...
A bit of an update on my favorite independent Ford shop; earlier I mentioned he installed Brand X long block rebuilt and had issues with the head gasket(s). The block wasn't overheated as he noted by the tell-tale heat tags as still not discolored. The engine had only 260 miles on it when it came back in. It was a definate rebuilder error.
I almost can't express my disappointment enough, to now be aware that the oil pressure gauge is fake. Ignorance is bliss. The way I see it, apparently the consistantly excellent fake oil pressure reading is purposely meant to deceive the ignorant consumer... to ever avoid complaints about low oil pressure to Ford. Bummer. But thank the gods I now know.
I would have been concerned much earlier if I thought the cruise oil pressure was unusually low (probably was, like as in way back when I was buying it "pre-owned"). I understand that pressures may be acceptably lower at idle, and intentionally sizing pumps down to a minimal flow may even be a recent strategy to avoid fuel consumption. Bearing clearance specs aren't much tighter than they were 40 years ago (if any), and now this particular modern engine (Triton) calls for 5W20 weight oil. Pretty thin stuff, easily having a high leakage rate. It is my opinion that there may be very little pressure left at the far end of the longest oil galleys, just as there is sometimes little left at the last water sprinkler of a series. Same principle in my book.
And that example may be my problem.
Only after hours of searching the net, I discovered a great visual of the oil circuits in the Tritons by Googling, "ford triton oiling system". Thanks to Steve83 at SuperMotors.net, the image link is here, but the lone image is depicted below if it renders:
IF I GOT THIS RIGHT, one may note that the oil up to the RH (passenger) camshaft must travel all the way to the rear of the engine before it even reaches the cam galley. A double check with my trusty local Ford dealer tech (mentioned first post) reveals that, the other day, he meant the steel backed (not fiber) babbitt thrust bearing sometimes cracks and fails. It is sometimes found in the bottom of the pan in pieces. It is located rearmost in the Triton engines, which means it already gets less oil than the old style center-thrust main bearing... also since the oil pump is now also entirely located forward of the engine block instead of midships. By the time meager oil gets back to the thrust bearing, one must hope it isn't operating in high thrust conditions, or it could fail... which incidentally it does on occasion. I'll bet that more rarely happened on the center thrust bearings of older style engines with the oil pump inches away.
And... what if the thrust bearing does fail or develop an unusually large clearance? Well the first thing that would happen is very little oil would make it up to the RH (righthand) cam since the only oil feed passage is on the rear of this head, after the rear main and thirsty thrust washer get their share first. The LH head does not suffer such since the lone oil feed cam galley is at the front of the engine, very near the pump. Of course, the one-ended heads are the same in this regard and this is just how it works out.
So what have I observed? Well, I did see a video showing a failure of the nylon cam guide on the RH side. No special mention was made of the reason for it to be the RH side, but I believe there is a good answer as to why the failure was on the RH side. Another thread was from a fellow who had two cam failures on the RH head and couldn't understand why. Furthermore, my Jasper dealer/installer shop made special mention that Jasper had tried to take special precaution to modify rebuilds because of Tritons tendency to lose oil to the rear cam(s) at high speed. I'll bet a round of beer it is always the right head/cam. I haven't seen the Jasper promotional video he saw, and I am not sure if Jasper released it to the web yet, but that apparently was part of Jaspers sales pitch to him, then his to me. Jasper advertises improved oiling, although according to the sales tech, they faulted the OEM pump design that leaks under high pressure (high rpm?), yet another consideration.
The "high speed oil loss" is an interesting history point. Ford used to make an engine called the FE series. It was originally sort of a big block truck engine and, coincidentally, NASCAR had just banned blowers and fuel injection on smallblock engines. The introduction year was 1958. In 1957, Chevy had just introduced Rochester FI on their "Fuelie" 283 Corvette, and Ford had just kicked their butt by introducing McCulloch superchargers on their ill-breathing 312 Y-block. But by 1958 NASCAR banned them both... blowers and FI to promote NA (natural aspiration) power only. Thus the big-block NASCAR era, with the allowed limit up to 430 cu in (7L).
In 1958 Ford introduced their FE series, 332, 352, 390 cu in, on up to to 427 cu inch. That same year Chevy introduced their canted valve 348, and then the shortly after, the similar 409 (so fine, my 409). Chevy soon modded their original canted valve engine to produce the 396, the 427 and finally the 454 and up. Chrysler, not to be forgotten, then simply kicked Ford and GM's butt per NASCAR allowing the deep breathing, naturally aspirated 392 Hemi, including a superior combustion chamber, a therefore superior engine. Finally, after much whining by Ford and GM, NASCAR banned huge cubic inches along with blowers and FI, and the NA carbed, non-blown 366, then current 358 cu in engine became the NASCAR spec limit. I think chrysler should have made a smallblock hemi, heh heh.
Now the point. By the 60's, Ford had trouble with their FE engines. When they ran at high rpm speeds, they discovered that the oiling system couldn't keep up. Factoid: when any piston engine runs at high speed, the bearing oil leakage rate goes way up. Note the common use of high capacity oil pumps in race engines. I'm not entirely sure why, but it could simply be centrifugal force. Imagine a drilled crank filled with an oil column intended to extend out to the rod journals, suddenly being spun at terrific speed, even faster than a cream separator. That might be enough centrifugal force to explode the leakage rate right there. Anyway, to fix this, the Ford 427 Side-Oiler was born (sometimes running the first Ford V-8 "cammer"... SOHC heads with one huge chain). By necessity, newly designed large oil galleys were cast onto the exterior of the original FE block design (thus side-oilers!) just to carry enough oil to keep up with rpm demand. The now durable FE 427 engine was then quite successful and Henry even used it to kick Enzo Ferrari's butt in some international racing during the '60's.
So if the new generation Ford OHC engineers have not yet thoroughly rediscovered that high rpms can cause oil starvation... well then...
To remove the Triton oil pump also requires first removing both cam chains and lower sprockets. The cams are a bit tricky to realign in time with the crank when reassembling, as the depressed valves turn them slightly. With the transmission disconnected, the intake removed for cowl room and the radiator out, the motor can be finally lifted enough to drop the pan and remove the sump and oil pump for a good look. I think it books at about 5-6 hours or more.
It is possible that a relief valve is stuck open (I haven't tried to restart it cold). Since the engine had just run cold a few blocks and then warmed up, thinning the oil as it idled by itself unattended, an unseated valve could leak away all idle pressure. I racked my brain trying to think of what mysterious debris could cause this. Then I read this.
Yes, the relief valve could have opened when oil was cold and thick, probably at high pressure. Then debris made up of shredded nylon could "pinch" through the oil pump and jam the valve open to the detriment of warm thin oil. Or this debris could float around in the oil and totally plug the sump screen. Suddenly the reports of catastrophic pressure loss, suddenly being ok again after a mere restart makes sense to me. The******supposedly falls away from the sump screen after the pump suction pauses. I think this MIGHT be my answer... and the answer to a lot of other baffled owners and mechanics.
The Youtube Video I linked above, even stated that broken plastic/nylon guides sometimes mashed into the oil pump causing it to seize. One must also imagine that the chain continues to grind a stuck broken piece. That scenario makes extra sense since the right (passenger) guide is more likely to break (lack of oil) and the upper highly tensed chain strand is conveniently on it's way down towards the pump on this side. Whatsmore, the RH is more likely to break because, only after the RH oil has traveled all the way to the back of the crank... hopefully not leaked away through a failure prone thrust washer or any other loose bearing... then all the way forward along the cam... does the hydraulic-piston cam tensioner finally receive pressure to duly press against the lower nylon tensioner and oil the chain, and nylon guides/tensioners, through a small oriface. I bet a lot of worn Triton engines no longer get any significant oil that far forward on the RH cam. Also note the video remarking where a sloppy cam chain has whipped against the aluminum cam cover, not to mention the now missing upper plastic guide. Lack of tensioner pressure would allow chain whipping.
As another bit of trivia, I owned several of the old Ford Y-blocks around 1957. The engine design had difficulty getting enough oil through galleys from the mains, and straight up through the worn cam bearings to oil the rocker shaft. One morning the rockers literally squeaked, and the solution was to pipe oil to one of the two valve cover bolts, then down said special hollow bolt to oil the rockers. It came as an aftermarket kit with copper tubing and adjustment valves (like radiator drains) tied into the oil sending unit, I believe. Back then, I checked a lot of oil while pumping gas after school. The kit was pretty common on older Ford V-8's.
Thanks for the info and insights on the relief valve.
I'm not sure if it was clear earlier, but Ford did have a bulletin out concerning pieces of oil filter lodged in oil galleys that they would no longer warranty, if Ford oil filters were not used. It sounds like Ford warranty control found pieces of "red rubbery" (disintegrated filter valves?) plugging galleys.
The last oil change included a Delco filter. The GM dealer offered to tow it (free) to their shop and change filters to see if that would help. But, of course it would not help if a stray trim piece lodged in a galley (and so GM/Delco could claim it was not the filter). Such a plugged galley would be tedious to find even if the engine were entirely disassembled as I have seen a comment that it sticks in a small oriface on the head gasket.
On top of that, the GM shop earnestly avoided any discussion of whether Delco might stand for warranty, if even such a determination of filter-fault were found and admitted. And I did not want them to run the unoiled engine for a few seconds, and shut it off cold, because of cylinder condensation issues (I know, I'm anal about this). Finally, I was parked at NAPA pricing out a new $200 starter when the oil pressure failed. So, to top it off, the starter "reliably fails" to crank in cold weather. So GM would tow it (-20F degrees the previous night) and then it would certainly have to warm up in their shop to even crank over with the fuel hopefully allowed off. It was just too complicated to explain, yet that snafu, to them too. I declined their offer, a fair offer I might add. It is very unlikely(?) the filter anyway. And there is also a history of failed Triton engines having a mysterious (see above) immediate return of oil pressure on restart. That would be embarrassing unless they didn't try to start it until after the new filter and I said, "Aha! Now it works! It WAS the filter!!"
I am as curious as any of you. Unfortunately I may not get a chance to tear it down if I simply have the engine replaced with a rebuilt long-block. It is so much trouble to look prior to repair... the engine must be nearly removed to get enough clearance to even pull the bottom pan off. No mechanic wants to do it, especially cheaply. Both cam chains must be removed to get at the oil pump. Every experienced indication so far says that the engine is likely toast anyway and I am reluctant to pay vast amounts to look at something already sunk just to satisfy my curiousity. I could quick look at the engine myself after removal/replacement and still meet the 30 day core return deadline. I have an engine stand. It would be a scramble.
But I think my truck is already gone. And I can buy one with a new engine for about what they are worth. I can buy mine. Rats.
Along the lines of analysis, I did check with a local machinist. He can rebore the 6.8L or whatever else it needs. I know he has a good rep, but he is also pricy. So far he declined to price a full rebuild machine process out as though he knew I wouldn't bite anyway. A recent (2 years ago, before the oil boom) valve job he did on a V-6 cost me $500 machining plus installation labor to the tune of $1400. I didn't look, but I could maybe have bought new heads for less. Then again, a rebuilt Ford brand V-10 longblock is now locally at $5200, so I don't know. Rebuilding my own would allow me, heck require me, to do all disa$$embly/rea$$embly. At least the Ford longblock might have all new sparkplug threads (Timesert).
Thanks for the reply.
I agree. The only filter issue would be if it released debris that blocked a main oil galley. Probably not it. I think a failed pump or plugged sump more likely. I have a heated garage with a full overhead lift. It is now full of somebody elses furniture.
Figures.
It's like Murphys' Law. I fill my shop with furniture, my truck breaks and now it's a record cold winter. Guess I should apologize to the rest of you.
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
===================================================================
I do have a shot at a reasonably priced running V-10 engine from another Excursion. It has 110k on it and my source says the truck has supposedly been well cared for appearance-wise. It was repo'ed for an unpaid bill and there is no title, so it will be parted out by a private party. It is tempting. I would save about $6k upfront and buy a pig in a poke. I am seriously considering having an oil analysis done on it, as well as my own. A lab might give me useful info on either or both. One more hat in the ring.
Thanks all,
Wes
...
A bit of an update on my favorite independent Ford shop; earlier I mentioned he installed Brand X long block rebuilt and had issues with the head gasket(s). The block wasn't overheated as he noted by the tell-tale heat tags as still not discolored. The engine had only 260 miles on it when it came back in. It was a definate rebuilder error.
I almost can't express my disappointment enough, to now be aware that the oil pressure gauge is fake. Ignorance is bliss. The way I see it, apparently the consistantly excellent fake oil pressure reading is purposely meant to deceive the ignorant consumer... to ever avoid complaints about low oil pressure to Ford. Bummer. But thank the gods I now know.
I would have been concerned much earlier if I thought the cruise oil pressure was unusually low (probably was, like as in way back when I was buying it "pre-owned"). I understand that pressures may be acceptably lower at idle, and intentionally sizing pumps down to a minimal flow may even be a recent strategy to avoid fuel consumption. Bearing clearance specs aren't much tighter than they were 40 years ago (if any), and now this particular modern engine (Triton) calls for 5W20 weight oil. Pretty thin stuff, easily having a high leakage rate. It is my opinion that there may be very little pressure left at the far end of the longest oil galleys, just as there is sometimes little left at the last water sprinkler of a series. Same principle in my book.
And that example may be my problem.
Only after hours of searching the net, I discovered a great visual of the oil circuits in the Tritons by Googling, "ford triton oiling system". Thanks to Steve83 at SuperMotors.net, the image link is here, but the lone image is depicted below if it renders:
IF I GOT THIS RIGHT, one may note that the oil up to the RH (passenger) camshaft must travel all the way to the rear of the engine before it even reaches the cam galley. A double check with my trusty local Ford dealer tech (mentioned first post) reveals that, the other day, he meant the steel backed (not fiber) babbitt thrust bearing sometimes cracks and fails. It is sometimes found in the bottom of the pan in pieces. It is located rearmost in the Triton engines, which means it already gets less oil than the old style center-thrust main bearing... also since the oil pump is now also entirely located forward of the engine block instead of midships. By the time meager oil gets back to the thrust bearing, one must hope it isn't operating in high thrust conditions, or it could fail... which incidentally it does on occasion. I'll bet that more rarely happened on the center thrust bearings of older style engines with the oil pump inches away.
And... what if the thrust bearing does fail or develop an unusually large clearance? Well the first thing that would happen is very little oil would make it up to the RH (righthand) cam since the only oil feed passage is on the rear of this head, after the rear main and thirsty thrust washer get their share first. The LH head does not suffer such since the lone oil feed cam galley is at the front of the engine, very near the pump. Of course, the one-ended heads are the same in this regard and this is just how it works out.
So what have I observed? Well, I did see a video showing a failure of the nylon cam guide on the RH side. No special mention was made of the reason for it to be the RH side, but I believe there is a good answer as to why the failure was on the RH side. Another thread was from a fellow who had two cam failures on the RH head and couldn't understand why. Furthermore, my Jasper dealer/installer shop made special mention that Jasper had tried to take special precaution to modify rebuilds because of Tritons tendency to lose oil to the rear cam(s) at high speed. I'll bet a round of beer it is always the right head/cam. I haven't seen the Jasper promotional video he saw, and I am not sure if Jasper released it to the web yet, but that apparently was part of Jaspers sales pitch to him, then his to me. Jasper advertises improved oiling, although according to the sales tech, they faulted the OEM pump design that leaks under high pressure (high rpm?), yet another consideration.
The "high speed oil loss" is an interesting history point. Ford used to make an engine called the FE series. It was originally sort of a big block truck engine and, coincidentally, NASCAR had just banned blowers and fuel injection on smallblock engines. The introduction year was 1958. In 1957, Chevy had just introduced Rochester FI on their "Fuelie" 283 Corvette, and Ford had just kicked their butt by introducing McCulloch superchargers on their ill-breathing 312 Y-block. But by 1958 NASCAR banned them both... blowers and FI to promote NA (natural aspiration) power only. Thus the big-block NASCAR era, with the allowed limit up to 430 cu in (7L).
In 1958 Ford introduced their FE series, 332, 352, 390 cu in, on up to to 427 cu inch. That same year Chevy introduced their canted valve 348, and then the shortly after, the similar 409 (so fine, my 409). Chevy soon modded their original canted valve engine to produce the 396, the 427 and finally the 454 and up. Chrysler, not to be forgotten, then simply kicked Ford and GM's butt per NASCAR allowing the deep breathing, naturally aspirated 392 Hemi, including a superior combustion chamber, a therefore superior engine. Finally, after much whining by Ford and GM, NASCAR banned huge cubic inches along with blowers and FI, and the NA carbed, non-blown 366, then current 358 cu in engine became the NASCAR spec limit. I think chrysler should have made a smallblock hemi, heh heh.
Now the point. By the 60's, Ford had trouble with their FE engines. When they ran at high rpm speeds, they discovered that the oiling system couldn't keep up. Factoid: when any piston engine runs at high speed, the bearing oil leakage rate goes way up. Note the common use of high capacity oil pumps in race engines. I'm not entirely sure why, but it could simply be centrifugal force. Imagine a drilled crank filled with an oil column intended to extend out to the rod journals, suddenly being spun at terrific speed, even faster than a cream separator. That might be enough centrifugal force to explode the leakage rate right there. Anyway, to fix this, the Ford 427 Side-Oiler was born (sometimes running the first Ford V-8 "cammer"... SOHC heads with one huge chain). By necessity, newly designed large oil galleys were cast onto the exterior of the original FE block design (thus side-oilers!) just to carry enough oil to keep up with rpm demand. The now durable FE 427 engine was then quite successful and Henry even used it to kick Enzo Ferrari's butt in some international racing during the '60's.
So if the new generation Ford OHC engineers have not yet thoroughly rediscovered that high rpms can cause oil starvation... well then...
spadoctor wrote:spadoctor,
One of the main points of the engine flush was a stuck relief valve causing zero pressure, FWIW...a good friend use to use Jasper engines but overall had a 30% failure rate of those he installed. He now uses a company called East Coast Engine in philly. Years ago when I worked for Mazda we had a big problem with filters made in Israel. The check valves would loosen causing major fluctuation in oil pressure. I looked at my Ex and it appears the pump could be removed by removing the front cover and removing the pan bolts and just jacking the motor allowing access to the front pump bolts without removing the motor. Worth a try if needed
To remove the Triton oil pump also requires first removing both cam chains and lower sprockets. The cams are a bit tricky to realign in time with the crank when reassembling, as the depressed valves turn them slightly. With the transmission disconnected, the intake removed for cowl room and the radiator out, the motor can be finally lifted enough to drop the pan and remove the sump and oil pump for a good look. I think it books at about 5-6 hours or more.
It is possible that a relief valve is stuck open (I haven't tried to restart it cold). Since the engine had just run cold a few blocks and then warmed up, thinning the oil as it idled by itself unattended, an unseated valve could leak away all idle pressure. I racked my brain trying to think of what mysterious debris could cause this. Then I read this.
Yes, the relief valve could have opened when oil was cold and thick, probably at high pressure. Then debris made up of shredded nylon could "pinch" through the oil pump and jam the valve open to the detriment of warm thin oil. Or this debris could float around in the oil and totally plug the sump screen. Suddenly the reports of catastrophic pressure loss, suddenly being ok again after a mere restart makes sense to me. The******supposedly falls away from the sump screen after the pump suction pauses. I think this MIGHT be my answer... and the answer to a lot of other baffled owners and mechanics.
The Youtube Video I linked above, even stated that broken plastic/nylon guides sometimes mashed into the oil pump causing it to seize. One must also imagine that the chain continues to grind a stuck broken piece. That scenario makes extra sense since the right (passenger) guide is more likely to break (lack of oil) and the upper highly tensed chain strand is conveniently on it's way down towards the pump on this side. Whatsmore, the RH is more likely to break because, only after the RH oil has traveled all the way to the back of the crank... hopefully not leaked away through a failure prone thrust washer or any other loose bearing... then all the way forward along the cam... does the hydraulic-piston cam tensioner finally receive pressure to duly press against the lower nylon tensioner and oil the chain, and nylon guides/tensioners, through a small oriface. I bet a lot of worn Triton engines no longer get any significant oil that far forward on the RH cam. Also note the video remarking where a sloppy cam chain has whipped against the aluminum cam cover, not to mention the now missing upper plastic guide. Lack of tensioner pressure would allow chain whipping.
As another bit of trivia, I owned several of the old Ford Y-blocks around 1957. The engine design had difficulty getting enough oil through galleys from the mains, and straight up through the worn cam bearings to oil the rocker shaft. One morning the rockers literally squeaked, and the solution was to pipe oil to one of the two valve cover bolts, then down said special hollow bolt to oil the rockers. It came as an aftermarket kit with copper tubing and adjustment valves (like radiator drains) tied into the oil sending unit, I believe. Back then, I checked a lot of oil while pumping gas after school. The kit was pretty common on older Ford V-8's.
Thanks for the info and insights on the relief valve.
ExxWhy wrote:ExxWhy,
What brand oil filter is on there? Perhaps it was mentioned, but I didn't find it. Failed oil filter blocking oil supply to the pump sounds as likely as anything to me, but that's just a guess from 1000 miles away. Sounds like you'll get to the bottom of it with a relatively minor teardown inspection. I have expectations you can fix it and drive it for a while yet.
I'm not sure if it was clear earlier, but Ford did have a bulletin out concerning pieces of oil filter lodged in oil galleys that they would no longer warranty, if Ford oil filters were not used. It sounds like Ford warranty control found pieces of "red rubbery" (disintegrated filter valves?) plugging galleys.
The last oil change included a Delco filter. The GM dealer offered to tow it (free) to their shop and change filters to see if that would help. But, of course it would not help if a stray trim piece lodged in a galley (and so GM/Delco could claim it was not the filter). Such a plugged galley would be tedious to find even if the engine were entirely disassembled as I have seen a comment that it sticks in a small oriface on the head gasket.
On top of that, the GM shop earnestly avoided any discussion of whether Delco might stand for warranty, if even such a determination of filter-fault were found and admitted. And I did not want them to run the unoiled engine for a few seconds, and shut it off cold, because of cylinder condensation issues (I know, I'm anal about this). Finally, I was parked at NAPA pricing out a new $200 starter when the oil pressure failed. So, to top it off, the starter "reliably fails" to crank in cold weather. So GM would tow it (-20F degrees the previous night) and then it would certainly have to warm up in their shop to even crank over with the fuel hopefully allowed off. It was just too complicated to explain, yet that snafu, to them too. I declined their offer, a fair offer I might add. It is very unlikely(?) the filter anyway. And there is also a history of failed Triton engines having a mysterious (see above) immediate return of oil pressure on restart. That would be embarrassing unless they didn't try to start it until after the new filter and I said, "Aha! Now it works! It WAS the filter!!"
I am as curious as any of you. Unfortunately I may not get a chance to tear it down if I simply have the engine replaced with a rebuilt long-block. It is so much trouble to look prior to repair... the engine must be nearly removed to get enough clearance to even pull the bottom pan off. No mechanic wants to do it, especially cheaply. Both cam chains must be removed to get at the oil pump. Every experienced indication so far says that the engine is likely toast anyway and I am reluctant to pay vast amounts to look at something already sunk just to satisfy my curiousity. I could quick look at the engine myself after removal/replacement and still meet the 30 day core return deadline. I have an engine stand. It would be a scramble.
But I think my truck is already gone. And I can buy one with a new engine for about what they are worth. I can buy mine. Rats.
Along the lines of analysis, I did check with a local machinist. He can rebore the 6.8L or whatever else it needs. I know he has a good rep, but he is also pricy. So far he declined to price a full rebuild machine process out as though he knew I wouldn't bite anyway. A recent (2 years ago, before the oil boom) valve job he did on a V-6 cost me $500 machining plus installation labor to the tune of $1400. I didn't look, but I could maybe have bought new heads for less. Then again, a rebuilt Ford brand V-10 longblock is now locally at $5200, so I don't know. Rebuilding my own would allow me, heck require me, to do all disa$$embly/rea$$embly. At least the Ford longblock might have all new sparkplug threads (Timesert).
Thanks for the reply.
93Cobra2771 wrote:Richard,
Failed oil filter won't block ALL of the oil supply. The filter only actively filters a percentage of the oil at any one time.
As mentioned above, I'd get a real gauge on it to check what your pressure is. If you have 0psi, then further, internal engine will be required, unfortunately.
I agree. The only filter issue would be if it released debris that blocked a main oil galley. Probably not it. I think a failed pump or plugged sump more likely. I have a heated garage with a full overhead lift. It is now full of somebody elses furniture.
Figures.
It's like Murphys' Law. I fill my shop with furniture, my truck breaks and now it's a record cold winter. Guess I should apologize to the rest of you.
Thanks for your thoughts on this.
===================================================================
I do have a shot at a reasonably priced running V-10 engine from another Excursion. It has 110k on it and my source says the truck has supposedly been well cared for appearance-wise. It was repo'ed for an unpaid bill and there is no title, so it will be parted out by a private party. It is tempting. I would save about $6k upfront and buy a pig in a poke. I am seriously considering having an oil analysis done on it, as well as my own. A lab might give me useful info on either or both. One more hat in the ring.
Thanks all,
Wes
...
