Just a data point that if I keep mine filled to the midway point on the dip stick it doesn't seem to go down nearly as quickly compared to when I fill it to the top of the range. It makes no sense but there it is.
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
I understand your concern with it and I don't overfill mine either despite a need for more cooling on the track. I just thought I'd share what we were told. I'll be interested to see what kind of oil temps you are running to compare with mine. Since installing the gauge I've always had the air-to-oil cooler so I don't have any stock oil temps to compare them to.LostPony said:Unless Ford officially releases something stating to overfill, I will not do it. To me that would be a reason for Ford to deny a warranty claim if something were to occur, and there was no official paperwork on overfilling.
I will be installing a true temp gauge and oil pressure gauge in my car in the very near future.
5 DOT 0 said:Just a data point that if I keep mine filled to the midway point on the dip stick it doesn't seem to go down nearly as quickly compared to when I fill it to the top of the range. It makes no sense but there it is.
07SGT0547 said:I also believe that a majority of the oil consumption issues are the result of the higher RPM's forcing the oil vapors out the PCV system... For those of you who have the "Catch Can" installed, is the amount of oil in the canister consistent with the amount of oil you are showing low on the dipstick??? I realize that it won't be 100% accurate, but at least it is an indication of "where" that oil might be going... And other than a physical leak, where else could it go???
Great read and thanks for posting. Engine durability was advertised from day one and I don't think that should be a big concern. I've seen my share of Vette and P-cars pop engines this year already, but haven't heard of too many Bosses. It's particularly interesting in the article how they repeatedly talk about more high end power available above 7500 RPM. You think that revised crank timing ring now being offered has something to do with that? :-Xzzyzx said:I seriously doubt there's any "design flaw" at play here. It's far more likely that there are assembly irregularities, or batches of parts that are marginal (though unlikely).
Also there seems to be a lot of debate on design details of the engine. That can all be settled by reading this article:
http://www.mustang50magazine.com/techarticles/m5lp_1108_2011_ford_mustang_302/viewall.html
It's a long but fantastic read. Might clear up a lot of misconceptions as well as Fords design intent on various components.
cloud9 said:You think that revised crank timing ring now being offered has something to do with that? :-X
Rich_S said:Can I ask a stupid question? Apart from the car in this thread, how many Boss owners have experienced an engine failure like this? The way people are talking about warped heads and such, you'd think this was common. I had never even heard of it until this thread.
zzyzx said:cloud9 said:You think that revised crank timing ring now being offered has something to do with that? :-X
I didn't know there was a revised timing ring. Care to fill me in on the details/provide a link? And yes, per the article, I would definitely think that has something to do with it.
Were you towing a fuel tanker?jeepinocala said:I had a chance to run my car around 100mph-120 for a few hours straight
07SGT0547 said:Mid-Week Update (7/22/2012):
Looks like my replacement Long Block actually arrived at the Dealer on Monday... Service Writer had this particular Monday OFF and didn't see the warranty paperwork until early this Morning... Should have the BOSS back on the road in a few days... Hoping to be able to pick it up on Monday the 30th...