Taurus Car Club of America : Ford Taurus Forum banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
509 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Well, I was returning from getting some food for my various lizards, when I pulled next to a caddy with a lady in it who is 40-50 years old.. I had 2 of my friends in my car, so I decided to goof off and race her (with out her knowing it
)

Well, I revved my engine, looked at her, and winked. She kinda sighed.. So then the light turned green, and I gun it, only to hear another cars wheels sqeeling aswell.. I look over, and this lady istring to keep up with me.. Then I get ahead of her, and come to another red light.. Then I look over, and I see her laughing her a** off and smiling at me.. Then the light turned green, she waved to me, and we went our sepperate ways..

Man, me and my friends were laughing ALOT!

That was cool.. I dont know if she was GUNNING it though, because it is a Caddy, and I am thinking that they are faster than a Vulcan FF.. but what car isnt faster than a Vulcan?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,493 Posts
what kind of caddy? Some do have have the 300hp northstar
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
Yeah Caddy's before the Northstar were not very quick at all. Lol, anyone remember the Cadillac Cimmaron, aka the Cadillac Cavalier. Some world standard. What a joke. I do like newer Caddies though.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,493 Posts
the fwd 4.9 is no dog
and the 94-96 big body fleetwoods had the LT1 in them, and the 87-93 could either have the 307 or the 350
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
QUOTE
the 87-93 could either have the 307 or the 350[/b]
The 307 was made until 1990. In 1990 Most of the Big RWD Fleetwood's had the 350 TBI by then.

Ahhh... The good old 307 Olds..... WHAT THE HELL WERE THEY THINKING?!?!?! A $30,000+ car for 1987-1990 and the standard engine was a Olds 307 with a Rochester Electronic QuadraJet!!!

Two Words FUEL INJECTION.

I can't believe somebody would actually buy one of those cars in 1990 with a 307 in it. It's a good engine, I had one in my Olds Ninety-Eight, but the only way to do a burnout is to put the bumper against a brick wall and hit the gas.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,963 Posts
The Olds 307 was a pathetic motor. My friend has one in her Caprice, and that darn thing is slower than an old Camry. Could have fooled me that it was a V-8. Only way I know that is the horrible gas mileage.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,493 Posts
yea when the body style changed they drop the 307 and just had the 350 then in 94 it was the lt1
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
549 Posts
Let's not forget their 4.1 liter "high technology" V8 that was more notorious for blowing up than the Essex, and the troublesome V-8-6-4 and diesels of earlier days.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,493 Posts
but at lease you could prevent it by putting them stop leak pills in there. not the autozones ones, the ones you get from the dealer.

With the 8-6-4 you could turn it off by pulling the two wires from the tranny
The 8-6-4 was a good system ahead of its time. The problem the system had was turning the back on after they were turned off.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,963 Posts
Originally posted by RocketFast321@Apr 12 2004, 03:09 PM
but at lease you could prevent it by putting them stop leak pills in there. not the autozones ones, the ones you get from the dealer.

With the 8-6-4 you could turn it off by pulling the two wires from the tranny
The 8-6-4 was a good system ahead of its time. The problem the system had was turning the back on after they were turned off.
Turning back on is a pretty big problem to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
The 307 was very reliable as an engine, the Rochester Electronic Q-jet was the problem. If it worked, great, if not... Pushin' time Baby!!! And the HP/TQ numbers were GARBAGE, as well as Fuel Mileage.

The Caddy 4.1 was a crap shoot every time you turned the key to start. Those motors usually had Catastrophic Failures that required engine replacements, not just head gaskets or what not.

The Caddy 8-6-4 was a great design on paper, however the technology just didn't match up. It was called the 8-6-what for a long time, because you never knew how many cylinders that the car would run on, 4,3,5, or sometimes none.

Last and certainly least was the Olds 350 Diesel. Good Fuel economy, but that was it. This motor was the biggest POS that GM ever designed. The whole lets take a 350 gas motor and make it a Diesel. Not one US maker has designed a Diesel for a car since then. It's nickname, the Expode-a-tron!!!

They also made a 6 cylinder diesel, which was still a POS, but just less of a POS than the 350.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Originally posted by JJ57@Apr 13 2004, 07:53 AM
The 307 was very reliable as an engine, the Rochester Electronic Q-jet was the problem. If it worked, great, if not... Pushin' time Baby!!! And the HP/TQ numbers were GARBAGE, as well as Fuel Mileage.

The Caddy 4.1 was a crap shoot every time you turned the key to start. Those motors usually had Catastrophic Failures that required engine replacements, not just head gaskets or what not.

The Caddy 8-6-4 was a great design on paper, however the technology just didn't match up. It was called the 8-6-what for a long time, because you never knew how many cylinders that the car would run on, 4,3,5, or sometimes none.

Last and certainly least was the Olds 350 Diesel. Good Fuel economy, but that was it. This motor was the biggest POS that GM ever designed. The whole lets take a 350 gas motor and make it a Diesel. Not one US maker has designed a Diesel for a car since then. It's nickname, the Expode-a-tron!!!

They also made a 6 cylinder diesel, which was still a POS, but just less of a POS than the 350.
I sense anger....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,963 Posts
Originally posted by Blue Vulcan+Apr 13 2004, 03:39 PM-->QUOTE (Blue Vulcan @ Apr 13 2004, 03:39 PM)
<!--QuoteBegin-JJ57
@Apr 13 2004, 07:53 AM
The 307 was very reliable as an engine, the Rochester Electronic Q-jet was the problem.  If it worked, great, if not...  Pushin' time Baby!!!  And the HP/TQ numbers were GARBAGE, as well as Fuel Mileage. 

The Caddy 4.1 was a crap shoot every time you turned the key to start.  Those motors usually had Catastrophic Failures that required engine replacements, not just head gaskets or what not. 

The Caddy 8-6-4 was a great design on paper, however the technology just didn't match up.  It was called the 8-6-what for a long time, because you never knew how many cylinders that the car would run on,  4,3,5, or sometimes none.

Last and certainly least was the Olds 350 Diesel.  Good Fuel economy, but that was it.  This motor was the biggest POS that GM ever designed.  The whole lets take a 350 gas motor and make it a Diesel.  Not one US maker has designed a Diesel for a car since then.  It's nickname, the Expode-a-tron!!! 

They also made a 6 cylinder diesel, which was still a POS, but just less of a POS than the 350.
I sense anger.... [/b]
I sense truth.


I am in the same boat. I had more than one GM strand me and my family, and the Buick was the last straw. Honestly, should an engine explode at 5K miles? Should water pumps go out every 5K miles? I thought the Taurus had problems...at least it's a nice car to drive when it runs.

Olds 307 follows the Vulcan principle. Make no power, make no engine damage. Of course, the Vulcan gets good mileage at least.


Oh yes, and I will never forgive GM for making America turn their noses up at diesel engines in cars. My next car might be a TDI Jetta. I hate VWs with a passion, but that mileage is amazing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
Originally posted by Majisto@Apr 13 2004, 04:43 PM
I sense truth.


I am in the same boat. I had more than one GM strand me and my family, and the Buick was the last straw. Honestly, should an engine explode at 5K miles? Should water pumps go out every 5K miles? I thought the Taurus had problems...at least it's a nice car to drive when it runs.

Olds 307 follows the Vulcan principle. Make no power, make no engine damage. Of course, the Vulcan gets good mileage at least.


Oh yes, and I will never forgive GM for making America turn their noses up at diesel engines in cars. My next car might be a TDI Jetta. I hate VWs with a passion, but that mileage is amazing.
I've owned several GM cars and by far the best engine I've ever had was a Buick 350. The quadrajet, of course, was just stupid.....but the engine and tranny were utterly bulletproof and it produced GOBS of torque.

The 5.0L in my old Mustang comes a second close...only because I didn't own it long enough to put enough mileage on it to see how long it would stay bulletproof (to say 6000 RPM?).

By far the worst engine I've ever had was the 2.5L "Iron Duke" as its called. That old "Tech 4" Chevy engine. It was in an '85 Olds Calais and while it was an extremely well riding and nice little car with good gas mileage.....the engine left me stranded TWICE because of dropped (read: NO) oil pressure.

GM isn't the worst car company they're just too big and corporate for their own good. They have too many chiefs and their indians are overpaid (stoopid unions). This doesn't mean that every GM is crap. Ever outrun a Viper in a 455 equipped 80 Trans Am that doesn't look or sound like it would? Its *VERY* satisfying.


I agree with the less power/more reliability thing in both companies. Unfortunately it is also a fact of life for some engines as they see fit....though Ford's engines are usually pretty stoutly made to begin with. Also my Vulcan gets just as good mileage as my mom's 2.5L equipped Altima. In case you didn't know...the Altima is about 600 lbs lighter and the engine is a 4 banger. Pretty darn good for a heavy six if you ask me.

I don't think GM is to blame for us lacking diesel power. It never stopped Dodge and Ford from putting them in their trucks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
411 Posts
As said before, the 307 was like the vulcan, not much power, but reliable. The Quadrajets were in constant need of care. The Electronic Q-jets were even worse than that.

GM has a "Limp Home mode" on all the CCC or Fuel Injection cars. But with the Electronic Q-jet, it is more like "crawl home mode."

My old 307 Powered Olds Ninety-Eight never did let me down, slow, bad on gas, but it always got me home.

Electronic Carbs.... What the F**K Were They Thinking?!?!?!?!?
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top