missing from the best list - 2.2 /2.5 transverse fours in L-bodies
The 2.6L Mitsubishi used circa 85, has to be on the worst list.
Parents bought a brand new 85 Dodge Caravan, largest available engine at that time was the 2.6L. So as a boy I got to watch one of the greatest mechanics I have ever known, rebuild that piece of **** 3 times. ( As a side note, this mechanic was and still is the type who will forget more than many will ever know). I in fact worked along side him on one of the rebuilds as the tool boy, so yes I'd say I refer to reality, not hearsay. It is also a fact that those engines were described in reviews as an engine designed to "self destruct". I saw the article myself. This was the only one I personally had anything to do with. I'm just glad you had better experiences than were had with ours.Did you one or more 2.0 or 2.6L Mistubishi motors or just speaking from hearsay?
I've owned them in 1 Starion, 3 Conquest, 4 D-50, 1 Arrow.
Did you know the 2.6 was a multi time SCCA champion?
With that - "I disagree"
I agree.Did you one or more 2.0 or 2.6L Mistubishi motors or just speaking from hearsay?
I've owned them in 1 Starion, 3 Conquest, 4 D-50, 1 Arrow.
Did you know the 2.6 was a multi time SCCA champion?
With that - "I disagree"
True I shouldn't lump them all into the same category. Ours had one head crack, guide problems resulting in oil control issues, and premature timing gear wear, and a head gasket issue. I'm not sure it came from the factory with rings, it was an oil burner almost from brand new. You can understand this left a bad taste in the mouth.The "self destruct" feature on the 1.6, 2.0, 2.6 'G' motor was no different than any other interference engine if you lose the chain or belt..
While there was a bunch of whoha about the "jet valve" I never had any issue.