Jump to content

7Mary3

Member
  • Posts

    3,148
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Posts posted by 7Mary3

  1. 60 Degree V-8's: Yes, they are not balanced like 60 degree V-6's and 90 degree V-8's. G.M. did build a 60 degree V-8 from 1966-72, and I doubt many of you have ever heard of it. It was the GMC 637, a heavy truck engine that was built in both gasoline and diesel versions. It was based on the truck-only GMC 60 degree V-6's. GMC basically added 2 cylinders and a balance shaft to the 478 V-6. The gasoline 637 made a ridiculous amount of torque (something like 600+ ft. lbs.), the diesel a bit less (it was naturally aspirated-no turbo).

  2. I still call BS on the whole Mod motor program being compromised for a low production car that was known as the Continental. That would be monumentally stupid for Ford to do. Then again this is Ford we are talking about :finger::finger::finger::finger:

     

    That's exactly the story I heard when the Modular/Triton first came out- it was designed for the Lincoln Continental and a potential FWD Crown Vic./Marquis/Town Car replacement that never saw the light of day. Disaster struck when Jac Nassar mandated that Ford only needed only one family of V-8 engine, and since the Modular would work in FWD car applications, it became 'The' Ford V-8. Engineers were put to the task to make it acceptable for light trucks. The Modular had been designed for the shortest overall length (crank pulley to flywheel) possible, and that is why the bore centers are so small. 5.4L is just about all the engine is capable of displacement-wise from a production standpoint. Ford engine designers had to resort to adding 2 cylinders to get the displacement close to 7L. That presented problems as the Triton V-10 had vibration issues and required a balance shaft in the right head. All in all, the 3 valve heads have finally made the Tritons competitive, but there is no getting around that they are a compromised design. I am hopeful that the 'Hurricane' will be more of a real truck engine.

  3. The 500 is an imitation of the previous generation Camry. It doesn't have the resale that a Camry does, and the current Camry is in a different league. And this is why Ford is in trouble. Instead of updating the CV/GM, they waste there money building a Camry knock-off. Pretty soon, you will see major incentives on the 500 in an attempt to pump the numbers. Probably see a bunch of them in the rental fleets, too. And that will really kill the resale to the point that even if it's a decent car, you would be nuts to buy one. The CV/GM could be a real icon car, the type of car that Ford used to build, before they started falling all over themselves trying to copy Camrys, Altimas, and Accords.

  4. I think the body-on-frame being stronger that unitized body was valid in the past, but I am not too sure of that now. In fact, I think the Panthers are about the last body-on-frame cars built anywhere. I am not sure how a '78 era technology chassis could be the equal of something designed recently. No Mopar squad has been body-on-frame since '59 (and yes that includes the '69 Polara and the Belvedere). For what it's worth, I saw a unitized Chevy Astro van completely maul a Crown Vic once. Could have been a lucky shot, though.

  5. I think that the injection system on the 6.4L is less complex and should be an improvement over what the 6L has, however the twin turbochargers will result in an engine with more potential problems, and an engine that is harder to service (didn't think that was possible!). It remains to be seen if the 6.4L will be an improvement or not.

  6. I don't see how the 500 can target the panther/CVPI segment without aV8 and rear drive. There's no way I'll chase some yahoo at the limit in a front-drive. A front-drive pushed to it's limits is, by definition, uncontrolable. A rear drive is necessary to point yourself away from that tree when your at the limit and all else fails. How are the police going train for pursuits in a front-drive 500 PI? What am I missing? The 500 might target the taxi segment well and it will certainly garner it's share of the civilian CV/GM market, but to get CVPI converted I can't imagine fwd (or even the 500's awd) doing that. Ask any race car driver why that won't work.

     

    Doesn't matter. The police market is going to Dodge.

  7. GTO's getting 'creamed' by base GT Mustangs? My only explanation would be that the GTO driver wasn't aware the Mustang was racing him! Drive them both and then see if you agree with that statement. Back to the CVPI's: I just heard from a friend that the L.A.P.D. is going to sell all their CVPI's and go with the Charger. I think there may have been a lot of resentment for the CVPI in that department for some reason.

  8. No joke! I think Ford is in worse trouble than G.M. is now. G.M. has all these hot cars comming out,

    and Ford gives us imitation Camrys like the 500. Outside of the F-150 and the Mustang, what have they got?

    Explorer sales are in the toilet, Ranger's dead, the Super Duty's are going to fall victim to high fuel prices

    and a hideous re-style (and don't tell me that their commercial market is safe, either. An Isuzu NPR can do

    anything an F-450 can, but with better economy and reliability). Lincoln is Cadillac road kill. Mercury? Are they still around? Been so long since I have seen a new one. Volvo and Mazda show promise, but is it enough? Way forward, there isn't going to be a Ford if they don't shape up fast. Sorry for the rant...

  9. More of a problem than you might think. The F-450 has a longer wheelbase than the F-350 does, so it you were to mount a F-350 bed on an F-450, you would have quite a gap between the bed and cab. Ford does not have a pickup bed for the F-450, though a few companies make 5th. wheel 'puller beds' for them. I don't think that these beds, which are usually made of fiberglass, would be strong enough to mount a slide-in camper.

  10. The non-compete clause with Freightliner over the Sterling sale expires in 11/07. I am getting hints of heavier duty GVWR's at that time. I am keeping my fingers crossed as that will open a lot of markets for us, even just being able to go to a heavier single axle truck [35-36,000 GVWR]. A lot of municipalities spec 35K for their plow trucks as well asa lot of single axle fire trucks; both vocations we used to be a leader in.

     

    I don't think we will see an 'F-850', even when the no-compete clause ends with Freightliner. First, sales of the F-650 and F-750 have been less than spectacular. The truck is built by International, a competitor to Ford, and I don't think International wants Ford competing in the heavy duty segment. And, since the majority of the Ford commercial truck dealers are also Sterling dealers, there would be a lot of competition right on the dealer lots for an 'F-850'. As it is now, the Fords don't overlap with the Sterlings too much.

  11. Based on my own experiences, I like IFS on full size 4X4 pickups. I think the handle and ride better, and I have not had any more trouble with IFS compared to a straight axle. Yes, the GM IFS can have CV joint boot trouble in freezing weather, if they get packed with ice and snow. But, the plasic ball joints on the Super Duty front axles are weak, and prone to wearing out. There are certain situations off road where a straight axle has an advantage, but full size trucks are not good for hard-core off-roading anyway. Straight axle trucks are certainly easier to lift, if you are in to that sort of thing.

  12. I think Ford is in the process for giving the police car market back to Chrysler. That Charger is going to be THE law enforcement vehicle, and Ford has nothing to compete with it. Yes, they are still selling CVPI's now, but when police spec. Charger production gets under way, that's it. Many in law enforcement are very excited about Chrysler's return, particularly with the new Hemi. This new D3 will probably be a good car, I'll bet more appealing to the public, but I see no law enforcement application in it.

×
×
  • Create New...