Here's a bit of "counterpoint" on this "non biased Cobra site"...
I've owned 2 Roush motors, a 402R and a 468SRFE. I personally put 2k of the SPF/402R's 5,500 miles before selling. It was leak free and reliable - a really nice motor. The second was the 468FE (the original motor in my Kirkham). I put on 3,500 miles. It was also leak free (
), started every time on the first try, etc. What I didn't care for was the Avenger carbs Roush is so fond of but Roush's bit's and pieces give Kirkham a run for their money.
When I had my Twin Paxton motor built, I had Tom Lucas refresh the old Roush before I sold it (I wanted to sell it in good faith, having been refreshed by an FE expert). I asked Tom, "So what's the deal with Roush?" His reply was that the components were name parts. His issue was that they left "power on the table" by not porting, and there was certainly an extra cost for the name. They also have/had a warranty that created a standard. I understand there are people who have had warranty issues but that's certainly not the norm. Other builders had to compete with said warranty and ... they're not not all here with us now. Also, it could certainly be argued that the extra cost for the Roush would be made back on resale, just ask Lance Stander.
The real issue for me is that if there's a problem, Roush won't be as responsive as the independent. It doesn't mean they're gonna leave you in the weeds, though. And for every Roush story there is, there's just as many from the little guys. In fact, my choice of Roush over an "FE god" (with the Kirkham's first motor) was due to quite a few first hand accounts from owners! Having Tom Lucas or Joe Felciano's cell number and having them pick up on a Sunday means alot and there in lies the rub. Roush's business model isn't as conducive to a good builder/customer
relationship as a Barry, Brent, Tom, George, etc. and a relationship is what you want. For a crate motor, it certainly doesn't mean Roush is persona non grata.
5Likes
Threaded Mode
