Crappest engine ever

[drivewaymyway]

How about the old 1980's Fiat 900cc push rod rattler sewing machine of an engine ?? I did my apprenticeship on Fiat and soon discovered no two engines were the same, some were economical and sound, some were powerful and revvy, some were just leaky smokey baskets of recycled scrap.. Some could be coaxed to go like shite off a stick but others would struggle to make any speed against a head wind... Easy to fix though..

[somewhatfoolish]

Another contender for the crappiest so-called ‘marine engine’ ever must be the Petter Mini Twin (and its little single cylinder sister the Mini 6). Petter took an ageing, noisy, hard to start by hand industrial engine and bolted on an aluminium water-cooled block and heads and then thought it would be a good idea to pump salty seawater through it. Unsurprisingly few have survived. Spares are unobtainable now, of course.

 

This one here probably has only because it has spent its life on fresh water canals...

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R5QqKnYIBpI&t=59s

 

Squirrel2 has an air-cooled cousin of this one stashed away somewhere but need ear-defenders on to be anywhere near it when running; just like an ‘80s generator set!

 

Squirrel2

They weren't any worse than any of their contemporaries, noisy, unreliable exiles stolen from cement mixers covers pretty much all of them other than the Volvo Penta MD series, and the MDs cost a fortune; as long as you treated the cylinder head as a consumable item(!) and replaced it every 5 years or so... The cylinder head is of course the only bit that is now unobtainium!

[MarvinsMom]

easy - and i cannt belive its not been mentioned so far - the Rover kettle series.

 

fragile hopeless crap.

 

i had good service out of an 1800 CVH in a mark 2 sierra, and while it wasn't the best thing ever, it went ok. it didn't overheat or melt (like a k-series)

 

unlike the a-series (the engine that the kettle would replace) which while been old as adam, have to me a charm all of their own, and they do just keep on going!

[forddeliveryboy]

They built plenty of Dub flat fours but at the same time no one who has rebuilt a few would argue that they were anything other than pitiful pieces of aluminium and cast iron which barely held together.

 

There is a long list of manufacturers who ballsed up cam chain tensioners, camshafts, cam followers, cooling systems that wouldn't and lubrication systems that didn't.

 

I'm going to argue that in most cases the manufacturers had their hearts in the right place. Sure there was more than a hint of cynicism in the CVH abortion but at least the car was reasonably cheap to buy and reasonably reliable.

 

I would argue that the worst has to be judged on the chasm bewteen expectation and reality. As far as I am aware the engines installed in any Citroen DS were not bad engines per se but they were abysmal compared with the powered by some alien space technology that had dropped off planet Moon the rest of the car lead you to expect.

I enjoyed that post, there's so much bullshit passed around about engine tech.

 

The big fours in otherwise stellar Citroëns were indeed poor by comparison with the rest of the vehicle although I'm not sure that back in the 1960s and 70s anything lasting 300-500k with nothing more than valve clearance adjustments and oil changes should be regarded as abysmal?

 

Perhaps part of the problem was the company producing cars with the 'correct' power - ie just enough for straight, fast French roads. And so not enough for some slow English ones which still drive round field corners just before steep short hills, despite the torque. Even though they were old fashioned, for anyone coming from anything British, the engines alone were wonderful. But yes, compared with the aerodynamics, suspension and braking they were a bit crap.

[MikeR]

anything with a cam belt with a sub 100k life

[Skut]

How about the old 1980's Fiat 900cc push rod rattler sewing machine of an engine ?? I did my apprenticeship on Fiat and soon discovered no two engines were the same, some were economical and sound, some were powerful and revvy, some were just leaky smokey baskets of recycled scrap.. Some could be coaxed to go like shite off a stick but others would struggle to make any speed against a head wind... Easy to fix though..

Many moons ago I read an online account of why some Fiat engines seem to perform so differently. It suggested that Fiat was not annealing the blocks consistently after casting and that some were warping creating internal friction. Could have been apocryphal but having owned a lot of 80s Fiats I wouldnt be surprised.

 

Personal nomination would be something like the 50s Ford Sidevalve engine. Even in the 30s it was hardly cutting edge and by the 50s selling an engine with a predicted lifespan with proper servicing of 40000 miles was pathetic. Early ones had thermosiphon cooling. Which is a fancy term to describe it being too amateurish and wank to have a water pump.

[cros]

MGA twin cam? Most recalled. Jowett yes - rushed into production and snapped crankshafts galore. Pity as it really killed Jowett.

 

Twin cam had a few issues to be sure; I had the PA in mind, it's amazing how people coped with the location of that dynamo. At least you didn't get rust in the electricity though.

[red5]

They eat waterpumps and cambelt tensioners too. We had 3 go on our old Leon. Awful engines.

 

Don't forget the piston slap.

[Alfaisti]

Vauxhall's 1256cc engine as fitted to Viva and Shoveit absolutely awful heavy as and no power

[MrSchwifty]

The 3 cylinder Turbo Diesel from VW - as found in the Polo, Lupo etc. A hateful, rough, gutless lump. 

[leafsprung]

I don't quite get the hate for the venerable old 2 1/4 land rover petrol. They weren't bad engines at all and there's a lot of affection for them in LR circles. 300,000 miles plus isn't uncommon and they don't tend to give many serious issues if maintained and treated sensibly. I've had a few and if you accept they were a low revving, long-stroke engine designed (albeit many moons ago) for torque, fitted to a heavy agricultural utility vehicle with zero concessions to comfort, convenience and efficiency then they're pretty characterful and quite pleasant to be behind. They were designed in pre-small turbo diesel days when we weren't all rushing round like blue-arsed flies. A mate of mine had a series 3 with a military reconditioned 2 1/4 which was set up by an ex-REME mechanic. He was forever mincing the starter by trying to start it when it was running it was that smooth and quiet. It would start with the smallest flick of the key.  

 

I'm sure many people's judgements of a range of engines are clouded by badly maintained, amateur tuned examples which are then assessed against modern expectations and standards.

 

Of course there were some horrors, the only one I can contribute was the 2.5 'turbo' diesel in the Isuzu KB/Vauxhall Brava I had to endure in a work vehicle. The 100bhp rating was clearly utter horseshit. I don't quite know how it was possible to produce so little usable power from that capacity. No doubt it' would have run on piss and still been reliable once the tin plate bodies had long since returned to the soil.      

[stonedagain]

The 3 cylinder Turbo Diesel from VW - as found in the Polo, Lupo etc. A hateful, rough, gutless lump.

Mrs Stoned's Polo is a 1.4 TDI, it pulls like a train. Well impressed with it! The rest of the car though.........

[Guest Hooli]

The piece of shit pretending to be a power plant in a C15. It's barely got the grunt to turn the water pump let alone move a van.

 

Even for a basic NA diesel it's rough slow gutless noisey and generally awful. Mind you the rest of a C15 is as bad so it's lucky they have zero performance.

[Ghosty]

Honda D-Series.

[twosmoke300]

Honda D-Series.

Just cos you have had a few bad examples

[twosmoke300]

The piece of shit pretending to be a power plant in a C15. It's barely got the grunt to turn the water pump let alone move a van.

 

Even for a basic NA diesel it's rough slow gutless noisey and generally awful. Mind you the rest of a C15 is as bad so it's lucky they have zero performance.

Try that in a boxer !

[bigstraight6]

Mrs Stoned's Polo is a 1.4 TDI, it pulls like a train. Well impressed with it! The rest of the car though.........

I concur, my old Polo 1.4 TDI is the same and will cruise at 80 all day on the motorway and it’s on 146,000 miles now.

[xtriple]

I have owned precisely one LR and it was a big old Safari thing with millions of windows (worth mucho coin now apparently) and that was fitted with the 2 1/4 petrol (I think) it was certainly a sidevalve/overhead valve thing and I want to say it was 6 cylinder but I ain't sure, could have been a four... anyway, it was thirsty as all hell, slow as a rusty clockwork slow worm and utterly lovely! So smooth and quiet, just a lovely thing weighed down by a MASSIVE LR body. To be fair, the entire car was mint and the old boy I took it in P/X from had had it since the year dot.

 

He bought a Range Rover from me - what a mug! I preferred the Landy all day long but it is the only LR I have driven that I actually liked, the rest all feel baggy and worn out, that was tight and precise... even the steering!

[twosmoke300]

Isnt that the 2.6 IOE landrover engine ? As you say , smooth as silk but used more fuel than the v8

[xtriple]

Yes, you are possibly (probably) correct. It was a LONG time ago and y memory ain't what it used to be sonny

[forddeliveryboy]

Ime there are examples of almost all engines which don't run right, either because they weren't run in right or abuse in service (driving too gently for years can be as bad as any other abuse). There can be engines which are crap design but run very nicely because they happened to come off the production lines better than the rest and they've been serviced right.

 

The crappiest engine I've ever driven much was a gf's 1.9D VW on about 90k. It was rough and gutless (more than usual) and I reckoned it hadn't ever been run in properly (home counties lady owner from new previously) so overdue for an oil change I took it up to the Western Isles and worked it properly hard.

 

After that, it ran a good deal more smoothly, pulled harder and felt like a different lump altogether. Trouble being, it's all but impossible to do that with many modern engines without attaching a caravan coz they're so powerful.

[twosmoke300]

Deffo right there - I used to work on White Arrow transits and they were the quickest and most mechanically reliable vans we worked on . Beaten from day one

[PhilA]

Probably find that opened up the tolerances a little then the bearings got hardened to that shape, so the engine would be more loose than otherwise intended, and as such more willing and lively feeling.

 

Whereas by the time the bearings have worn to those tolerances in an engine treated with some sympathy, the thing's well past its' prime and any slack is offset by worn rings and such.

 

My old man used to reckon a worn engine that burned a bit of oil was better because the oil slowed the burn of cheap fuel and provided more of an impulse against the piston, providing greater torque. But, this was in the days of A-series Austins and Ford Valencia lumps ferrying us around.

 

Phil

[somewhatfoolish]

Isnt that the 2.6 IOE landrover engine ? As you say , smooth as silk but used more fuel than the v8

Early LRs had 1.6 then 2.0 IOE 4 cylinder engines, before the arrival of the stereotype 2&1/4 OHV in ~1958; long wheelbase ones were available with the IOE 6 from 1961 I think.

[sierraman]

Deffo right there - I used to work on White Arrow transits and they were the quickest and most mechanically reliable vans we worked on . Beaten from day one

I had several Transits all being run all day long took within an inch of their lives but on BP ultimate diesel. Never had a turbo or an injector go on them. Plenty of door hinges, clutches and DMFs mind. All did 100-120k over 3 years no problem with the usual stuff that causes grief on diesels.

[gtd2000]

Meanwhile, back in 2013...

 

http://autoshite.com/topic/13304-rover-kv6-engine/

[forddeliveryboy]

Probably find that opened up the tolerances a little then the bearings got hardened to that shape, so the engine would be more loose than otherwise intended, and as such more willing and lively feeling.

Phil

It didn't feel looser, still newish and snug feeling just less vibration. The bores would have been deglazed and the rings woken up, it carried on for years running really well.

 

2cv engines would go to sleep if not revved and worked hard, much beyond 60k they wouldn't 'recover' - it was a matter of giving the bores a honing with fine stones then running them 20 miles without the fan on at 55-60, followed by some fresh Total 15/40. Some English drivers still couldn't get out of the habit of treating an engine gently, nor the idea of oil needing replacing every 3-5k.

[The Reverend Bluejeans]

Look at the original Alfa Romeo twin cam as an example of how to do it right. So good it lasted what, 42 years? 1955 to 1997. Superbly engineered and made with details like studs and nuts for the mains and big ends as opposed to plain bolts. Plus with correct maintenance they are very strong. Even at the very end in the last 164, the 150 bhp 2.0 TS was still a benchmark in thorough and high quality engineering. Unlike the Fiat based thing that replaced it.

[richardthestag]

lots of great engines mentioned here, though they may have been in poor installations or even shite/zero maintenance,

 

Crappest engines?

 

Jag 2.8 6 pot, set too lean else as thirsty as 4.2. result = melting pistons

Ford Kent 1340 as fitted to Classic 61/62. 3 bearing crank. Bearing replacement every 10k miles not uncommon

Smart Fortwo 3 pot engine. Economical unless thrashed. lasts 30-40k miles unless thrashed*.

[richardthestag]

Interested to see what we get from this. Not crappest as in the usual shitefest of unreliable so much as crappy all round. May I nominate the Land Rover 2 and a quarter litre petrol. Rough. Unrefined. Fuck all power and barely 15mpg. Utter shite

 

strong, reliable, runs on goat piss, fix it with a hammer. in a LR Series will get you into the biggest mess you can find and then drag you out of it again.

 

In it's day cracking unit

 

now cracking unit

 

Ok when compared to a modern engine etc..