|
| Toras |
|
||
|
I think the EF \ EL motors are the best... although the EL seems smoother than the EF (both cars had auto trans)
|
||
| Top | |
||
| JUKBOX |
|
||
|
i heard that the EL is the best motor, even better then the AU's...
|
||
| Top | |
||
| mspw |
|
|||
|
arm79 wrote: I think its been well discussed that the EF seemed to have a number of electrical design issues that were resolved / upgraded in the AU release, which provided a better quality, more reliable end product that didnt cost as much to run. How many people do you hear complain about dud coil packs and idle/ECU problems in an AU compared to an EF.
Nothing wrong with the engine design though, considering they are basically the same engine, just the electrical drivers that are different. In the end, it does the same job and both approaches work well. How many people have had to replace faulty coil packs on EF's, just as a matter of interest. Was this an early identified fault on release that was also corrected early on? Are EF idle problems related to present coilpack issues and deficient ECU's; or is it a case of aging components, dirty ISC's and possible head gasket issues, (again owing to age and travelled kms)? Are many of these head gasket problems related to a poorly prescribed coolant type (again on release of model), gasket type and head torque specifications that may be a contributing legacy to some of those experienced gasket troubles. Again, could age be the contributing factor? If the discussion is based on engine choice rather than model selection, are all these points of discussion redundant. And finally, are the differences between EF's and EL's so fundamentally different that a distinction can justifiably be drawn? Outside of the realm of theory; observed in the varous models I have owned and driven the following points of interest I feel relevent to the discussion are as follows: EA 3.9's are fundamentally less refined and rough at high revs. EB 3.9's and felt decisively better but all the EA/EB's leak oil. The EB2 4.0 was the most rugged and reliable motor I've owned, though leaked oil from the tappet cover and mains seals. an EB2 I converted to EL motor produced noticably better torque in driving though was a rough reving motor and always ran hotter than my origional EB donk. The EF1 I later bought had a less responsive auto box than any I had previously owned. I changed over to manual soon after. The AU motor transplanted into my EF1 soon after tranformed the car into much smoother package though not quite as good on fuel (transplanted into the EF's standard coilpack and efi). The newly worked AU motor now in my EF1 remains smooth and delivers the goods in power (at least as good as a once owned e48 spec 265 6-pack Val). Fuel economy of the rebuild is at least as good as the factory EF. Again, running off the origional factory installed efi and coilpack (flawlessly). Though some of the quoted theory and stats may have possibly held merit, I'm yet to experience these in fact - lucky me.
_________________
|
|||
| Top | |
|||
| Who is online |
|---|
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 48 guests |
