fordmantpw Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 He wanted to give it to me and my wife as a wedding gift because he has more money than sense sometimes. We put the kaibash on that Probably a wise choice. That's the last thing you need in a new marriage is a boat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Probably a wise choice. That's the last thing you need in a new marriage is a boat! Oh, I don't know. Their collective animosity towards it and the corresponding joy at its departure could do a lot to strengthen the relationship. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted December 22, 2015 Share Posted December 22, 2015 Oh, I don't know. Their collective animosity towards it and the corresponding joy at its departure could do a lot to strengthen the relationship. While that's probably true, our bigger priority is finding a house rather than the toys. I'd rather have a new mustang than a new boat anyway, or rather an old boss or Mach 1 mustang. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted December 22, 2015 Author Share Posted December 22, 2015 Somebody has their priorities straight. What is wrong with you man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 If I wanted a push rod motor in a new Mustang, if hop in my Deloreon and go back 21 years in time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullynd Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 Gas engines? No. Electric drive trains? Maybe. But then, look how 2-Mode turned out for everyone involved... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 Hmnn-wild thought- at what point does the consumer come out on the short end of the stick? For example, today (speaking of V-8's) Ford has placed its bets on mod motors while GM sticks with pushrods. Let the better mousetrap win! Take the motor out of the equation and I still have the choice of the look of the Mustang vs the Camaro but again, each component sets each builder's product apart. Let the best builder win in the marketplace. Or is Sergio right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StangBang Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 If you think people were pissed in the late 1970's when Chevy engines ended up in Oldsmobiles, wait and see what happens when the same engine in a Camaro is found in a Mustang new off the assembly line. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthewq4b Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 I would think the best items for them to collaborate on are emission reduction technology. This something that all three could do better together than alone. It would be cost sharing and in turn a savings for each. The tech is applicable regardless of who's engine it ends up on. This would not impact each manufactures mantra for achieving fuel efficiency, IE Ford with smaller Eco boost engines and GM with larger engines and cylinder deactivation. That is something that all three could collaborate on, it is something all three have to meet, and something all three do. Might as well combine the R&D departments and reduce the management overhead and pool resources. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 There are plenty of Chevy LS engines running around in various Fords already especially Mustangs. You shut your whore mouth!!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 There was actually a pretty good rant by someone about putting LS engines in a Mustang...basically your putting in a cheap/crappy engine into a Mustang, just because its cheap/crappy because you think you'll blow it up! I have to see If I can find it again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 There was actually a pretty good rant by someone about putting LS engines in a Mustang...basically your putting in a cheap/crappy engine into a Mustang, just because its cheap/crappy because you think you'll blow it up! I have to see If I can find it again. And one has to wonder why they aren't replacing it with another Ford motor that blew up in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 And one has to wonder why they aren't replacing it with another Ford motor that blew up in the first place. Because Chevy-based power is cheaper. Again, why are we even having this discussion? Chevy derived power is cheaper than Ford. Has been for almost 60 years now. It's not going to change any time soon, and as long as it is, people will be putting Chevy power into Ford bodies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 I would think the best items for them to collaborate on are emission reduction technology. I'm not 100% sure on this, but I'm fairly certain that a lot of that research is done by Tier 1s that sell to any mfr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 (edited) You shut your whore mouth!!! That was uncalled for. Truth hurts some times. LOL I don't like it anymore than you do, but it is what it is. Edited December 23, 2015 by coupe3w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 There is a model out there for common engines - trucks. Although some manufacturers are trying to bring powertrain inhouse, the use of engines built by dedicated engine builders (Cummins, Cat (in the past)) is very well accepted. Also, GM engines (Detroit Diesel) were very well accepted before they became outdated. Done right for the "commodity" lines of automobiles (that vast grey middle of CUVs, SUV, midsize and compact sedans) it can be done. It would never work for the carmakers signature vehicles. Same with transmissions and axles. Both emissions and cost issues might drive things along such a path as it gets ever more expensive to certify a drivetrain. Wild thought - something along the lines of the Page & Page "rubberband drive" for an AWD CUV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtisH Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 There are plenty of Chevy LS engines running around in various Fords already especially Mustangs. New or used, I would never buy a Mustang with a Chevy engine. Most of my friends feel the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtisH Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 Done right for the "commodity" lines of automobiles (that vast grey middle of CUVs, SUV, midsize and compact sedans) it can be done. It would never work for the carmakers signature vehicles. I could probably be convinced that this would work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 The problem is that for that vast 'gray middle', there's not a lot of savings to be had. You're looking at mammoth scale at each individual manufacturer, such that the ROI component dedicated to the initial design/engineering costs is minuscule. I mean, why pool engine design resources if you only save a few bucks per engine? Is that worth sacrificing your autonomy? Because there's no real savings unless companies eliminate jobs and get rid of institutional knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 "Because there's no real savings unless companies eliminate jobs and get rid of institutional knowledge." Jobs can disappear, but the value of institutional knowledge may make its disappearance very costly in the long run, like decades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 I think all of the world’s auto makers should get together and design, engineer and build one generic engine for the world market. Think of the efficiencies and profits that could be gained. After that, all of the world’s auto manufacturers can get together to design, engineer and build one generic, global vehicle platform for the world market. Then each manufacturer could hang their unique name on the generic front fender and sit back and pull in the profits. Because that’s all this comes down to. Profits, profits, profits! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 There is a model out there for common engines - trucks. Although some manufacturers are trying to bring powertrain inhouse, the use of engines built by dedicated engine builders (Cummins, Cat (in the past)) is very well accepted. Also, GM engines (Detroit Diesel) were very well accepted before they became outdated. Done right for the "commodity" lines of automobiles (that vast grey middle of CUVs, SUV, midsize and compact sedans) it can be done. It would never work for the carmakers signature vehicles. Same with transmissions and axles. Both emissions and cost issues might drive things along such a path as it gets ever more expensive to certify a drivetrain. Wild thought - something along the lines of the Page & Page "rubberband drive" for an AWD CUV. Ifeg- I was going to mention heavy trucks in my post. True. Excluding Mack Engines in Macks and Detroits in GMC's virtually all class 8 builders did not have proprietary class 8 diesel engines but offered power from Cummins, Cat and Detroit- and even a limited time when Allis Chalmers made an attempt at getting in the business. And even Mack and to a lesser degree GMC offered other power besides their own Today most class 8 builders are back into an "in house" vertically integrated engine choice with Cummins about the only outsourced option. Paccar their DAF blocks, Daimler (F'liner, Western Star) uses their Mercedes/Detroits, and Volvo/Mack uses their ("shudder") Volvo engines that are built in the former Mack engine plant. Page and Page? You are making me feel my age. I started work in the industry just about the time weight laws went up and we had a lot of single axle B-61's. solution? lengthen the frames and add a dead axle- for you non truckers-or young guys the Page and Page concept in essence had what amounted to a pully in place of the wheel spacer between the duals and a "rubber" band drove the dead axle off the powered axle. we've actually gone full circle on that issue as dead non driving axles are making a big comeback (6 x 2 configuration-in particular in Europe and SA) but that is another story. Back to this post someone earlier mentioned about collaboration on environmental compliance issues and that might make sense. But common engines? I hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bzcat Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 (edited) If you think people were pissed in the late 1970's when Chevy engines ended up in Oldsmobiles, wait and see what happens when the same engine in a Camaro is found in a Mustang new off the assembly line. How upset are people now with Mazda engine in a Mustang? The 2.3 Ecoboost engine is largely based on the Duratec HE block, which is a clone of Mazda MZR engine. I don't think we are supposed to take the article at face value and conclude that if Ford and GM worked on engine development together, it means Ford will be using a Chevy engine or vice versa. I don't think there is anything particularly problematic with Ford and GM coming together to design a common block and go on to make its own respectively engines - like how Ford and Mazda worked together to design a common block and went on to make completely different engines from 1.6 MZR to 2.3 Ecoboost and everything in between. Or take for example, Ford's Duratorq I4 diesel engines which was co-developed with PSA. Ford and PSA then went on to make their own versions - with Ford even making an I5 version unique to Ford only. Edited December 23, 2015 by bzcat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 How upset are people now with Mazda engine in a Mustang? The 2.3 Ecoboost engine is largely based on the Duratec HE block, which is a clone of Mazda MZR engine. I don't think we are supposed to take the article at face value and conclude that if Ford and GM worked on engine development together, it means Ford will be using a Chevy engine or vice versa. I don't think there is anything particularly problematic with Ford and GM coming together to design a common block and go on to make its own respectively engines - like how Ford and Mazda worked together to design a common block and went on to make completely different engines from 1.6 MZR to 2.3 Ecoboost and everything in between. Or take for example, Ford's Duratorq I4 diesel engines which was co-developed with PSA. Ford and PSA then went on to make their own versions - with Ford even making an I5 version unique to Ford only. I have to agree, ford 2.0, 2.3 and 2.5 I-4s are Mazda engines. (I am not sure if Ford Still pays a Licencing fee to Mazda) All Mazda V6 engines are Ford engines. Each company has their Strengths why not use those strengths where you may be weak? In specialty non-core powertrains why not share basic engine designs and even manufacturing? why can't ford sell it's HEV and PHEV powertrains to Fiat, or fiat sell it's Light duty Diesel tech to Ford? why is Ford looking to develop a new V8 to replace the Low volume V10 when it could purchase a big block V8 from GM? is the prestige of an in-house design worth the cost for such a low volume engine? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted December 23, 2015 Share Posted December 23, 2015 ....why is Ford looking to develop a new V8 to replace the Low volume V10 when it could purchase a big block V8 from GM? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts