I'd like to see that..... Those car had what....180HP?? EDIT: I read down the page and found your stroker comment.
No, that's not true. From day one, the Ranger is all Ford (though they contracted the 5-speed trans to Mazda), the later Mazda pickup is a rebadged Ranger. The 626 and Taurus share nothing. Vast majority of FWD cars had Chrysler engines (2.2, 2.5, 3.3, 3., only the minivans got the Mitsubishi 2.6 and 3.0's in large numbers (a few higher-end cars got the 3.0 V6, a handful of cars got the 2.6 in the late 80's).
Sorry Jarlaxle, but you are incorrect. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Ranger. I was incorrect about the Mazda, and apologize for it.As for the Mitsubishi engines in Chrysler. Again, you are incorrect.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Chrysler_engines
The Ranger is a Ford. The Courier was a Mazda...buf not the Ranger. It used the old Pinto engine & Ford's German-designed V6. It used the TTB front end on 4WD trucks, a Forc exclusive. Mazda sold their trucks at the same time...the B2000/2200/2600 share NOTHING with the Ranger. The later B2300/2500/3000/4000 are 100% Ford, being rebadged Rangers.
I've worked on Mazda engines that were factory in both the Ranger and the Bronco II. My cousin in law has been a line mechanic for Ford for 30 years. The design was Ford but other than the little Pinto motor you mention, most of the drivelines were Mazda or Mazda based. Even the first 3.0 v6 Ford put in the Taurus was a Mazda based engine. It wasn't uncommon in that time period for all US makers to use Japanese drivelines in their bodies, as none really had a strong small engine program at the time. Please read the link.
Well for instance the Geo Metro had a Japanese made engine, so those are one of the few American cars that can go the distance with the same engine. But to make it more specific, any American engine that can go over 100,000 is generally not possible. Exceptions can be made if the owner is meticulous about changing oil at exactly the right time, and not driving the car hard. But generally Japanese engines will give you 200 plus miles on it, that is proven.
That used to be true, but not anymore. My 94 Cavalier with an all GM motor has 220,000 on it and runs great. The American companies have caught up with their foreign counterparts when it comes to longevity.
Not that I'm aware of. As long as you don't overheat them, the little 2.2 engines are nearly indestructible. And my grandparents old 65 Ford Custom with a 289 went nearly 250k before it gave up. And it had nothing except a set of valve cover gaskets outside regular maintenance. Granted it was probably an anomalously, but the dependability of American cars has increased greatly over the last decade or so.
The Geo Metro was a rebadged Suzuki Swift, built in Canada. The engine actually isn't that good...in addition to being VERY underpowered and raucous, it tends to pop head gaskets. Police cruisers & taxicabs lead some of the harshest lives around...and 300,000+ miles is VERY common. I drove a livery Town Car with 585,000 miles...had no problem running 80MPH with four people aboard. 300,000+ on a wrecker is also common...they can wind up 75-80K in a year. And, of course, some go even longer than that!
Not as unusual as you think...many engines were neglected to death. Just in my family, I recall... 1971 Chrysler T&C, 440 TNT, ~190,000 miles. (Grandmother's car, Sold) 1988 Dodge Dakota, TBI 3.9, 305,000 miles (Uncle's truck, engine pulled, truck turned into hot rod) 1972 Plymouth Satellite Custom, 318, 290,000 miles (Grandmother's car, sold due to rust...found, body restored, still going.) 1987 Dodge Omni, TBI 2.2, 285,000 miles. (Mother's car, sold due to not having A/C, hit a month later.) 1993 Chrysler Concorde, 3.5 V6, 260,000+ miles (Stepfather's car, passed down to brother, who sold it to one of his platoon mates. Still running with 280K as of 2 years ago.) 2003 Concorde 3.5 V6, ~190,0000 miles. (Stepfather's car, still going.) 1978 Ford Mustang II Ghia, 2.3, 230,000 miles. (Mother's car...junked when the clutch went out, car was very rusty & not worth a new clutch.) 1971 Plymouth Fury II, slant 6, odometer showed ~170,000 miles, but stopped nine years before the car did...easily 250K and probably more. (Stepfather's car, rotted out.) 1977 Mercury Cougar XR7, 351M, 160,000 miles (Mine, sold.) 1989 Olds Custom Cruiser, 307 Olds, 240,000 miles (Mine, sold.) One Liz towed a couple months ago: Mid-90's Buick Century station wagon, over 380,000 miles. (Taxicab, wrecked.)
Given the millions of vehicles on the road, It's not surprising Jaraxle. My last Rambler, a 1962 with a straight 6, 3 on the tree with OD went 170,000 before it went down for good. Actually, I read a report once that showed vehicles built on Mondays and Fridays have a shorter life span than those built in the middle of the week.
Again, the Ranger engines had zero Mazda DNA. The 2.3 and 2.5 were based on the old Pinto engine (usually called the "Lima"), the later 4-bangers were the Ford-Europe Duratec. The 2.9's and 4.0's were the Cologne V6. The 3.0 V6, though Mazda used them, was Ford's Vulcan V6 (the base Taurus engine). No Mazda power to be seen!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_MZR_engine MZR is the brand name of a generation of Straight-4 engines engineered and built by the Mazda Motor Corporation between 2001 and 2011. The MZR generation includes gasoline and diesel powered engines ranging in displacements from 1.3L to 2.5L. All gasoline-powered MZRs feature an all-aluminum block construction with iron cylinder liners. The diesel MZR-CD engines use a cast-iron block (virtually identical to the Mazda F engine) and an aluminum cylinder head. There are three specific engine families within the MZR which include: the small 1.3L to 1.6L Mazda Z-engine, the mid-sized 1.8L to 2.5L Mazda L-engine, and the 2.0L and 2.2L common-rail diesel Mazda R-engine. Each engine has its own engine code and for accuracy should be identified with such. The DISI turbocharged MZR L3-VDT was on the Ward's 10 Best Engines list for 3 consecutive years for 2006, 2007 and 2008. The Ford Motor Company owns rights to build and use the MZR generation of engines under their Duratec brand name for global service in its vehicles since 2003. As of 2011, Mazda discontinued development of the MZR generation of engines to be replaced by their new SkyActiv generation of engines. Ford continues to develop and manufacture variants of the Z-engine and L-engine for their Duratec and EcoBoost four-cylinder engines. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_L_engine 2.5L (L5-VE) Introduced in non-North American markets for the MY2008 and North American markets for MY2009, the 2.5L L5-VE is an updated, bored and stroked version of the L3-VE 2.3L. The 2.5L (2488 cc) L5 engine has an 89.0 mm (3.50 in) bore and a 100.0 mm (3.94 in) stroke, with a compression ratio of 9.7:1. The standard crankshaft is forged-steel with eight counterweights like the turbocharged DISI 2.3L L3-VDT. To increase durability of the bore, Mazda uses a 4340 steel-molybdenum alloy material for the cylinder liners. This offers enhanced high-heat tolerance as well as reduced friction. The increased stroke of 100 mm (3.9 in), up from 94 mm (3.7 in) of the L3, allows a taller (numerically lower) final-drive ratio resulting in lower-rpm while cruising to increase fuel economy. It produces 170 bhp (127 kW; 172 PS) at its 6000 rpm redline (168 bhp in PZEV trim) and 167 lb·ft (226 N·m) of torque at 4000 rpm (166 lb·ft in PZEV trim). EPA fuel economy estimates for the US market are 21 city/30 highway for the all-new 2009 Mazda6 equipped with the 5-speed automatic transaxle. 6-speed manual versions of the same car achieve 1 fewer mpg in the same EPA city/highway tests (20/29). Ford has developed an Atkinson cycle variant of the Mazda L5 engine for use in the Ford Fusion Hybrid vehicle. The Atkinson cycle engine was named one of Ward's 10 Best Engines for 2010. Applications: 2008- Mazda Atenza/Mazda6 (non-North America) 2009- Mazda6 (North America) 2009- Mazda Tribute 2010- * Mazda Axela/Mazda3 2011- * Ford Ranger
I bought a 2012 Jeep Wrangler .. besides the great engine power /transmission improvement it was a piece of crap. Front drive axle had to be replaced at 5k miles, driver door fixed at 7k, passenger door fixed at 8.5k, rear door fixed at 10.5k , navigation system malfunction at 11.2k .. and that was all she wrote.. back to the glue factory.
I'm not surprised by the results. American car makers have done a very good job improving quality. Of course the Japanese haven't stood still, hence the top score for Lexus. As for European automakers they've been struggling. Even BMW has had trouble in the past few years. As for the UK they've never managed to do an adequate job screwing stuff together. Land Rover is especially notorious as troublesome and expensive to maintain.
Ford and Mazda had an integrated motor program for many years. Just as the other 2 of the "Big Three" did with Japanese companies. It's hard to keep track of what was in what during those times. Even the consolidation of American companies caused identification problems.
Basically, Ford contracted it to Mazda...the only Mazda that transmission was ever used in were rebadged Fords.
I don't think you're right about the Taurus v-6. It would have been unusual for any Japanese company to develop a pushrod v-6, the design favored by American companies at the time. True the SHO used a Yamaha design, but that was a specialty car.
God and goddess, this is like talking to a wall...there was no, repeat NO Mazda in the 3.0 Vulcan! It was a clean-sheet design from FORD!
yet if you watch BBC's Top Gear the Land Rover wins all their challenges, I highly suspect the challenges are rigged, and they never do long term reliability tests...around here they're notoriously unreliable, continually in the shop and horribly expensive...when you watch the evening news and there's a film from some far off remote desert or jungle location invariably you'll see a Toyota land cruiser, CJ or pickup of some sort...
You did. " Even the first 3.0 v6 Ford put in the Taurus was a Mazda based engine." The 3.0 Taurus V6 is the Vulcan engine.
