracking my 350 and all the visceral fun that brings. Life is too short to fret about an unreliably small sample size. Have fun gents!

I don't think anyone is "fretting" over this. I find it interesting to follow and if anything it encourages me to drive mine more - if she blows, so be it. At least it will be under warranty. I love driving this car, and might even track it after taking the track attack school this summer.