Does it frustrate you too?

[d0sitmatr]

what about Ford having 2.3L ecodiesels in other countries that see upwards of 40mpg stock ?
most irritating of all is the Venezuelan model, which by all reports has some of the cheapest gas prices around the globe... people in that country can fill up 3 times to our 1 and still save money at the pump, they dont need a truck that gets 40mpg, yet that is what they are getting.
I think that the American culture is leaning towards demanding things like that be brought to our country.
I know that if they offered a small/midsized truck that had an avg of 40mpg from the factory, Id be 1 of the first in line for it

[cleanspeed1]

Originally Posted by d0sitmatr

what about Ford having 2.3L ecodiesels in other countries that see upwards of 40mpg stock ?
most irritating of all is the Venezuelan model, which by all reports has some of the cheapest gas prices around the globe... people in that country can fill up 3 times to our 1 and still save money at the pump, they dont need a truck that gets 40mpg, yet that is what they are getting.
I think that the American culture is leaning towards demanding things like that be brought to our country.
I know that if they offered a small/midsized truck that had an avg of 40mpg from the factory, Id be 1 of the first in line for it

Testify!

I started hunting for the pieces to drop a MWM Sprint into a Suburban, like a Canadian gentleman did, and I can't find a Sprint motor on this side of the border. This is an all factory setup available in South America; no cutting or madness, just bolt it in and go. They've had this combo for years from GM and Ford. 180hp and near 350 ft/lbs of torque, but will do 30+ mpg when driven right in a half ton truck with no special driving technique.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by d0sitmatr

Im also going to have to disagree with you about the american cars vs japanese cars.
my 99 ranger XLT (ford blueprinted, mazda copied) lasted 6 yrs and 60k miles with 0 major problems, and at the end, before trading it, I was averaging 25mpg hwy with the 3.0L auto.

I'll see your Ranger, and raise you my '88 Toyota pickup. About 200K when I bought it, 3-4 years ago, 221K now. No major problems - heck, no minor problems either. Averages about 27 mpg, with a good share of the miles either 4WD on rough & steep dirt, or heavily loaded - sometimes both.

Forget the 60K miles: realistically, 100K miles is a Japanese vehicle's extended break-in period :-)

Edit: My mistake, I did have one minor problem. Had to fix the tailgate latch. Took an hour or so, and a bit of JB Weld...

[Arragonis]

Returning to the original post, no I don't find that frustrating for two reasons:

1 - Technology always improves, we now have smartphones with more oomph than a PC had 5 years ago, and we have 1.4 production car engines making 170hp.

2 - As most EMers buy cars used, those new 2.4s will be in our greedy hands in a few years time and EMers will still be 20-30% above those EPA figures.

Originally Posted by jamesqf

Forget the 60K miles: realistically, 100K miles is a Japanese vehicle's extended break-in period :-)

I can't comment on the US vs Japanese debate but two facts stood out here in Europe. The first was that when Renault and Nissan 'merged' (yes all those Nissans you buy contribute to Renault's profits in France...) they started to base a lot of Nissans on Renault platforms - the Micra / Leaf is a Clio, the Versa is a Meganne, the Primera is/was a Laguna.

The Nissan dealers immediately noted a drop in quality and an increase in warranty work they had to carry out. On the flipside Toyota and Honda haven't noticed that from their European factories producing Japanese designed cars.

So I sense it may be at the design and production engineering stages were the problems start.

The second issue is that US built cars from US makers (Ford, GM, Chrysler) have (or in some cases had) an appalling reliability record in Europe. The GM Blazer and Ford Ranger were more or less disowned by Ford Europe, the Corvette sold in single figures and the Cadillac STS bombed even costing 30% less than the equivalent BMW or Merc. The Vauxhall / Opel Sintra (basically a US GM 'Van') was the UK's least reliable car for a number of years.

The Neon was sold here in the early 00s for a low price and lots of equipment. Car magazines still recommended a second hand European car instead.

[cleanspeed1]

Most of the time, when we see poor engineering, design or whatever nowadays, it usually stems from the top and accountants. An engineer can come up with a solution that far exceeds what was asked of them, but since it would make the vehicle too reliable and trouble free it would probably not see the light of day.

Here's an example, the Ford Powerstroke. The 7.3L was arguably one of the best designed engines available, and once understood could give you over a million miles of reliable service. When the competition ( in the form of the Duramax ) came out, Ford switched over to the 6.0L which was nothing but a problem child in "order to meet emissions". But with the programming that Ford supplied, and one less headbolt per cylinder, it was a high strung, head gasket popping mess that even now Ford is paying for. Ironically, the engine itself was not bad, as long as you kept the rated power down and gave it air to breathe ( like in a medium duty truck chassis ). A whole cottage industry has been created to upgrade the 6.0 so that it can be reliable, in the form of head gasket kits, studs and EGR coolers. The 6.4 was an attempt to address the 6.0 problems, but it was too little, too late.

The new 6.7 Scorpion diesel is even worse. Ever heard of an engine with 4 pushrods per cylinder? While a marvel in technology, it is way too complex.

All that had to happen was take the proven 7.3 PSD, engineer a set of 4 valve heads with matching pistons, and beat everyone with it. What might have been.

[Diesel_Dave]

Originally Posted by cleanspeed1

Most of the time, when we see poor engineering, design or whatever nowadays, it usually stems from the top and accountants. An engineer can come up with a solution that far exceeds what was asked of them, but since it would make the vehicle too reliable and trouble free it would probably not see the light of day.

Here's an example, the Ford Powerstroke. The 7.3L was arguably one of the best designed engines available, and once understood could give you over a million miles of reliable service. When the competition ( in the form of the Duramax ) came out, Ford switched over to the 6.0L which was nothing but a problem child in "order to meet emissions". But with the programming that Ford supplied, and one less headbolt per cylinder, it was a high strung, head gasket popping mess that even now Ford is paying for. Ironically, the engine itself was not bad, as long as you kept the rated power down and gave it air to breathe ( like in a medium duty truck chassis ). A whole cottage industry has been created to upgrade the 6.0 so that it can be reliable, in the form of head gasket kits, studs and EGR coolers. The 6.4 was an attempt to address the 6.0 problems, but it was too little, too late.

The new 6.7 Scorpion diesel is even worse. Ever heard of an engine with 4 pushrods per cylinder? While a marvel in technology, it is way too complex.

All that had to happen was take the proven 7.3 PSD, engineer a set of 4 valve heads with matching pistons, and beat everyone with it. What might have been.

I have a simple solution for you:

C-U-M-M-I-N-S

[d0sitmatr]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

I'll see your Ranger, and raise you my '88 Toyota pickup. About 200K when I bought it, 3-4 years ago, 221K now. No major problems - heck, no minor problems either. Averages about 27 mpg, with a good share of the miles either 4WD on rough & steep dirt, or heavily loaded - sometimes both.

Forget the 60K miles: realistically, 100K miles is a Japanese vehicle's extended break-in period :-)

your talking two very different time periods.
I will agree with you that in 1988 the toyota was king of reliability.
but that is no longer the case, and hasnt been for some time.

let me 1 up you in that comparison
my ranger, in the 6 yrs I owned it, received 1 tuneup, 2 oil changes and 1 trans flush.
that is all I ever did in maintenance over the course of 6 yrs. it drove me everywhere I needed to go, reliably.
in the course of owning my ranger, I also owned several japanese cars.
95 toyota 4 runner - 180k, needing the timing chain replaced, along with the headgasket and multiple oil leaks non working AC (BTW, I know it was very well taken care of by previous owner, as it was my sister in law's vehicle since new)
98 subaru outback- 170k, was in excellent condition (physically) needed timing belt, timing assembly, clutch, axle, and had a bad headgasket which caused constant overheating when driving more than an hour.
95 eagle talon (mitsubishi eclipse)- 170k, nothing major with this car, except constant CEL's thrown at random intervals, making me hesitant to drive it for extended periods of time. and when I did it eventually drive for more than 3 hrs, it would run hot (about 3/4)
96 honduh accord- 150k biggest PoS Ive ever owned. nothing but problems from day 1

so can you see where Im coming from ?

[Arragonis]

I don't think it is complexity more the amount of money that manufacturers wish to invest in production design and materials usage as well as testing vs what they may expect from warranty claims and reputation with end users.

Examples ? FIATs Multiair system seems fiendishly complex but reliable. All those 1980s DOHC VTEC style Hondas work for mega miles as do Toyotas of the same era - at that time the redline of the Toyota Twin Cam was an unheard of (for a compact, cheap car) 7800 RPM.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by cleanspeed1

The new 6.7 Scorpion diesel is even worse. Ever heard of an engine with 4 pushrods per cylinder?

Pushrods? (Pause for recovering classic car info from long-term memory bank...) Oh, yeah, those. You mean American-designed engines still have them? I don't suppose they still build flatheads, too, and use ignition points?

QED, I think :-)

[cleanspeed1]

Originally Posted by Diesel_Dave

I have a simple solution for you:

C-U-M-M-I-N-S

Hahahah! I had a first gen, VE pumped, dually. Best engine ever. Except for that KDP thing ( see, here we go again! )

Had a couple of early 7.3 PSDs; weren't bad until something in the HEUI system broke ( $$$$$$$$$ ).