The 350 Olds diesel was a pos. Most of them couldn't move themselves let alone any load. I think thew very last ones with the revised heads held up ok but by then they were stale toast anyway.
I knew lots of people that left theirs run in Alaska. I had one friend with a 6.9 that left it run all winter after a couple starters.

Diesels for cars definently suck.As far as the Power Stroke or the Cummins.Both are good engines with plenty of years and miles on them.If you live in a cold climate,the block heater is a necessity.Also alot of people will wear the starter out by not plugging in the heater,or not allowing glow plugs to warm up.If I were to haul anything continuosly with a truck I would go diesel(if the price of fuel would come down).But for a car.Never.

And if you have to leave your diesel run make sure you always park it right in the front door at the resteraunt or store so every one gets to enjoy the wonderful clattering and smell.

Oh yeah,try dealing with them in a confined shop for 8 hours and no one will fire up the exhaust fan since it pulls out all the precious heat.

Amen, willow.
Thanks to the glorious myth that you should not stop and start a diesel engine.
I cannot tell you the number of times I've had to stand in the convenience store and yell, because there are 3 or 4 farmer's drinking coffee, while their brand new diesels sit in the driveway wasting fuel.

well I'm not a farmer that for sure..I couldn't tell the difference between cow manuer or chicken manuer except don't step in either one. LOL

as for leaving them run I don't but the diesel air/fuel ratio idling is about 70:1. or more ,a far ways from 14:1 in a gasser.

Nevertheless there is nothing like diesel smell..mmmmmm...mmmm yumm. add a little soot and a little fuel on your hands and you are ready for serious trucking. LOL

Suburban cowboys carry rubber gloves to put diesel in their big trucks... no lie.

seriously the Dodge has the answer with the Cummins..no glow plugs, no spark plugs no starting problems. Just turn it on wait 30 sececons and light it off. Coler it is the louder and better it knocks. My neighbors love me when I leave at 5:00 am or roll in at 1:00 am.

hey diesel went down .10 cents today too.

In the early 80's, GM had a policy that they would not put a 350 in a shortbed 2wd pickup. (or so Dad was told by his dealer)

Dad had an 84 with a 350/700r4. What a joke. No power, forget economy. The torque-less wonder burned up 3 700's, before it shuddered like a dog poopin' peach seeds, and lefts its guts in the road.

They wouldn't even install a 350 at the dealer, because the pickup was only 2 years old. He finally traded it off for an 88 with a fuelie 4.3/700r4. I hate to say it, but for a 6-banger, it made the 305 look like a sick duck.

I'm going to have to say the Ford/Mercury 2.3/2.5L and the Chevy 350 (barely used them but all 4 have died within 400 miles...)

Eric

Quad 4 engine





•All of the Quad 4 heads tend to crack in the chambers. The early SOHC head cracks on the outside

•It’s almost impossible to get the spark plugs out without using an impact wrench and stripping the threads in the process, so plan on installing some thread inserts.

•The heads can’t be machined very much. The minimum thickness at the front of the head measured from the deck surface to the face of the bolt boss is 2.260".

•These head gaskets are very prone to leakage. GM has released several different head gaskets for the Quad 4 and changed the torque sequence more than once.

I live in about as cold as a climate as you can get- and I have had no more problems starting my diesel than any gas motor I have ever owned. My 93 definately stood the acid test- I was living at a house with no plug ins outside- and it started every day at 35 below by just "cycling" the warmer 3 times (cummins don't have glow plugs)- I do the same with my 98 now, whenever the temp drops below zero, this is my first winter, and it actually starts better than the 93 in cold- but I have to stick with it for about a minute for the idle to get right (much longer on my old carb gas motors LOL- just to get my average work beater non-EFI took about 5 minutes of feathering the gas to get the choke to set right when it is super cold)

The Chevy duracrap still is the worst diesel of the 3, and I am constantly having to loan my big shop type battery charger to him to start his chevy whenever it drops below 0. Never seen any cold start problems with the ford guys either.

I don't think the 350 is the absolute best motor I've ever had, but its probably on the top 20 best motors list. There's a reason they used that design for 50 years, dude. And there's a reason that they're the biggest car manufacturer in the world because of it. If you killed 4 350's you either A: got a bunch of loose, tired, already dead motors. B: had no idea what you were doing or C: you were super hard on them.

Sorry dude, that's the truth of it-

K

Well, I have to vote for something the rest of you have probably never even heard of, the 1977-79 AMC 2.0L four. It's the same basic engine used in a Porsche 944!! AMC bought rights to make it about the same time Audi started building the Porsche 944. They even bought a plant to build it. But implementation was the same thing Chrysler did with the VW engine in the Horizon -- threw away the EFI, and to top that off the electronic ignition, and put a crappy carb on it. It was REALLY underpowered in a Gremlin, especially with an auto! I saw a loaded Gremlin in a junkyard with one once -- I'd hate to have driven the thing with the AC on!! It was barely adequate with the four speed (no five at that time). Then they used it in the bigger Concord for ONE YEAR ONLY! Used a 3.58 rear axle with the auto. I knew a fellow who had a 4 speed version that picked up a noticeable amount of power with just a Pertronix electronic ignition in it. AMC claimed they weren't experienced enough with the EFI and didn't want the warranty problems, but why not the electronic ignition?? When you only have a few ponies to work with, you notice 3-5 more!! AMC lost money on this one, never fully built engines over here, just assembled them with imported major assemblies. I think Audi suspected it might not work out with the carb and points -- the agreement strictly forbade any mention of Audi or VW on the engine or in the service manuals!!

Your right, I never heard of that one.
That reminds me of another obscure engine I only saw in the parts books but never actually witnessed. Supposedly Lincoln offered a straight six diesel in Town Cars for a couple years during the early 80s. Anyone ever seen one of those?

I remeber that engine. We had a customer that had one in a 2dr Eagle 4x4 with an auto. Absolutley terrible. One thing to clarify. This motor is not the same motor Porsche put in the 944. It was in the 924. The 44's and 942S's all used an actual Porsche motor. The 924 was it's own car, and Audi did build the motor. The 944 was based on the 924 by in large, but only when it came to the chassis. Porsche had a ton of left over 924 parts about the time the were planning on killing it. Hence the 924S. It looked like a 24, but had the exact same drivetrain as the 44. That being said, I really don't like P cars all that much. German lawn art in my opinion. I did see some trashing of Kia motors. I think they are pretty reliable as a whole. They are all based on Mazda designs. The early models may have been piles, but I haven't had any problems in the last 70k with my Rio.(yeah, daily driver/commuter is a Kia Rio ) I beat the living crap outa it too. Can't beat the 100k warrenty as well. I work with 5 other people who own Kia's. Out of all of 'em, only one had any problems, and that was an issue with wiring. Factory fixed it for free. I'm not saying they are the best thing ever, but are on par with any domestic turd box car in the same class. Plus they're cheap!

I don't imagin many rember or have even heard about the early 50's Crosley sheet metal motor. These were made around 51 to 53 I think. The block was made of sheet steel!!! Steel tubing for cylinders too. It was all assembled in a fixture and furnace brazed. Quite remarkable. I can't remember how many cu in they were but about 25 to 30 hp was the rating. The cars were very small. Two people (small) could just fit in the tiny body. The 3 sp trans was like clock work. I doubt it weighed 20 pounds. The rear end was smaller than a golf cart. These motors burne oil from the staqrt and got only worse. Most were replaced with the cast iron version.
They also made an outboard boat motor called The Fageol It was about 50 hp with 2 carbs and a hot cam. It was pretty quiet for its day. With a 14foot boat 2 people in the boat and 180 lbs of me on one ski. could barely get me out of the water. It worked much better to hop on one leg on the dock and time the last hop with the slack in the rope. It was fun. Many of the bodies of these cars were made into the "gassers' of the day in the 60's.