Can't argue with any of this:
 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/enth...ab1ba0f5&ei=15

Tom V

The flathead Ford V8 does not belong on that list IMO

More or less agree. They could have made it a top 30 list and had more disagreements. I can certainly think of 20 more to add with the Vega in their somewhere. Personally, I think the Flathead Ford could have been left off a top 10, simply because of it's historical importance and Ford did address the overheating issues with an improved head later in production.

Oh, I just noticed the list was V-8 engines only. That eliminates the Vega. Could probably shorten my list to 20 then. Even my favorite engine, the Strato Streak Pontiac would probably make someones list for oil leaks everywhere and the plastic camshaft sprocket failures. Both easily fixed.

This comment on the Caddy HT-4100 "but the worst came from Cadillac's choice to use cast-iron head bolts. but the worst came from Cadillac's choice to use cast-iron head bolts. "

Seriously, cast iron head bolts? I doubt if that's true... I had the 4.5L version in a '93 Eldo. It had cast iron heads on an aluminum block, maybe that's what the ignoramus writer had in mind.

george

The 6.5 Detroit Diesel designed engine had faulty harmonic balancers, which caused the cranks to break soon after the balancers failed. The balancers became a maintenance item after the failures were determined to have caused the cranks to break.

I have 2 trucks with 6.5 engines, both over 250,000 miles, not buying that they can't run reliably if the balancers problems are addressed. JMO.

Pisses me off when you put together a great post about racing a Flathead Ford Engine at the Bonneville Salt Flats and the Site wipes your post clean due to a "Timed Out for the post"

Tom V.

Odd, but ALL the nearly two thousand HT4100 engines I machined had steel head bolts and main cap bolts. It was one of the many weaknesses of this engine: galvanic corrosion in the main saddle and head bolt bosses. George, all of the HT4100 had cast iron heads( which were amazingly durable) on aluminum blocks. If you ever get the chance, lift a 4.1 block, then lift a late 4.9 block. The 4.9 block is nearly fifty percent heavier.

American-made V8 engines are among the best engines from the Big Three; even today, they continue to use a cross-plane-crank setup, which is why they sound so different from their European counterparts, who opted for a flat-plane setup. "

James Bimson has got to be pretty clueless to make a statement like that. Only a few Italians did that, plus the lone, extremely limited AMG V8 in the GT Black Series. All the other V8's from Europe are cross-planes (and sound just like American V8's).

Brad, the cracking in 6.2/6.5 cranks was primarily in early 6.2 nodular cranks. We magnafluxed hundreds a month; never found a late 6.2 (one piece rear seal) or a 6.5 crank that was cracked. Since WHEN do millennial automotive writers know ANYTHING about anything?

I think most of the clickbait on MSN is written by low paid interns and not reviewed by editors...the stuff posted there is usually full of glaring errors.

They did the Ford flathead V8 dirty.

Sure it was best suited for cooler climates like in Motor City but that one major innovation (first monocast V8 block) opened the door for the common man to own an affordable V8.

It grew from 65 hp in ‘32 to 75 hp in ‘33 to 85 hp in 1934 where it stayed for quite a few years. These engines had full-pressure oiling to all the bearings, unlike their main competitor Chevrolet’s straight six that utilized low-pressure main oiling and babbit conrod bearings that were splash oiled. Not a high-speed engine design unlike the Ford.

The 239-inch 85 hp V8 Fords ruled the highways, they could cruise at 80 mph which was pretty much unheard of for mass-produced passenger cars until their introduction. Even the first somewhat trouble-prone 221-inch ‘32 V8s (cracked blocks and overheating issues) delivered 65 mph speeds, compared to the previous 40 hp Model A that was practically throwing the crankshaft out of the block doing 45 mph.

Part of the problem was for the first few years Ford V8 engines had head mounted water pumps that created low pressure in the engine block which caused the water to boil at a lower temperature. After the water pumps were moved to the block where they pushed the coolant through the block instead of sucking it through like the 1937 and earlier designs this helped but never fully cured it.

Back in those days because of the comparatively crude machining none of the engines lasted much more than 40k miles before needing a rebuild, just a sign of the times and really not a Ford Motor Company issue.

No matter their flaws this engine opened the door for what we all enjoy today, the affordable American V8 powerhouse. :thumbup:

They left out the 307 Oldsmobile V8s of the mid-80's that all puked antifreeze from blown intake gaskets due to intake manifold flange erosion.

One has to consider that the flat head V8 came out in 1932. It can't really be compared to engines conceived in later decades. It was the "go to"Hot Rod" engine.......until 1949 and was taken out of the picture in 1955 mostly...

I remember reading an article In Hot Rod probably 20 years ago about a guy who made big power using those olds diesel blocks for gasoline engines. Made big power at an Engine Masters event.

Yep. The Olds 350 diesel block was the best thing about that engine: a high nickel content four block main block.

they listed 479 Million dollars in warranty repairs on the Ford 6.0 diesel , that was for those who were lucky enough to still be in warranty. I bet those engines cost the company i work for in excess of 10 million dollars. A good number of those F-350's we just scrapped after their 6.0s died.

The disappointment with the 5.7L Olds diesel was the damage done by the first generation clouded perception of the second generation. The first suffering from severe lifter and cam lobe wear from oil contamination. Owners did not realize the importance of the 3000 mile oil change with the diesels compared to lazier practices with gasoline engines. The EGR system in the diesel pumped a lot of soot back into the crankcase as blow-by. Additionally, the lack of a water separator contributed heavily to those blown head gasket situations as well as injector pump corrosion.

I had a 1981 Bonneville with the second generation 5.7L diesel and had no problems except for a fuel gel-over during the big chill in 1983 until about 70,000 miles. One of my GMI classmates worked on the V-6 diesel development at Oldsmobile and and gave me a few tips on the 5.7L for reliability. The roller lifters in that engine cured the cam wear and a water separator had been added in the fuel filter. My problem was worn out wrist pin bushings leading to piston slap and three bent rods.

I found a specialist in OKC that rebuilt them with drilled rods to pressure feed the wrist pin bushing, and he changed the head bolts to the larger diameter ones from the 6.2L diesel. He essentially blueprinted the engine and you could definitely tell the difference with the ease of starting and performance gains. I went another 200,000 miles on the engine before a Texas hailstorm totaled out the car. I never got less than 22 mpg with that car and went as high as 34 mpg on the highway.

My biggest complaint was the wimpy Turbo 200N transmission they used. I went through 4 rebuilds due to lock-up torque converter failures. The diesel had too much torque at low rpms before the transmission oil pump pressure was high enough to maintain the lock-up in the converter.

Still the best long distance cruiser I ever had though.

I did exactly that. Went from 4.057 bore to 4.250, and put in a 4.00 crank from a 425. Ended up with 454" in a small block package, with the nice meaty main bearing support.

In defense of the flathead Ford, it was decades prior to any of the other engines on the list. I'd give them a pass, based on that alone. It was a breakthrough in its own way. Those others, well, I say they should have known better.

I also had a 81 diesel Bonneville, 4 dr white with maroon cloth interior, factory red pinstripe. I bought it at 48,000 and drove it to 150,000 with zero engine problems. The guy I sold it to absolutely refused to buy it with a diesel engine. so I converted it to a 350 rocket gas engine. I sold the 5.7 engine running, and never heard anything from the guy that bought it from me. I assume it ran fine after he installed it.

At that time I was working as a line mechanic at a buick dealership, and was privy to all the missed maintenance items that got overlooked when diesels were serviced. One main problem was the valve cover breather filters never got replaced, or even washed out at oil changes. Carbon plugged up the inadequate gas engine breathers, and then blowby had no where to go with the plugged breathers. It blew out the rear main seal from too much crankcase pressure. As well as the RTV valve cover seal, no gasket, creating massive oil leaks. letting owners finally run the engine out of oil and causing crank and bearing failures, called reliability problems.

As it has been already pointed out, an outstanding car for highway trips. Great comfort as well as great mileage, and at that time diesel fuel was still less than gasoline per gallon. Properly maintained the second gen 5.7 was a fair engine, not great, but adequate in my experience. As the article said from 77-80, they were ticking time bombs.

After installing a few 5.7s in pickup trucks GM wisely called upon Detroit Diesel to design the 6.2/6.5 engines for light duty trucks, but they too had some problems from design shortcomings, and penny pinching book keepers. IH/Navistar took on the manufacturing of the 6.5 diesels after GM dumped the design for the Duramax to keep making it for the military for the military Hummers. The IH/Navistar 6.5, is a much improved quality piece over the same GM offerings previously. The Hummer late model government surplus 6.5s are highly sought after as replacement engines for civilian GM light duty trucks. They are a much better built rendition than what GM was making.

If the post 1980 diesels were properly maintained, they ran well and got great fuel mileage. In 1985 I drove mine from Erie PA to Phoenix AZ, and best tank was 32 MPG. Hard to argue that mileage in a full size car when the same gas powered car would likely never see 20MPG. My TH 200 never gave up when I had the diesel. When I put the gas engine in, I left the TH 350 bolted to the rocket 350, so the car had a durable transmission when I sold it. Unfortunately the guy that bought it pulled onto the highway in front of another car, and totaled it about a year after he bought it. My injection pump finally went out at over 130,000 miles, and I just bought a used one for it from a friend that owned a wrecking yard. At the time a reman was in the neighborhood of $550, lots of money in the late 80s.

Just like the corvair, and the Fiero, GM finally got the cars/engines figured out and working, just before they went out of production due to the bad rap from the earliest models. In the corvairs case, Ralph Nader hastened their demise. Funny too that the IRS 61-63 Tempest used the basically same swing arm rear suspension as the corvair did, as did the VW bugs, but no mention of either of those cars having the same ill handling type of suspension quirks. There were probably other cars that used swing arm rear IRS that I'm forgetting about during that time.

GM was famous for doing field testing of new ideas, and making the customers the Guinea pigs. Denying that their designs/ideas were just fine, even though customer complaints proved otherwise. When they dropped Pontiac, I never bought another new car from GM, and never will either.

:focus:

I had a short bus fleet with well over 100 of those Ford 6.0 diesels as a customer (I was an ACD, Motorcraft and Mopar OE parts territory manager) and they had plenty of them repaired on Ford's dime - long after the original factory warranty expired as a result of multiple class action lawsuits.

Suffice it to say, I made a lot of money selling Motorcraft parts to that fleet while they were my customer between 2010 and 2018.

I think the 6.0 diesel repairs actually cost Ford more than $1,000,000,000.00

If that Billion dollars is a accurate, that's some SERIOUS money, even for a giant like Ford. Hell, that's 4 NFL quarterback contracts! That should put it into perspective and qualify that engine for the list. I am happy to say I have never worked on one of those engines.

I didnt bother reading. I have found that anything MSN is garbage. I would bet the writers in all likelihood have never driven a car, much less know the ins and outs. Just about everyone I have read to date is seriously flawed to some degree. It is so I wont read them at all. SO, maybe there was something intelligent, but somehow I doubt it.

I'd go further and say the Olds diesel reputation ruined the ENTIRE US (car) diesel market for decades.

The Ford Dealership told me that there would be no Ford V8s soon. I mentioned the risk with the 1.0 Liter ECOboost timing BELT soaking in hot oil being a failure timebomb. Ford Engine designers getting away with fundamental crap like organic belts in hot oil seems to be an intentional demise.

https://www.fordracingbyspeedshopdir...EaAqgXEALw_wcB

(1) A Ford Pushrod NA V8 Engine

(2) The Ford Dealership told me that there would be no Ford V8s soon.
Maybe as far as Ford boosted V8 Diesels go.

3) The Ford 1.0L EcoBoost Fox engine received important updates in 2017. Although thermodynamically similar to its predecessor, it was entirely reconfigured to integrate a new cylinder deactivation system for improved efficiency. A dual-mass flywheel and a vibration-damping clutch disc were also added to quell engine oscillations when running on two cylinders. Offered in two different variations, with different power ratings, the Ford 1.0L EcoBoost Fox engine was awarded the International Engine of Year twice. It powers the following vehicles.

Ford Fiesta
Ford Focus (European market)
Ford EcoSport

Ford 1.0L EcoBoost Fox engine was awarded the International Engine of Year TWICE.
Obviously the International JUDGES have a different opinion.

Tom V.

Do the job, and then we can talk again.

I seriously doubt Ford would kill their “cash cow”( truck production) to keep the “greenies” happy. The F series Ford truck IS the main stay of corporate light truck fleets.

Totally Agree.

Just Saying the Pushrod Gas engine is ANOTHER example that the conventional gas & diesel engine will be around for quite some time.

Tom V.

2.7 million ECOBOOST engine vehicles, (all I wanted was a single dollar for each vehicle, LOL!).

My biggest takeaway from the ecoboost 3.5L gas engine is how tough and reliable they have been in heavy duty use. A fleet of 18 passenger vans with that engine I worked on from 2015 to 2022 didn't have a single major mechanical failure. No turbo issues, no valvetrain, lower end, or even transmission problems. Two of them had over 300K miles on them. Oil leaks, minor coolant leaks, coils and O2 sensors sure. But nothing major. Very impressed. That engine will NEVER make the 10 worst list. It's a V-6 anyway.

When I retired in 2016 Ford Research gave me a "one of a kind" hand made/machined lamp. The words on the plaque say:

Ford Logo Presented to ECOBOOST Logo
August T Vaught

IN RECOGNITION OF YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO FORD POWERTRAIN AND BOOSTING TECHNOLOGY

HAPPY RETIREMENT
POWERTRAIN RESEARCH & ADVANCED ENGINEERING TEAM

That being said the 3.5L ECOBOOST race car that won at Le Mans could run at Le Mans as speeds exceeding
250 mph 3 times each lap (7 miles = ONE LAP) for 24 hours on race day. The 3.5L engine Mike, as you posted,
was a very durable boosted engine Mike.

Tom V.

Well i should have qualified Ford Gasoline V8s in Ford Production vehicles.

I may not know a whole lot about them, but that article is the very first time I have read it being suggested that the flathead ford engine was unreliable.

Older stuff required more maintenance period - maybe the authors personal bias placed it on the list?

I also think the the cited three year run of the Chevy 267 (79-80-81) is wrong;
It’s possible that the Malibu sedan I had was an ‘81, but I thought it was an ‘82 - it had that gutless small block. It may have been gutless, but it was reliable.
The same article suggested that the Pontiac 265 was made for longer than the Chev 267;
Is that correct??
I thought I read that the last Pontiav V8 was a 301 - and that it was built in (?)1981…??

As mentioned, take anything printed in an MSN article with a healthy grain of salt.

Need a follow-up article on 4-CYLs and 6-CYLs. Or auto engines in general, that which only 2 or 3 of the V8s (caddy 4100 & 4-6-8 or olds diesel) would relist.

Me thinks the article is dissing on (gasoline) V8s as narrative. Plenty of epic 4 cyl fails and fewer 6-cyl. V8s the least fail variety.

Monza/Vega alum 4 cylinder. A favorite of exterminators everywhere.

My Uncle the Pontiac/Cadillac Dealer for 67 years used to say:

4 cylinder engine can live for "X" number of miles
6 cylinder engine can live for "2X" number of miles
8 cylinder engine can live for "3X" number of miles.

Lots of 7.3 liter diesels with 300K plus miles on them out there in service.

Tom V.

The highest mileage 6.9/7.3 IDI or 7.3 PowerStroke I ever machined had over 500,000 miles on it. It came from a box truck chassis that was owned by a trucking company that made multiple runs per day from Louisville, KY to St. Louis, MO.( all interstate mileage). The reason it was removed and shipped to us was because one of the HEUI injectors had frozen in the open position, flooding that cylinder with fuel.

Tom - either both of us are too wordy ;), or both of us type poorly! (OR both!!!)

My solution, if the post will be long, is to type it on Microsoft Word, edit, then cut and paste.

Jon

Thanks Jon, first statement fits exactly.

Tom V.

I disagree with the '79 SBC. For the most part, they were all very reliable. The first year flathead V8 had some bugs that later flathead V8's did not have. That said, they had a habit of cracking the blocks and vapor locking as part of their design. Not a super robust engine, IMO. Great for what it was at its price point 90 years ago, though. I started working in the auto industry in 1979 and can verify 100% the other engines being listed as total junk. Cadillac were the worst of the worst....and GM liked to use the consumer as their test bed, rather than the lab and test track, like the imports.

On the vapor lock issue, the flathead V8 fuel pump was mounted on the top of the intake manifold at the back, there really couldn’t have been a worse place to put it.

In 1932 they increased the number of louvers in the hood sides from 20 to 25 halfway through the year in an attempt to alleviate the overheating issue, little by little.

The last Pontiac v8 was the short deck 265, I had one in an '81 Grand Prix

The 6.2/6.5 GM diesel was supposedly based on the Pontiac V8?
If so, anyone got any specifics?

I can tell you for certain that's not true, I have 2, 6.5s and the architecture is completely different. Nothing would interchange between the 2 engines, and they don't look anything alike. Different rocker arm setups, timing covers are completely different, the valve order arrangement is different, nope after working on hundreds of Stratostreak V8s, they have nothing in common with the 2, 6.5s I currently own.

Pontiac long block:

https://i.ibb.co/924bkfD/Pontiac-Long-Block.webp

6.5 long block:

https://i.ibb.co/MMJjSVV/6-5.jpg

In 81 there were both 265, and 301s available. The 301 from 1977 through 1981, the 265, only 2 years, 1980, and 1981. Just remember the 4.9 turbo T/As were available in 1980-1981. The conventional non turbo was available in Pontiacs, as well as many buicks.

I worked in a buick dealership in 1982-1985, if you ordered a V8 in a Buick there were only 2 choices in 1981, a 307 olds, or a 301 Pontiac, Buick had already discontinued their 350 V8s in 1980.

I also worked at a GM dealer during that period as a line Tech. The Cadillac HT 4100 was a super weak piece of junk. I remember going to a class at the GM Training Center in Cincinnati when it first came out. They made a huge deal out of the engine block weighing 57 lbs. I still remember that number. That was supposed to be a selling point! Three months into production, we started getting them in with main bearing knocking noise and metal in the oil. Most of them had 4 or 5 V-type accessory belts. GM issued a service bulletin stating that the belts, MUST be tightened with a belt tension gauge, and they supplied a revised set of belts, a little wider with rounded shoulders so they could be run at a newer, lower belt tension. The reason? Tightening the belts in the conventional manner would ruin the line hone and pull the block out of shape wiping out the main bearings. Yea, the perfect engine for a typical Cadillac owner. Yikes.

Post #46; amazing.

The 301's 1st year was 77. I had one in my 79 Formula. A friend i worked with at Anchor said he'd walk all over the 301 with his 302 Ford T-bird. Both cars had 4barrel carbs. No idea what his rear ratio was, but mine was a 2:48 posi. He ate crow for a long time. :D