What is it with automakers that their engines are money pits? I bought a used '04 F150 with the 5.4L aware of potential problems. The guy I bought it from just installed a phaser kit because the chain slapped a hole in the cover and I figured $4-5K on top of the price in case I needed a new engine. Still beat the heck out of buying new (or even lightly used). Well, after changing the oil and putting a cleaner in it, the thing seized up running down the freeway. So, I ended up with the $5k reman install after all. The shop that did it had (2) p/u's on the floor with 5.4's being installed when I took mine in. The rebuild shops must love Ford engineers (if you can call them that).
Don't these guys test these things anymore? They've got dynos and proving grounds that they used to run these things for hundred of thousands of miles to test new designs or even variation or new parts. I did a project for the GM Tech Center in Warren MI in the '80s where they built up engines in what they called their "Motor Room". They'd do a few of the same type engines with various differences, send them out for 50,000 mile tests, tear them down, record all the data, send them out again for lord knows how many times.
Seems like the engine problems that turn out to be "common issues" as mentioned in the 6.0 Powerstroke post below (or with my 5.4L) would show up before they built Production Unit # 1 if they did the testing. I guess they'd rather the customer be the guinea pig.
I recall an issue with early 5.4l's where the plugs popped out and dealer after dealer would deny knowledge of this for years. People who had it happen would then check online and find out it'd been happening for years. To the point that companies made a good living specializing in repairing them. Same thing goes for the 5.4L 2 part plug design. Changing plugs could run up to $1000 because it was unlikely the shop could change 8 w/o getting most of them to break in half.
Today, all the marketing you hear about is the fancy electronics they put in the car, bluetooth, voice activation, etc. I heard that Ford's Sync system so infuriated Mark Fields (ex-ceo) that he smashed a screen in frustration. If only they'd invest in basic car/engine design half as much as they're investing in software.
Plus, another part of the problem is that when times got tough, the Big 3 got rid of a lot of guys with years of engineering experience. For a while, they hired these guys back as contractors but then started hiring young "smart" engineers when times got better. I've worked with some of the "new" guys at all of the Detroit 3 and they're basically paper pushers. They also think if it looks good on the tube (3D CAD models), it'll work in real life.
Don't these guys test these things anymore? They've got dynos and proving grounds that they used to run these things for hundred of thousands of miles to test new designs or even variation or new parts. I did a project for the GM Tech Center in Warren MI in the '80s where they built up engines in what they called their "Motor Room". They'd do a few of the same type engines with various differences, send them out for 50,000 mile tests, tear them down, record all the data, send them out again for lord knows how many times.
Seems like the engine problems that turn out to be "common issues" as mentioned in the 6.0 Powerstroke post below (or with my 5.4L) would show up before they built Production Unit # 1 if they did the testing. I guess they'd rather the customer be the guinea pig.
I recall an issue with early 5.4l's where the plugs popped out and dealer after dealer would deny knowledge of this for years. People who had it happen would then check online and find out it'd been happening for years. To the point that companies made a good living specializing in repairing them. Same thing goes for the 5.4L 2 part plug design. Changing plugs could run up to $1000 because it was unlikely the shop could change 8 w/o getting most of them to break in half.
Today, all the marketing you hear about is the fancy electronics they put in the car, bluetooth, voice activation, etc. I heard that Ford's Sync system so infuriated Mark Fields (ex-ceo) that he smashed a screen in frustration. If only they'd invest in basic car/engine design half as much as they're investing in software.
Plus, another part of the problem is that when times got tough, the Big 3 got rid of a lot of guys with years of engineering experience. For a while, they hired these guys back as contractors but then started hiring young "smart" engineers when times got better. I've worked with some of the "new" guys at all of the Detroit 3 and they're basically paper pushers. They also think if it looks good on the tube (3D CAD models), it'll work in real life.