Chrysler engines

On 24 Jul 2005 11:11:31 -0700, "Kruse" > wrote:

>
>
wrote:
>
>> That Vega engine has to be one of the worst GM ever made. The metallurgy
>> sounded very
>> high tech, and the promise was there, but they were just no good.
>
>Here's what GM <SHOULD> have done. Take the old four cylinder engine
>from the Chevy II/Nova and put it in the Vega. That engine was very
>reliable (I still use one for an every day driver in a '69 Nova) and
>easily had enough power. Take all the money that they spent on the Vega
>engine warranty program that was used on all the engines that they
>replaced free of charge on the ones that failed before 50K miles and
>use that money to perfect the Vega aluminum engine before they put it
>on the market without testing it. If you can drop a small block Chevy
>in the Vega and it will hold up, you could have easily used the old
>Chevy II four cylinder engine without any problems.
>Oh, wait. I forgot that this was GM.
>

The 1975-and-up Vega engines (hydraulic lifers) were actually fairly
rugged - friend had one in a 1976 Monza that we beat mercilessly. Wide
open throttle immediately after a cold start was one of our rituals.
(What can I say - the ignorance of youth). No smoke or odd noises
ensued.

To reply via email, remove the 1 from the above address.