Official: Ford 2012 Police Interceptor based on Taurus

[wiretap]

I've been working at the Ford Dynamometer Laboratory for almost 20 years now. I have been involved in much of the engine research an development during that time. I used the term bullet proof simply to indicate that this engine has done particularly well during all phases of development and durability testing. If that term bothers you, then I am sorry. Lets get past that.

As for the history part. Ford's engine program is so much better today than it was 20 years or even 5 years ago. But I'm sure you know much more than I do about that too.😱

c3p0
🙄

Congrats.. and engine can pass testing. Bulletproof indeed. rofl..

 

[EightySix Four]

Congrats.. and engine can pass testing. Bulletproof indeed. rofl..

A jalopnik post has spoken, you are wrong sir.

 

[wiretap]

A jalopnik post has spoken, you are wrong sir.

Oh, look, they're properly using the term bullet proof in regards to the diverse heritage of an engine where it had tons of aftermarket/3rd-party use and proven longevity.

 

[EightySix Four]

Oh, look, they're properly using the term bullet proof in regards to the diverse heritage of an engine where it had tons of aftermarket/3rd-party use and proven longevity.

They're using the term to discuss a stock engine which over it's life span was proven durable. They did not say ZOMG LOOK IT MADE ONE BILLION HORSEPOWERS FOR FIVE THOUSAND MILES, IT IS BULLETPROOF.

 

[wiretap]

I guess you didn't read the article and commentary. It's a blog post.

 

[EightySix Four]

I guess you didn't read the article and commentary. It's a blog post.

You obviously didn't read the post because you would know they weren't calling the Buick V6 bulletproof. They called the AMC Straight Six bulletproof because in stock form the thing could take a fucking beating.

When those Kenosha swashbucklers at AMC bought Kaiser-Jeep in 1970, the bulletproof AMC Straight Six shoved the Buick aside.

 

[wiretap]

Yes.. I know.. then read the article where they declare all the aftermarket/3rd-party uses of that engine which contributed to that status.

 

[EightySix Four]

The first article I linked to will send you here when you click on the word AMC straight six. The two sources for that article are this and this of which neither discuss it's high horsepower aftermarket.

 

[wiretap]

I never said they used the AMC straight six for high "horsepower aftermarket".. exchanging 'bullet proof' for 'reliable' is often seen liberally misused on blog sites.

 

[EightySix Four]

I never said they used the AMC straight six for high "horsepower aftermarket".. exchanging 'bullet proof' for 'reliable' is often seen liberally misused on blog sites.

Ok, I cede and bow down before you, the god of the modern lexicon, since when everyone else is wrong, you must surely be right.

 

[wiretap]

Ok, I cede and bow down before you, the god of the modern lexicon, since when everyone else is wrong, you must surely be right.

It sounds like you're unaware how they came up with using the term bullet proof on that site.. are you well versed in what the people used that engine for.. the applications they used it for.. the type power they made on the stock block with forced induction? It has quite a long history in the aftermarket community to earn that term.

 

[EightySix Four]

It sounds like you're unaware how they came up with using the term bullet proof on that site.. are you well versed in what the people used that engine for.. the applications they used it for.. the type power they made on the stock block with forced induction? It has quite a long history in the aftermarket community to earn that term.

Ugh... The reason an engine has a strong history in the aftermarket community is because it is bullet proof, not the other way around.

 

[wiretap]

Yeah, just reverse it, lol. A regular engine with a long life would just be considered reliable. When you're pushing something beyond it's OEM intentions, and it has a long history with that community that proves it, that would be considered bullet proof.

 

[EightySix Four]

Yeah, just reverse it, lol. A regular engine with a long life would just be considered reliable. When you're pushing something beyond it's OEM intentions, and it has a long history with that community that proves it, that would be considered bullet proof.

I feel like I'm literally arguing with your avatar.

 

[wiretap]

OEM reliable != bullet proof

 

[EightySix Four]

OEM reliable = bullet proof

 

[yh125d]

Growing up in the motor city on Woodward.. I'd disagree about that being a 'factory' term.

Don't act as though your vehicular vernacular is somehow superior to others' because you grew up in Detroit. Contrary to what you may believe you don't get to define what term is proper or what isn't



And don't act like Ford's testing hasn't been considerably more thorough than what is common for new engines

 

[EightySix Four]

Don't act as though your vehicular vernacular is somehow superior to others' because you grew up in Detroit. Contrary to what you may believe you don't get to define what term is proper or what isn't



And don't act like Ford's testing hasn't been considerably more thorough than what is common for new engines

Detroit Public School System FTW 😉

 

[fbrdphreak]

ROFL. Vernacular arguments (and stupid chowderheads!) FTW

 

[EightySix Four]

ROFL. Vernacular arguments (and stupid chowderheads!) FTW

It's better than working on my paper.

 

[wiretap]

OEM reliable = bullet proof

LOL.. now designing an engine that underwent testing is considered 'bullet proof'. I guess all engines backed by a warranty are bullet proof now. Damn, those Kia's with their 10 year 100,000 mile powertrain warranty are exceptionally bullet proof since Ford is only giving the Taurus SHO a 5 year 60,000 mile powertrain warranty.

 

[EightySix Four]

LOL.. now designing an engine that underwent testing is considered 'bullet proof'. I guess all engines backed by a warranty are bullet proof now. Damn, those Kia's with their 10 year 100,000 mile powertrain warranty are exceptionally bullet proof since Ford is only giving the Taurus SHO a 5 year 60,000 mile powertrain warranty.

I never said the ecoboost was bullet proof, I sad your definition is wrong.

At factory specs, it does what it's designed to do and it isn't supposed to fail. Bullet proof goes beyond that, describing something that can be pushed beyond what it's supposed to do and still hold up to the extremes. Unless this is just a Detroit local thing, I've never heard anyone describe a factory vehicle as bullet proof. Just about any car can last you a decade or longer unmodified, whether it be a Kia or a Ford F-350.. that's not the same as 'bullet proof'.

No, bullet proof is a motor that does what is designed to do, and does it well, for an exceptional period of time with no significant issues. For example, do you think the designers of the AMC straight-6 family expected their design to carry on from 1964 to 2006?

 

[fbrdphreak]

Something tells me that trying to argue with a know-it-all engineering student and Detroit native is much like this.

 

[EightySix Four]

Something tells me that trying to argue with a know-it-all engineering student and Detroit native is much like this.

I had not seen that clip in a long time, thanks for the laugh.

 

[wiretap]

Yet you persist with incorrect rhetoric when specific examples are cited.

According to the logic from the other side, longevity/reliability = bullet proof. Well, it would seem if other manufacturers have extensively tested their products and have more faith in the product, so much so as to back it with ~40% more of a warranty, it's just that much more "bullet proof". It's almost comical just to say because something may last a long time that it's "bullet proof". That's the entire premise of your argument.