According to You: The worst engines you’ve experienced

Check engine light
Getty Images

We recently asked about the worst engines you’ve experienced in your lifetime, and you certainly delivered. Perhaps too well, as the responses were overwhelming. How on earth could we cover all the bad engines made over the years? Our solution to this (wonderful) problem was thus: we thinned the herd down to responses that specifically included personal experiences that add a little more value than just the usual re-hashing of the same stories you’ve heard elsewhere.

Let’s get right to it!

The Iron Duke four-cylinder

Uh, sure…why not? Pontiac

Charles A Parent said that the worst engine he ever owned was a Pontiac Iron Duke that “constantly ate Throttle Position Sensors and cracked the cast iron exhaust manifold three times.”

While the inclusion of TPS sensors suggests it might be the later TECH IV design, combining that with a four-speed shifter “that was prone to locking, in or out of gear” caused him to Lemon Law the car.

VW Type 412 1.8-liter flat-four

Heritage Parts Centre

Hagerty Community user lasersailor came in strong with this one:

“I’ve got you all beat. 1679cc flat 4 in my parents 1972 VW411 wagon with a wimpy 3-speed auto transmission. Two fires caused by improper fuel injection repair at the so-called dealer in Florida. The 2nd fire caused near total immolation. Plus it was slower than a Pinto or Vega.”

Toyota 3VZ-E V-6

Toyota

Hagerty Community member John Nichols gave a very balanced perspective on one of the more desirable and durable engines from Toyota, because sometimes tearing into something can turn into quite a shock:

“I recently got involved with a 1992 Toyota V-6 rebuild. The truck had a blown head gasket, the oil was full of water. Obviously these vehicles have a huge cult following of being amazingly reliable which I’m sure is well deserved.

HOWEVER when things do start to go it will cost you and assembly must be performed like a surgical operation. Parts and pieces and shrouds, crossover exhaust converters not to mention miles of vacuum lines weird little filters and of course the timing belt alignment are all part of the problem, not to mention the famous under the manifold sensor wire.

Ordinarily working on engines can be kind of fun be it a small block or an English roadster, although you have to make little tweaks often and pay attention to detail the reward of a few hours attention is measurable performance improvement.”

Chrysler 2.2-liter four-cylinder

Plymouth

This one might spark some controversy, as Chrysler’s 2.2-liter engine was designed specifically for a new platform and a new automotive reality. That said, Hagerty Community member David likely had an older model, but his experiences are certainly worth a read:

“As I recall memories of the early 80’s K Car with that darn 2.2 liter I feel a tension headache coming on. That engine had more use as a boat anchor, and I remember my poor dad spent more time and dollars repairing shoddy engineering design.

Crazy but true, when I got my licence and started to drive – I took that K Car to town and the engine actually fell out of the car! The front motor mount failed in the middle of an intersection. I guess even the car itself was sick of that engine and tried to spit it out.”

I reckon that A. Raymond had it even worse, but at least the dealership asked him a rather hilarious question:

“I had a Chrysler 2.2 non turbo forced upon me as a young fellow. Driving home from work in rush hour traffic, the engine decided it was time to digest itself. (It had 25,000 miles on it at the time.) The dealership accused me of ‘racing’. I laughed long and hard at the suggestion and told them I wouldn’t be doing too much racing with 88 hp.

After begrudgingly replacing the motor under warranty, I drove it another 3 months before selling it to another unfortunate schmuck. It was the worst thing I have ever had the displeasure of having to drive. I look back now and still laugh at that ‘you must have been racing’ suggestion.”

Oldsmobile Quad 4 four-cylinder

Oldsmobile

Brian was pretty sick of the Iron Duke in his 1985 Cutlass Calais, noting it was reliable but also “noisy and weak.” So imagine his delight when the Quad 4 made a splash in 1987:

“I was so excited to get one of the first Quad 4s. More power and much quieter. My love affair ended at 67,000 miles when it had a complete meltdown out of warranty. My very last GM car.”

And then we heard from Tom:

“Yes, I had the Quad 4 in a Pontiac Grand Am. Delightful, until the head gasket failed. Dealership near my work (different state from purchase point) tried really hard not to cover the failure but, after showing how much coolant I was adding, did a cheap fix. Probably tore it down to only replace the head gasket because it failed again, just out of warranty.

At that point, I was back where I bought the car, and they repaired it again, but it still didn’t seal. Any time I got in traffic, it would overheat and blow out the coolant. Tried checking the cooling system (radiator, etc.) without finding any issues. Aluminum head must have been significantly warped by that point. Finally sold that car. Too bad as it was fine as long as it was moving.”

Honda CVCC four-cylinder

Honda

Dan T Man takes us over to Honda, a brand we don’t usually hear about in this context. But he noted that the “1751 CC engine in the original Honda Accord was known to develop a head gasket leak between the #3 and #4 cylinders every 30,000 miles.” He said that it ran fine otherwise, and learned that “when the engine lost about 50 rpm at idle it was time for another change” of the head gasket.

AJD went further:

“My first brand-new car was a 1977 Honda Civic CVCC. Within 60K miles it had eaten 3 water pumps and blown its head gasket. The head gasket had been recalled but would not be replaced until blown. It really blew up nicely and the engine never ran right again.”

Buick 3.8-liter (Malaise Era) V-6

Buick

Don’t take this as a slam on Buick’s tried-and-true, 90-degree, 3.8-liter V-6. Odds are the problems that Dwayne Wertman experienced came from the Malaise Era engineering mounted to its induction and exhaust systems.

“I bought a new 1981 Oldsmobile Cutlass V-6. The engine would ping and rattle just trying to keep up with traffic. Often times it would stall in the intersection. I returned to the dealership on many occasions. It was a really good dealership, [because] after eight months they bought back and all I lost was tax and license.”

eagerdever drives home the point of this being an issue from the 1970s and early 1980s:

“I experienced oiling problems accompanied by valve train noise and the engine light in a 3.8 V-6 in a ’79 Olds Cutlass wagon. I’d stop and let the engine cool down, and then be on my way. The crankshaft finally broke in half. Because it broke on the diagonal, the engine continued to run, though poorly. A co-worker had similar problems with that engine in a Grand Prix, replaced under warranty. Another co-worker lost the engine in his Buick Skyhawk (the Buick version of the Chevy Monza). All three were due to poor oiling.”

Mitsubishi 4G54 four-cylinder with Mazda sprinkles

1987 Mazda B-series Sajeev Mehta

While the Buick was a victim of engineering mandates of the era, apparently Mazda shot themselves in the foot with a half-baked design made with no third-party intervention!  Check out Arthur Hill’s fascinating tale of deceit:

“In 1988, as my family grew to 4, I needed to trade my Toyota 4X4 Pickup for one of the new ones with actual back seats to hold the two children. Unfortunately Toyota did not produce one until a few years later, but Mazda had a very nice looking B2600 4X4 that had back seats. This truck had the worst engine I ever had to deal with.  I quickly discovered that if you really put your foot into it under a load, the engine would stutter and almost stall. Many trips to the dealer failed to solve this issue.

Finally a mechanic took me aside and admitted that Mazda rushed the truck into production without having an engine big enough, so they used a Mitsubishi 2.6 engine instead, but to make it easier to work on for their service people, they adapted their own accessories including the carburetor. Under load the only way the engine could get enough fuel was to link both barrels together all the time.

Needless to say, Mazda dropped this truck and you never see any on the road. Terrible truck with a terrible engine, but the actual Mitsubishi 2.6 engine was probably fine in their own vehicles.”

Mitsubishi 4G54/Chrysler HEMI 2.6-liter four-cylinder

2040 Parts

No, not that Hemi. Or that one. We’re talking about the hemi-headed Mitsubishi 2.6-liter used on the Chrysler K-car and its derivatives. Chris Harshman said that the “worst engine I ever had was a 4-cylinder Mitsubishi engine in my 1982 Dodge 400. I used to joke with my friends that I could accelerate from 0-to-35 in 12 seconds.”

Subaru boxer flat-four/flat-six

Subaru

BobJ chimed in with one of the more offensive engines in modern history: the head gasket-munching Subaru boxer. But unlike other stories here, he made the same mistake twice.

“Had a 2005 and a 2010. Both blew head gaskets. Out of warranty but I complained and Subaru of America paid for half. Everyone complains about poor head gasket design & construction but I also wonder about open deck block design.”

GM 2.4-liter Ecotec four-cylinder

General Motors

Hagerty Community member Rob keeps us in a more modern era, with a problem with the Ecotec 2.4-liter mill in his 2010 Chevrolet Equinox.

“Here’s a counterpoint for everyone who marvels at the reliability of modern cars. Launched just after GM’s bankruptcy, I should have known they probably cut corners on validation but couldn’t pass up a nice sized SUV that cracked 30 mpg.

It went through numerous high pressure fuel pumps. The timing chain tensioner went bad. The variable cam timing system went out and timing chain would slap like crazy when you started it. It had a bad heat treat on a pin in the cam shaft. Started burning over a quart of oil every 1000 miles and was rebuilt under warranty just before 50k Powertrain warranty expired. And I never got anywhere near 30 mpg on the highway.”

Ford 1.5-liter Ecoboost four-cylinder

Ford

Steve notes that his 2015-vintage, 1.5-liter, Ford EcoBoost engine is “absolute garbage compared to every other engine I’ve had the pleasure (or displeasure) of operating.” His example needed a new long block after 60,000 miles, and this helped him create a visionary notion about the EcoBoost’s promise of power and efficiency in a single engine:

“The reality is that you can’t have it all and ultimately lose out due to the extra complexity and stresses on the engine. I am not sure if the other EcoBoost variants are like this and I don’t care to find out personally.”

Holden Starfire four-cylinder

AbdullahKhanz | Wikipedia

Mr. Nigel Utting takes us to the Land Down Under, reminding us that “GM Holden came up with an abominable 1.9 liter 4 cylinder named the Starfire.” The lack of power likely made Nigel’s comments far from the minority, with fuel economy numbers there were disappointing to boot:

“Based on a cut down six, this god-awful thing used to have a couple of seconds delay between hitting the accelerator and responding, a bit like downloading revs of the internet with a slow connection.”

Ford Cologne V-6

Ford

While Ford of Germany contributed greatly to the automotive landscape in Europe and the USA alike, Patrick Abbott reminds us that the Cologne V-6 wasn’t necessarily one of them. His example “regularly destroyed rocker arm assemblies and main bearings” while Richard Eaton was truly cursed with a lemon:

“I purchased a new, 1990 Ford Ranger with the 2.9-liter V6. Should have seen this coming when the transmission had to be replaced 4x for porous castings, and then both heads cracked under a recall. But then less than 50k miles after those heads they were again cracked sufficiently to turn the oil white in 1000 miles. Never again will I buy Fords.”

The Oldsmobile Diesel V-6

Oldsmobile

TerryTwoUtes picked up an example of an engine that history hasn’t looked too favorably upon: the Oldsmobile diesel.

“My parents had a ’78 Oldsmobile Delta 88 diesel, the dreaded 350 diesel engine derived from the gasser engine. After about 5–6 blown head gaskets and even one full short block replacement, it was finally traded off. Only good thing was GM trying to save face and all of those repairs were covered under extended warranty.”

Cadillac HT4100 V-8

Cadillac

Speaking of obvious punching bags, Hagerty Community member Coffeyclan reminds us all how low Cadillac went upon the introduction of this “High Technology” motor:

“The worst was Cadillac’s HT4100 engine. Acceleration was at a snail’s pace, the timing chain went bad twice, etc, etc, etc. I sold this car before the warranty ran out!”

Detroit Diesel “Fuel-Squeezer”

Detroit Diesel

The one, the only, the legendary DUB6 threw us a curveball, thanks to his experience driving commercial trucks:

“In the mid-’70s, I drove longhaul truck for a fleet operator that leased their rigs. Most of the trucks had Cat engines and either 13 or 18 speed transmissions. As fuel prices rose during the embargo period, the leasing company offered up a Kenworth needle-nose with Detroit Diesel “Fuel-Squeezer” and 6 speed tranny to test out. Guess who was low enough on the pole to get picked to drive it for what was supposed to be 3 months?

That thing was so gutless – and the gear ratios so far apart – that even on the slightest grade, I was lucky to be able to manage 20 mph, loaded. Empty, it might get to 50 downhill, but then of course, there would be a corresponding upgrade. Fuel squeezing? Hardly. Most of the big Cats were averaging 4.5-5 mpg. This little longnose managed about 6.0 – mostly because the throttle had to be just about wide open all the time just to maintain forward momentum.

Maybe would have been fine for a flat-land operation, but in the mountainous WEST, it was pretty sad. My trips started taking up to twice as long as was projected, and several appointments would be missed every week. After about 8 weeks, the truck went back to Kenworth!”

Toyota 18R-C four-cylinder

Toyota

Let’s be clear on one thing: This isn’t a slam on all Toyota 18R engines, only the California-spec motor aimed at reducing emissions. Pete notes that the 18R-C was never designed for durability:

“I am a car guy and former auto mechanic. By far the worst designed and engineered engine was a Toyota 18R-C. I have had experience with more than one, and they all burned valves every 15,000 miles even after Toyota did a factory upgrade to “fix” the problem (which it did not). I drove the car for 75,000 miles and did 5 valve jobs before I woke up and sold it for $500, it did have a good clock though.”

Chevrolet 2300 four-cylinder

Chevrolet

Of course the 2300 motor would make the list, as there were three negative comments to this effect. It didn’t help that the early Vegas weren’t the most reliable dance partner, and NCB chimed in with a personalized tale of ownership:

“I owned a 1973 Vega GT. Yes, I’m dating myself. First, and worst car I ever owned. Engine overheated due to poor cooling system design which led to scored cylinder walls in the aluminum block. It drank oil! Bad valve stem seals and “rusting away to nothing in 5 years” were icing on the cake. MotorTrend Car of The Year in 1971!”

 

Read next Up next: Mazda boss: Long live Miata, Jeep’s “death wobble” case update, NHTSA probes 1.9M Ford Explorers
Your daily pit stop for automotive news.

Sign up to receive our Daily Driver newsletter

Subject to Hagerty's Privacy Policy and Terms of Conditions

Thanks for signing up.

Comments

    And the Oscar goes to… The GM/Olds Northstar 4.0 liter V8. It should have made the list at the number 1 position. An absolute undiluted lump of irreparable garbage.

    I hesitate to call something a terrible engine because owners refused to do the required maintenance. No one, I mean almost no one changed the coolant as recommended in earlier aluminum and aluminum head cars.

    If you went by the manufactures recommendations none of these cars, including Northstars of Subaru Boxer engines lose head gaskets. In fact Subaru specified to add the GM coolant addictive tablets to their engines every year, just as Cadillac did.

    Additionally, the Vega 2.3L only burnt excessive oil because owners refused to change the oil as directed and expected them to take it just just like an old cast iron small block Chevy. Chevrolet, finally put in ’76 and that ended that but too late, the rep was established.

    The mention of the Honda CVCC is simply hilarious, once again, lack of coolant replacement, period.

    After 40m years in the business (ending 8 years ago) I remember 2 especially bad engines not mentioned.

    1. Chevy Z34 3.4L DOHC, simply miserable to work on.

    2. Ford 3.8 V6. Talk about head-gasket failures, they had plenty but as i stated earlier, usually due to lack of maintenance, but they were also miserable to work on.

    I would have to say the Chrysler 2.2 L four is right up there with the worst engine in the last 40 years or so. had one blew an entire cylinder head and engine. Got rid of the entire car shortly after it came back after 2 months at a dealer being replaced. Not mentioned is the recent 4.2 L inline 6 from GM in all the Chev Trailblazers and Envoys. 2001 +. Had to be the worst engine in the last 20 years.

    Only GMAC would finance me in 1980 so I purchased a 1980 Chevy Citation with the 2.8 L LE2 V6. The car was constantly in the shop. The only car I’ve had that had metal power steering lines break twice spraying fluid everywhere and marring the paint. The CEL was on more than it was off. We lovingly call that car The Shitation. I took a trip in a 1973 Vega and I agree that one belongs on the list.

    My 2011 Mini Cooper S required a new engine at 100K due to exceptional oil consumption and carbon buildup on the valves (bad bearings and valves too far gone for shell blasting). I’ve learned that direct injected engines leave the valves in bad shape in short order. I’m now at 162K and starting to see the same issues with the former engine. I change oil at 5K religiously and I’ve installed an oil catch can, all to little avail. Asking BMW for help gets a hearty laugh! Really disappointed as the car is a blast to drive!

    I worked at a Cadillac dealership from the 1980’s through the 1990’s. I experienced both the V8-6-4 and the HT 4100 firsthand. The Cadillac V8-6-4 was a great engine saddled with electronics that were not sophisticated enough to prevent vibration when the engine was in six-cylinder mode. That was the main complaint. We never had any mechanical failures with 368 other than oil leaks from the plastic valve covers. The V8-6-4 function of the 368 only worked when it was in third gear so all you had to do was disconnect the third gear pressure switch at the transmission and it would stay in eight cylinder mode all the time. They actually got better gas mileage when running on eight cylinders all the time.

    The HT 4100 was a victim of gasket technology that was not capable of sealing dissimilar metals. The block was aluminum with iron wet sleeves, iron heads and an aluminum intake manifold. The intake manifold would expand at a different rate than the heads flattening the intake gaskets causing the intake bolts to loose their torque. Once the intake gasket started to leak, coolant got in the oil and it wore out the camshafts and the bearings. Usually they leaked just enough to ruin the lubricating properties of the oil but not enough to make a milkshake out of the oil. GM had a “coolant mod” campaign where you put SIX Bars-Leaks pellets in the radiator and changed the oil. It didn’t work very well. We replaced camshafts, crankshafts and bearings constantly while these engines were under warranty. It took GM seven years to figure it out but when they came up with a graphite coated intake gasket with Beville spring intake bolts, the problems stopped. The engines would last forever after that. Those gaskets first came out on the 1989 4.5 L V8 and they were very reliable. Your comments about the HT 4100 being gutless is very true but nothing in the early 1980’s was very powerful.

    The Chrysler 2.2L “Fell out of the car”??? Seriously? That’s describing a poor motor (that really was bullet proof)???

    Back in the day I lived about mile from a VW mechanic. I lost count how many fuel injected 411’s pulled over on fire in front of my house.

    How about every engine the English ever built (with exception to the 3.8/4.2L straight 6 in the XKE’s)

    Impossible to get at nuts and bolts in severely outdated thread pitch and size combinations, intake and exhaust on the same side of the head, heavier than a Panzer tank, most originally designed as irrigation pumps, I could go on and on.

    If you’ve ever had the displeasure of working on one yourself, you’d agree I’m sure.

    How could you not include the infamous GM (Oldsmobile) V-8 diesels of the 1980’s? I was dumb enough to have had two. Both engines failed. What a piece of crap!

    Find it hard to believe that Ford’s 2.0 VVT isn’t on this list endless timing chain, sprocket , pin, etc. issues.
    Even with service at specified dealer intervals eventually Range Rover ended up footing most of the bill but with many headaches included.
    I believe they don’t want it to be public knowledge its Ford’s baby with English Ford FOMOCO stamped everywhere inside.

    I’ve owned a few of these and have had markedly better experiences. I didn’t abuse them (not too much) and was religious about servicing.

    2.2L in a 1985 LeBaron GTS: trouble free (engine-transmission) for well over 100k miles – 136k when sold 8 years later. We had a drivability issue early on that no dealer had a clue about – shop manual even had incorrect info. MOTOR magazine printed a Mopar service bulletin that finally corrected the situation.

    2.9L motor in a 1988 Ranger 2wd. Trouble free (engine-transmission) for 13 years and 181k miles when traded. Salesman bought it for his mom after taking it in as a trade. Oil pan gasket was leaking by this time – only normal wear and tear parts replaced and maintenance items on both motors.

    I forgot about my experience with the Buick 3.8L V6 in my ‘new for 1978’ downsized Monte Carlo. First year of the even firing crankshaft in the 3.8L. Traded after 2 years and 24k miles. Local carburetor rebuild shop corrected the drivability issues (not legal but they did a brisk business) but the motor consumed a quart of oil every 750 miles – Chevrolet stated this was in the ‘normal’ range. Drivetrain reliable otherwise.

    Numerous exterior trim pieces and all dash instruments failed (except the speedometer) or fell off of the car after the warranty expired. My first ‘brand new’ car. I actually traded this car for a 1 year old 1979 Sedan Deville – hoping no trim would fall off before the deal for the Cadillac was completed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *