Where did I say the 5.4L performed better than the 6.0L? Jesus Christ guy, reading comprehension again, I clearly compared it to the 5.3L because you claimed it was underpowered, while it was clearly more powerful than the 5.3L GM offering.
Wasn't meant to be a "gotcha", just pointing out that for similar displacement, the mod was not the factory of impotent rage you've made efforts to construe it as.
Yes, the bigger engine makes more power. My 6.4L makes 475HP, that's not surprising. The modular was indeed handicapped by its displacement limit, I've not disputed that. The big bore 6.2L variant (Hurricane) that eventually made it into production demonstrated that the architecture itself was just fine and would have been more flexible if Ford had gone ahead with both versions from the get-go.
Yep, and GM would discontinue the F-body, twice. Some vehicles just sell better than others.
The 3V was a gong show. The evolution into the Coyote was a success though, and that engine has done well.
As I said, Mossberg 500 vs a Remington 870, both are tough as nails and will get the job done.
3800 Buick is still better
Uhhh, the naturally aspirated Series II/III 3800 was 205HP out of 231ci, so 0.89HP/L. The PI 4.6L 2V was 260HP out of 281ci, so 0.93HP/L.
Grand Marquis never came with 260hp. 260(250?) was a fleet only option, and it drank fuel to get it.
Are you day drinking? The 4.6L 32-valve was available supercharged in the Mustang, which had a much smaller engine bay and was "rated" at 390HP, with them typically making about that at the tires. Numerous examples making anything from 600 to 1,000RWHP. Sure is handy having such a robust powerplant available in the same family. You have to be some kind of special to think that despite the 32V 4.6L coming in the Marauder, that somehow the 32V SC version wouldn't fitDay Drinking Emett said:
See, that's the problem, you've made numerous unqualified statements that were easily rebutted and then you moved the goal posts, creating the tangents you now accuse me of going on. We could go back through them if you'd like?
By making numerous false claims? I think not.
Captain Strawman, do you understand why I linked the video of the Crown Vic's with the terminator swap? It's because you said the engine wouldn't fit. See, that was another easily disproven statement, and then you pretend like you've been honest and taken the high road, which is the furthest thing from the truth.
Yes, clearly demonstrated by their decades of fleet use in limo, taxi and law enforcementDay Drinking Emett said:
I drive a 475HP SRT Grand Cherokee, I've owned three of them, before that a Charger SRT8, before that, a BMW M5.Day Drinking Emett said:
IMO, if you must buy that vintage GM
, and how good you are at fixing leaks
I'm comparing engines of like displacement, literally the definition of apples to apples.
The 7.7 second 0-60 of the Navigator is considerably better than the 9.5 second 0-60 of the 5.3 equipped Escalade, despite you claiming the contrary.
Where did I say the 5.4L performed better than the 6.0L? Jesus Christ guy, reading comprehension again, I clearly compared it to the 5.3L because you claimed it was underpowered, while it was clearly more powerful than the 5.3L GM offerings
Yes, clearly demonstrated by their decades of fleet use in limo, taxi and law enforcement
Timing chain issues are hit and miss on the modular. We put >200,000 miles on our 2002 Expedition, no issues. My parents currently have >200,000 miles on their 2000 Expedition, no issues. A good friend of mine had an '03 F-150, timing set packed it in at ~90,000 miles.
You really can't go wrong with either, so if you can find a decent Buick, then I think you'll be well-served. I do agree with @michaelluscher on the Aurora, just for the coolness factor (they were beautiful cars) but the odds of finding one are slim, and I'm not sure parts availability would make it a wise choice.
Same with the oil pickup o ring issue on the LS engines. They're both good enough engines to move a truck around for a long time (well maybe not the 3v plugspitter)
It was a few years of the 2V that spit the plugs, 3V had the plugs that broke off in the heads, lol, and had phaser problems. And yes, despite some minor issues with both the 2V (crossover, timing chain guides, plugs) and the LS-family (oil pump o-ring, AFM lifter failure) both are excellent, durable and long-lived engines that generally deliver excellent service. The Navigator had the 4V 5.4L, while the Aviator had the 4V 4.6L.
I have two of those cars in my saved list. Not the 2010 because it doesn’t have a 3800.IMO, if you must buy that vintage GM
Try and find the nicest elderly owned Celebration/Limited/Ultra top of the line edition with all the goodies
Regal Gran Sport or a Park Ave Ultra for boosty noises
I believe you got a 4.6 Northstar (that doesn't blow up) in CXS Lucerne, although the Lacrosse was equally nice
Lacrosse Super also had a V8
Maybe a 4.0 Aurora for extra obscurity?
Because the blend door actuators and window regulators are gonna fail anyway, might as well have the nice dual zone climate and heated leather seats to go with it
Sunroofs are 50/50, depending on how much you like the
