4.2L V6 questions

[dunce]

I am looking to buy a 2001 F150 4.2L V6 automatic with 97,000 miles on it.
Are there any known problems with this engine or tranny? My '89 F150 5.0L is
getting very tired with 239,000 miles of great trouble free service. I heard
the fuel economy would not be much better than what I have now, around 15mpg
combined. I'm not too concerned about that, I just don't want to buy
something with a lot of known problems.

[NOBODY]

YESSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!! Headgaskets, and Piston Rods. Look into the
problems the Winstars are having with the 3.8L. It's the same blocks with
the same problems. I got rid of my F-150 because of it.

"dunce" <du...@moron.com> wrote in message news:3dd7...@news.sihope.com...
: I am looking to buy a 2001 F150 4.2L V6 automatic with 97,000 miles on it.

:
:

[dunce]

Thanks Nobody, very useful info. I wonder what % of these engines have
problems. You would think that Ford would have fixed the problem over the
years, rather than having to fix them all under the 100,000 mile warranty.

"NOBODY" <blue_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ehHSfegjCHA.1236@cpimsnntpa03...

[CJB]

What 100k warranty.

The 3.8 has a terrible design at the head gaskets. I knew that the 4.2 was
based on the 3.8, but I didn't know that they hadn't fixed the problem.
That's moronic on Ford's part. Take the worst engine in their entire fleet,
modify it, and put it in a truck without fixing the #1 design flaw.

CJB

"dunce" <du...@moron.com> wrote in message news:3dd8...@news.sihope.com...

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.391 / Virus Database: 222 - Release Date: 9/19/2002

-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----

[dunce]

I guess it's a "secret warranty"......shhhh......don't tell anyone....
http://www.lemonaidcars.com/secret_warranties.htm

"CJB" <belle...@citynet.net> wrote in message
news:3dd84...@corp.newsgroups.com...

[C. E. White]

Did your 4.2L V-6 actually fail? I did an internet search and don't see
a lot of reports of 4.2L V-6 head gasket failures. Out of almost 300
consumer complaints related to 2001 F150s in the NHTSA Consumer
Complaints database, not one mentioned the 4.2L V-6, much less the head
gaskets of the 4.2L engine. There are no TSBs for 2001 F150s that even
mention the 4.2L (not counting general information TSBs). There are no
"field service actions" (i.e., recalls) that involve the 4.2L engine
except for a PVC issue from 1998. If you do a Google groups search on
Ford V6 Head Gasket, you get many hits that talk about real head gasket
failures with the 3.8L, but none that actually recount a 4.2L head
gasket failure (although I am sure there are some). There are a lot of
people saying that since the 3.8L had a lot of head gasket failures, the
4.2L head gasket will fail also. I am not sure this fair. It is my
understanding that neither the block, heads, or head gasket are the same
as the 3.8L that had all the problems. The block includes extra
stiffening and the heads are beefier. If you do a search on any of the
automotive service magazine web sites on head gasket failures, you get
hits on Ford 3.8L V6's, Toyota V6s, Honda fours, various GM engines, but
none on Ford 4.2L V6 engines. I have a hard time believing this engine
has major problems and none of the service magazines are mentioning it,
at lease in passing.

On the other hand, I have a 300 inline 6 in my 1992 F150 and I really
like it.

Here is an interesting article on the 3.8L -
http://www.babcox.com/editorial/ar/ar90134.htm

Regards,

Ed White

[moli n ny]

Bad mouthing an entire class of vehicles w/o evidence
seems normal for some in this group.
Please check your facts / the ford or truck newsgroups /
NHTSA advisories, consumer report alerts, etc and report
only facts, not your assumptions or gut feelings.
I love my '01 F150, and with 75k miles only my wife n dog
have been more reliable.

>>Look into the problems the Winstars are having with the 3.8L.

>> It's the same blocks with the same problemsI got rid of my
>> F-150 because of it.
Please !

[Alex McClure]

I had a 4.2 L F150 (1998). I traded it on a 4x4 4.6L. The 4.2 had 45000
miles with no problems.

My brother has a 4.2L (1998) and he has over 100000 miles with no engine
problems. He has replaced the usual, brakes, tie rods, ball joints, etc.
Other than that, he "hammers" it, tows with it and it keeps on going.

Alex

"moli n ny" <mol...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:EOwC9.14893$vM1.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

[NOBODY]

For the original poster, look through here.

http://www.ford-trucks.com/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForum
ID6&conf=DCConfID1

"C. E. White" <cewh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3DD9C818...@mindspring.com...
: Did your 4.2L V-6 actually fail? I did an internet search and don't see

: > :

[NOBODY]

"moli n ny" <mol...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:EOwC9.14893$vM1.1...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...

: Bad mouthing an entire class of vehicles w/o evidence

: seems normal for some in this group.
: Please check your facts / the ford or truck newsgroups /
: NHTSA advisories, consumer report alerts, etc and report
: only facts, not your assumptions or gut feelings.
: I love my '01 F150, and with 75k miles only my wife n dog
: have been more reliable.

Thank you for your superior attitude. WOW, I'm impressed with you!!!!!
Swearing by an "entire class of vehicles" (cough) w/o evidence seems normal
to you.
You might try checking your facts / the ford or truck newsgroups / NHTSA

advisories, consumer report alerts, etc and report only facts, not your

assumptions or gut feelings. ie: "I love my '01 F150, and with 75k miles

only my wife n dog have been more reliable."

I'm not sure what's more annoying: Being told what to do or comparing your
truck to your wife.

[Randy]

I drove my '93 F150 for 170k miles - best vehicle I've ever owned. In 2000,
I found I could get 6000 off the sticker on a new Chevy Silverado - huge
mistake. It drove nice, but had tons of problems, and I had to complain to
General Motors before the Chevy dealer would take the problems seriously.
After 4 months of frustration, I threw up my hands, and traded on a new 2001
F150 4.6L Auto. I would have driven it forever, except that a rocker arm
fell off at 6000 miles and destroyed the head. The dealer rebuilt the engine
twice under warranty, but it never ran right after that. Ford eventually
offered to buy it back, which I accepted.

In my opinion, this was a quality issue, not a design problem, and is the
legacy of total-creep Jac Nasser. Nasser slashed quality control programs to
make the short term numbers look good, and a lot of customers got royally
screwed in the process.

I'd be very careful about buying any Nasser-era Ford. It's especially
important to check things like carfax.com to see if the particular vehicle
you're looking at has ever been wrecked, or was ever bought back under the
lemon law. The 15 bucks to check is cheap, compared with the sick feeling
you get from feeling like you're stuck with a lemon. Trust me, I know.

Randy

"dunce" <du...@moron.com> wrote in message news:3dd7...@news.sihope.com...

[RandyP]

My 97 4.2L just hit 100,000 miles today with zero engine related problems so
far.

"Alex McClure" <merc...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:hdDC9.22226$lj.5...@read1.cgocable.net...

[dunce]

Thanks people for the info. Am I correct in assuming no better than 15 mpg
combined? What kind of highway gas mileage can be expected with a 4.2L
supercab auto 2wd? Also, why are 2wd pickups so hard to sell? I put 240,000
on my 2wd '89 in Minnesota and have never been stuck, although I know my
vehicle's limitations and avoid those situations. For me, a 4wd truck would
just be more moving parts to wear out.

"Alex McClure" <merc...@cogeco.ca> wrote in message
news:hdDC9.22226$lj.5...@read1.cgocable.net...

[dunce]

Thanks, I tried but the forum is currently offline. Maybe tomorrow.....

"NOBODY" <blue_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message

news:O#5rOTEkCHA.1632@cpimsnntpa03...

[dunce]

WOAH , I see what you mean! Thanks for the link! Guess I won't be buying a
4.2!! Or even another Ford, for that matter! In fact, if you can believe the
forums, there ain't a car company in the world that builds anything worth
buying. Maybe I'll just weld the engine cradle from my smashed '93 SHO
(Yamaha engine, (boat motor)) into my '53 F100. Better yet, I'll weld one in
back too. Then I'll have a '53 Quadra-steer!!

"dunce" <du...@moron.com> wrote in message news:3ddc...@news.sihope.com...

[C. E. White]

dunce wrote:
>
> Thanks people for the info. Am I correct in assuming no better than 15 mpg
> combined? What kind of highway gas mileage can be expected with a 4.2L
> supercab auto 2wd? Also, why are 2wd pickups so hard to sell? I put 240,000
> on my 2wd '89 in Minnesota and have never been stuck, although I know my
> vehicle's limitations and avoid those situations. For me, a 4wd truck would
> just be more moving parts to wear out.

Well my '92 F150 is 4.9L 2WD, non-limited slip, short wheelbase. It will
get stuck on wet grass. Anytime I need to ride the pasture fences went
the ground is even slightly wet, I take my Fathers 4WD Ranger. Anytime I
don't have to worry about getting stuck I love my F150. The thing I
don't understand is why my F150 is so bad. My Father used to raise hogs
and for many years he owned nothing but short wheelbase, 2WD, non
limited slip Ford pick ups. I can remember hauling feed to the hogs when
the path was so bad we literally left three tracks - the third was for
the differential pumpkin. He never got stuck. My Father says it is the
tires. In the "old days" He only used relatively narrow "Co-Op" mud
grips on the rear and regular old narrow bias ply tires on the front. My
Father claims my tires (realtively wide all terrain Michelins) are no
good for mud because they won't cut down and get a grip. I believe him,
but there is no way I am going to ride around on the old style mud
grips. You could hear them whine from two miles away.

Regards,

Ed White

[C-squared]

On Wed, 20 Nov 2002 19:46:04 -0600, "dunce" <du...@moron.com> wrote:

>Thanks people for the info. Am I correct in assuming no better than 15 mpg
>combined? What kind of highway gas mileage can be expected with a 4.2L
>supercab auto 2wd? Also, why are 2wd pickups so hard to sell? I put 240,000
>on my 2wd '89 in Minnesota and have never been stuck, although I know my
>vehicle's limitations and avoid those situations. For me, a 4wd truck would
>just be more moving parts to wear out.

I had a '92 F150 8ft bed, 4x2 manual trans and I got 18mpg combined
driving. I did a lot of cruising @ 40mph though and speeding at 80mph
(yeah yeah, it's only 10 over in Michigan.)

I imagine you'll get 16-17mpg if you drive nicely.

2wd isn't so hard to sell if you're "down south", otherwise people are
worried about snow OR they may be using 4x4 for real offroading.

-----------------------------------------------------
Contact: (my webform is all messed up right now,
just post on the usenet and I'll respond)

[left...@yahoo.com]

Buy it you want be sorry.

[SC Tom]

<left...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:b89a8253-6c6c-4181...@googlegroups.com...

I'm sure he must have made up his mind in the 13-1/2 years since his post
:-)
--
SC Tom

[Rick C. Hodgin]

SC Tom wrote:
> I'm sure he must have made up his mind in the 13-1/2 years
> since his post :-)

LOL! My thoughts exactly. :-)

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin