[ChefBorOzzy]

From my experience, Ford vehicles tend to have annoyances and little things that were not engineered properly. Large failures? No clue.

My Mustang had a delaminated screen and it was still under 3 year warranty. There is a TSB for it I believe and they still denied claim to have it fixed. Control arms squeaking which is a common issue with the S197.. Premature failure, but they'll only help you on their dime if it's under warranty. My truck makes a squealing sound around 1500-2000 RPM and people say it's coming from the throttle body. My driver seat moves a bit when turning. Automatic is not very crisp, but gets the job done. I think in general Ford vehicles are reliable as far as larger things go, but I seem to have experienced smaller annoyances with them and the refinement has not been up to par. My 2012 Legacy was great throughout 40k miles with only condensation happening on spoiler brake light.. And that's a Subaru.

I owned a Cruze for a very short period of time (bought used and it was abused) and I don't recall what I took it to dealer for, but they fixed a small leak without even mentioning it to me before hand.

[Mountain]

Originally Posted by FastCarFanBoy

Having owned a Mustang I will tell you that not once did I need my warranty as my car never needed repair while making nearly twice the power it was designed with.

Blanket statements are foolish.

Have you owned a S550? Your info states a 2013... the S197 is a TANK.

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

People tend to say this about all direct injected engines, but that is definitely not the case. In most cases, it is a small displacement engine with boost. This causes more blowby past the rings, which causes more oil going through your PCV system (smaller amount of ring surface area, and more combustion pressure (in terms of pounds per square inch)). It is also a big problem in engines that are know to go through oil between oil changes. If you aren't losing any oil between oil changes, you probably don't have as much oil on the backs of your valves as someone who has to add a quart between oil changes.

The LT1 is not a small displacement engine and no boost. Plus there is a built in oil separator in the valve covers that was redesigned for the Camaro engine over what the Corvette got.

You can also get a catch can to help reduce the amount of oil going into the intake.

You can also use a product like CRC or Seafoam's upper engine cleaner. There is a hose that you put into the intake to spray cleaner through the throttle and into the intake manifold, so it cleans the backs of the valves. I have used both, and like the CRC product better. Worked wonders in several cases (two engines that were over 150k miles and were getting worse gas mileage, a tiny bit of hesitation, and needed to be turned over longer to start). Problem instantly solved Got noticeably better gas mileage as well.

I would recommend using this as a preventative rather than a cure for long term deposits, even though I used it as a cure for some issues. As a preventative, it will work more optimally.

In the end of the day, direct injection is not the cause of the issue, it only amplifies the issues cars get from consuming too much oil by a bunch.

I had my dealer do this at 15k miles and will probably do so annually.

[torqueaddict]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

People tend to say this about all direct injected engines, but that is definitely not the case. In most cases, it is a small displacement engine with boost. This causes more blowby past the rings, which causes more oil going through your PCV system (smaller amount of ring surface area, and more combustion pressure (in terms of pounds per square inch)). It is also a big problem in engines that are know to go through oil between oil changes. If you aren't losing any oil between oil changes, you probably don't have as much oil on the backs of your valves as someone who has to add a quart between oil changes.

The LT1 is not a small displacement engine and no boost. Plus there is a built in oil separator in the valve covers that was redesigned for the Camaro engine over what the Corvette got.

You can also get a catch can to help reduce the amount of oil going into the intake.

You can also use a product like CRC or Seafoam's upper engine cleaner. There is a hose that you put into the intake to spray cleaner through the throttle and into the intake manifold, so it cleans the backs of the valves. I have used both, and like the CRC product better. Worked wonders in several cases (two engines that were over 150k miles and were getting worse gas mileage, a tiny bit of hesitation, and needed to be turned over longer to start). Problem instantly solved Got noticeably better gas mileage as well.

I would recommend using this as a preventative rather than a cure for long term deposits, even though I used it as a cure for some issues. As a preventative, it will work more optimally.

In the end of the day, direct injection is not the cause of the issue, it only amplifies the issues cars get from consuming too much oil by a bunch.

Good info. I remember a few guys Seafoaming their DISIs early on. I've always been of the belief that you follow the manufacturer's maintenance schedule and that if it aint broke, don't fix it. Where I'll stray is with engine oils. I'll use full synthetic but that's about it.

I've read both pros and cons regarding Seafoam and it's all hearsay and opinion. Some think it's snake oil and can possibly cause damage. Ohers had positive results like you did. What are your thoughts? Any possible downsides to it?

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by torqueaddict

Good info. I remember a few guys Seafoaming their DISIs early on. I've always been of the belief that you follow the manufacturer's maintenance schedule and that if it aint broke, don't fix it. Where I'll stray is with engine oils. I'll use full synthetic but that's about it.

I've read both pros and cons regarding Seafoam and it's all hearsay and opinion. Some think it's snake oil and can possibly cause damage. Ohers had positive results like you did. What are your thoughts? Any possible downsides to it?

I used seafoam a couple of times as a preventative, so I didn't really see much difference. But then again, that would be the expected outcome on a low mileage engine that you are doing maintenance on.

BUT, my wife's Traverse has close to 90,000 miles on it, and she told me that she tried to start it and it failed to start. She tried a second time, and it started. I tried to reproduce the issue, it started each time, however, it did take a few more cranks before it kicked in than usual. I checked the battery, the starter, the alternator, and they were all fine. I did some research and some folks have had issues with the valves coking because it's a DI engine. I also read that CRC works better than Seafoam, so I though I would give it a try. Worked like a charm. It was a huge improvement on starting (starts right away, big difference), and we (both her and I noticed) that it had more pep to the engine, shifted better, and got better MPGs. It was very noticeable.

That engine had never had any treatment like this before, so I am regretting not doing it as a regular maintenance thing. But, I will now.

Another time, I helped a guy do it to his engine (a Honda something or other with over 150,000 miles), and when we were done, he was very impressed with the results, so who am I to argue.

I am not sure about doing any damage. I doubt that it could. It's just a solvent designed to dissolve the gunk on the backs of the valves. But then again, so is gasoline. In fact, the issue with DI is that you don't have gasoline spraying on the backs of the valves so they don't get cleaned. And if it harmed a bunch of engines, they would get sued eventually and go out of business, stop producing it, or change the formula. The stuff has been around for a long time and many folks swear by it. In my opinion (take that for what it's worth, this is the internet after all), the worst case scenario is that it doesn't work much, so it's a waste of time and money (not much of either though).

So, I'm going to start doing it on my Camaro. I don't think it will hurt, and may prevent future problems.

One other note: I have noticed that you can buy bore-scopes pretty cheap now. I see some that just connect to your laptop by USB for about $10. I may pick one up and scope my engine before/after treatment, to see if there is any need/difference. I like proof rather than intuition.

[Spartan268]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I used seafoam a couple of times as a preventative, so I didn't really see much difference. But then again, that would be the expected outcome on a low mileage engine that you are doing maintenance on.

BUT, my wife's Traverse has close to 90,000 miles on it, and she told me that she tried to start it and it failed to start. She tried a second time, and it started. I tried to reproduce the issue, it started each time, however, it did take a few more cranks before it kicked in than usual. I checked the battery, the starter, the alternator, and they were all fine. I did some research and some folks have had issues with the valves coking because it's a DI engine. I also read that CRC works better than Seafoam, so I though I would give it a try. Worked like a charm. It was a huge improvement on starting (starts right away, big difference), and we (both her and I noticed) that it had more pep to the engine, shifted better, and got better MPGs. It was very noticeable.

That engine had never had any treatment like this before, so I am regretting not doing it as a regular maintenance thing. But, I will now.

Another time, I helped a guy do it to his engine (a Honda something or other with over 150,000 miles), and when we were done, he was very impressed with the results, so who am I to argue.

I am not sure about doing any damage. I doubt that it could. It's just a solvent designed to dissolve the gunk on the backs of the valves. But then again, so is gasoline. In fact, the issue with DI is that you don't have gasoline spraying on the backs of the valves so they don't get cleaned. And if it harmed a bunch of engines, they would get sued eventually and go out of business, stop producing it, or change the formula. The stuff has been around for a long time and many folks swear by it. In my opinion (take that for what it's worth, this is the internet after all), the worst case scenario is that it doesn't work much, so it's a waste of time and money (not much of either though).

So, I'm going to start doing it on my Camaro. I don't think it will hurt, and may prevent future problems.

One other note: I have noticed that you can buy bore-scopes pretty cheap now. I see some that just connect to your laptop by USB for about $10. I may pick one up and scope my engine before/after treatment, to see if there is any need/difference. I like proof rather than intuition.

Please do post and let us know. I'll make this a new yearly routine as well for my car assuming the results are positive. It sounds like it will since you're hitting the valves. If this gets squared off then I'll be keeping this sucker for a long time.

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by Spartan268

Please do post and let us know. I'll make this a new yearly routine as well for my car assuming the results are positive. It sounds like it will since you're hitting the valves. If this gets squared off then I'll be keeping this sucker for a long time.

I'm keeping mine for a very long time no matter what. If my engine blows up (for whatever reason), I have been eyeing the LT376/535 crate engine. Same engine as the LT1 but with GM's hot cam and heads (not sure if there is a different intake as well), and it puts out 535 N/A HP without and fitment issues. I am almost hoping my engine will coke up and die (ALMOST).

Or if some mechanic says that my valves are all coked up and the only cure is to walnut blast them, I will tell them to just put in the hot cam and heads from GM. Either way, 535 N/A HP will be fun on the track. Not that 455 HP is bad or anything...

[hotlap]

Originally Posted by whiteboyblues2001

I'm keeping mine for a very long time no matter what. If my engine blows up (for whatever reason), I have been eyeing the LT376/535 crate engine. Same engine as the LT1 but with GM's hot cam and heads (not sure if there is a different intake as well), and it puts out 535 N/A HP without and fitment issues. I am almost hoping my engine will coke up and die (ALMOST).

Or if some mechanic says that my valves are all coked up and the only cure is to walnut blast them, I will tell them to just put in the hot cam and heads from GM. Either way, 535 N/A HP will be fun on the track. Not that 455 HP is bad or anything...

I've had that same thought.

[sgo1960]

So I'm new here.. 58yo looking for my midlife crisis car. I've been wrenching cars since about 1972 and my cars rarely see the dealership except for warranty items. So I currently own a 2003 Mustang GT Vert Centennial version with a few mods, tune, subframe connectors, Magnaflow exaust, strut tower brace etc... I have about 160k on the car and it's been good to me. Biggest problems were poor seam sealer on floor plans which lead to leaks and horrible, I mean horrible, rust protection. Front strut tower corrosion which I think I mitigated with some welding and POR15, Eastwood frame encapsulation stuff.
My major complaint with Ford is that these are all items that go back a generation or so in Mustangs and that Ford never fixed. Frame rails that rot. Ford knows it. Rear ends that whine and clunk. Again Ford knows it.

So, fast forward to the present, I'm between Camaro and Mustang for my next car. I grew up with American iron and I love it.... However, reading the boards I'm getting scared... Mustang with evap problems? Yea, I've done evaps in Fords and Chevy's and it almost always requires major surgery to the dash. Why the heater core and evap core aren't easily accessible via a removable panel is a mystery. I'm an engineer by trade and this seems easy to do, at least to me. Still it seems to be a problem for Fords. And then the Camaro has it's own set of problems although my research seems to indicate the problems are less than the Fords... So, where does this leave me? I'm scared. Honestly. I'm thinking of buying a Boxster instead. My daughter's had Jettas and they were easy to fix. For the record I am leaning toward a Camaro SS but not going near anything with magnetic shocks.. Paying $400 for a single replacement shock is not my idea of fun. Same for all this electronic differential, electro magic this and that.. Just more stuff to break.. And expensive to fix... Am I a solitary man with this line of thinking?
Thanks for listening.

[Chadicus]

Originally Posted by sgo1960

So I'm new here.. 58yo looking for my midlife crisis car. I've been wrenching cars since about 1972 and my cars rarely see the dealership except for warranty items. So I currently own a 2003 Mustang GT Vert Centennial version with a few mods, tune, subframe connectors, Magnaflow exaust, strut tower brace etc... I have about 160k on the car and it's been good to me. Biggest problems were poor seam sealer on floor plans which lead to leaks and horrible, I mean horrible, rust protection. Front strut tower corrosion which I think I mitigated with some welding and POR15, Eastwood frame encapsulation stuff.
My major complaint with Ford is that these are all items that go back a generation or so in Mustangs and that Ford never fixed. Frame rails that rot. Ford knows it. Rear ends that whine and clunk. Again Ford knows it.

So, fast forward to the present, I'm between Camaro and Mustang for my next car. I grew up with American iron and I love it.... However, reading the boards I'm getting scared... Mustang with evap problems? Yea, I've done evaps in Fords and Chevy's and it almost always requires major surgery to the dash. Why the heater core and evap core aren't easily accessible via a removable panel is a mystery. I'm an engineer by trade and this seems easy to do, at least to me. Still it seems to be a problem for Fords. And then the Camaro has it's own set of problems although my research seems to indicate the problems are less than the Fords... So, where does this leave me? I'm scared. Honestly. I'm thinking of buying a Boxster instead. My daughter's had Jettas and they were easy to fix. For the record I am leaning toward a Camaro SS but not going near anything with magnetic shocks.. Paying $400 for a single replacement shock is not my idea of fun. Same for all this electronic differential, electro magic this and that.. Just more stuff to break.. And expensive to fix... Am I a solitary man with this line of thinking?
Thanks for listening.

I'm am engineer as well and I love the magnetic shocks. To me fixing a computer is easier for me to do but it is what it is. Yes they are more expensive to fix than the classics but the ride and performance are in a whole different league. I wouldn't worry about the magnetic ride control too much. The tech has been around for years. On the other hand the non MRC suspension is set up nicely as well. It's 1600 less at the very least.

You can't really go wrong with the Boxster or the SS. I like both but to be honest I never cross-shopped them. Good luck with your decision.

[sgo1960]

Originally Posted by Chadicus

I'm am engineer as well and I love the magnetic shocks. To me fixing a computer is easier for me to do but it is what it is. Yes they are more expensive to fix than the classics but the ride and performance are in a whole different league. I wouldn't worry about the magnetic ride control too much. The tech has been around for years. On the other hand the non MRC suspension is set up nicely as well. It's 1600 less at the very least.

You can't really go wrong with the Boxster or the SS. I like both but to be honest I never cross-shopped them. Good luck with your decision.

Thank you for the advice !

[whiteboyblues2001]

Originally Posted by sgo1960

So I'm new here.. 58yo looking for my midlife crisis car. I've been wrenching cars since about 1972 and my cars rarely see the dealership except for warranty items. So I currently own a 2003 Mustang GT Vert Centennial version with a few mods, tune, subframe connectors, Magnaflow exaust, strut tower brace etc... I have about 160k on the car and it's been good to me. Biggest problems were poor seam sealer on floor plans which lead to leaks and horrible, I mean horrible, rust protection. Front strut tower corrosion which I think I mitigated with some welding and POR15, Eastwood frame encapsulation stuff.
My major complaint with Ford is that these are all items that go back a generation or so in Mustangs and that Ford never fixed. Frame rails that rot. Ford knows it. Rear ends that whine and clunk. Again Ford knows it.

So, fast forward to the present, I'm between Camaro and Mustang for my next car. I grew up with American iron and I love it.... However, reading the boards I'm getting scared... Mustang with evap problems? Yea, I've done evaps in Fords and Chevy's and it almost always requires major surgery to the dash. Why the heater core and evap core aren't easily accessible via a removable panel is a mystery. I'm an engineer by trade and this seems easy to do, at least to me. Still it seems to be a problem for Fords. And then the Camaro has it's own set of problems although my research seems to indicate the problems are less than the Fords... So, where does this leave me? I'm scared. Honestly. I'm thinking of buying a Boxster instead. My daughter's had Jettas and they were easy to fix. For the record I am leaning toward a Camaro SS but not going near anything with magnetic shocks.. Paying $400 for a single replacement shock is not my idea of fun. Same for all this electronic differential, electro magic this and that.. Just more stuff to break.. And expensive to fix... Am I a solitary man with this line of thinking?
Thanks for listening.

I wouldn't worry about the magnetic shocks, they have been around for a long time now, and they seem to last as long as any other dampers. They are just a bit more expensive. But the tires are about the same cost, and you will replace them more frequently. Just think of it as another tire replacement. The SS has had some initial issues, most of which have been fixed. Just to be safe, the rear differential groan is an easy one, just change the fluid after initial break in (1500 miles) and you won't have the issue. The A8 has had issues, if you are getting the manual, you are good, but if you get the auto, it seems that changing the trans fluid after break-in will prevent any shudder issue.

As far as the Boxster goes, it's a great car, great engineering, great reliability, BUT, if anything does need work after time, it will be challenging to fix due to the engine placement. You have to take the engine out for a ton of stuff that would be easy in a non-mid-engine car. And the parts are expensive. For example, I just looked up the OE struts on a 2015 boxster, and they are on sale for $300. Not much less than the MRC struts from the Camaro, and MRC is amazing. I would definitely recommend getting the MRC, but if you don't, the regular struts are under $100.

[newmoon]

2019 Mustang Bullitt - 480 hp.

https://at.ford.com/en/homepage/news...ittsummer.html

[drew peacock]

looks shite that bullit.
terrible colour and hideous wheels.
no thanks