You beat me to it!
Which Vehicles Have Simple Engines?
- Thread starter Soft Cars
- Start date
i had a u.s. spec 1993 volvo 245 in japan, saudi arabia and south korea for 12 years. the engine, transmission and body were great. all the small bits were not.
2014 Mustang GT-500 fits all of your requirements. The 5.8L Trinity engine was fixed timing with port injection.
Was looking for the same thing when I bought my ‘21 Kia Soul. Stick shift, no auto stop/start, no direct injection, no cylinder deactivation.
Has VVT as it is an atkinson cycle engine. Should be pretty reliable but then it’s a Kia…..
Has VVT as it is an atkinson cycle engine. Should be pretty reliable but then it’s a Kia…..
I would say my 5.2L in Ram in signature
Also -- Subaru 2.5L N/A Baja in signature
And -- 3.0L Vulcan Taurus in signature are all pretty simple!!!!
Also -- Subaru 2.5L N/A Baja in signature
And -- 3.0L Vulcan Taurus in signature are all pretty simple!!!!
Only 5 moving engine parts.
No CVT.
No body rust due to duraplast body.
Inexpensive replacement parts.
Best part of all: no EPA/CAFE mandated emission equipment or oils.
I think Trabant is BITOG-approved car design.
Up to 2011 the 2.0 duratec in the Focus met the criteria, 2012 introduced variable valve timing and direct injection to the same block. With the manual trans the simple engine seems pretty decent until it gets above 6000 rpm and it quits making more power. The mazda3 of similar years had the same 2.0 with vvt and its a bit zippier at 5500 and up. I think most vvt systems are reliable enough to not fail, but some are not.
For Chevy trucks you would want a 2007-2009 Silverado or Tahoe with a 4.8 liter LY2. In 2010 it got VVT with the L-20.
Are you saying it would fail to meet relevant emissions standards, or fail to match the original fuel consumption ratings, or both?
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,580
As I said, I would guess (lest anyone get upset and demand a white paper) is it would use more fuel / get less MPG than originally. If the backside of the valves are all carboned up, air is turbulent, valves don't seal as well, the vehicle isn't running as good as it used to, it likely is going to get worse MPG. In fact these are both on the list of symptoms for carboned up valves "poor fuel economy" , and my guess is it starts doing worse long before anyone really notices, doesn't just happen a minute before the end. By the time they notice its usually really bad.
I think a one time cafe test when new is sort of like a random sample. A fact that VW exploited with their diesels, as did some others I think.
I assume since its still closed loop and still has a cat, it should still pass emissions - also my "guess" only based on a pretty good knowledge of a how a closed loop engine control system works. I have no test data to establish my thesis (yet).
Actually what’s miserable is working on these modern wonders when the VVT acts up. If I have a choice of a classic Jeep with the simple 4.0 liter in-line six vs a newer one with the Pentastar V6, with VVT and overhead cams I’ll take the simple one every time. That’s 50 years experience as a backyard mechanic. Keep It Simple Sir!!!
Another one that I like that’s used in boats & also swapped into Jeep CJs is the all cast iron GM 4.3 V6. This is actually 3/4ths of a 5.7 and fitted with an even fire split journal crankshaft. They later on got a balance shaft & Vortec cyl heads. 225 hp with a 4 bbl carb. Simple tough & durable, easy to get 200-300k miles if maintained. Just like the cast iron Jeep in-line 6 I posted above.
I am a big fan of in-line 6s because they are in perfect primary & secondary balance Vs a V6. Also very easy to work on.
Imagine what a pain a top engine overhaul will be on an overhead cam engine with VVT, on this one, an easy job and the parts are inexpensive and widely available:
I am a big fan of in-line 6s because they are in perfect primary & secondary balance Vs a V6. Also very easy to work on.
Imagine what a pain a top engine overhaul will be on an overhead cam engine with VVT, on this one, an easy job and the parts are inexpensive and widely available:
Last edited:
The 3.7 Cyclone in my F150
Port injection, VVT
Not a powerhouse in a crewcab and not the best mpg, but reliable as can be all day long
Port injection, VVT
Not a powerhouse in a crewcab and not the best mpg, but reliable as can be all day long
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,580
To prove Murphy lives at my house - I had one of those - Grand Marquis actually. Bent a valve at around 100K (just one). Of course you can't get the head off without pulling the engine because the head bolt hit the overhanging firewall. The only engine I ever had internal trouble with before 200K.
The benefits of VVT greatly outweigh any risks. Honda and many others have used this tech now for decades and have a stellar track record.
Ever keep one 150-200k miles?
Only 2 so far. Tundra, I traded at 160-something k (170? can't remember). Camry, totaled at 236k. Despite mile long timing chains, no issues that I knew of during ownership. Only engine problems either gave was the Tundra needed a throttle body cleaning, and a noisy serpentine tensioner. The Camry likewise got a noisy idler pulley. Neither of which was VVT related.
Granted, only 2 examples, but outside of Ford phasers, I've not heard much about issues. Timing chain stretch and/or guide problems and/or tensioner problems, yes--but that's separate from VVT.
Similar threads
