What's new
By:
Ram Heavy Duty Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

3.0 twin turbo Hurricane motor

WXman said:
Except for the ones that aren't. The Jeep 4.0 for example. Terrible fuel economy, oil leaks galore, crank sensor failures, heads cracking between #2 and #3 cylinder, gasket failures, etc. etc. I guess the Cummins has been overall very good. Can't really think of any other I-6 engines that have been great. Maybe Mercedes had a couple back in the old days.
Click to expand...

You're one of the few people I've ever seen bash the 4.0 as problematic. It's nothing for those to run 200k-300k with minimal maintenance.
 
Docwagon1776 said:
You're one of the few people I've ever seen bash the 4.0 as problematic. It's nothing for those to run 200k-300k with minimal maintenance.
Click to expand...
Only issues they had was the rear main seal leak and maybe a head gasket but usually only when they got over heated.
 
WXman said:
Except for the ones that aren't. The Jeep 4.0 for example. Terrible fuel economy, oil leaks galore, crank sensor failures, heads cracking between #2 and #3 cylinder, gasket failures, etc. etc. I guess the Cummins has been overall very good. Can't really think of any other I-6 engines that have been great. Maybe Mercedes had a couple back in the old days.
Click to expand...
Im not sure what you are smoking but the 4.0L in the jeeps were great before the 03 change up. The ford 300 straight 6 the GM 258 the AMC 258 the dodge 225 slant 6. Hell even the old pontiac I8 was a great engine. The list of great I6 engines far out number the one or 2 bad ones… and have you ever noticed the trucking industry is almost all inline engines? There is a huge reason for it RELIABILITY!
 
BamaOEF said:
dont forget about the GM 4.2 Atlas. Great engine, lousy MPG. Had one in a 05 Trailblazer. Smooth runner but only got about 15 MPG city, 18 Hwy.
From the web.
The 4.2-liter Atlas LL8, otherwise called the Vortec 4200, was a groundbreaking engine for GM. It featured an all-aluminum construction, dual overhead cams with variable valve timing on the exhaust side, four valves per cylinder, a coil-on-plug ignition system, a high compression ratio of 10:1, and its cylinder heads featured GM’s then-prevalent “Vortec” engineering designed to maximize airflow.

This combination allowed for the production of 1.06 horsepower per cubic inch – a total of 270 horsepower at 6,000 rpm. Torque was rated at 275 pound-feet at 3,600 rpm, but 90 percent of peak torque was available between 1,600 and 5,600 rpm. These stats far exceeded every comparable V-6 on the market at the time, including GM’s own 4.3-liter Vortec V-6.
Click to expand...
The 4.2 was the only good thing about those trail blazers lol
 
Docwagon1776 said:
You're one of the few people I've ever seen bash the 4.0 as problematic. It's nothing for those to run 200k-300k with minimal maintenance.
Click to expand...

Show me a 4.0 that isn't covered in oil. I'll wait.

The only reason the 4.0 was considered good back in the 90s is because the junk Ford and GM were using was worse.

I had the misfortune of working on the old 4.0s back in the day. What a nightmare. Had one in particular that WOULD NOT run correctly no matter what we did to it. New head, new sensors, complete timing, fuel system, it ended up almost new and still wouldn't run correctly.
 
WXman said:
Show me a 4.0 that isn't covered in oil. I'll wait.

The only reason the 4.0 was considered good back in the 90s is because the junk Ford and GM were using was worse.
Click to expand...
My 4.0L never leaked a drop of oil except when the valve cover gasket leaked but a 30 min swap to replace the gasket and no more leaks. The only ones that were coated in oil were the ones that were not maintained same goes for the cummins engines.
 
WXman said:
Show me a 4.0 that isn't covered in oil. I'll wait.

The only reason the 4.0 was considered good back in the 90s is because the junk Ford and GM were using was worse.

I had the misfortune of working on the old 4.0s back in the day. What a nightmare. Had one in particular that WOULD NOT run correctly no matter what we did to it. New head, new sensors, complete timing, fuel system, it ended up almost new and still wouldn't run correctly.
Click to expand...
You can say that about anything thats not maintained. Oil seals will fail over time. Ive owned no less than probably 15 4.0s in several different Jeeps, a quick valve cover or even oil pan gasket and its good to go. So many are misdiagnosed as rear main seals but its just a **** install on the oil pan gasket. I even had one running with a bad lifter and cam lobe. Had another one running with muddy water as coolant hahaha. Beat the **** out of them and they still ran.
 
WXman said:
Show me a 4.0 that isn't covered in oil. I'll wait.

The only reason the 4.0 was considered good back in the 90s is because the junk Ford and GM were using was worse.

I had the misfortune of working on the old 4.0s back in the day. What a nightmare. Had one in particular that WOULD NOT run correctly no matter what we did to it. New head, new sensors, complete timing, fuel system, it ended up almost new and still wouldn't run correctly.
Click to expand...
You're the first I've heard say something like that. Gimme one of the late 4.0's with the nice coil rail and I'm a happy camper. Sure things can go wrong - I had an 02 Grand Cherokee that developed a light tick that one day sitting at a light developed into a heavier tick. Ended up pulling the head and oil pan off to push the slugs out and found #4 with a cracked piston skirt. Cylinders still looked ok so I just ball honed them, installed new pistons, rings, rod bearings, lifters and associated gaskets and the thing is still running fine 70k later (had like 260k on it when I sold it). Never burned a drop of oil. Super easy tractor engine IMO and I'd rather have it over many modern engines.

E62B9DA7-6F95-4B92-A514-76798AF95FB8.jpeg7236760C-3D2E-4C6F-A066-10D1362EF6BC.jpeg
CAFC03C0-5C6D-4D80-8F56-18420A1C504F.jpeg
 
Poolmonkey said:
lol….never. Thought I would stay in a newish Raptor as long as they made them, nope.
It’s hilarious when my buddy hooks the travel trailer to his Ford with a six.
Click to expand...

I had a 2011 F150 with the 3.5l EcoBoost v6 that would out-tow any big block from the 90s and early 2000's.

Power is not at all their problem.
 
pizzatots said:
If the 6.4 is discontinued for an I6, maybe we'll finally be lauded for "high resale" in the HEMI club ;)
Click to expand...

Doubtful.

The Mopar "hemi" was originally just a copy of GM's LS platform. There are so many of them out there, and they have so little redeeming quality separating them from their competition, that high resale is very unlikely.
 
gimmie11s said:
I had a 2011 F150 with the 3.5l EcoBoost v6 that would out-tow any big block from the 90s and early 2000's.

Power is not at all their problem.
Click to expand...

Ha…doing 50 trying to prevent running out of gas isn’t what I’d call out-towing. He barely makes it from stop to stop.
 
Poolmonkey said:
Ha…doing 50 trying to prevent running out of gas isn’t what I’d call out-towing. He barely makes it from stop to stop.
Click to expand...

Seems you've never towed with one.

That little 3.5 would put a vortec 454 to shame. Ive owned both and towed back to back with the same trailer.
 
gimmie11s said:
Seems you've never towed with one.

That little 3.5 would put a vortec 454 to shame. Ive owned both and towed back to back with the same trailer.
Click to expand...
I also had a 3.5 ecoboost F150, and it was one stupid quick truck! However, I didn't tow with it, mainly because I can't stand towing with a half ton, suspensions and tires are too soft
 
The 454 would last longer, and doing a waterpump on a 3.5 is a joke
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top