Longevity of a Ford Modular

Status
Not open for further replies.
Very, very interesting article! Thanks for posting!

I find it very interesting about the opposite approached to the engine and transmission. Engines get an absolutely anal 3k oil change every 2 weeks, while the transmissions are left to fail completely.

If they moved their oil changes to every 6k, and did a transmission service with the money saved form the OC budget, I wonder if they would see a change in the service life of components?
 
"For extreme engine life, does Checker Cab use any synthetic oils? No, not unless called for by the Owner’s Manual, i.e., rear gear lubricant on Ford CVPI. According to the automakers, the use of engine synthetic oil is permissible as long as the normal oil change interval is followed. With synthetics twice as expensive as petroleum oil, the same change interval eliminates most claimed advantages of synthetics."

This is one application where a bulk synthetic would be advantages IMO, with double the interval. But Checker can likely get bulk conventional 5w-20 for way less then half the cost of a comparable bulk synthetic.
 
I've seen the article ..or one like it. The CVPI was clearly one of Ford's better ideas. I hope to own one someday before they're evolved out of existence.
 
There's only one thing I see that really doesn't make sense:

The unibody construction makes the replacement of damaged body panels more difficult and expensive than a body-on-frame construction.

Well.... not so much. Most of the outwardly visible body *panels* on a unibody car (namely the Intrepid they mention in the article) do not actually carry load- hood, fenders, rear quarters, door panels, rear deck lid- none of them are stress bearing.. Only the roof, A, and C pillars carry load. The rest of the load-bearing structure is internal- inner fenders, inner trunk rails, rear bumper backing panel, and the chassis rails and pinch weld rails under the floor.

In my experience, replacing the visible body metal on a unibody is absolutely no different than in a body-on-frame car. If either type is whacked hard enough that the roof or an inner panel is bent (or the suspension carrying components are bent) then the car is pretty much a write-off without time on a frame straightener- and both unibodies and B.O.F can be satisfactorily straightened much of the time if the damage isn't enormous.

I'm not saying B.O.F. doesn't have some advantages- it does. But I think the article overstates it- likely from lack of experience with unibody work since such a small percentage of the taxi fleet is unibody. But with all the minivans being used as cabs, its growing rapidly. Not to mention that unibody is THE dominant type in the market as a whole.
 
Great article. No transmission services. They are hands off until something breaks. So much for 30,000 mile transmission services or fluid exchanges. LOL
 
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
Originally Posted By: Johnny
I've owned a lot of cars in my lifetime and none more enjoyable to drive on a daily basis than my 2005 Grand Marquis.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3Xz6Fok6PI&feature=related

Is that you Johnny!


crackmeup2.gif
crackmeup2.gif
crackmeup2.gif
19.gif


Now put some snow tires on that thing and it might work up here in the winter.
 
Originally Posted By: Drew99GT
"For extreme engine life, does Checker Cab use any synthetic oils? No, not unless called for by the Owner’s Manual, i.e., rear gear lubricant on Ford CVPI. According to the automakers, the use of engine synthetic oil is permissible as long as the normal oil change interval is followed. With synthetics twice as expensive as petroleum oil, the same change interval eliminates most claimed advantages of synthetics."

This is one application where a bulk synthetic would be advantages IMO, with double the interval. But Checker can likely get bulk conventional 5w-20 for way less then half the cost of a comparable bulk synthetic.
Common knowledge on this board is,,, unless syn oils are used and changed every 5,000 miles any engine will fail at 50,000 miles!!!
 
Originally Posted By: Jason2007
More proof that Ford can build a great V8. Hopefully their new V6 & I4 can get some of that longevity.


I don't know about the basic architecture of the EcoBoost v6, but I think it will fare more like the Chrysler 3.5 and for the same reasons. The good old Modular v8, even though its not a 60s engine, is built a lot like one. Iron block. Timing chain. Sheer ruggedness. The Chrysler 3.5, according to the article, did OK but became a problem much quicker and frankly that's no surprise. Its a good engine and if you've ever driven behind one its very impressive in its responsiveness and smoothness... but its got an aluminum block and heads, a plastic intake manifold, and a timing belt (and its an interference engine on top of that, just like most import engines of similar configuration.) Its just not built for the kind of long haul that the Modular, the old 302/351, Ford and Chrysler big-blocks, Jeep 4.0, Buick and Chrysler 3.8s (both iron blocks) and other "lower tech" engines are. I (well, mostly my wife) got 260,000 trouble-free miles out of a *first* generation Chrysler 3.5, which had an iron block, aluminum heads, and aluminum intake, and was not an interference engine.

It used to be that for the most part, well-cared-for engines far outlasted the rest of the car- particularly appearance and trim pieces, and comfort parts like HVAC. Not anymore- the engines today have to be lighter and smaller with higher power density, and that's just not conducive to running 300,000 trouble-free miles. Plus it makes economic sense to design ALL the parts of the car to about the same life expectancy.
 
I've read that aluminum blocks have there problems with different thermal expansion rates between it and the crankshaft. Therefore the bearings take more of a beating. Read this in report related to the Corvette and high levels of copper in the UOAs.
 
Originally Posted By: modularv8
The following article is a report on how the Ford Crown Victoria 4.6l gets 300k miles under the most severe service conditions. Article also mentions it does it with 5w20 for those who are concerned about it.
http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/articlearchive/details.aspx?ID=373

Agreed!! Superb design!!

We've run probably 20 or so in E/F-150/250's for 200-300,000 miles with very few issues (a couple popped spark plugs in the early ones). And, get this, probably 80% of the filters used were Frams.
shocked2.gif
 
Yup gotta love the mods. GM 6.0 gasser has great longevity aswell. I have seen V10's with over 300k on them and a few 4.6's. Saw a 6.0 GM gasser with over 500K on it. Mostly highway though and well kept.
 
Originally Posted By: ADFD1
Just out of curiosity how is the Chrysler 3.7L they use in some of the Jeeps?

The 3.7 is the same as the 4.7 just minus two cylinders!....As durable as the Chrysler 4.7!
 
I know of someone who runs a Taxi shop in Atlanta. They regularly get 400k mi from retired police cars and over 500k from cars they bought new. He took a picture of one with 650k on the original engine. Oh, he does not mess with the engine below the intake manifold. If its anything internal its much faster and cheaper for him to install a junkyard engine from his pile than to mess with fixing it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
Oil experts, please share your knowledge.
2
Replies
26
Views
3K
kschachn
GON
Contaminated fuel and Progressive Insurance
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
edhackett
fofojoe
Pulpy looking flakes in coolant - 2000 Ford Crown Vic
Replies
14
Views
3K
fofojoe
wwillson
  • Sticky
Pennzoil - Key Features and Benefits of ILSAC GF-7 Q&A - Answers
Replies
1
Views
4K
oilstained
Hermann
One year/10,600 mile review of my 2022 Ford Maverick Hybrid
2
Replies
24
Views
22K
Hermann
Back
Top Bottom