• Welcome Visitor! Please take a few seconds and Register for our forum. Even if you don't want to post, you can still 'Like' and react to posts.

How do you honestly feel about ford.

85_Ranger4x4

Forum Staff Member
Forum Moderator
Article Contributor
V8 Engine Swap
OTOTM Winner
TRS Banner 2010-2011
TRS 20th Anniversary
TRS Event Participant
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
29,367
Reaction score
12,084
Points
113
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle Year
1985
Make / Model
Ford
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
5.0
Transmission
Manual
You're calling the '69 Nova SS with 396 and 4spd a loser?! Pinto wasn't bad car - it was victim of smear campaign. Gremlin with 304 V-8 could show tail lights to a lot of other "sports cars" and the 4 cylinder ones were right car for Arab Embargo in '74. Looking back 50 years later, they aren't so impressive, but neither was a '70s Corolla.
Not all Novas are created equal...

 


Rock Auto 5% Discount Code: BD8D9A3814E19D Expires July 5th, 2022

Roert42

Well-Known Member
RBV's on Boost
Joined
Apr 24, 2020
Messages
2,962
Reaction score
2,337
Points
113
Location
Kintersville, PA
Vehicle Year
2011
Make / Model
Ranger XLT
Engine Size
4.0 SOHC
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
But how much of the decline in quality we see (in all cars/trucks) is due the the CAFE standards the fed. gov. requires for improved fuel economy?
Mfrs. are forced to make them lighter and lighter to meet CAFE.

Not only do they need to be lighter to meet CAFE standards, but they also need to be bigger and heavier to meet safety standards. Adding Crush zones add material and volume to the car, and airbags add weight.

Gotta cut your weight from somewhere.
 

Dirtman

Former Middleweight Moss Fighting Champion
Supporting Member
Joined
May 28, 2018
Messages
19,339
Reaction score
13,330
Points
113
Location
41N 75W
Vehicle Year
2009
Engine Type
2.3 (4 Cylinder)
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Lift
It's up there.
Total Drop
It's down there.
Tire Size
Round.
My credo
I poop in the furnace.
Not only do they need to be lighter to meet CAFE standards, but they also need to be bigger and heavier to meet safety standards. Adding Crush zones add material and volume to the car, and airbags add weight.

Gotta cut your weight from somewhere.
This is why fat people shouldn't be allowed to drive...
 

19Walt93

Well-Known Member
Ford Technician
V8 Engine Swap
Joined
Nov 13, 2018
Messages
3,272
Reaction score
2,570
Points
113
Location
Canaan,NH
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
V8
Engine Size
351
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Total Drop
3"
Tire Size
235/55R16
My credo
If you don't have time to do it right will you have time to do it over?
I don't think you can generalize and make a convincing argument. I've owned products from Dodge, Chevrolet and Ford. You've got to judge the individual product, every manufacturer has released a loser (Gremlin, Nova, PT Cruiser, Pinto).
The worst car I've ever owned is a tie between a Ford Granada and Dodge Intrepid. The Granada had the variable venturi carburetor (couldn't be tuned) and the Intrepid had a bad transmission and was in the shop costing me thousands.
The best cars I've ever owned, also a tie between my Corvette, Taurus, and my Focus ST. The Corvette was just plain bad ass, the Taurus was perfect for a small family and the Focus ST was a pocket rocket super fun to drive.
I've only owned two trucks and both are Ford Rangers. The '99 seems to be bullet proof, 270,000 miles all original except for the front locking hubs. The new '21 is too new to comment.
A six cylinder 3 speed Gremlin could get 30 mpg with ease because AMC built light cheap cars, keep them out of the salt and they provided cheap transportation. The AMC six cylinder was a rejected GM design(too heavy) so it had cam problems, many AMC's had electric fuel pumps added because the fuel pump lobe wore off the cam. Chevy Novas were pretty decent small cars, they felt more solid than an AMC but had soft, camshaft eating engines like all Chevy's. The rebadged Toyota/Nova was a P.O.S. because Ford and Chevy buyers are more apt to trash a poor car than a Toyota buyer. The PT Cruiser was Chrysler's attempt to turn a geek -Omni/Horizon-into one of the cool kids. The Pinto was a good durable little car that got unfairly bashed for the gas tank being located behind the axle- just like every other rear drive car of the time. I like Focus's especially with manual transmissions but a Pinto with factory sway bars and radial tires will out corner any front wheel drive- even with 1970's tires.
 

Eddo Rogue

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
2,688
Reaction score
1,195
Points
113
Location
Burbank,CA
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ranger 4x4
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
OHV
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
skyjacker front leveling kit
Tire Size
31-10.50R15
My credo
Crossed threads are tight threads.
I have the 5.4 and actually love it. Maybe I am lucky, but other than a broken valve spring at 110k miles, I haven't had any problems. I did the spark plugs no problems either. Just followed proper procedure before cracking them loose. The valve spring replacement cost me $1300 bucks out the door, 3 day turnaround. No biggie in my book for what I put that truck through.

I am very weary of screaming turbo v6's mated to 10 speed transmissions. seems very straining of both.

The old Dodge 12 valve diesels are very sought after around here, more so than the LS.

Yep, nobody swaps in a Ford engine, except maybe the old 5.0/302. The coyote motors are cool, but hella expensive.

Seems newer vehicles are packed with technology that compensates for lazy, inattentive, or incompetent drivers. Backup cameras, Lane change assist, blind spot indicators, self parking....etc...

Driving is a verb, an action. Yet most people treat it as a noun, a thing. Carmakers seem to encourage this.

There are little things I hate about each of my Fords:

My F150 doors do not unlock when I open my door. Countless times I find the passenger door locked and must walk around to driver side to unlock it (my keys stay in the ignition). My Fusion unlocks all doors when one is opened from inside.

My '11 Fusion is just about perfect, except the info screen offers all sorts of useless bits , but no outside temp gauge of any sort.

My Ranger has no way of turning off the interior light with the door open. I got pissed and ripped out the dome light, and clipped a flashlight to the visor.
 

Eddo Rogue

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 18, 2020
Messages
2,688
Reaction score
1,195
Points
113
Location
Burbank,CA
Vehicle Year
1993
Make / Model
Ranger 4x4
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
OHV
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Total Lift
skyjacker front leveling kit
Tire Size
31-10.50R15
My credo
Crossed threads are tight threads.
This is why fat people shouldn't be allowed to drive...
My fat friend had the driver seat replaced 3 times. Also the left shocks were replaced more often than the right. The truck still had a permanent lean. This was in a early y2k's GMC 1500
 

1990RangerinSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2016
Messages
2,043
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
Location
Saskatchewan, Canada
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
the zetec engine. the engine is solid and has behaved well. car is at 190k now. it drove from California to Wisconsin and back last summer. I crashed it once and damaged the frame rail a little bit but it still drives straight. My complaints on the focus are no access door to change the fuel pump (wtf!) , overall cheap plastic feeling to the interior (though nothing has broken yet), timing belt instead of chain, the AC fan resistor problem I mentioned earlier, plastic intake and valve covers, and how buried in the alternator is. Also not a fan of the flare fitting that I keep seeing on American cars power steering high pressure line (subaru has banjo bolts, much easier to deal with). All of these are design decisions that make for a less robust and serviceable product.
I liked having that engine, too. Although I can't really compare it to the other available engines (2.0 SPI and 2.3 Duratec). In the year that I had the car (bought with 50,000 miles, totalled at just over 55,000 miles), other than the suspension issue and the issues the car had when I bought it, it was a trouble free car. I put tires on it, I changed the oil, but that's it. I was REALLY disappointed when my wife totalled it. I preferred driving it over the 2003 Sunfire that we had at the same time (and for a couple of years after).
 

1990RangerinSK

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2016
Messages
2,043
Reaction score
1,048
Points
113
Location
Saskatchewan, Canada
Vehicle Year
1990
Make / Model
Ford Ranger
Engine Type
2.9 V6
Transmission
Automatic
2WD / 4WD
2WD
Seems newer vehicles are packed with technology that compensates for lazy, inattentive, or incompetent drivers. Backup cameras, Lane change assist, blind spot indicators, self parking....etc...
No. That technology is there because today's vehicles have blind spots (and bigger blind spots than the cars you would rather drive). They aren't there because drivers are lazy. They are there to make the car safer. Blind spot indicators warn you when somebody is in your blind spot (which you can't see when you look over your shoulder or in your mirror). Lane departure warnings alert you to the fact that you are moving out of your lane. Rear view cameras allow you to see what is in the huge blind spot created by your trunk lid (or truck box). Anti-Lock Brakes prevent your wheels from locking up so that you can still steer. Airbags prevent you from hitting parts of your vehicle in a crash. And seatbelts keep you in place during a crash. Oh, and the cross traffic alert warns you that there is cross traffic that you may not be able to see. The system that applies the brakes to avoid a crash (what do they call that?) responds faster than your reflexes can, to apply the brakes and avoid a collision.

I don't feel that I need any of those features. I've had a clean driving record for 16 years without them. But, if I had an opportunity to buy a car with all of that on it, I'd jump at it. It won't change the way I drive, I'll still shoulder check, tap the brake when I'm approaching somebody going slower than I am, watch for cross traffic, etc. But those safety features will alert me to something that I may have missed.
 

ThatOneGuy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2017
Messages
417
Reaction score
305
Points
63
Location
South sound
Vehicle Year
1983 1993
Make / Model
Ranger Explorer
Engine Type
4.0 V6
Engine Size
Explorer is 4.0 ranger is 2.3 soon to be 4.0
Transmission
Manual
2WD / 4WD
4WD
Tire Size
235/75/15
My credo
Let the universe take you where it will !!!
I don't know all those nanny tech add-ons just add future repairs in the thousands of dollars, but then again once I buy something I'm gonna keep it till it can no longer be repaired, unless I'm just not interested, in it any longer, no rust issues here, it's quite common to see nice examples of 50-70 year old cars here, and I want mine to get there as well.
 

Sponsored Ad


Sponsored Ad

Top