Garbage. Complete crap. Who thought it a good idea to put the water pump inside the engine, driven by the timing chain, with no provision to let coolant out of the engine if it springs a leak? Just the labor is over 12 hours because the valve covers, upper intake manifold, front cover (22 bolts) and the entire timing chain have to be disassembled, through a space less than four inches wide. I'm working on a 2009 Edge with 93,000 miles on it and a crankcase full of milk. I fear for the long term health of the engine. And my brother has a 2012 Lincoln MKZ.

[edited to correct the mileage]

This message has been edited. Last edited by: egregore,

That's exactly how my 2004 Chrysler Seabring died.

milk...milk...dead.

Engineered from the get go to make more money once it leaves the dealership. Your normal shade tree mechanic won't even think about something as substantial as what you are doing, so they take it to the good folks that sold it to them, thus ensuring Ford makes more $$ on it.

As an aside: I firmly believe newer cars/trucks are engineered to fail at or damn near their warranty. My brothers company work truck, a 2016 Chevy 1500 4x4 with a 5.3, shit the bed at 54,xxx miles. Locked up tighter than a nuns legs. No pulling heavy loads, no racing the engine, and service was done at prescribed intervals. Just your average running back and forth between job sites in NoVa. The companies entire fleet of new Chevy's has been plagued with issues very similar to his. Couldn't get me to buy a newer American made vehicle with your money Kidding really, I do love the new Mustangs, but that's seriously about it.

^ "locked up tighter than a nuns legs"

...

quote:

My brothers company work truck, a 2016 Chevy 1500 4x4 with a 5.3, shit the bed at 54,xxx miles.

Seriously? That is normally a "can't kill it" engine. They've been making it since 1999.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Garbage. Complete crap. Who thought it a good idea to put the water pump inside the engine, driven by the timing chain, with no provision to let coolant out of the engine if it springs a leak? Just the labor is over 12 hours because the valve covers, upper intake manifold, front cover (22 bolts) and the entire timing chain have to be disassembled, through a space less than four inches wide. I'm working on a 2009 Edge with 103,000 miles on it and a crankcase full of milk. I fear for the long term health of the engine. And my brother has a 2012 Lincoln MKZ.

I hear ya, complete garbage. Why couldn't Ford just put the 3.5 and 3.7 from the vans and trucks in these things? At least they have external waterpumps.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:

quote:

My brothers company work truck, a 2016 Chevy 1500 4x4 with a 5.3, shit the bed at 54,xxx miles.

Seriously? That is normally a "can't kill it" engine. They've been making it since 1999.

I have to agree that the older 5.3's seem fantastic. Then something changed. The one in his truck looks nothing like my uncles 10 year old Chevy 1500 with a 5.3. I am sure some parts would go from one to the other, but I think Government Motors wanted a redesign. Probably wrong, haven't looked into it per se, just what we can see when we open the hoods.

Will say this: the less complex the engines are, the easier it is for Bubba to do some bubba'n down under a shade tree. Complicatin' shit makes money for the auto maker on purpose.

After a little checking, it looks as though that's a $2k repair. That's if no additional damage, which is not uncommon.

There are lots of inferior designs out there. I've owned my share. Pays to investigate them up front, never buy the latest designs; wait til they pan out - or not. Let those early adopters determine on their dime.

American auto manufacturers have been selling us not ready for prime time cars and trucks for years. It's better than it was, but then the vehicles and subsequent repairs cost considerably more now. Some folks simply cannot afford a $2k repair...

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Garbage. Complete crap. Who thought it a good idea to put the water pump inside the engine, driven by the timing chain, with no provision to let coolant out of the engine if it springs a leak? Just the labor is over 12 hours because the valve covers, upper intake manifold, front cover (22 bolts) and the entire timing chain have to be disassembled, through a space less than four inches wide. I'm working on a 2009 Edge with 103,000 miles on it and a crankcase full of milk. I fear for the long term health of the engine.

Uh oh, I have a 2010 Edge, just over 120,000 miles; I assume it's the same engine.

My '72 Super Beetle's water pump was a breeze...

quote:

Originally posted by mjlennon:
After a little checking, it looks as though that's a $2k repair. That's if no additional damage, which is not uncommon.

There are lots of inferior designs out there. I've owned my share. Pays to investigate them up front, never buy the latest designs; wait til they pan out - or not. Let those early adopters determine on their dime.

American auto manufacturers have been selling us not ready for prime time cars and trucks for years. It's better than it was, but then the vehicles and subsequent repairs cost considerably more now. Some folks simply cannot afford a $2k repair...

And with unlimited credit available for anyone regardless of credit scores; how many new cars do you think they sell because people simply don't have 2k to drop? I'd bet it is a ton and I have no doubt that repair costs are being pushed higher and higher in order to get people to just give up and buy a new one.

As an example, my 2008 Explorer began leaking coolant a few months ago. I wasn't sure where the leak was so I took it to the dealership to get them to diagnose it for me. They found it wa the thermostat housing and came back with an estimate of around 900 bucks to fix it. It took me less than an hour and cost me less than $150 with parts and coolant.

I have learned my lesson and I will never buy another new car again. Like you say I will let other folks pay for the beta testing of a new car. I am happy to buy used with cash from now on. If I have my way I'll never have another car payment again.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:

quote:

My brothers company work truck, a 2016 Chevy 1500 4x4 with a 5.3, shit the bed at 54,xxx miles.

Seriously? That is normally a "can't kill it" engine. They've been making it since 1999.

They ditched the reliable Vortec of the same size and came out with an all new one in I think 2014 model year.

Same engine in our Flex...just shy of 80k on it.
Any idea if the 3.5EcoBoost is the same design?

quote:

Originally posted by Shifferbrains:

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Garbage. Complete crap. Who thought it a good idea to put the water pump inside the engine, driven by the timing chain, with no provision to let coolant out of the engine if it springs a leak? Just the labor is over 12 hours because the valve covers, upper intake manifold, front cover (22 bolts) and the entire timing chain have to be disassembled, through a space less than four inches wide. I'm working on a 2009 Edge with 103,000 miles on it and a crankcase full of milk. I fear for the long term health of the engine. And my brother has a 2012 Lincoln MKZ.

I hear ya, complete garbage. Why couldn't Ford just put the 3.5 and 3.7 from the vans and trucks in these things? At least they have external waterpumps.

size.

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:

Same engine in our Flex...just shy of 80k on it.
Any idea if the 3.5EcoBoost is the same design?

There aren't many differences between the NA 3.5 and the EcoBoost 3.5.

quote:

Originally posted by Orguss:

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:

Same engine in our Flex...just shy of 80k on it.
Any idea if the 3.5EcoBoost is the same design?

There aren't many differences between the NA 3.5 and the EcoBoost 3.5.

That was my assumption. Wonder if the 2.7 is different...

I got down into the guts yesterday evening and also found an unusual amount of protrusion on the timing chain tensioner, indicating chain wear. Not wanting to put it back together like that, especially since it arrived with a cam timing code, we're giving the owner at least an option to replace the chain and guides. (There are actually three chains, but the two little ones that connect the cams on each bank look OK.) He's going to be really unhappy, since he had a bit of an attitude to begin with.

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:

Same engine in our Flex...just shy of 80k on it.
Any idea if the 3.5EcoBoost is the same design?

I looked on Google Images and this engine appears to have an external water pump.

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:

quote:

Originally posted by Orguss:

quote:

Originally posted by P250UA5:

Same engine in our Flex...just shy of 80k on it.
Any idea if the 3.5EcoBoost is the same design?

There aren't many differences between the NA 3.5 and the EcoBoost 3.5.

That was my assumption. Wonder if the 2.7 is different...

Yeah, it's a lot different.