Duratec vs Vulcan - Taurus Car Club of America : Ford Taurus Forum
Register Home Forums Active Topics Topic Finder Photos Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Auto EscrowAuto Loans
TaurusClub.com is the premier Ford Taurus Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-25-2011, 03:49 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Member Number: 33735
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: mass
Chapter: Northeast
Drives: 2003 SE Vulcan
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 1
Trader Score: 0 reviews
Rep Power: 0
dickchiasson is an unknown quantity at this point
Default Duratec vs Vulcan

Which engine is better. I am buying a 06 Taurus
dickchiasson is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 01-25-2011, 04:07 PM   #2 (permalink)
Devoted Member
 
sable23's Avatar
 
Member Number: 15982
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Paynesville, MN
Chapter: Northern
Drives: 2000 Sable LS Premium with '04 power
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 2,123
Trader Score: 0 reviews
Rep Power: 18
sable23 will become famous soon enough
Default

the 06 taurus only had one engine available that was the vulcan... as for duratec compared to vulcan. i would say the vulcan is pretty bullet proof but has a few key issues with it (cam syncro, cooling system corrosion, etc.) the engine is a bit lower on power but get a bit better mileage than the duratec. the Duratec is also a good engine though, plenty of power and they can go for a very long time with regular maintenance. though the duratec is a larger engine and that makes it harder to work on. I love my duratec and would have a very hard time going back to a vulcan.
__________________
2000 Sable LS Premium "Dorothy" - Roush springs, FN-74 front brakes, Rear disc swap, SHO leather, 18's, Magnaflow exhaust, HIDs, and more.
2004 Volvo S60R 6-Speed Manual 300HP AWD - Beat and Broken.
2002 Cougar sport "Hello Cougar" - 3.0L Hybrid, Headers, Quaife, BAT suspension kit, Shaved hatch, and many more goodies.
1989 SHO, 1983 Ranger, 1997 Contour
sable23 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2011, 04:49 PM   #3 (permalink)
Member
 
Member Number: 6935
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kenosha, Wi
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 424
Trader Score: 0 reviews
Rep Power: 0
emb2580 has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Send a message via ICQ to emb2580 Send a message via AIM to emb2580 Send a message via MSN to emb2580 Send a message via Yahoo to emb2580
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sable23 View Post
though the duratec is a larger engine and that makes it harder to work on.
They have the same displacement (182 cubic inches, although some sources quote the 'tec as 181) It's really just the heads that are larger on the 'tec. Also, the Vulcan is all-iron whereas the Duratec is all-aluminum so it weighs less.
__________________
2003 Ranger XL Long bed, Vulcan, Auto trans. 52K. Black/Medium dark Flint (gray)
emb2580 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2011, 05:02 PM   #4 (permalink)
Devoted Member
 
sable23's Avatar
 
Member Number: 15982
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Paynesville, MN
Chapter: Northern
Drives: 2000 Sable LS Premium with '04 power
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 2,123
Trader Score: 0 reviews
Rep Power: 18
sable23 will become famous soon enough
Default

yes i was speaking in overall size not displacement.
__________________
2000 Sable LS Premium "Dorothy" - Roush springs, FN-74 front brakes, Rear disc swap, SHO leather, 18's, Magnaflow exhaust, HIDs, and more.
2004 Volvo S60R 6-Speed Manual 300HP AWD - Beat and Broken.
2002 Cougar sport "Hello Cougar" - 3.0L Hybrid, Headers, Quaife, BAT suspension kit, Shaved hatch, and many more goodies.
1989 SHO, 1983 Ranger, 1997 Contour
sable23 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2011, 07:35 PM   #5 (permalink)
Crazy Devoted Member
 
Member Number: 10865
Join Date: Dec 2006
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 12,898
Trader Score: 1 reviews
Rep Power: 54
sheila is a name known to allsheila is a name known to all
Default

Both are good engines. Like previously stated, you really dont have an option for 06, except for the flex fuel version of the vulcan. In 07, you dont even have that. The 3.0 tecs were last put in tauri in 05, but were used in the ford 500 for 3 yrs. (05-07).
sheila is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2011, 09:43 PM   #6 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Member Number: 33696
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Northeast
Chapter: Northeast
Drives: 2006 Taurus SEL Vulcan and a 2005 Taurus SE Vulcan
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 95
Trader Score: 0 reviews
Rep Power: 8
Benzin Bruder is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

I have an 05 SE.

Is there a specific number/letter in the VIN that will tell me what engine I have?

Thanks
Benzin Bruder is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2011, 10:05 PM   #7 (permalink)
Member
 
Member Number: 6935
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kenosha, Wi
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 424
Trader Score: 0 reviews
Rep Power: 0
emb2580 has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Send a message via ICQ to emb2580 Send a message via AIM to emb2580 Send a message via MSN to emb2580 Send a message via Yahoo to emb2580
Default

the 8th digit of the Vin is the engine code. U for Vulcan and I believe S for Duratec.
__________________
2003 Ranger XL Long bed, Vulcan, Auto trans. 52K. Black/Medium dark Flint (gray)
emb2580 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2011, 10:10 PM   #8 (permalink)
Crazy Devoted Member
 
durasel's Avatar
 
Member Number: 3580
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canton Michigan
Chapter: Midwest
Drives: 03 SEL Premium DOHC
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 5,131
Trader Score: 38 reviews
Rep Power: 33
durasel has a spectacular aura about
Default

The tecs get the same milage as the vulcans thanks to the dohc design.

I'm kind spoiled having the tec engines.

When Fusion time comes around, it'll be a tough decision between the 2.5 175 hp 4 cyl vs the DOHC 240 hp 3.0, especially with gas prices!!
__________________
4 Taur Family:
98 Comfort DOHC
00 SE
03 SEL Premium DOHC
04 SES Sport DOHC

2003 SEL Premium
Every available factory option
September 2009 Car of the Month

Dealing in Mach Audio Systems and Ford CD Changers for the last 10 years with perfect feedback. I'm happy to answer any/all questions.
I have many very satisfied club members!
durasel is online now   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 01-25-2011, 10:17 PM   #9 (permalink)
Cake monster

 
Member Number: 18214
Join Date: Mar 2009
Chapter: Northeast
Drives: none right now
Visit: My Garage
Posts: 1,581
Trader Score: 0 reviews
Rep Power: 18
JW657 is a jewel in the rough
Default

3.0 OHV love it or hate it?

There's a long debate about the OHV 3.0

Quote:
I think they could have addressed much more than the cam issue. Like this:

3.8 Essex

200 HP
230 TQ

52.63 HP/L
60.52 TQ/L

3.0 Vulcan

145 HP
170 TQ

48.33 HP/L
58.00 TQ/L

The Vulcan makes 4 less HP per litre and 2 less lb.ft as well. If the Vulcan had comparable power in terms of displacement to the Essex, it would have made around 160 HP and 182 lb.ft. GM's 60 Degree made that (more actually) at 3.1, so why couldn't Ford? The engine should have received a decent redesign like the Essex got. It didn't though and they kept it at 4-banger output levels. The Buick 3.8 made comparable power levels to an Essex, too.

We should have a way better engine than we do. They should have made the heads a little thicker while they were at it. This engine was neglected. The Vulcan didn't even compete with domestic offerings:

Chrysler OHV 3.3 V6:

160 HP
203 lb.ft

GM 60 Degree 3.1:

160 HP
185 lb·ft

Ford Vulcan 3.0

144 HP
174 lb.ft

It gets even worse for the 4th gen. I'm still incredibly amazed as to why they even tried putting it in the windstar, the MPG rating was worse than an engine that displaced another .8 litres and made a ton more power too.

I have some ideas as to why they screwed up the engines in the 3rd gen so badly:

Ford SHO V8 engine

It made 235 hp and 230 lb·ft, just 35 more HP than the 3.8 would have made. It matches the lf.ft rating and does it at a lower RPM range. I think this is a big reason for them not continuing the Essex engine in the Taurus, it would have made the SHO seem worthless.

The head gasket issues probably didn't help with the situation.

The 3rd gen SHO should have never been. Not to offend anyone, but it really shouldn't. They should have just stuck one of their then current mustang engines, the 3.8 Essex or the 4.6 Modular. It would have been way more fun in my opinion to be able to go and buy add ons that are made for Mustang owners. If they did that then we could easily piggy back off the after market for the Mustang. A supercharged, 3.8 Taurus? Is it better than a SHO V8? I would guess that it is.
^^ that's what I think about the Vulcan.
__________________
I love cake. I AM THE CAKE BOSS!

JW657 is offline   Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Taurus Car Club of America : Ford Taurus Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:52 PM.



Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2