Uh-oh, don't look now but here come those pesky FACTS that seem to endanger Kajtec's government conspiracy theories...

My thinkning has always been that if you're gonna argue a point, you had better know what you're talking about, or at least take the time and effort to learn the details. Otherwise you end up simply quoting other people's thinking and they may be dead wrong. Kinda like when you stated that some Euro engine actually exhausted cleaner air than it took in. Nonsense, that's pure physics you're throwing out the window. ALL internal combustion engines burn fuel to produce power. In the most common cases we use gasoline and diesel, wood-burning vehicles just don't seem to have caught on yet. No matter how you ignite and combust the fuel, whether it's through compression or ignition, they produce burnt gasses that must be exausted into the atmosphere. Anything that burns, and I mean ANYTHING produces byproducts that worsen the air. Even that smelly candle my wife thinks smells good is not making the air any cleaner, it makes it worse, that's just hard, cold facts. To suggest the Men In Black are keeping the "good" technolgy a secret to boost oil prices is ridiculous and sounds a lot lke the various stories of the past of home inventors who made a car that ran off water, or a 100mpg carburator that "Big Oil" bought the rights to just to keep it a secret. In order to make power you need to burn fuel, and THAT law of phsics, while oversimplified cannot be wished away. If it could, top fuel dragsters would get 50 mpg while making 8,000 hp, and Nascar stockers would never need to stop for gas. But that doesn't happen, nor do vehicles that actually clean the air as you drive.

 

But wait, there's MORE!!!



Uh oh...what's that at the top right of the diagram just past the air filter...Oh NO!!! It's a MAF sensor! How could THAT be?

 

That's what I'm saying. Our dealer down here charges less than half of what his was charging him for a brand new, complete, ready to roll engine. Something wasn't right with a lot of things in that thread.

One thing to remember about the non-turbo diesels is that they were built over 20 years ago when 200 hp was a LOT for a stock vehicle. My 5.0 trucks from that era only have 175 hp. A 4 cyl ranger is pretty close to that right now. Just because they didn't come from the factory with a lot of hp doesn't mean they don't have the potential to make a lot more. That's like me saying that gassers only have higher hp because they turn more rpms. The more rpms you turn, the more hp you are going to make, regardless of how much torque you have. The only way this will ever be an apples to apples comparison is if you take the turbo off of the PSD and limit the gasser to 3500 rpms.


I have never had the hood up on a 6.4, but I would tackle a 6.0 or 7.3 any day of the week and not even think twice. Take my 7.3 vs my 5.0/5.4 for example. No coil, no plugs, no plug wires, no upper/lower intake plenum, etc. The valley on my 7.3 looks bare compared to any of my gassers. I can change both heads on my 7.3 faster than I can get the intake off of my gassers. If you want something that is a complete PITA to work on, buy an 87-88 turbo coupe. It's a 10-12 hour job to do something as simple as change the valve cover gasket on one of them. I have 3 of them and my sister has 1, and don't even ask me what I would like to do to the person that designed that thing...... lol.

 

i have been reading this post for a while...i also read it before buying my current 7.3. i have had it for a month and thought i would chime in. there are some great points for and against each motor...just like anything else...ford vs chevy, chevy vs dodge, etc. i have owned a 99 5.4, a 03 5.4, a 2000 6.8, and a 2003 6.8. none of these trucks have performed the way my 2000 7.3 does. i love driving it, it has a lot of power and gets decent mpgs. after having this truck, i cant speak for the 6.0, or the 6.4...heard nothing good about them anyways...i will never own another gasser. yeah...up keep is more and maintenance is more...but with that expense you get great enjoyment. my v10s and v8s could tow what i needed done(firewood, cars, scrap metal, etc) but this truck is incredible. i didnt want to include an opinion, but now having owned many motor styles, i have a good opinion. hope this keeps the post going...i know im going to get blasted too...lol.
thanks for a great forum...
chris

 

Back in '91 my wife was in the market for a new-to-her car and very nearly bought an '88 Turbo coupe. I loved the thing, it was fast, and I still think they are the best-looking T-birds ever. This one was black with a black leather interior and was just beautiful. Unfortunatly, the insurance was too high and she ended up with an '88 Mustang GT. In fact we still have it and it's about to become my new daily driver to save wear-and-tear on my F250, not to mention it gets 20+ mpg even with a heavy foot, so I'll be able to save up for a lift sooner! But I still lust after that black-on-black Turbo Coupe...

 

I think they are the best looking t birds ever built too. That's why I have 3 of them lol. They just didn't do a good job designing a few things on them. The intercooler sits almost on top of the engine and the intake has to cross over top of the valve cover to connect to the turbo. Then the fuel rail bolts onto the side of the valve cover and the tranny dipstick on the auto connects to the lower intake. So to change a valve cover gasket you have to remove pretty much half of the engine. Then to top it off, the intercooler inlet is on the bottom, so you have to poke around without sight to try to get it into the boot. I'm no engineer, but I would have put the intercooler in front of the radiator(with inlet/outlets on the sides) and ran the intake and tubing towards the front of the engine instead of over it. That just makes too much sense and would make repairs way too easy though.

Then you have oil changes. Someone thought it was a good idea to make the oil filter touch the steering column on one side and the frame on the other. So no way in hell you are getting a filter wrench on it. Just my personal opinion, but I think that before they can sell a car, the people that design it should have to take it apart and put it back together piece by piece. I can't tell you how many things I have taken off a car and within 5 seconds seen a better way it could be done. Surely someone who actually builds cars for a living would notice the same things.

I like the old fox body mustangs too. As far as new mustangs go (post muscle car era), the fox body and the 05-up are my favorite ones. I've got an 83 lx, 86 gt, 91 lx and 91 gt right now. I used to have another 91 lx coupe, but I sold it a few years back. My wife wants me to sell the two 91's and get an 03 cobra(her favorite body style), but I'm not a big fan of the 4.6 or that body style.

 

The 03 Cobra is my favorite stang too.
I really like the 03-04 Marauders.

 

I think sometimes manufacturers do this stuff for a reason, so they can get more money from people that don't have special tools or lifts in their garage. Like my wife's old Nissan Sentra. The oil filter was on the back side of the engine, I physically could not even get a hand on it, let alone have a chance at loosening it.

To me, it seems Ford is one of the worst at this. I never had a problem working on my Chevy's, and I am tarded. Like the whole take the cab off to get to the head gasket. That one completely backfired when the head gaskets did not last through the warranty cycle.

And why do I need a special socket just to take the seats out.

Okay, that is my Ford rant for both V10 and PSD! haha.

 

For the starters this is only one head, when engine has 2.
Than the main difference that just to check injector seal leak takes couple of hours, when on cdi it takes few minutes.

 

I gave you couple of opinions while I can't see yours in all that blabling.
So how much air you think is in Los Angeles smog? The truth is that during the combustion the clean engine will burn lot of poisons as well. It was intended as a joke, but it is quite possible that the engine can burn more poisons than produce.
Than whole World is enjoying big fleet of 60-70 mpg cars for a generation. How many of those can you find at your local dealership? Dare to explain why?

 

The EPA!

The EPA is why my 6.4L PSD got 8 MPG towing 7,500 lbs back and forth to Watertown, NY last month! It's also why I struggle to get 15 unloaded on the highway, and why I've seriously considered a Spartan DPF delete kit just to increase MPGs!

Before the EPA heavily regulated emissions for diesel engines various states made passenger cars with diesel engines comply with a very difficult standard. This is why you couldn't get a VW TDI in California, New York, or Vermont.

Nobody could build a passenger car diesel engine that could be sold nationwide for a reasonable price. The PSD option increased from ~$5K to $8K because of emissions regulations over the past few years. With those price increases nobody would have bought a diesel passenger car! So nobody outside VW ever tried.

 

Since I don't want to confuse you further, here's the very basic answer. This is the most absurd, far-fetched theory I have ever read. Not only is it not true (not by a long shot) it is a physical impossiblity and shows your complete lack of knowledge of internal combustion engines of any kind.

 

I like the older mustangs and was thinking about getting one of the new 5.0's next year, but sometimes you've got to let the wife get what she wants lol. So I will probably end up getting one at some point. I told her the only way I would get one is if we got a mystichrome.

A few years back Chevy was talking about putting locks on the hood so that you couldn't do something as simple as check your oil or put washer fluid in it without taking it to the dealer. Once the warranty ran out they said they would unlock it. Motor Trend ran an article about it saying it was one of the worst decisions they could make. I think it may eventually come to something like that though. I hate to say it, but I have said it many times. The easiest car to work on that I have ever owned(other than my 60's models) is my wife's Mitsubishi Eclipse. You can tell they thought about the people working on it when they designed it. I can change the oil and tranny fluid in it before I can even get the oil filter off of some of my Fords.

I've got one Ford that has a front sump oil pan and the drain plug is on the FRONT of the sump. If you jack the car up from the front then all the oil runs away from the drain plug. If you jack it up from the back to let the oil run the right way, then you only have about an inch to crawl under the car. Even a 1st grader knows that oil won't flow uphill. They have idiots like that in charge of the car companies and then wonder why they are going bankrupt.

 

Reading these posts are like watching a boxing match at times. Kills the time with reading anyways.

 

I know what you mean!

My wife's 2008 CR-V is the exact same way. Instead of dropping the tank to get at the fuel pump there's an access port in the floor pan. Tranny drain plug instead of having to remove the pan, oil filter is really easily accessable, right next to the easy oil drain plug. Changing rear diff fluid is a cinch, both fill and drain plugs use a standard 3/8" ratchet head. Just did rear brakes last Wednesday, and it was one of the easiest brake jobs I've ever done.

Without a doubt the easiest car I've ever had to maintain! Newer Fords seem to be better, but why couldn't Ford do this in the past?