Reliable?

[05SSick]

Hey,

Is it true that the V8's are more reliable then the V6's? I heard that somewhere and I was wondering if anybody had both could tell me.

[87TtopMan]

I have a simple theory for this, Ford knows everyone only really cares about the V8's in the mustangs so they make sure that they run better IMHO.

[DeltaMustang65]

This is over-simplifying a bit, but a V8 engine doesn't have to work as hard as a 6 to push the same car. However, there are a variety of other reasons as to why you may find one kind of engine more reliable than another.

[Mr 5 0]

FWIW: I owned a 1990 Mustang 5.0 which saw many street races under my 15-year ownership. The 302 (C.I.) engine never gave me a moments trouble in the 125,000 miles I put on it. To be honest, I changed the oil and filter every 2,000 miles and never went into the redline, all of which help an engine's longevity, I'm sure. The Mustang 'modular' 281 (4.6L) V-8 may be a tad less reliable than the (earlier) 5.0 V-8 but is certainly more reliable (and fun to drive) than the V-6, which is rather 'primitive' in some ways - and has to 'work' harder, too, just to deliver less performance.

[Unit 5302]

If you're looking at the Mustang, I would have to say yes. The V-8 engined Mustangs are historically more reliable than their V6 counterparts.

The V-8 cars generally have superior running gear and higher end components while base models receive cheaper parts to keep prices low. Also, the Mustang used the same basic mainstream V8 engine (260-289-302) from 1965-1995. Ford was pretty familiar with how to build the variants of the 5.0. The 4.6L saw action in other models for at least 4 years prior to its introduction into the Mustang as well. Unfortunately the 3.8L V-6, which was notoriously problematic throughout the 1990s, didn't benefit from being in use for more than a decade.