My opinion is that everything will eventually wear out, and anything maintained badly will suffer from it. That being said, I don't feel the 4.7 is any better or worse than the 5.2 or 5.9. I picked the 4.7 because I don't tow anything, I do pack mine full of stuff to haul once in a while, and the engine has more than enough power to do what I want it to. When I floor it it does take off just fine. I'll go with the guys that say what you need/want from the truck should be what makes the decision. If you plan on using it as a daily driving car and want the best MPG (I get 13-15 in mine, but I'm a big lead foot, I have got up to about 20 if I go easy on it) THen get the 4.7, if you want to build it up, go with one of the others, and the 5.9 is definitely the best one for towing.

 

 

+1 This has become a very interesting thread........

 

My parents have a 2006 4.7 (different gen, I know) but they had a timing chain issue and it made the oil pump quit working and it toasted the motor. $3500 later and she runs great! Happened around 90k.

 

I take offense to that Hammer. I don't bring arguments to the table, I just simply correct the miss information that a lot of users post on the forum with "true" and corrected information. In your post you had miss information, I corrected your analysis, with that you took offense.

The reason is, you made a statement, which wasn't completely diagnosed because of "internet" miss information, and used Master Tech's name to boast your statement. The fact of the matter was it was incorrect, as stated, respectfully. With that said, Master even agreed with me for that matter, but I'm not going to bring him or anyone into a statement simply to boast my persona, I stand alone.

As for this being an argument, it never was, it is debate, but you don't like it. Here is the definition of an argument, for argumentative sake:
an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation
a statement, reason, or fact for or against a point

I am correcting the miss information, not disagreeing entirely with your points. You made basic blank statements and I cleaned them up with all the correct information so that users would be correctly informed. I apologize if you take this as "arguing" because it's not.

I wasn't raised in a box, and I can't even comprehend why you would say something like that? Of course people think there was a great motor backed with a crappy transmissions, just like people think there's nothing but sludge in Chrysler engines. The fact of the matter is; it is incorrect information, period!......People still think this way and if those people think that then they need to be taught the truth.

215 F is hot enough to do damage, especially in an aluminum head and cast block motor with metal parts. This is why I don't own one, and don't even like them. I've even seen valves pop out in cast engines at 215 F. This is one reason I push for a 180 T-stat in all engines if it can be used. 195 F is only for emissions and driver comfort, not what the engines like.

Like I said before, I'm not trying to start an argument.

 

I agree with 180* t stats. Vehicles seem to run better and have less wear and tear

 

When you say to get a chain kit, is that a complete kit including chains, sprockets, guides, and tensioners or are you good to just replace the guides and tensioners? Reason I ask is that I did mine some 30k ago when a head went (overheated & found crack in the head). I checked over the chains and sprockets closely and could find no evidence of wear. The guides were also in good shape with the only real wear on the left upper chain guide and that was minimal. I replaced the guides and tensioners, but put the rest back in.

FWIW, I've found the 4.7 to be as good as anything else out there. Decent gas mileage, runs well, and is probably has one of the smoothest idles I've ever seen. I'm sitting at 172k miles as of this morning and have no doubt that I'll see 200k soon.

Thanks!

Bob

 

I have a 4.7 and I have looked for a 180 degree tstat but can only find them for the 5.9. do they make a 180 for the 4.7? if so if anyone got one where did they get it at?

 

the 180 stat is a bad idea for the 4.7, it is very picky about the style of stat that it gets so only use OEM style 195deg stats

 

NO, I did NOT bring Master Tech's name into my post to "boast". I simply NAMED MY SOURCE as I, like MOST was completely unaware that valve seat failures were common in the 4.7 until he told me that it was in deed the case. Simple as that.

As for misinformation, excuse me for lumping the 5.2 tranny with the 5.9, brain fart I guess, woops!




I would NEVER have thought 215* would crap out an engine and I'm still not sure it's the cause for my dropped valve seat. If that's the case, then Chrysler has engineered a total POS engine IMO...