Worst Engines

[lexus114]

Originally Posted By: Scott_Tucker
Originally Posted By: super20dan
the gm 2.6? v6 that went into the s10 and jeep cherokee in the mid 80,s rear main seal could not hold up . seen them fail at 20k


I would not argue with that!


Wasnt that the 2.8 ?

 

[Scott_Tucker]

Originally Posted By: lexus114
Originally Posted By: Scott_Tucker
Originally Posted By: super20dan
the gm 2.6? v6 that went into the s10 and jeep cherokee in the mid 80,s rear main seal could not hold up . seen them fail at 20k


I would not argue with that!


Wasnt that the 2.8 ?

Yes

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: oilboy123
Originally Posted By: Gene K
Worst engine ever was the 170 Slant 6 Mopar.

Started leaking oil at the oil plug boots (Through Valve Cover) almost immediately so you had to add a quart every 500-1000 miles.

No power, no refinement, no fuel mileage (not as good as a 318).

So since it was leaking oil constantly you stopped bothering to change it and starting changing the filter every year or two when you thought of it.

Then you waited for it to die... and waited.... and waited.... and waited....

4 generations and 480,000 miles later we finally gave up and sold the miserable piece of excrement... after a nuclear war the only survivors will be Cockroaches and Slant 6's!

480K and it's bad?


An excellent question. My mother was seemingly incapable of killing the 225 Slant-6 in her '73 Dart, notwithstanding the generous coating of shiny black sludge (visible through the oil filler) she had built. Car ran essentially flawlessly (but for that nagging "dieseling" issue on shutdown) until a persistent electrical problem flared up, literally, and incinerated the car in front of the local Burger King in 1982. Oh well -- nine years from an early 70s domestic -- not bad, IMO.

 

[daves87rs]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Originally Posted By: oilboy123
Originally Posted By: Gene K
Worst engine ever was the 170 Slant 6 Mopar.

Started leaking oil at the oil plug boots (Through Valve Cover) almost immediately so you had to add a quart every 500-1000 miles.

No power, no refinement, no fuel mileage (not as good as a 318).

So since it was leaking oil constantly you stopped bothering to change it and starting changing the filter every year or two when you thought of it.

Then you waited for it to die... and waited.... and waited.... and waited....

4 generations and 480,000 miles later we finally gave up and sold the miserable piece of excrement... after a nuclear war the only survivors will be Cockroaches and Slant 6's!

480K and it's bad?


An excellent question. My mother was seemingly incapable of killing the 225 Slant-6 in her '73 Dart, notwithstanding the generous coating of shiny black sludge (visible through the oil filler) she had built. Car ran essentially flawlessly (but for that nagging "dieseling" issue on shutdown) until a persistent electrical problem flared up, literally, and incinerated the car in front of the local Burger King in 1982. Oh well -- nine years from an early 70s domestic -- not bad, IMO.



Wow!

 

[jcwit]

The worst engine I ever has was the one Opel put in the Opel GT. Carb issues up the ying-yang. Worked and worked to try to fix it, finally did with a new Corvette.

Why drive the make belive when I could buy the real thing.

 

[dhise]

Originally Posted By: jcwit
The worst engine I ever has was the one Opel put in the Opel GT. Carb issues up the ying-yang. Worked and worked to try to fix it, finally did with a new Corvette.

Why drive the make belive when I could buy the real thing.


I loved my opel, but you had to get rid of that solex and put a weber carb on there. All the problems went away then!

 

[oilboy123]

I did a quick rebuild on a slant because the head gasket failed. I reused the cam and lapped the valves with grinding compound.

A real cheap git R done job...... It still ran great. I have done real rebuilds before. The Aspen seemed to burn through ignition modules. My Dad got a tow home one time and I said you cooked the brakes time to sell.

Engine still ran OK.

Vega engine has to be one of the worst. Would have been a good car with one of those hi performance engines. Pretty sad they scrapped a bunch of them.......

Quote from WIKI:

In the USA, the name has also appeared in the title of a road car (well before it did in Europe) as the Cosworth version of the Chevrolet Vega. Only 3,508 1975 and '76 Cosworth Vegas were produced from March 1975 through 1976. The engine features the Vega sleeveless, aluminum-alloy block fitted with forged components. The twin-cam, 16 valve, aluminum cylinder head design was assisted by Cosworth, but Chevrolet did the development work. The engine features electronic ignition, Bendix electronic fuel injection, and stainless steel headers.[7] The final US emissions standardized version produces 110 bhp. Cosworth's EA racing version was not successful due to engine block structural failures. Chevrolet later produced a heavy-duty 'off-road' block with thicker walls to better withstand the racing application, but by that time Cosworth had moved on. Projected first year sales of the Cosworth Vega had been 5,000. With only 3508 cars produced and many unsold, the car was discontinued. 1500 hand-built Cosworth Vega engines were simply scrapped for lack of demand.[8]

 

[Summerwind]

I have one of those "Bad" GM 2.8 V6 engines in my '88 Cutlass Supreme, 131k, everything seems to be holding up fine, slight seepage on the valve cover gaskets is all...must be all that high-iron from the Mobil 1 its had keeping the rear-main seal together??

 

[SteveSRT8]

My son's first car was an old Buick with the 2.8.

He abused it terribly, and it stood up to everything he threw at it.

 

[demarpaint]

I remember the Pontiac overhead cam 6 cyl engine was a POS, and the Vega Engine. This one I better hide for, but here goes, the Chrysler Slant 6. I had one in a work van and I could predict rain a week before it happened, as soon as it got damp the thing wouldn't start. It lacked power so much it was annoying. My wife had one in a Duster, same problems with damp wet weather as the van. It left her stranded more times in the few years we had that car, than all the cars we've owned together for the 27 years we're married. People touted them as the best engine ever, I thought just the opposite. I better hide now.

 

[EricZoom]

Originally Posted By: dhise
Originally Posted By: jcwit
The worst engine I ever has was the one Opel put in the Opel GT. Carb issues up the ying-yang. Worked and worked to try to fix it, finally did with a new Corvette.

Why drive the make belive when I could buy the real thing.


I loved my opel, but you had to get rid of that solex and put a weber carb on there. All the problems went away then!



I had an Opel Manta luxus, and that Solex was definitely a PIA.

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Wow first post you drag up a 3 1/2 year old thread, lol.


Yeah, no kidding. How does one even find a particular 3 1/2 year old thread to bump? I know on the Cobalt forum I frequent, there's a "related threads" wizard at the bottom of the page that often lures people into bumping old threads (without even realizing it) but this forum doesn't have that I think.

 

[Nayov]

The 3.0 V6 they used in the Ranger. The power of a 4 cylinder with the fuel economy of a V8, not to mention the ever-present pinging issue.

 

[Gene K]

Originally Posted By: Gene K
Worst engine ever was the 170 Slant 6 Mopar.

Started leaking oil at the oil plug boots (Through Valve Cover) almost immediately so you had to add a quart every 500-1000 miles.

No power, no refinement, no fuel mileage (not as good as a 318).

So since it was leaking oil constantly you stopped bothering to change it and starting changing the filter every year or two when you thought of it.

Then you waited for it to die... and waited.... and waited.... and waited....

4 generations and 480,000 miles later we finally gave up and sold the miserable piece of excrement... after a nuclear war the only survivors will be Cockroaches and Slant 6's!


The admittedly tongue-in-cheek post above was to point out their are different ways to judge an engine. Best and Worst is really subjective.

PS My Mother's 80's S-Blazer broke the crank on the GM 60-Degree 2.8L TBI V6 at 80,000 miles. They were known to do that on occasion.

 

[Camu Mahubah]

Originally Posted By: Gene K
Worst engine ever was the 170 Slant 6 Mopar.

Started leaking oil at the oil plug boots (Through Valve Cover) almost immediately so you had to add a quart every 500-1000 miles.

No power, no refinement, no fuel mileage (not as good as a 318).

So since it was leaking oil constantly you stopped bothering to change it and starting changing the filter every year or two when you thought of it.

Then you waited for it to die... and waited.... and waited.... and waited....

4 generations and 480,000 miles later we finally gave up and sold the miserable piece of excrement... after a nuclear war the only survivors will be Cockroaches and Slant 6's!


One of the best posts I have ever read on Bob...

 

[ls1mike]

I had a Ford 2.9, that sure was an oil burning, coolant using pile. When I finally pulled the intake I ended up pulling the heads as the headgaskets were leaking too and found a bad piston. That was a 80,000 miles in Bronco II.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I remember the Pontiac overhead cam 6 cyl engine was a POS, and the Vega Engine. This one I better hide for, but here goes, the Chrysler Slant 6. I had one in a work van and I could predict rain a week before it happened, as soon as it got damp the thing wouldn't start. It lacked power so much it was annoying. My wife had one in a Duster, same problems with damp wet weather as the van. It left her stranded more times in the few years we had that car, than all the cars we've owned together for the 27 years we're married. People touted them as the best engine ever, I thought just the opposite. I better hide now.

No need to hide -- but... While I respect your opinion (and experience with the engine) I have to disagree with you on this. First of all, it sounds like you're judging the engine by the performance standards we've become conditioned to by modern vehicles. The Slant-6 was designed in the late 50s, using now-ancient technology. Virtually ALL engines of the period were incredibly quirky compared to what we're now used to. Today, on a cold morning, you crank the engine, the ECU tells the FI exactly how much gas to add, and the thing just fires right up. Both our Darts required the proper use of the automatic choke. You had to follow the ritual, and starting could be iffy. But that was how almost ALL carb-ed engines were. The biggest annoyance we had was the occasional dieseling on shut down. But OTOH, both our 68 and 73 (198 and 225 respectively) survived abusive lives and were nearly glitch free. Low power? Hey, they're from a different time. A Slant-6 in a van would be like a contemporary I-4 in the same van today. Good solid engines, IMO.

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
. A Slant-6 in a van would be like a contemporary I-4 in the same van today. Good solid engines, IMO.

When I was in the Air Force in the early 1960s our weapons area trucks were 3/4 ton 4WD crew cab Dodges with 225 cubic inch sixes. All 4 got the snot driven out of them, survived that and poor maintenance by the Turk civilians working in the motor pool.

The 18 months I was there, the only mechanical problem I remember was a rear universal joint. Since we were on the end of a long slow supply chain, it became a front wheel drive 3/4 ton crew cab for a few weeks.

They would top out about 70 mph on the open road and didn't seem too strained doing it.

 

[Shannow]

Dunno if it qualifies as a "worst", but it could be described as futile maybe.

Oz had a home grown V-8 manufactured by Holden :salutes: :RIP:, that was available in 308ci (later 304), and 253 c.i.

I think that the only possible reason for the 253 was that Ford had their 250c.i. six, and V-8 of comparable size could be marketted better against it. The Aussie 6 was pretty well dimensionally maxed out at 202 c.i.

In their design, they kept the heads for the 4"bore 308, the 3.062"cranks stroke, and applied a 3.625" bore. Heads overhung the block badly, had an overly large CC, and lost quench/squish.

The 253 was as noisy as a 308, comparatively gutless, and drank fuel at pretty much the same rate.

Not worst, but like I said futile.

 

[Silk]

There was a long stroke 350 version too - I never knew,but drove one a couple of weeks ago.

I didn't like the Vega engine.The cyl head was very much like the Vauxhall/Bedford engine,but one piece.One the Vauxhall engine the cam was held in a seperate alloy housing....removing the cam in the Vega engine required special tool,I had to send it out.