If people lifted the hood more than once a year and checked the oil, and READ the factory service intervals for the 2.8 for valve adjustment, did not run it low on coolant, had the pan and valve cover gaskets re-torqued according to factory recommendations, instead of calling them a POS and trashing them.....You might find the little 2.8 was a great motor,....... but what do I know, I only got 315,000 trouble free miles out of mine before it needed rebuilt.

 

got a 91 explorer 4.0L getting close to 300,000 miles, finally starting to use some oil and antifreeze, but at -35 it still starts with the first cylinder past TDC. even after sitting for a month. def never was much for high end power but surprisingly torquey. other than a clutch and rad pretty maintenance free

 

I gotta ask the OP, why all the hate one the old engines that made the F-Series? My '92 with a worn-out 302 gets comparable mileage to a 5.4 and probably the new 5.0. I'll admit it's lacking on power, but a rebuild and a better cam will fix that for the most part. I'd never trade my old, simple, user-serviceable engine that has half the wires and sensors the newer engines have for a 5.4 0r a new 5.0. The old engines can take more abuse and are time proven designs. Most of the trucks they came in can take more abuse than the new ones too.

 

ANYTHING with so much garbage under the hood that you can hardly even see the engine itself!

 

Well, when I originally posted this...I was more so aiming at the worst engines ''currently used'' in vehicles...What I said was that ''If Ford still used the old engine's in the trucks I would give them some criticism''. Not because I think older Ford engines are bad...My first truck was a 1990 F-150 with a 302 V8 and it was a damn good truck! As a matter of the fact my grand dad owned a 1993 F-150 for 10 years, and when he sold it in 2003 it had a tad over 700,000 miles on it...I know that sounds crazy, but its the truth. So by no means do I think old F-series engines are bad...But if Ford still used the old OHV 190hp 302 in a 2011 F-150, they would by far be the least competitive trucks out there. And I would be criticle of them, ''not because they are unreliable'' but because they aren't competitve...I was more so talking about the 4.6L and 5.4L engine's though when I made that statement.

 

I actually rank the 4.6L 2V right along side the 300 I-6 as one of Ford's best ever produced engines.

Is a spark plug issue real cause to call an engine bad? Yes, it can get frustrating and be expensive to repair but the engine itself is well known to run for over 250K. Most modern diesels only run that distance before major service is required. I consider both mod motors to be a score on Ford's part.

Perhaps the scope of this topic should have been given some guidance such as:

1. Overall reliability
2. Cost of ownership, daily driving and maintenance.
3. Parts availability,etc.

The 351 and 460 were fantastic for the first 100K to 150K then they required plenty of work. This is only my personal experience and not industry fact.

Then again, one only needs to look in the 6.2L and Superduty forums to get a glimpse of the issues that are happening with Ford's newest big V-8. I won't get into that here but if anyone is interested.....