Fox T-Bird/Cougar Forums

We had a vehicle traded in at work last week, and as I'm looking at it, it became clear why GM went bankrupt (actually, it was clear long ago, but this moment just reminded me). As any mechanic can tell you, the quality record of the van shown in the pic (GM U-van) is horrible.  I'm not talking about the quality here, though, I'm talking about the looks. These are basically Venture/Montana vans that nobody was buying, so GM grafted an SUV-style front end onto them in an effort to trick people into buying them (people were buying SUV's, after all, not minivans).

The results were horrible. Just look at the proportions of the front end of this thing. It looks like it had an allergic reaction to a giant bee sting. The front wheel looks like it's about 6" too close to the door. And if you'd even been under the hood of one (I pity you), you can see that GM obviously made zero changes to the structure of the thing. They simply bolted a molded plastic support onto the old Venture van and bolted that really ugly nose job onto it.

GM should have had to, as part of their bankruptcy, send every single purchaser of these things a letter of deepest apology. I mean the Aztek was ugly, yeah, but at least it was ugly to be different. These things were ugly in a weak attempt at conforming. Shame, GM, shame...

I've seen 'em around, and I too have noticed the proportioning (or glaring lack thereof) in these POS's.

I daresay the mechanicals aren't changed? Nothing like having to reach over 3 feet of plastic to do simple engine maintenance.

If ever there was a fitting example of "10 pounds of shiznit in a 5 pound bag" that pictured above would be it.

Not because of the cars and trucks they build. The finance end went bankrupt. The car side does very well. The Government made GM make loans that were not solvent and that destroyed our economy a couple years back. GM builds dam good cars. Their is an old saying!!!! GOD TOUCHED THE LS MOTORS!!!


(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/573F7A22-514C-441D-9A1C-CA82E82FA6CE-4419-0000021BC9F928CD.jpg)

Tom, all due respect...the government didn't have jack shiznit to do with gm's bankruptcy....for that matter, they're  near bankrupt again AFTER a loan or 2.

And there's plenty of unaltered video footage of '12 Stangs smoking NEW LSshaging whatever engines.

Go troll your GM shiznit on some chevy board, if there's any left that you've not been kicked off of. I'm for one sick of seeing or hearing chevy this, LS that in every other thread you've posted in...especially one that has nothing to do with the ed engine in the first place.

Besides, maybe the glaring similarities between the LS engines and the Ford's windsor from years ago make your blood boil, no? Word has it GM had a little Yates help on some cylinder head design...seems ole Robert borrowed a page from Ford...

And if that isn't enough, why did GM change their firing order to be the same as Ford?

Now, just how does that make you feel?

Edit, I just figured out why the LS is called..the "LS".
It stand for Legally Stolen.

My boss just bought a Chevy version of this van as a beater. It is just awful. Not in reliability but in looks.

The post office bought a bunch of these Chevy vans to replace the old mail trucks. They still use them, at least around here. The funny thing is that besides my boss's van I've never seen one of these privately owned.

For myself, I've just never cared for GM's styling. It's just one of those subjective things that's hard to put a finger on.

My take on their troubles is simplistic--too much money going out and not enough coming in. There's an emotional aspect to cars, of course (which is why we're all here), but dollars and cents do count for a lot. I remember an article I once read about the model year Explorer I bought. It doesn't have "flash", but it has what counts--easy-on-the-eyes styling, well-thought-out ease of use, and no real deficiencies. It had the best brakes in its class, but otherwise it basically does what it's supposed to do very well without getting in your way, and without costing a fortune. "You'll have trouble finding it in a parking lot," it pointed out, but that's a testament to how it hit the sweet spot between all the issues involved. Simply put, it gives the customer what they want, at the right price point to be sustainable from a business perspective. Somewhere I think GM forgot that. They need to realize that they're competing for business against a whole host of companies, each of which is trying their own strategy at balancing costs vs. offering what best fits their customers' needs.

GM is far from alone in this. The 2002-2005 T-Bird is an example of a similar debacle. It's a neat car--my dad has an '05 in the driveway, but it was overpriced from the jump and was inherently limited to a tiny market. It was doomed from the start. Neat car, yes, but it doesn't do a company any good if it doesn't sell.

I know, the elephant in the room is the Volt. If I was on the board of directors I'd propose killing that white elephant tomorrow, but then again my philosophy is that a company's first duty is to survive, and I don't see the Volt doing that for them (how the heck are you supposed to use a plug-in when you park in the street???). I guess the designers don't have teenage punks with nasty streaks in their neighborhoods).

GM has astronomical costs. Their first and last rule must be, "It has to sell". Otherwise any discussion of a product offering is just academic. If they built the Volt in Mexico (or heck, if they built it in Huntsville) then such an expensive experiment might make a tiny bit more sense (bh virtue of making the experiment less expensive). The way they did it, though, makes no sense to me.

When Airbus announced the double-decker A380, my first reaction was to turn to my dad and ask, "are they out of their minds?" The plane is "cool", big, and a leap in size, and there is no market in the world that can keep such an aircraft consistently filled to justify buying them. Like GM, they forgot the golden rule of business: "is there a market for this?" In other words, "will it sell enough to justify it?"

For the Blazer, and the Cavalier, the answer was "yes". For many other vehicles, it isn't. If they're going to insist on operating in a high-cost environment like Michigan, then they must concentrate on creating saleable products even more to compensate for it.

Go troll your GM shiznit on some chevy board, if there's any left that you've not been kicked off of. I'm for one sick of seeing or hearing chevy this, LS that in every other thread you've posted in...especially one that has nothing to do with the ed engine in the first place.

Just curious what GM forum was i thrown off ????

If you take the 351 and late-5.0L Ford firing order and renumber the cylinders like a Chevy, the firing order is 1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3. That's the same as the Chevy Gen III and IV (LS-series) V-8s.

GM LS V8 engines and Ford Modular V8s have an identical firing pattern despite having a different firing order.





Wow a little humor and you go BONKERS!!! Calm down and look at the SNAKE !!! And POUNDER. They are my CHEVY EATERS

So as i am bowing out of here i just wanted to let you look at !!!

POUNDER &  THE SNAKE !!!

I hope i helped out with problems even though i am basically a CHEVY GUY. Thanks !!!

(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/000_0526.jpg)

(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/000_0611.jpg)

This is my BRAIN!!!


(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/a6fe85a8.jpg)

i just love reading about gm's on a fox tbird cougar forum. ls this ls that. ugh. I understand why they went bankrupt, to much of the for every chevy, we need a buick,  pontiac, saturn equivalent. 

the op's starting the thread doesnt make me mad. its the every thread needs to be, for lack of a better expression. ls nuthugging fest.

I don't remember blaming GM's bankruptcy on the Camaro or LSx engine. I don't think I even mentioned one of those. I rather think I pointed out the U-van. This thread was meant to be a humorous poke at a (really) ugly duckling. The proportions of that van just struck me as really odd, so I took a picture. Reliability-wise Ford did no better *cough*windstar*cough*, but at least Ford had the sense to give up on minivans instead of trying to pass them off as SUV's. The Taurus-X/Freestyle, though...

oh, thunder chicken. i totally understand your point. i think anyone who works on them, or has in the past knows that. it just sucks that every thread turns into a ls whatever debate. what i never did realize were that the uglys that chevy put out were all on that platform.

Have you not had a look at the new Explorer?  It is another unit body monstrosity and is really nothing more than a minivan with a snout.

Compare the towing capacity of the new Explorer vs. the chevy van pictured..or any other fwd gm van, for that matter.

I can appreciate someone's fondness for different makes of cars/trucks/beer, whatever....
On the other hand, I don't go to Camaro boards and brag about what 5.0 I've touched today. Just gets old, ya know..?

I'm not as old, experienced, or built as many as a lot of you older folks...but I have been around long enough to know that if they have tires, they're gonna cause trouble, sooner or later, regardless of what the badge on the trunk says.


And Tom, firing order = firing pattern. LS is the same as modular Ford V8s in that regard.

You forgot to add,    AND  :ies:              :giggle:  LOL

Chevy made "our ford 302", roll back the clock and look at the original RPM gettin chevy302.

All Ford did was swap the order of cylinders 5 and 3 and cylinders 4 and 7 to get the new firing order. Also, don't forget that Ford numbers its cylinders differently than Chevy. A Ford has 1-2-3-4 on the right  bank and 5-6-7-8 on the left  side. Chevy is 1-3-5-7 on the left and 2-4-6-8 on the right  If you simply renumber cylinder locations of the older Ford engines as if they were Chevys, you'll discover that the firing order is, in fact, identical to GM style. Further, if you take the 351 and late-5.0L Ford firing order and renumber the cylinders like a Chevy, the firing order is 1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3. That's the same as the Chevy Gen III and IV LS-series V-8s.

Now i am DUN!!! 302 and as i depart :bowdown::bowdown::bowdown:

I think the original point of the thread has been sidetracked.  It really matters not whether the LS engines are good, great or suck eggs, if GM can't or won't make decisions, overall that keep them in business without tapping the taxpayers pockets.  Like GM and Chrysler, Ford has made decisions that have been, shall we say questionable, the latest attempt to make a Thunderbird come to mind, though it can't go without notice that Ford managed to shed debt, cut losses and avoid tapping the taxpayers pockets to stay in business.  They will be rewarded for their efforts, as they should be.  Maybe some day Ford will purchase GM for a song or at the very least hire those brilliant engineers that have contributed to the LS engines and perhaps other overlooked areas of superior engineering, bolstering their talent pool and providing the consumer with the best of the best...again, as it should be.

Everyone is just bothered by the fact that ls engines can make some serious steam, stock. I don't get all the hate the ls swappers get on this forum. A cool fast car is just that. Having an almost identical weight, size, headers, boltpattern and layout should make it a very popular swap.

Its just too bad everyone on here is so close minded.

I wouldnt call it close minded, more like personal preference.  We're all driving Fox T-bird/Cougar's for heavens sake, that alone makes us a pretty open minded bunch.  There's nothing wrong with preferring Ford powerplants in Ford vehicles.  I really like the LS series engines, heck I even drive a Chevy Z71 w/5.3 daily but I get tired of seeing SBC's and LS motors swapped into EVERYTHING.  Look on ebay at old hotrods, I don't care what brand of car it is chances are it has a freakin' 350/350 swapped in. 

Personally, there's nothing more refreshing than seeing a old Ford hot rod with a flathead or SBF instead of a 350/350 combo (can we say boring?).  The LS is the new 350/350 combo.

Looking at the photo Carm posted, it looks like they borrowed the wheel covers from the Bonneville from a few years ago. The van is ugly, for sure.

I wince every time I see a new Equinox. It's so overcooked it's nearly cartoonish.

I don't hate GM's LS engine. It DOES make great power for it's size and weight.
I DO hate seeing a reference to one by the same person nearly everytime he posts, however.

With that said, all the manufacturers have to trim costs to stay solvent...unfortunately, for GM, the result was a hideous concoction like the first post shows...

Personally, I hope it's that American's (middle class) are finally learning to live within their means. Last time I bought a new car was in 1986 (I wish it were my Cougar) but it wasn't. People spend $40,000 for a car and then by the time it's paid for it, it is worth little to nothing. Most people can't work on the new cars, mainly because they are pretty much computers on wheels and need expensive equipment and training. I believe that is why people are starting to have more respect for the cars of yesterday. Registration, insurance, maintenance, is far less, not to mention no car payment. They say most divorces in this country are over money. Where I worked for about half my life, I watched people move up the ladder of success. They would work 60+ hours a week for a raise or a promotion, never having the time to enjoy their toys. Sorta like Tom's quote: "To impress people I don't know". There was always the cars parked away from all the other, because they were in fear of having their baby scratched or touched. I even used to ask some of my friends if their family had a picture of them so they would remember what they looked like when they finally walked in the door. I've heard of so many of them dropping dead only month's after retiring because they didn't know what to do with themselves. At 65+ they were trying to find a hobby. When I had my new Camero IROC back in "86", I realized that I drove it 30 miles a day to and from work to let it sit in the sun for 8.5 hours, then groceries, gas station, stores and back home. Money... you can be it's master.... or it's slave.

^ One of the most intelligent posts I have read in quite a while!

For real Tom...this IS a board for products of the Ford Motor Company. I for one don't waste my time chastising people like you for doing what you do, in my opinion, you let it go because "who the hell cares". But you should seriously not be surprised at all to receive backlash. As Larry The Cable Guy once said, "why don't I go to a trailer park with a bullhorn and start yelling 'walmart sucks!!'"

Also, relevant to this actual discussion.....one stellar engine, stellar as it may be, does not a car company make. Does not a successful business make. I'd say they're dealing with increasing CAFE requirements well, what with the Cruze, Sonic, Aveo, Cobalt, pretty much the same  little car as far as I'm concerned, but you make more models with better efficiency, you pad your average. As opposed to somehow making trucks and Shelby Mustangs get 30+ MPG, or cease their production.


Third, yes 86cougar awesome post. Just had to say that. lol




FOURTH...putting an LS or whatever the hell the "frontrunner" that everyones-doing-cause-its-cheap-and-fast, is a cop-out in mine eyes. A cheap easy way out. If you wanna hoon for pennies, go ahead. Just don't expect anyone to be impressed with the overall package. I don't even like seeing '32 Fords with 350/THM350/Mustang II front/blah blah blah.

What are we talking about here, to clarify the argument? An 18-year-old kid's budget hot-rod rusted/faded/clunky whatever that just needs to be fast and loud and raise hell on a kid's income? Sure, pop the hood and see an LS or an LT1 gotten for "500 bucks man the camaro was wrecked and they just wanted everything gone"

Or

A cleanly and meticulously restored vehicle, that was 100% complete, with it's perhaps goofy but period correct proprietary digital dash and ECM and MPG calculator and all that good stuff...that won't work with a Brand X random motor swap. "But I wanted it to MOVE too". So you spent all this time and money on the restoration....but you cheaped out on the giddy-up. I'm always disappointed when I see this. A real quality well-done badass-looking creative vehicle deserves a drivetrain with the same attributes. Put a Nissan SR20 in it and boost the shiznit out of it. Keep the exhaust quiet, don't open the hood alot, see how long you can keep the secret. Build up a Dodge 440 and have someone custom fab an original 383 COMMANDO air cleaner to fit the two fours that feed it instead of lopping two of those cheesy triangle Edelbrock filters on 'em. No puppies engine in an American car! No Pentastar  in a Mustang! But it's unusual and it runs 12's. Strong arguments on both sides of the fence, hard to call it totally right OR totally wrong....

There's a common term that quickly and accurately describes our feelings on the subject:  Swap.  Pretty much eliminates the need for explanation.

I DO hate seeing a reference to one by the same person nearly everytime he posts

Not to worry i am moving on. All i was doing was making a little joke and it seems like you blew it out of proportion.  I equally work on and own many fords and Chevys. As i thought i was a big help with my experience you sounded off about how many Chevy sites i was thrown off. Which by the way is laughable as i am only on one and seldom post. I share my experience as i like to help others. So be it as it may i will pass and let you take over. Just do me a favor and control your temper. It is not my fault the LS engines make so much HP with so little effort. By the way last time i looked an engine is an air pump and no matter who builds said units they all work the same. Only difference is chevys work BETTER that is not my fault. With that i know it is a ford site and i appoligize. But i share things with you guys that i can take to my grave. But that is not ME. Passing on experience and knowledge is something special. So i will pass and let you answer all the ills and repair procedures as well as posting you vast knowledge on the forum with other vehicles i know you are an expert on. Thanks Tom!!!

this is actually kinda odd, to be so harsh on other engines in a serious manner. we all joke around and bust balls but this is a little too serious.  Wrenching is wrenching no matter what car you got problems with.

if you happen to be a family member here that has a couple birds or a coug, and it so happens you have problems with your "other" car, we still always try to help.

@Zonda, I don't like the whole unusual engine from XXX manufacturer in XXX othe manufacturer's car either.  Want a creative swap idea? here's one. TC with a 2.3L 16v duratec ranger engine, compression drop, T5 (or something similar) , turbo, Air to air, etc.  Keeps it in the family, keeps the right to bear it's own name.  Now that's an unusual swap.  Don't care what the difficulties are, make it work, then lift your hood and brag about overcoming them.  I've got a Mark VIII engine under my bench I might just stuff in my bird someday, who knows.

Props to Chevy for their new Silverado ad though.  shiznit's hilarious.  In a good way.

Foe that is my point exactly, I go to all the local car shows including the big ones. people like my stuff because it is unique. If i see another 5.0 mustang or another CHEVELLE they bore me as do other cars like BIG BLOCK CHEVELLE'S i am going to PUKE. They are a dime a dozen even though i own one myself. They just dont do it for me. I like things like my LS powered 6 speeder  STANG DROP. At shows i pop the hood and tuns of people flock by it. I also like Flat heads. Nothing gets my attention more  than a traditional TUB  FLATTIE !! That is just me. But going to shows always is the same chromed out cars polished and proper stockers and the ones that are 100% stock and 100% resto. Other than that i like people to flock around the cars we build and fascinate them with transplanted this or that. Other than that i am a chevy guy and that is that. But some might say my FORDS are awsum as you have seen some of my toys. As for posting chevy info on a Ford site you are correct. Now if only ford could get an engine to BREATHE we would not be having this conversation. Other than the new engine offered by THE BLUE OVAL!!! Thanks for listening. Just to show you i am flexible here is my HONDA!!! You see i cant let the RICERS get an edge on me. So when they complain about my V8 Cars i show them i can build ricers as well. Once again an engine is an air pump. The more air it pumps the more HP IT MAKES!!!

(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/civ010.jpg)

Tom, it's not a thing personal, and it's not the fact that you're a Chevy guy...hey, I've got a couple of Chevies...as to whether they have better engines or not..well, neither of them run, while my Fords all start. (Except the Mustang, but we'll forgive it as it's a 2.3)

If you talked about pringles chips in every post, and not the LS, it would be the same response from me: if I want pringles, I'll go get some of my own, lol.

Carry on :)

I really don't do forums much till now. I went to another one and started asking questions about my "86" Cougar. I had a guy who said that he like my year car and went on to help me with my problem. That's when it dawned on me that the forum was for "Classic Cougars". Nobody EVER said "go away", "you shouldn't be here",... nothing. If they did answer me it was to help and it was in a respectful manner. I REALLY wish I did own an old classic Cougar, they are very nice cars! I do have a "57" Oldsmobile that I haven't really even started to work on yet. It's my FAVORITE car and it does not even run. It needs everything!! It needs paint, chrome, window or two, wiring harness, fluids, rebuilt everything, on and on. I doubt that I would come here to ask you guy's about fixing it, not because you wouldn't know how, but because it's an OLDSMOBILE. From what I understand, this is the "Lounge", Your place to sit back, relax, and discuss whatever you feel like...but KEEP IT CLEAN! So, now you know I own an Oldsmobile (painful as that may be).(lol)

This will be my only post on this thread.

Tom, I am sorry, but you struck a nerve on one of your previous posts. You said Ford did not understand that engines are nothing but air pumps. Just a little history for you. Ford has built the best vehicles of all time. Ford may not always have the most power, however, at least their stuff will stay together. To look inside a GM engine, you will find undersized bolts and at times too few of bolts. Funny how Chevy guys all look for 4 bolt mains. If their mains had big enough bolts to begin with, they would not need 4 of them. Yes, LS engines are great. It's about time. Don't get me wrong. Ford has recently lost their way, but they are trying hard to fix it. Now, a little food for thought. Ford has been a poorly managed company from the start. Back in the day, Ford almost went under just because Henry refused to paint them anything other than black. That management has continued to present day. With poor management and lack of LS engines, Ford still manages to get by without handouts from the government. GM's problem is butt ugly cars. Ford learned you can't sell butt ugly cars when they made the Edsel, which by the way, was one of the best built cars ever.

Thunder Chicken, I am sorry to ugly up your post with this childish nonsense. I am sorry to the moderators as well. I am sure they are watching this post like a hawk.

86Cougar, I have to say bravo to your earlier post. That has to be the best post this site has ever seen.

Better tell FORD about the lack of head bolts on the 2.3 TURBO Engine CHROME !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 (at least their stuff will stay together)

Their is an old poem i made up in the shop for my guys that fits your post perfectly!!!

(Better not put to much HP in that 302 other wise you will have TWO!!!)

No worry's i get it.

I MADE A JOKE AND ALL HELL BROKE LOOSE.

Have to GO a coyote transplant  is waiting and in progress. Or do you disapprove of transplanting late model motors in early STANGS!!!

:hick::hick:

If their mains had big enough bolts to begin with, they would not need 4 of them.

Clearly you do not have a CLUE what this is all about. Better do some research on this before posting. By the way they use 6 bolt mains NOW!!!

Tom how many cars do you own?  Seems like every thread you post in has pics of your vehicles.

Tom, there's a problem with that Honda... It has no compression in cylinders 5,6,7 and 8 ;)

On a more serious note, once again, this is not about lsx vs windsor. It's not about Chevy 4-bolt mains VS Ford 4-bolt heads (fwiw, I believe the 4-cam modular was using 6 bolt mains back in '93). It's about me making fun of GM U-vans. Now everyone behave or I'll get one of those vans and make one if you sit in the back and the other sit in the way-back...

The U vans are ugly for sure. U van stands for UGLY- Van

 
Just had flashbacks to my childhood and riding in my Mom's '91 Dodge van.  I swear that while driving, she could reach back and slap you all the way in the backseat.

:laughing: How true!!! :laughing:  Although mine was usually in 9 passenger station wagons

 
Haha instantly reminded of this guy, I find him hilarious!

[video=youtube;ALKd6BzmfR0]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALKd6BzmfR0&feature=youtube_gdata_player[/video]

Tom, there's a problem with that Honda... It has no compression in cylinders 5,6,7 and 8


Got it it is a joke!!! You see i can take a joke. But seriously this car is beyond fast as your wildest dreams. This car is OUTRAGEOUS.

Is it faster than a speeding ticket? lol

Nope but it will put down many a 302 without even breaking a sweat.

Before and after!!! Post  your car 302. I am curious to see it???
 
(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/civv-1.jpg)

302 last post for me on this forum. Seems like we have common interests other than cars!!! LOL!!!

(http://i28.photobucket.com/albums/c209/tfalconier/IMG_0107-1.jpg)

I hate even mentioning a ls, but it takes 6.2 liters to even keep up with a lowly 420 hp 5.0. I dont see ls's spinning 7000-7300 on a regular basis.Gm is behind Ford big time.

Fascinating