3.0 OHV love it or hate it?
- Status
1 - 20 of 195 Posts
With the small about of work I've put into my Vulcan, it's performance is now acceptable. I do have the mindset that it's more fun to get a lower powered car to perform and do work because it's more fufilling and rewarding when a doggish car put a smile on your face.
Joined
·
12 Posts
Both Tauri that ive owned came equipped with the vulcan. Yes, i do believe that they are underpowered for the chassis but at least Ford offered the duratec. With proper maintanance either one could last just as long as the other, but i do like the fact that the vulcan is simpler to work on, as far as engine design and space in the engine compartment.
But hey, im a GM fan...PuShRoD pOwAh!!!
But hey, im a GM fan...PuShRoD pOwAh!!!
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
I owned 3 Vulcans before I got a 'Tec. They are a lot easier to work on, but after driving a Duratec for a while, I'm hooked. Those extra 55 horses make a Taurus a completely different animal!
Joined
·
5,895 Posts
Very reliable, easy to work on. If you want more power you have the option of the tec motor.
Joined
·
7,306 Posts
I'm really indifferent, it is adequate for what I need. It's going outlast the car ... oh wait, it already has.
There are some on this forum who claim to get 35mpg from their Vulcan. I can only laugh hysterically at them.
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Yay, the good old 3L OHV--on Gen1 Taurus! Almost bulletproof for wear and tear and usually outlasted the lousey Gen1 bodies which rusted out under the paint. Those motors were low output but long lived. Today, you can get motors giving 140 HP from 2L 4 Bangers! But the good old 3L Ford V6 was a workhorse and Ive seen many in U-Pulls with over 200,000 miles.
Joined
·
56 Posts
That's just it. After all the yrs. of using this archaic application, including the whole lineup of products that have been around for so/too long w/o any upgrades or improvements, there is no excuse for them to be anything but near-perfect. But nooo, they have to wring every last dime outta them, the greedy SOB-s. And they are suddenly surprised when other marks are eating their lunch. And I don't mean that Fomoco ain't the only one.
Yep, and coincidently, it's just the opposite with the GM 3.1/3.8, LOL.
Joined
·
1,013 Posts
Underpowered, but bulletproof.
Joined
·
1,392 Posts
On my 2'nd Vulcan Taurus. Most 4cyl cars have more power than this ancent v6 from the mid 80's, of which somehow found it's way into a 2007 car, in addition to some SE's still having a "tape player" as standard in the 2000's. They do last a long time, and being a pushrod engine, take up less space so they're easier to work on. I might replace mine with a 148hp 2.0 liter 4cyl Mazda3 this spring, or just keep my Taurus til the ax4n bites the dust (car not worth enough to justify a rebuild). I'm getting tired of this car, as it's too outdated for me. Wasn't this the very last car Ford made that still used a pushrod engine?
Joined
·
2,426 Posts
Wait too long on a CPS replacement and see how bulletproof one is....
I supose that the automotive engineers at Ford had to keep MPG in mind. The old Gen1 was pretty reasonable on gas and would run forever. Think back at those V8's from the 60's and 70's pathetic horsepower and 15 MPG A typical 1980's V8 with 6 liters was abominable and under 200 HP. Atrocious performance but so nice and "Torqey" nice hiway boats and 2 tons of iron to watch go rusty and they were so cheap at the time--mass produced junk when gas was 50 cents a gallon.
I forgot to mention that the Detroit (and elsewhere) factories had to pay $30 an hour to unionised boneheads to put the lugnuts on! So, the laid-off workers would have to go out and scrimp and save to buy a beat-up Kia and put more Americans out of a job!
1 - 20 of 195 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
