What the F@#& was chevy thinking?

try changing spark plugs on a 93 and newer ford ranger with the mitsubishi 4 cylinder in it with 8 spark plugs!!!! now that was a stupid design......it may have made them slightly more efficient but stupid to work on.....not to mention I can't count how many of them engines I have seen broke down...2.3l I think they are.

also I can stand the (96 and newer I think?) ford 4.0l v6 mostly used in the "exploders" as I call them.....they used plastic timing chain tensioners (some 4.6l v8's used them also) and on the 4.0l there are some in the front AND the rear of the engine....yes thats right, there are multiple timing chains and it has them in the rear of the engine aswell.

dumb design.

I could pick apart all the different brands that have flaws and designs I dislike.......but in the end it what manufacturers that did things RIGHT that make me like what I like.

and mopar is where its at......and you can't beat how things were made back in the day, easy to work on with room around everything (for the most part).....and they were built to last and the interior and exterior being made for the most part of metal makes it feel not as cheap as the newer cars where everything is made of plastic or fiberglass.

not to mention....you just cant find the style of yesteryear in the newer cars (some have came close....but there is no replacement).

Ford Rangers are only new here, only released about 18 months ago, and all come with a 3.0lt turbo diesel...no petrols.
The Explorers released here had 2 engines...4.0 V6 pushrod ( man trans only) and the 4.0 OHC V6 ( auto trans only).....the reason they expoloded was the jack shaft adapter had only 1 oil hole.....so they seized, not enough lube oil getting in there....they were replaced with one that has 8 oil holes.
The rear leaf springs in them sagged very quickly too. This was the UN & UP models.