Sweet crap in the morning this is bad.

351CJ said:
You obviuously did NOT read my above post. The 3V engine has been in production for over a year. Most likely over 1 million 3V engines have been built so far (2 million heads ). If this problem is for real, it is NOT a new model headache.

Ford builds over 1 milliion 4.6L and 5.4L engines per year. That's an engine every 30 seconds of every day 365 days a year 24 hours a day. If anyone thinks they can do it better than Ford, go start you own auto company!
:drool: 265,000,000 HP
 
  • Sponsors (?)


TomServo92 said:
Notice the word "alleged" in the title of the BON article? Take it with a grain of salt until it shows up on a more credible web site.

That is why I said, "if it's true".

As far as I am concerned, if the public isn't effected then it never happened. That is, if their internal quality control found a problem and fixed it then this is a non-issue. In fact, it gives me great confidence that they will not allow any "lemons" to be produced. Good job Ford! :nice:

If on the other hand, these suspect heads are out there on thousands of F150s then that is a whole other ball o' wax.
 
updated 08 September 2004, 10:00pm, est.
We are now stating for a FACTUAL matter that Ford has ordered assembly plants to stop shipping 2005 model year vehicles due to defective 4.6L and 5.4L engines.

At this time, we are only ALLEGING that the GT "40" heads are defective.

The article below is presented how it was originally published.

hmm
 
SVTdriver said:
Even if it is a fact. How is it a bad thing that they caught them at the plant? Would it have been better for them to ship them and have owners call about problems?

I completely agree with SVTdriver......better that they caught it now rather than later. I was talking with a Ford dealership in Maryland and he said that he was hoping to have a few mustangs in the showroom by the end of this month. :nice:
 
351CJ said:
You obviuously did NOT read my above post. The 3V engine has been in production for over a year. Most likely over 1 million 3V engines have been built so far (2 million heads ). If this problem is for real, it is NOT a new model headache.

Ford builds over 1 milliion 4.6L and 5.4L engines per year. That's an engine every 30 seconds of every day 365 days a year 24 hours a day. If anyone thinks they can do it better than Ford, go start you own auto company!

Whoa, ease down there tiger, I did read your post and I'm not blaming the engine as a whole, but it's well known that new vechicles do sometimes have unforeseen problems that need to be addressed the first model year. Shoot the 4.6 mustang has been around for a long time and Ford still has been having the head tick issues with their late model Stangs. That said I have full confidence that Ford will do right with this new car.
 
351CJ said:
You obviuously did NOT read my above post. The 3V engine has been in production for over a year. Most likely over 1 million 3V engines have been built so far (2 million heads ). If this problem is for real, it is NOT a new model headache.

Ford builds over 1 milliion 4.6L and 5.4L engines per year. That's an engine every 30 seconds of every day 365 days a year 24 hours a day. If anyone thinks they can do it better than Ford, go start you own auto company!

Hum so you’re assuming the 5.4 3-valve motor making 300 hp will be the exact same heads on the 4.6 Mustang? The truck motor usually differs from the car version especially in a performance car. The 4.6L in the truck is a 2 valve motor making 231 hp.

http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2004/2004_f150.html

Also available in the new F-150 is the 4.6-liter Triton™ V-8. It achieves 231 horsepower at 4,750 rpm and an impressive 293 foot-pounds of torque at 3,500 rpm. Ninety percent of this torque is available at 2,000 rpm for strong towing performance and solid acceleration while hauling heavy loads.

The 4.6-liter Triton™ V-8 has two valves per cylinder and a cast iron block. It uses an upgraded version of Ford's 4R70E four-speed automatic transmission, which has improved shifting controls, for smoother performance.
 
possibilities behind the seat.
New engine technology - Ford's new 5.4-liter, 3-valve Triton™ V-8 engine produces 300 peak horsepower, a 15-percent improvement over the previous award-winning 5.4-liter engine, along with improvements in low-speed and peak torque and greater fuel efficiency. Smooth, quiet and refined, it also contributes to the quieter cab environment.


I copied that from the same article.
 
ttown said:
Hum so you’re assuming the 5.4 3-valve motor making 300 hp will be the exact same heads on the 4.6 Mustang? The truck motor usually differs from the car version especially in a performance car. The 4.6L in the truck is a 2 valve motor making 231 hp.

http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2004/2004_f150.html

Also available in the new F-150 is the 4.6-liter Triton™ V-8. It achieves 231 horsepower at 4,750 rpm and an impressive 293 foot-pounds of torque at 3,500 rpm. Ninety percent of this torque is available at 2,000 rpm for strong towing performance and solid acceleration while hauling heavy loads.

The 4.6-liter Triton™ V-8 has two valves per cylinder and a cast iron block. It uses an upgraded version of Ford's 4R70E four-speed automatic transmission, which has improved shifting controls, for smoother performance.

Looks to me like you need to re-read the article before posting anything in here.
 
ttown said:
Hum so you’re assuming the 5.4 3-valve motor making 300 hp will be the exact same heads on the 4.6 Mustang? The truck motor usually differs from the car version especially in a performance car. The 4.6L in the truck is a 2 valve motor making 231 hp.
No, I do not make assumptions.

I read in several places that the 3V heads on the 05 Stang 4.6L are essentially identical to the 5.4L, 3V, F-150 engine. Even the cams are the same. I was referring to 5.4L, 3V truck engine, NOT, the 4.6L truck engine.

By the way, you might be interested to know that the reason why the 03 - 04 Mach 1 Motor runs so strong is because they lifted the cams from the 5.4L DOHC engine in the Lincoln Navigator. :hail2:

Welcome to the 21st century. It's amazing what you can do with a spome changes in PCM code on the same hardware that is used on trucks. :nice:
 
And just to clarify people, it's usually a PRODUCTION related problem, not a design flaw. In the course of manufacturing a cylinder head, there are many many processes and a ton of machinework involved. You get one guy or one piece of renegade machinery, on one shift, that gets out of spec... or you get raw materials put into process that are out of spec, or any 50 friggin thousand other scenarios, you can wind up with a run, or scattered instances, of defects. Ever hear of a casting defect in a block or crankshaft?? Poop happens sometimes, in fact, it happens all the time in manufacturing. You just never hear about it if the company has good countermeasures in place to check for anything that "falls through the cracks" in their process sheets. The fact that Ford found this themselves is a sign of a proactive company, not a "build now test later" scenario.
 
RICKS said:
And just to clarify people, it's usually a PRODUCTION related problem, not a design flaw. In the course of manufacturing a cylinder head, there are many many processes and a ton of machinework involved. You get one guy or one piece of renegade machinery, on one shift, that gets out of spec... or you get raw materials put into process that are out of spec, or any 50 friggin thousand other scenarios, you can wind up with a run, or scattered instances, of defects. Ever hear of a casting defect in a block or crankshaft?? Poop happens sometimes, in fact, it happens all the time in manufacturing. You just never hear about it if the company has good countermeasures in place to check for anything that "falls through the cracks" in their process sheets. The fact that Ford found this themselves is a sign of a proactive company, not a "build now test later" scenario.

The funny thing about your comment is that it's the exact same thing I told a buddy of mine when he first sent me over to BON to read the article. :nice:
 
RICKS said:
And just to clarify people, it's usually a PRODUCTION related problem, not a design flaw. In the course of manufacturing a cylinder head, there are many many processes and a ton of machinework involved. You get one guy or one piece of renegade machinery, on one shift, that gets out of spec... or you get raw materials put into process that are out of spec, or any 50 friggin thousand other scenarios, you can wind up with a run, or scattered instances, of defects. Ever hear of a casting defect in a block or crankshaft?? Poop happens sometimes, in fact, it happens all the time in manufacturing. You just never hear about it if the company has good countermeasures in place to check for anything that "falls through the cracks" in their process sheets. The fact that Ford found this themselves is a sign of a proactive company, not a "build now test later" scenario.

You're absolutely correct. Back when I was an engineering co-op student at Windsor Engine Plant, I was always out there screening engines for things just like this. It's mostly just Ford covering their asses, and very few engines actually turn out to be affected. You don't usually read about it, because it's part of the business. People might be making a big deal out of this one because it's the new Stang.

It's certainly nothing to be alarmed about, guys.