I don't disparage anything....I just tell the truth!!

Sometimes people get on me for being "down" on certain makes and models. I'm not "down" on anything; I just give my readers my honest opinion, which I hope will help them make informed decisions before they spend a large amount of money on a project. Lately several people have asked why I "Hate" Fords. I don't hate Fords; I've owned two Ford Pickups both bought brand-new and paid off and kept about 8 or 10 years. I've owned two Mustangs one a '66 289 GT  the other an '83 "5.0".  I'd love to have a 390 powered '67-70 Cougar if I could find one that wasn't priced in the stratosphere. Ditto for a 1970-71 429 T-Bird. If I buy another used work truck it'll probably be a '70's, '80's or 90's F150 or F250.  I don't "hate" Fords. Some people got this impression from a few posts I wrote several years ago. One was about classic movie car chases. I talked about "Bullitt".  Everything I said was from an interview with Stunt Coordinator Carey Loftin from way back in 1987.  Ford had a contract to supply cars for movies with Warner Brothers.  Steve McQueen didn't want two Fords in the chase. He thought it would be hokey that both the cops and bad guys would be driving Fords. Chrysler and GM wouldn't give them any cars, citing Ford's contract with Warner. Loftin and McQueen went to a Bay Area Dodge dealer and bought the Charger with their own money. The Charger was a 440 / 4-speed. The five Mustangs supplied by Ford were 390 / 4-speeds. A little history-when GM debuted the Camaro and Firebird in late 1966 for the '67 model year Ford was caught with their pants down. The 302 Z/28 would run circles around the 289 Mustang. Worse yet-you could get a 396 Rat Motor in a Camaro and a 400 ( the same engine in the mighty GTO ) in a Firebird. All a 289 Mustang would see of a 396 Camaro or 400 Firebird is the taillights. Ford hastily dropped the 390 in the '67 Mustang. However-unlike the 396 Chevy or 400 Pontiac-the 390 was not a high-performance engine. It was a low-revving high torque towing engine used in "big" cars like LTDs and station wagons, and trucks. One of the buff magazines tested the big-block pony cars and the Chevy and Pontiac ran off and left the Mustang. I mean badly-by half a second or more. The Mustang ran something like a 15.6 in the 1/4; the automatic Firebird ran a 15.1-a five car length drubbing, and the 4-speed Camaro ran something like 14.7-a nine car length drubbing. Anyhow-in early practice the 440 Charger would run off and leave the Mustang so badly that they couldn't film it. Steve McQueen was furious. Loftin and his mechanic Max Balchowsky hopped up one of the Mustangs with headers, an Edelbrock intake and double-pumper Holley carb and a Mallory distributor. Now McQueen and stuntman Bill Hickman ( who drove the Charger ) could successfully play cat and mouse. However-bounding over the streets of San Francisco at speeds up to 115 mph-the Mustangs were falling apart-breaking shock towers and suspension parts, door handles coming off etc. Loftin and Balchowsky worked every night taking parts off the other cars to keep the camera car running. That's why only two of the five still exist; the other three were crushed. Meanwhile-the Charger with it's torsion bar front end and Dana 60 rear had no problems other than throwing hubcaps off. If you watch the film-the Charger loses 8 hubcaps in the chase. People say this really "bashes" Fords. How?  It's the truth straight out of the mouth of the man who lived it. What did they want to me do? Lie?  The other things I've been called out on are saying that Ford's are a nightmare when swapping engines. Guess what? They are. Unlike a small-block Chevy or a Pontiac or an AMC or a small or big-block Chrysler where almost everything interchanges regardless of model-every Ford is different. A 390 in a Mustang uses a different oil pan and accessories and mounting points than a 390 in an LTD, which is different from a 390 in a T-Bird, which is different than a 390 in an F100 Pickup!!  A 289 / 302 has a different bellhousing bolt-pattern than a 351C, which is different from a 390 / 428, which is different from a 429 / 460.  Not the same as bolting a TH350 from a '79 Camaro into your '65 Chevelle and not having to change anything !!!  ( A Powerglide and a TH350 are not only the same length and have the same bellhousing bolt-pattern, but also use the same rear trans mount and driveshaft yoke!! ).  I just stated an irrefutable fact-Ford stuff does not interchange as easily as GM or Chrysler stuff. That's good advice for novice engine swappers to know, not a "slam" on any product. The other thing I've been taken to task for is when discussing carburators I've said the Autolite 4300 was the worst carb ever made. Guess what ?  It Is!!!!  My dad and I worked for Ford in the '70's. If you had a 351C Mustang or Torino, or a 460 T-Bird or Lincoln ( all of which used that awful 4bbl ) you enjoyed hard starting, especially in cold weather-hesitation, stumbling, crappy gas mileage, ( I mean 5-8 mpg on a brand-new car ) and all around awful performance. They were terrible when they were brand-new. Some of these cars didn't have 5,000 miles on them. If the customer bitched hard enough Ford Dealers would replace the 4300 with a 600 cfm Holley with an Electric Choke and cover it under warranty!!  The part number was 6619 or 6919; I think the throttle linkage was the difference-one for sticks and one for automatics.  I remember because as a parts guy I ordered so god damnded many of them!! With the Holleys the cars ran like a champ!!  The main reason GM and Chrysler musclecars ran so good was they had decent carburators. GM used the great Carter AFB until 1966. Early Q-Jets ( '66-67 ) had a few problems but they were ironed out quickly. Through the late '60's and all of the '70's Quadrajets were bullet proof. ( Some Chevys had 3310 Holleys and they worked good. )  Mopars had the excellent Carter AVS until 1971. The Thermo-Quad worked good on 340, 360 and 400-440 engines in the '70's. Meanwhile-Boss 302s and 429s had Holleys as did 428CJ's; some 429CJ Torinos actually had Quadrajets. Everything else limped along with that awful 4300. Again-what do people want me to do? Lie and say they were great?  I've said many times that Chrysler was light-years ahead of GM on automatic transmission technology when they introduced the Torqueflite in 1962. It was far superior to GM's hydramatics and Powerglides. The TH400 introduced in 1965 was just as good; but oddly they were only available in "big" cars. If you wanted a GTO or a Chevelle or 442 with an automatic you got the awful Two-Speed Powerglide / ST300 !!! A TH400 wasn't available in an SS396 or GTO or 442 until 1967!! In a Corvette until 1968!!  I'm sorry if the truth hurts some people's feelings. Here's another example-a lot of people say I'm "Biased" to GM stuff. Again-not true I already stated my feeling on Fords. I've owned "Bullitt" Chargers. I'd love to find a "Vanishing Point" '70-74 Challenger, a Charger-based 383 '71 Super Bee, or even a '78-79 Li'l Red Express Pickup.  I like Mopars fine. But yet I've been called out for saying that nothing makes as much power for as little money as a small or big-block Chevy. Again-that's an irrefutable fact. Their's more speed equipment on the market for a small-block Chevy than anything else on the planet. The small-block Chevy is usually the test mule for anyone introducing anything new!!  Like it or not they offer the most "bang" for the buck. Sure, a 360 Mopar, or 360 AMC or 350 Olds, or 351W or 351C Ford can run every bit as strong as a 350 Chevy. At 2 or 3 times the cost. Ditto for the big-blocks. Like it or not-Nothing makes more power for less money than a Chevy Rat Motor. Yes a Chrysler Hemi or Boss Nine Ford can make as much or more power-at two or three times the cost. Cases in Point-GMPP sells 454HO crate engines for $5995. Their rated at 440 hp and 500 lbs of torque. A Mopar Performance 426 crate Hemi makes 465 hp and 490 lbs of torque. And sells for $ 14,995.  GMPP's "King Kong" Rat-the 572-makes 720 hp and sells for $17,995.  Mopar Performance's 528 Crate Hemi makes 625 hp and sells for $22,725.  Jon Kaase has a 600 inch Boss-Nine that makes 912 hp and 826 lbs of torque. For the tidy sum of $36,999!!!   The same goes for other restoration parts-be it body parts, interior trim, suspension parts, etc. GM stuff if going to be the cheapest, followed by Chrysler, then Ford. AMC people have a real rough time. A Chevelle or GTO is going to cheaper to restore than a Road Runner. A Mustang is going to be way easier and cheaper than a Javelin. Like it or not that's the state of the business right now. Parts companies are in business to make money. Your going to sell a lot more stuff for a '70-81 Camaro / Firebird than you are of something that only fits '72-73 Mercury Montego GT's!!!  The same for sports car guys. A Triumph Spitfire or MGB is cheaper to restore than  a Datsun 240 / 260 / 280Z, which is cheaper to restore than a Porsche 911, which is cheaper to restore than a Ferarri 308 GTS !!  So I'm not "Bashing" anything when I'm giving advice; I'm trying to save people money and frustration!!  If that's "Biased" then I guess there's nothing I can do about it. Mastermind