Engine (top) covers - your opinions?

Status
Not open for further replies.

wemay

Site Donor 2023
Joined
Apr 4, 2012
Messages
17,320
Location
Everglades
I hate them. The Vehicle mfcs claim it's for reducing engine noise but i've always been of the opinion that it disguises leaks and muffles abnormal engine sounds that could point towards something going wrong. I also would rather look at the engine rather than a plastic cover.
 
The top cover, not the skid plate which i think does protect the engine from road debris being kicked up.
 
Some engine covers I have removed in the past. To me it just depends how the engine looks without it and its purpose.

Like with the KIA i removed the plastic covers and went with a painted valve cover and aluminium coil cover vs the stock plastic cover.
 
Holding the heat in and keeping water off of the FI and coils might be good in the Winter. Other wise ive really dislike Hyundia kia engine covers. Not Asthetcally pleasing.


I recall marveling at the mechanically FI Alfa Romero in 1969 (?) with my father when car shopping.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Alfred_B
OP, you have new cars. They should not have abnormal engine noises.


They don't
smile.gif
 
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Other wise ive really dislike Hyundia kia engine covers. Not Asthetcally pleasing.


BINGO! I think they look like afterthoughts. It's just a pet peeve of mine i guess.
 
My car's engine cover is even more annoying than most because I have to remove it to top off the oil, which I have to do every 1000-2000 miles. The oil consumption is basically a feature of the engine's design, so it seems silly to me that Mazda would add a barrier. At least it's mind-numbingly simple to remove and put back on.

Not sure why I still keep mine on. A lot of RX-8 owners seem to like to leave it off. I don't like the way it looks, and probably wouldn't notice any extra NVH. But... meh...
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
Do you think that the manufacturer puts anything on the car without reason?


No, i shared the reason Hyundai gives for the engine cover. "Noise reduction." Which, BTW, i haven't noticed since removing it from the Sonata.

Still contemplating the Turbo's cover.
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
My car's engine cover is even more annoying than most because I have to remove it to top off the oil, which I have to do every 1000-2000 miles. The oil consumption is basically a feature of the engine's design, so it seems silly to me that Mazda would add a barrier. At least it's mind-numbingly simple to remove and put back on.

Not sure why I still keep mine on. A lot of RX-8 owners seem to like to leave it off. I don't like the way it looks, and probably wouldn't notice any extra NVH. But... meh...
21.gif



+1
 
I just like a clean (not shiny) engine-bay where i can see everything.
 
I take them off. I believe the manufactures put the cover on for aesthetic reasons. I think the cover traps heat. On my VW the coils(COP) failed less frequently with the cover off.
 
I finally removed the cover from my 04 escape.It requires a deep 8mm socket and ratchet to remove just to look at the water pump belt or anything else practically. Not good if you have a problem on the road and just want to have a quick look.
 
Originally Posted By: wemay
I also would rather look at the engine rather than a plastic cover.


Same here, and I'm pretty sure that's part of the reason that SRT Challengers/Chargers don't have full engine covers but the regular models do (SRTs do have simulated "valve covers" that actually cover the coils and look a little like old-school cast aluminum valve covers). Gearheads like an engine to look like an engine.

http://www.seriouswheels.com/pics-2011/def/2011-Dodge-Challenger-SRT8-392-Engine-1920x1440.jpg

That said, the full cover on Caddy CTS-V's is kinda neat in its own way for being so complete and totally non-gearhead-ish.

http://image.motortrend.com/f/18538248%2Bw750/112_0907_15z%2B2009_cadillac_CTS-V%2Bengine.jpg
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top