Think you know where your car was made?

Jstas

Find out for real.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2009/06/19/automobiles/20090619-auto-plants-4.html

That's an interactive map of all the major brands sold IN the U.S. and a listing of not only where the engine was made and where the transmission was made but where final assembly of the vehicle is and if the it's made by unionized labor. Pretty interesting stuff.

Granted, some of the models are brand spankin' new but most on the list have been being built in those locations for the last 3-5 years and most of the plants have been in operation longer.

Don't forget to scroll all the way down and see the lists at the bottom for what is assembled in Mexico and Canada too.

thuffman03

CaNaDa is were my car was brought to life. Were the parts came I don't know.

venomclan

All U.S. made here, non-union.

Sherardp

All Japanese baby, yeah.

Kex

Wow, there were quite a few French transmissions in unexpected places in that list ... and a few vehicles assembled in Mexico that I would not have guessed in a million years, not to mention more Mexican engines in some U.S. brands than I would have thought.

French transmissions don't scare me one little bit, but Mexican engines I'm not so sure about. I guess it all depends on how good the quality control procedures are, and how well they were able to transfer the necessary know-how to "do it right".

As for our own cars, no surprises there.

Jstas

The French transmissions come from Renault who owns a controlling interest in Nissan and pretty much all of Renault Samsung. Between those two companies, probably 50% of all transmissions out there in most Japanese and European market cars are Renault-Nissan units. Hell, the sweet sounding engines in the Nissan Z cars, the Infiniti SUV's and even the GT-R can trace it's motivation source back to a Renault design in the VQ engine series.

Another chunk actually come from Peugeot who builds quite a few parts for other companies. For instance, you might have a Chrysler designed 4 speed transmission in your Neon but it was likely built under contract, in France, by Peugeot.

ND13

John,

Is it Cosworth making those V6s for Ford. I know the were originally from England, but the company has changed hands several times since its inception. VW owned it for a while.

I'm pretty sure that the 2.9L V6 my '89 Bronco II had was a Cosworth. It was WAAAAAY better than the 2.8 V^ that was available.

Jstas

ND13 wrote: »

John,

Is it Cosworth making those V6s for Ford. I know the were originally from England, but the company has changed hands several times since its inception. VW owned it for a while.

I'm pretty sure that the 2.9L V6 my '89 Bronco II had was a Cosworth. It was WAAAAAY better than the 2.8 V^ that was available.

I don't think so. Cosworth stopped doing complete production engines when Ford sold them. They do tuning of existing engines and they build race engines still but I don't think there has been an all Cosworth mill in a Ford since the Escort. But Ford dumped Cosworth as an in-house tuner around the time when they put SVT together from the racing and performance division and the SVO team.

The old 2.8/2.9L V6 in the Rangers and Broncos was the Cologne V6 and it was made by Ford of Europe in Germany. Made in Cologne, Germany to be exact. But the Ford engine from Europe now are Ford of Europe engines. That engine started out in 1968 at something like 1.8 liters. It's been in a Ford vehicle somewhere in the world since then all the way up until the Ranger dumped it in the 4.0L version for the OHC 4.0 dropped under the hood a few years ago. But the current SOHC 4.0L is derived from the Cologne V6 so technically, it's still being produced and motivating Ford, Mazda, Land Rover cars and trucks, including the current Mustang.

There was a Cosworth version of the 2.9L that was modified by Cosworth for DOHC valvetrains. It made 193 horsepower and 203 pound feet of torque. It was used only in Scorpios for the Cosworth 24v version of the Scorpio. In 1995, power got bumped to 210. But it was European market only. However, i have seen 2.9L Cosworths here that came in through Canada from owners importing that pile of crap Scorpio, probably just for the engine. I've only seen them used for race duty but there aren't many classes a car with that engine can race in because it's not original equipment. As hot as it is, it can't keep up with the crazy power being made by the more wildly supported V8's and V6's and I4's being used in open, unlimited and outlaw classes. However, it is a popular swap in Europe for a Sierra. I see websites devoted to the swap quite often and in turbocharged form, the engine can put out 400 some odd horse but that is getting to the point where the engine can't take much more abuse.

The 2.9L in your Bronco II was a redesigned 2.8L. The 2.9L eliminated the 2.8L's hot spot that cause cylinder head cracking and intake manifold failure. It did so by moving the center exhaust port to the opposite side of the cylinder so that it didn't share the same exhaust port as a neighboring cylinder. they also made the cam shafts chain driven in the 2.9L as opposed to gear driven in the 2.8L. That also reversed the rotation of the cams and made for a more favorable valvetrain geometry. The problem with the 2.9L though was the intake manifold liked to warp and chew up the intake gasket which would then allow the coolant crossover to dump coolant in the cylinders and really cause a problem. While it did happen, it wasn't as common as one would think. Certainly alot better than cracked cylinder heads and intakes or gear driven timing sets with nylon teeth that would wear out and lock up the valvetrain making a piston get up close and personal like with an open valve.

The 2.9L was a vast improvement over the 2.8L and it got even better, pretty much bulletproof actually, in the 4.0L version. But the 2.9L still had head cracking problems around the valve stems but only on North American market models. The NA models were missing material that the European models had that gave them the extra strength. But in 1989, Ford tried to fix it and the 89TM head was born. It reduced the head cracking problems but it didn't really go away until the 4.0L came out. But honestly, after 89, unless you were beating on the truck, the 2.9L tended to last a good long time. Another issue was that if you did not do regular oil changes, the 2.9L had sludging problems. Especially if you had a leaky intake gasket. But regular maintenance on the engine it'd last a couple hundred thousand miles easily.

ND13

I just knew that it was German made and Co was in the name. I've wasted a lot of brain cells since then.:o:p;) So what you're saying is that the '92 Ranger Sport I ordered with the 4.0 V6/5 speed, that I had modded and put in 4:11 gears in the limited-slip rearend, was pretty much a jim dandy of an engine. I know that I surprised a lot of so-called performance cars with it. It was a major sleeper.

Jstas

That 4.0L was a torque monster and very favorable for off-roaders. 4.11 gears in the rear end would have made that thing scoot. It was 160 horsepower and 225 pound feet of torque stock. With a supercharger kit, power was put up to the Mustang GT/Cobra territory with 220-230 horsepower and over 300 pound feet of torque. The 4x4 versions were right around 4,000 pounds but the trucks were good for high 15 second 1/4 miles. With 4.11's you could be pretty close to 14's. I've seen 4x4 Rangers with supercharged 4.0L and 4.11's hit high 13's at the track. The SOHC versions that are out now are heavy breathers and like high RPM air flow.

Hell, the Terlingua Racer Pak from Shelby for the '08 V6 Mustang could be had with a Paxton supercharger running at 6 psi. It pushed the V6 power up to 375 horses. With the lower weight of the V6 and suspension upgrades, that V6 Mustang will spank everything short of the Supercharged Cobras from 03/04. The stock V6 only puts out about 210 horsepower. If a few tuning changes and a supercharger running at a paltry 6psi can bump power up 165 horses, that engine is seriously restricted. Imagine what an intercooled twin turbo setup could do on that wee beasty. Hell, forget the Duratec 35 in the new Taurus SHO, put the 4.0L Cologne in there with the EcoBoost setup! 400+ horsepower and 20 MPG fuel economy would be a cinch!

ND13

Mine was a 4x2 regular cab, short box. IIRC(it was 19 years ago), I put in a set custom made headers(friend owned an exhaust shop), mellow 2 3/4" cat-back exhaust, larger throttle body, Centerforce II dual friction clutch, cold air intake, I think the mass air sensor was from a 5.0 Stang, the 4:11's, plus a couple suspension mods and a bed cover. It took a while to get the launch down, but if launched correctly, it was a very quick truck. I never took it to a track, but I'd guess it's do 60 in the mid to low 5's and the 1/4 in the 13's. The fuel cutoff was eliminated, but I never changed out the speedo, so I have no clue on the top speed, but it was up there for a truck. I kept it mostly stock looking inside and out, other than the obligatory larger wheels and tires and I had all the black trim(door handles, front grill and bumpers, etc) painted body color red. It was a very sharp truck. Not bad for a truck I had less than $13k in after the mods.

MacLeod

Hmmm. Both my Dodge Rams were built in Mexico. My Nissan was built in Tennessee and my Honda was built in Ohio. Go figure.

Rivrrat

Ford F-150...All American Babeeeee.

Systems

My Camry was built in Kentucky.

GaryZ06

Corvette Z06.....Bowling Green,KY.....Pure American

AsSiMiLaTeD

I'm surprised to see so many of the Toyota models made over here, though my 4Runner was still built in japan.

[sarcasm]
It's amazing that Toyota is even able to function and build cars over here, well you know without the help of unions and all
[/sarcasm]