Replaced Voodoo Engine

[JAJ]

^^^ There you go. Many opt for the 8 or 10 year warranty. The only problem with the warranty when it comes to an engine issue is that Ford replaces (not repairs) engines. On a regular 350, not a big deal. On a more rare R, numbers matching is important. On an extremely rare car, like a base R, numbers matching is extremely important IMHO.

If you're buying an extremely rare model and you want the numbers to match, then pull the engine the day you get it home and strip it down to a longish block (don't take the front cover or the heads off so it's still sealed) and store it. Build a new long block from parts and reinstall the old block when it's time to sell. It'll add more to the long term value of the car than the cost of the long block or parts. Ditto the gearbox if it's numbered too.

 

[Tomster]

If you're buying an extremely rare model and you want the numbers to match, then pull the engine the day you get it home and strip it down to a longish block (don't take the front cover or the heads off so it's still sealed) and store it. Build a new long block from parts and reinstall the old block when it's time to sell. It'll add more to the long term value of the car than the cost of the long block or parts. Ditto the gearbox if it's numbered too.

That's the plan, stan.

Anybody have an extra Voodoo laying around?

I've already got a spare transmission.

 

[DCShelby]

Did they tell you if this is a "2019" motor? Also, were you offered a Ford extended warranty? Mine might be ready for pickup tomorrow.

Hi, no way to tell. I suppose I can go see if the block is stamped as a 2019. I plan to call ford customer care and ask for an extended warranty. I have to say it seems they did a great job. No leaks or noises and the hood is lined up fine. Clutch and shifter are fine, so are the brakes. Hester and AC systems working fine. Even my garage door opener and XM did not need to be reprogrammed. Oil gauge seems fine as well.

 

[JAJ]

That's the plan, stan.

Well first, my name's not stan, but I think you're doing exactly the right thing.

I've priced this strategy for my car - not to make an investment out of it, but just to be able to run it hard and not worry about it. I'm considering buying an Aluminator A52XS and putting it in with a GT350 intake manifold so it fits without a lot of fooling around. Maybe even changing the Aluminator crank and cams to FPC so it works with the OEM ECU. It's expensive, but after all, what isn't?

 

[Tomster]

Plan rhymes with Stan.... nevermind.

Anyway, that is the best course of action, I agree. A limited quantity car like this would be best to either hardly drive it, OR swap key powertrain components that maintains a numbers matching car.

My plan, Stan, is option B.

 

[Hack]

Plan rhymes with Stan.... nevermind.

Anyway, that is the best course of action, I agree. A limited quantity car like this would be best to either hardly drive it, OR swap key powertrain components that maintains a numbers matching car.

My plan, Stan, is option B.

You could just repair the engine if something happens as well. I would think having miles on the odometer will be the thing that impacts the value the most. You can tell the buyer that the original engine has X miles on it, but I'm not sure how well that would be received by most people. I know if I were a buyer and someone told me that the original engine has many fewer miles on it than the chassis, I would take it with a grain of salt. Unless you are planning to sell to someone that knows and trusts you..

IMO the most likely explanation for the oil use is valves/seals leaking. Heads shouldn't be too terrible to refurbish.

 

[Zitrosounds]

Related, someone posted this to me on another board. R&T long-term test update - they are over 40K on theirs and have added 21.5 qts of oil

i think it's quite telling that both the C&D and R&T long term cars were drinking oil. It's good I guess, that kind of press pushes Ford more for a response than a bunch of internet posts.

As far as I am aware, R&T does not have a long term car. The article being circulated is car and drivers FEB/2019. I am subscribed to all major automobile publications.

 

[JR369]

Related, someone posted this to me on another board. R&T long-term test update - they are over 40K on theirs and have added 21.5 qts of oil

That is 1.6 quarts per 3k miles or .26875 quarts per 500. I don't see that as alarming.

 

[Zitrosounds]

That is 1.6 quarts per 3k miles or .26875 quarts per 500. I don't see that as alarming.

Well you know, like this thread, there is a varying degree of what some find alarming and acceptable. From my experiences with cars and my aviation background, I agree with the latter.

 

[DCShelby]

You guys are off to average it out over the entire mileage. That gives the wrong impression and assumes a normal distribution of the usage. It’s not, in most cases the usage increased at a faster rate. In my case normal till about 4K miles, then increasing 4 to 6k, and then increasing even more after 6k... till I had the test done at 7.5k and motor replaced at 8.5k when the usage was 4 quarts every 500 miles. I’d like to see a log of oil usage and mileage in more detail. I should have kept a total amount of oil used in my case. But I did not, I simply checked it quite often and added oil till it was full. I can go back and look at my receipts for oil purchase at the dealer.

 

[JR369]

You guys are off to average it out over the entire mileage. That gives the wrong impression and assumes a normal distribution of the usage. It’s not, in most cases the usage increased at a faster rate. In my case normal till about 4K miles, then increasing 4 to 6k, and then increasing even more after 6k... till I had the test done at 7.5k and motor replaced at 8.5k when the usage was 4 quarts every 500 miles. I’d like to see a log of oil usage and mileage in more detail. I should have kept a total amount of oil used in my case. But I did not, I simply checked it quite often and added oil till it was full. I can go back and look at my receipts for oil purchase at the dealer.

You have a valid point. We really do need to see oil consumption data spanning the 40,000 miles.

 

[rick81721]

As far as I am aware, R&T does not have a long term car. The article being circulated is car and drivers FEB/2019. I am subscribed to all major automobile publications.

Yeah it was misattributed - C&D

 

[rick81721]

You guys are off to average it out over the entire mileage. That gives the wrong impression and assumes a normal distribution of the usage. It’s not, in most cases the usage increased at a faster rate. In my case normal till about 4K miles, then increasing 4 to 6k, and then increasing even more after 6k... till I had the test done at 7.5k and motor replaced at 8.5k when the usage was 4 quarts every 500 miles. I’d like to see a log of oil usage and mileage in more detail. I should have kept a total amount of oil used in my case. But I did not, I simply checked it quite often and added oil till it was full. I can go back and look at my receipts for oil purchase at the dealer.

My motor was similar to yours. I keep a spreadsheet of oil addition, changes, etc from day 1. Dropped mine off at the dealer with 9800 miles on it. Between me and dealer testing, 11 qts were added. But to your point, didn't add any until 4500 miles. So basically 10 qts in the last 4400 miles.

 

[AdamIsAdam]

The article lists when oil was added and how much. So the 1qt per 1k miles was only from 14k miles on, when it started using oil. And consumption didn't seem to increase from 14k miles to 40k miles.

 

[Zitrosounds]

I am not saying those that have engines loosing oil do not have a problem nor am I saying it is acceptable. What I will say is this thread is all over the place. It is titled 'Blown engine" yet only less than a hand full have actually suffered a hole in the block or broken valve train. I my self had an engine failure with my first 350 and it, i suspect was a bearing failure, yet no hole in the block or busted valve train. Additionally, categorizing an engine as failed due to oil consumption and subsequently replaced is far fetched, especially not having any data to say what was the cause. I am aware of one car suffering oil consumption more than the allowed Ford criteria and it was determined the car had low compression in multiple cylinders. That at least is an engine worthy of being called a failure. How many of the engines in this thread where replaced for oil consumption? How many of those actually had a diagnosis? This thread is borderline ridiculous. I am going to try and organize the data compiled in this thread and try and make sense of it. Albeit, I don't know if I will ever have enough time to go down the rabbit hole.