User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 8:03:26 AM EDT
[#1]
Peak
 Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 8:13:11 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tifosi: Love that channel. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By tifosi: Originally Posted By ZuoZongtang: The YouTube channel "I do cars." Tears down engines to find out what went wrong. The 300 Ford and. 5.9 Cummins were two of my favorite. ‘Forbidden Glitter’ |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 8:40:23 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rebel31: CX-5 is legit. We had 2017 that we loved but was totaled in a not at fault accident when my wife was driving. Replaced it with a 2021 GT CX-5 that is a model refresh year. Even better than the 2017 we had. There is NO WAY I'd want an older vehicle. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Rebel31: Originally Posted By glock27bill: I bought a 2019 Mazda CX-5. Not only is the handling insane for a 4 door CUV, but I get an extra 23hp when I run premium through it (250hp vs 227hp)...the computer constantly runs the engine on the verge of knock, so it self-adjusts to octane. I will say that I miss the security of carrying a few tools plus an extra rotor, condenser and fan belt to keep myself on the road should I have an issue. I've had the electronic pickup go in an S-10 ignition, and all I could do is stare at it. That happened on a Thanksgiving Day. CX-5 is legit. We had 2017 that we loved but was totaled in a not at fault accident when my wife was driving. Replaced it with a 2021 GT CX-5 that is a model refresh year. Even better than the 2017 we had. There is NO WAY I'd want an older vehicle. Wife has a 2023 CX-5 Premium Plus (one step down from the turbo). You would think it had a turbo. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 8:40:46 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By thorshammerblow: I agree. I took a 1970 400 SBC that was totally seized up. Stripped it down, magnafluxed for cracks, then honed it, planed the head and block, opened up the valve to 2.02, polished and balanced the crank, hypereutectic pistons, 350 connecting rods (to get a bit more stroke), a 1968 corvette carburetor, a Z28 aluminum intake, 3" exhaust manifold, and a pretty salty roller cam. I put it in my 73 corvette and since the only external difference between the 350 and 400 is that the 400 has one more freeze plug it looks totally stock. It puts out a bit under 500 HP and it is naturally aspirated and it is a reliable motor (my brother has one with almost the exact same setup except it has a cast iron intake and a quadrajet carburetor and it had 150k miles on it in his 72 one ton truck). I would not have been able to get that kind of performance out of that engine with parts made 20-30 years ago. Here is a pic of me tightening down the rockers https://i.imgur.com/4hSLiQm.jpg Here is a pic of the engine right before we attached the transmission and put it in the car. https://i.imgur.com/fMMWEUi.jpg Here is a pic of the vette before I pushed it into the garage https://i.imgur.com/4iFmmOR.jpeg?1 And here it is all done and pretty (the pos range in the background is my daily driver )https://i.imgur.com/A8p51Iz.jpeg?2 Very nice but highly unlikely that engine is close to even 350 flywheel HP. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 8:41:26 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BlackTaco: Mazda stepped up their game - the new CX9 sure is pretty damn nice! Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By BlackTaco: Originally Posted By glock27bill: I bought a 2019 Mazda CX-5. Not only is the handling insane for a 4 door CUV, but I get an extra 23hp when I run premium through it (250hp vs 227hp)...the computer constantly runs the engine on the verge of knock, so it self-adjusts to octane. I will say that I miss the security of carrying a few tools plus an extra rotor, condenser and fan belt to keep myself on the road should I have an issue. I've had the electronic pickup go in an S-10 ignition, and all I could do is stare at it. That happened on a Thanksgiving Day. Mazda stepped up their game - the new CX9 sure is pretty damn nice! Zoom Zoom! |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 9:01:38 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20  Attached FileLong Skirt Pistons, Double Row TC, Metal TC Guides  |
|
|
|
KY, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 9:31:13 AM EDT
[Last Edit: SDGlock23]
[#7]
Usually gearing can help out with that, I still drive my 04 Colorado every day (5 speed, inline 5 engine). It's not quick but it's been absolutely reliable in the 20years I've had it. I'll likely get a new daily in the next year or two but it's been a damned good truck, I like the look of the new Colorado/Canyon.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 10:15:52 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SnowMexican: Honda K master race. Checking in. Almost at the end of an era once Honda goes hybrid or electric with the next R. It's had a great run. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 10:20:05 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By SDGlock23: Usually gearing can help out with that, I still drive my 04 Colorado every day (5 speed, inline 5 engine). It's not quick but it's been absolutely reliable in the 20years I've had it. I'll likely get a new daily in the next year or two but it's been a damned good truck, I like the look of the new Colorado/Canyon. Those are neat engines . Also makes me think back to the '91-'93 gmc cyclone( turbo) ; 280hp-350ftlb Then the atlas 4200 ; 275hp-275 ftlb 4.3 LV1/3 ; 285hp-305ftlb ...e85 tune 297hp-330ftlb |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 10:22:29 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 I love my '85. So much better with EFI, and a Marlin Crawler 2.28/4.7 dual transfer case. Awesome engine. |
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 10:32:46 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alacrity: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/14291/IMG_7651_jpeg-3199141.JPG Long Skirt Pistons, Double Row TC, Metal TC Guides Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alacrity: Originally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/14291/IMG_7651_jpeg-3199141.JPG Long Skirt Pistons, Double Row TC, Metal TC Guides  |
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 10:38:32 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ackrite: I love my '85. So much better with EFI, and a Marlin Crawler 2.28/4.7 dual transfer case. Awesome engine. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ackrite: Originally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 I love my '85. So much better with EFI, and a Marlin Crawler 2.28/4.7 dual transfer case. Awesome engine. I was too poor for an EFI yota back then.
|
|
|
FL, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 10:55:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: fuzzy03cls]
[#13]
My 04 Explorer has the 4.6 V8. I drove a 2022 Explorer with the base engine & it will blow the doors off mine like I'm standing still.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 11:00:29 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DriftPunch: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3561/Screenshot_20230720_144231_Firefox-2892517.jpg It's all good, until it isn't! (AFAIK, this is the back of the engine) Bet timing that is fun |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 11:05:07 AM EDT
[Last Edit: housewolf]
[#15]
I like the LS platform, I have an LS2 & LSA, but OP said "amazing" and I think those do what they're supposed to do but don't find them amazing. I also wouldn't include a modified engine because that's the point in modifying, make them perform better than intended. Amazing.
What I do find amazing is the GM HFV6 platform. LF1 is 170 cu in, 11.7:1 CR, burns regular fuel and produces 270 HP. LF4 is 217 cu in and produces 472 HP. These are tiny little stock engines that are outperforming engines twice their size made 25 years ago. Add the performance of these engines to modern drivetrain and suspension tech and it flat out embarrasses many of the "performance cars" of yesteryear. old man that grew up driving 60s & 70s musclecars |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 11:06:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Alacrity]
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 9D1Alpha: Those are neat engines . Also makes me think back to the '91-'93 gmc cyclone( turbo) ; 280hp-350ftlb Then the atlas 4200 ; 275hp-275 ftlb 4.3 LV1/3 ; 285hp-305ftlb ...e85 tune 297hp-330ftlb Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 9D1Alpha: Originally Posted By SDGlock23: Usually gearing can help out with that, I still drive my 04 Colorado every day (5 speed, inline 5 engine). It's not quick but it's been absolutely reliable in the 20years I've had it. I'll likely get a new daily in the next year or two but it's been a damned good truck, I like the look of the new Colorado/Canyon. Those are neat engines . Also makes me think back to the '91-'93 gmc cyclone( turbo) ; 280hp-350ftlb Then the atlas 4200 ; 275hp-275 ftlb 4.3 LV1/3 ; 285hp-305ftlb ...e85 tune 297hp-330ftlb Definitely neat engines. Like often at GM, poor quality management killed them. The extended warranty on the LK5 and L52 couldn't undo the damage, esp given the after-sales care which seems endemic with GM. If a buyer got a head with proper valve seat hardness, they did ok tho. I always dug H3's and had a number of peeps wheel them with us. Couple had the issue - it wasn't smooth sailing but eventually fixed. One of them had some pretty serious oil usage. I'd like an Alpha, but then 460L-E.  Still there are plenty of high mile examples rolling. |
|
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 12:22:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9D1Alpha]
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alacrity: Definitely neat engines. Like often at GM, poor quality management killed them. The extended warranty on the LK5 and L52 couldn't undo the damage, esp given the after-sales care which seems endemic with GM. If a buyer got a head with proper valve seat hardness, they did ok tho. I always dug H3's and had a number of peeps wheel them with us. Couple had the issue - it wasn't smooth sailing but eventually fixed. One of them had some pretty serious oil usage. I'd like an Alpha, but then 460L-E. Still there are plenty of high mile examples rolling. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alacrity: Originally Posted By 9D1Alpha: Originally Posted By SDGlock23: Usually gearing can help out with that, I still drive my 04 Colorado every day (5 speed, inline 5 engine). It's not quick but it's been absolutely reliable in the 20years I've had it. I'll likely get a new daily in the next year or two but it's been a damned good truck, I like the look of the new Colorado/Canyon. Those are neat engines . Also makes me think back to the '91-'93 gmc cyclone( turbo) ; 280hp-350ftlb Then the atlas 4200 ; 275hp-275 ftlb 4.3 LV1/3 ; 285hp-305ftlb ...e85 tune 297hp-330ftlb Definitely neat engines. Like often at GM, poor quality management killed them. The extended warranty on the LK5 and L52 couldn't undo the damage, esp given the after-sales care which seems endemic with GM. If a buyer got a head with proper valve seat hardness, they did ok tho. I always dug H3's and had a number of peeps wheel them with us. Couple had the issue - it wasn't smooth sailing but eventually fixed. One of them had some pretty serious oil usage. I'd like an Alpha, but then 460L-E. Still there are plenty of high mile examples rolling. Moving to today's GM econo-truck we have the 2.7 turbo (310hp-430ftlb) . AFM continues to be a pest , they should Chuck it . Hard to tell if it's a clean sheet from the 2.9 atlas. Knowing GM it's recycled development . If it were mine I'd lose the AFM and swap the turbo out for a M90 ...even though it is a fancy dual-volute turbo . * the H3s have some decent hardware underneath for being factory bought . |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 1:47:15 PM EDT
[#18]
Next up ; The rise of the three-cylinder
According to a media report, new cars with 3-cylinder engines are gaining popularity in the USA. The three-pot engines, which essentially had zero sales in 2019, now occupy a 5.6% market share at the end of Q2 2023; further approaching 6.2% in Q3. What's also interesting to note is that while three-cylinder engines are gaining popularity, the market share of larger 6 and 8-cylinder engines is slowing down. Reports state that demand for 6-cylinder engines has fallen by 1.8% since last year. Similarly, the market share of 8-cylinder units has also reduced from 11.5% to 10.9% over the past year. Four-cylinder engines though, remain the most popular powertrain option in the USA. The market share of the 4-pot engines even increased over the past year and now commands 57.2%. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 1:55:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Houstons_Problem]
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Burnsy: I think it's a lot rarer than you think it is. A google search of several sites says that a gasoline powered consumer vehicle reaching 300K miles is generally less than 1% of it's model siblings. 200K miles is still in the single digit percentile. One example: https://www.iseecars.com/car-lifespan-study "iSeeCars analyzed over two million cars produced and sold for at least 10 of the past 20 model years, ranking each model by its highest mileage-achieving cars. All 20 models had at least 2.5 percent of the top-ranking 20 models clear 200,000 miles, and the top 1 percent of these vehicles delivered between 230,000 and 297,000 miles over the last two decades. For example, 1% of Toyota Sequoias on the road have at least 296,509 miles on the odometer." High mileage is more of an indicator of usage and incorporates other factors such as suspension, interior, and exterior as well as the specific utility of a particular vehicle and it's appeal to owners. Vehicles that get miles put on quickly aren't having age related retirement. Things like interiors, suspension components, body work, etc deteriorate with age and make vehicles less desirable in comparison to new ones. Vehicles that don't rack up miles quickly are often replaced with when the engine is perfectly fine. Work trucks, sports cars, and luxury vehicles have different usages and owners with different values. Never replaced a vehicle because of engine problems. They get replaced because they are old and I want something new or something with different capabilities. |
|
|
TX, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 2:08:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Houstons_Problem]
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JackRebney: Tons. I've owned several and I know plenty of people with 20-30 year old vehicles with 200k or better. It's not rare. I own a 65 year old vehicle, a 16 year old and recently had a 17 year old stolen which was replaced with new in 2022. Anyone driving to work and parking there in a 17 year old vehicle knows that the vast majority of vehicles are much newer. |
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 2:23:03 PM EDT
[#21]
Mercedes is pulling 560hp out of a 1.6L engine that redlines at 11k rpm in a ROAD CAR
|
|
|
OR, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 2:35:50 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alacrity: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/14291/IMG_7651_jpeg-3199141.JPG Long Skirt Pistons, Double Row TC, Metal TC Guides Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alacrity: Originally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/14291/IMG_7651_jpeg-3199141.JPG Long Skirt Pistons, Double Row TC, Metal TC Guides Both are fantastic motors. Unfortunately the HP rating is in the name. Neither make much power. Good competition to the Z24i and the KA 24 which made more power and just as reliable. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 3:07:43 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By HLB0302: Mercedes is pulling 560hp out of a 1.6L engine that redlines at 11k rpm in a ROAD CAR |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 3:19:31 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryI just reset mine,it was at 12.3 mpg,I just added a cheapie throttle pedal programer to it to dial back the retardedly sensitive throttle response. |
|
|
CO, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 3:29:06 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By housewolf: That alone sounds "amazing" but when you consider a $2MM price tag you have to admit, the wow factor is somewhat diminished. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By housewolf: Originally Posted By HLB0302: Mercedes is pulling 560hp out of a 1.6L engine that redlines at 11k rpm in a ROAD CAR The price tag has more to do with only making 275 of them. That’s a lot of R&D cost spread across a very small sample. But I can see your point. |
|
|
OH, USA
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 3:29:36 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By DirtyDirk: Changed the starter on a '71 Pontiac once in below zero weather, all I needed to do it was 11/32 nut driver for one nut, 5/8 socket for the battery cable on the solenoid and a 9/16 socket for the 2 bolts to hold the starter itself. After disconnecting the battery of course. A 5 minute job, even in below zero weather. I just changed the starter on a N52 BMW, have to pull the intake. Miserable job even in 50 degree weather not to mention below zero weather. Did the same on a couple of other vehicles I owned , one in a parking lot. Not happening today. The days of getting a starter for $79 or just the bendix for $15 is long gone. Lots of cars and trucks (today) have inverters. If you want sticker shock look at a price of an alternator for one of the high output models.............. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/27/2024 4:59:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Alacrity]
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Deerhurst: Both are fantastic motors. Unfortunately the HP rating is in the name. Neither make much power. Good competition to the Z24i and the KA 24 which made more power and just as reliable. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Deerhurst: Originally Posted By Alacrity: Originally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/14291/IMG_7651_jpeg-3199141.JPG Long Skirt Pistons, Double Row TC, Metal TC Guides Both are fantastic motors. Unfortunately the HP rating is in the name. Neither make much power. Good competition to the Z24i and the KA 24 which made more power and just as reliable. Thr KA24 was a better engine all around than the 22R. I'm not in the cult. It was amortization play that had the decontenting I mentioned above, as well as some other measures aimed at reducing cost. Which it did admirably, especially compared to the cost per unit Nissan had in dev, new production tooling, etc, plus opportunity cost. I mean the R Series had an incredible run, 50s until late 90s in the VW Taro, so it was an incredibly successful engine, from a profit perspective. Toyota didn't hafta be cutting edge, or the most/best of anything to compete. The subsequent RZ proved that Im a bigger fan of the 18R-G which well predated me and the 22R. Contemporary - the Y engines - which was the real marginal market truck workhorse for the rest of the world which the States only saw in the MasterAce Surf and the T engines, especially the 4T-GTEU. Sick engine for the period. It's no Tipo 233 ATR18S but still cool from Toyota. The more Nissan gets mentioned, the more certain I become, no company in the history of manufacturing, squandered more talent, legacy, engineering accumen and market position than they. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2024 6:14:18 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By fuzzy03cls: My 04 Explorer has the 4.6 V8. I drove a 2022 Explorer with the base engine & it will blow the doors off mine like I'm standing still. Our '03 Explorer had the 4.0L V6. Decent engine. Respectable power and highway fuel economy around 22-23mpg. Our '18 Durango with the 3.6L V6 stomps the ever loving crap out of that 4.0L. Better fuel economy and waaaaaaay more power. Also, I had a rental 2018 F-150 with the 3.5L ecoboost a few years ago. Damn thing was a literal banshee. It was astonishing how much power that thing made. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2024 7:30:11 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lou_Daks: Lemme guess - it's German. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Lou_Daks: Originally Posted By DriftPunch: https://www.ar15.com/media/mediaFiles/3561/Screenshot_20230720_144231_Firefox-2892517.jpg It's all good, until it isn't! (AFAIK, this is the back of the engine) Lemme guess - it's German. Everyone uses that photo to show how 'scary' that Audi V8s are, but while I owned that car, I don't recall ever hearing about catastrophic failures related to belt or chain failure. I"m sure it happened, but other items (water pumps, fuel pumps) seemed to cause more issues. m |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/28/2024 7:49:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: Alacrity]
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 9D1Alpha: Moving to today's GM econo-truck we have the 2.7 turbo (310hp-430ftlb) . AFM continues to be a pest , they should Chuck it . Hard to tell if it's a clean sheet from the 2.9 atlas. Knowing GM it's recycled development . If it were mine I'd lose the AFM and swap the turbo out for a M90 ...even though it is a fancy dual-volute turbo . * the H3s have some decent hardware underneath for being factory bought . Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 9D1Alpha: Originally Posted By Alacrity: Originally Posted By 9D1Alpha: Originally Posted By SDGlock23: Usually gearing can help out with that, I still drive my 04 Colorado every day (5 speed, inline 5 engine). It's not quick but it's been absolutely reliable in the 20years I've had it. I'll likely get a new daily in the next year or two but it's been a damned good truck, I like the look of the new Colorado/Canyon. Those are neat engines . Also makes me think back to the '91-'93 gmc cyclone( turbo) ; 280hp-350ftlb Then the atlas 4200 ; 275hp-275 ftlb 4.3 LV1/3 ; 285hp-305ftlb ...e85 tune 297hp-330ftlb Definitely neat engines. Like often at GM, poor quality management killed them. The extended warranty on the LK5 and L52 couldn't undo the damage, esp given the after-sales care which seems endemic with GM. If a buyer got a head with proper valve seat hardness, they did ok tho. I always dug H3's and had a number of peeps wheel them with us. Couple had the issue - it wasn't smooth sailing but eventually fixed. One of them had some pretty serious oil usage. I'd like an Alpha, but then 460L-E. Still there are plenty of high mile examples rolling. Moving to today's GM econo-truck we have the 2.7 turbo (310hp-430ftlb) . AFM continues to be a pest , they should Chuck it . Hard to tell if it's a clean sheet from the 2.9 atlas. Knowing GM it's recycled development . If it were mine I'd lose the AFM and swap the turbo out for a M90 ...even though it is a fancy dual-volute turbo . * the H3s have some decent hardware underneath for being factory bought . Bet you're right, due to the same suspicions. But evolution is great. . .when it works. I really know little in detail about the L2R/L3B, beyond the small number of 2023 production being replace for mfg defects and having someone tell me there was a prod revision which increased block rigidity. Which, as @ VVinci mentioned previously, is one of the major improvements (much due to improved modeling and computational failure analysis) many mfgs made as big outputs were developed. The additional benefits of reduced NVH and increased durability kinda forming a triangle. So if I had any interest, I'd look for a later strengthened block, tho I don't think that had any relationship to the failed engines, which IIRC were just a production flaw that escaped QC. Really haven't talked in depth to anyone at GM Powertrain (now GM Global Propulsion Systems) since getting some time with the MDE and 2.8/2.5 Duramax teams. Since Torino was sold to Punch, and little interest in GM motive power since, I really have very little knowledge on what's been going on over there. Besides lots of jettisoning. |
|
|
|
OR, USA
|
Posted: 4/28/2024 8:50:09 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Alacrity: Thr KA24 was a better engine all around than the 22R. I'm not in the cult. It was amortization play that had the decontenting I mentioned above, as well as some other measures aimed at reducing cost. Which it did admirably, especially compared to the cost per unit Nissan had in dev, new production tooling, etc, plus opportunity cost. I mean the R Series had an incredible run, 50s until late 90s in the VW Taro, so it was an incredibly successful engine, from a profit perspective. Toyota didn't hafta be cutting edge, or the most/best of anything to compete. The subsequent RZ proved that Im a bigger fan of the 18R-G which well predated me and the 22R. Contemporary - the Y engines - which was the real marginal market truck workhorse for the rest of the world which the States only saw in the MasterAce Surf and the T engines, especially the 4T-GTEU. Sick engine for the period. It's no Tipo 233 ATR18S but still cool from Toyota. The more Nissan gets mentioned, the more certain I become, no company in the history of manufacturing, squandered more talent, legacy, engineering accumen and market position than they. I wholly agree with your statement. Nissan had it in the bag and just let it all go. They still are not trying to do anything positive. They had the Z cars and the hardbody pickup and the Pathfinder. All amazingly good vehicles so they went cheap on the pickup (frontier is still a good truck), ruined the Pathfinder by putting the name on a minivan and forgot to allow the Z to evolve. 300zx was peak Z car. The amount of tech coupled with raw power and good, old fashioned car was perfect. Then they started to focus on junk like the juke and leaf and CVTs. Fas far as I'm concerned they had the best small truck on the market with the most power, most capable, best interior and possibly longest lasting and gave it up for a CVT and some electric leaf garbage. As for the 4.2 in the Audi, the only thing I know of with it is timing belt tensioners will let loose eventually. Doesn't appear to be an issue if you timing belts when you should be doing them. I DD a 3.0AVK. Everyone says it's slow and weak and unreliable. It's faster than a stage 2 1.8T of the same era, it's crazy smooth, make torque low like a truck and as long as you maintain it regularly it is fantastic. Even gets decent fuel economy. It is very sensitive to vacuum leaks. I'm at 210,000 miles. Getting ready to do a second timing belt. I'll probably pay someone to do it for me. Belt, tensioners, snub mount. |
|
|
NC, USA
|
Posted: 4/28/2024 9:02:53 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FMJ3:  Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 and the only way to kill it was to submerg it in salt water for 18 years |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2024 1:28:44 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 87million times better than the 18RC.. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2024 1:55:49 AM EDT
[#34]
Automobile technology has gone too far for me. I blame freedom hating government for it. I’ve had a few old cars that were great. A big V8 with dual grind cam and highway gears can get 13+ mpg driven hard. The only thing that sucked was drum brakes and keeping the carb optimally tuned. Fuel injection fixed that. Antilock made them even better. Wish it stopped there. No direct injection, stop start, soy wiring, pedestrian crash safety, plastic everywhere disposable cars for me. Gonna be a chore but I’ll try to hang on.
|
|
|
|
CA, USA
|
Posted: 4/29/2024 2:19:53 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By djkest: Part of it is transmission technology as well. The new transmissions are fantastic and really get the most bang for your buck. My wife used to own a KIA Sorrento. It had a 3.3 Liter V-6 and a 6-speed auto and that stupid thing got 26-30 MPG on road trips, fully loaded with the AC on. And it's a heavy AWD SUV. Yeah, I have a new F250. That 10-speed auto does an amazing job of keeping the engine on the power peak when you step on it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2024 6:45:37 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By flynlr: 87million times better than the 18RC.. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By flynlr: Originally Posted By FMJ3: Peak https://www.toyotanation.com/attachments/271cf3ef-41ad-4a6a-bfc4-df36f4a0ae07-jpeg.430943/ Needed about 6 tools to fix almost anything and maybe $20 87million times better than the 18RC.. California units were always their own special shit show. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2024 6:53:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: triburst1]
[#37]
Agreed.
My DD is a 5500 lb AWD three row SUV with nearly 500 HP that will smoke V8 sports cars I had 20 years ago and get 24 MPG on the highway loaded with kids and luggage. My fun car is an 800 HP Hellcat that is a basically a comfortable grand that will bend the space time continuum with the tap of a foot. |
|
|
|
AL, USA
|
Posted: 4/29/2024 9:00:30 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 57fairlane: The engineering is amazing. The beancounters still suck. Whoever thought plastic oil pans should be a thing is a moron. Whoever thought having the entire display be in a tablet and if that tablet goes down, everything goes down is a moron. Whoever thought turbo engines don't need catch cans is a moron. Honda changed the game. H22A1 comes out in 1993 and the Japanese spec engine basically makes the same power as Ford's 302. N/A 2.2 liter vs N/A 5.0 liter both making 220hp  The reliability of the B/H/F/K series is well-known . . . it's what the Big 3 SHOULD have been doing all along given DOHC/small displacement/4 cylinder/high HP has existed since Miller/Offenhauser in the 1920s and the 1960s showed so much promise with the SOHC display engines. Lol. It's not like that at all. Japanese are taxed on engine displacement. American manufacturers are doing us a big favpr giving us a big displacement engine not maxed out in hp/ci. Think insurance premiums and hot rodded engines. If it's not clear to you now, I'll spell it out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/29/2024 11:24:47 PM EDT
[#39]
Was on site today speaking with one of our mechanics about these new Cat engines we're using (360x A4's). He told me that the cap screws for the rods have embedded microchips to detect elongation. Rather than swap screws at a specific interval, the techs will pull the inspection covers and wave an instrument over the screw heads to determine remaining fastener life.
Granted, these engines are spec'd for continuous, full-load application and they're not your basic C15, but that's pretty damn wild. |
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
