Ecoboost Intake Valve Carbon build up ?

[OffTheWall503]

We are having an interesting discussion on Bob Is The Oil Guy if you would like to peek in. Someone had a valid comment here:

From what I've read, several GDI engines (eg the ones from Ford & Hyundai) seem to be relatively problem free. However the horrendously bad problems Audi ran into with their 2.0L TFSI engines point to what can happen if things go wrong with GDI engines. One shouldn't dismiss this lightly. Regardless of what you think of The Germans, the TFSI was an advanced design, well engineered bit of kit and the Audi engine oils were state-of-the-art, highly specified synthetics. That the engines were prone to awful deposit formation (both IVD & CCD) and excessive oil consumption says to me that with GDI, you need to be particularly wary of The Law Of Unintended Consequences.

If you ask me what three things to look out for in buying a GDI engine oil, I would say Noack, Noack & Noack. You want it to always be as low as possible because you fundamentally want to keep the oil in the crankcase and out of the combustion chamber. You should IMO, compromise every other aspect of your oil's performance (eg fuel economy & cold start) in pursuit low volatility. A full PAO 10W30 would be my first choice oil.

To me, the focus on Calcium/SAPS is somewhat misplaced. If you look at murder victims, they are often covered in blood. We all know that blood should be on the inside, not the outside and that having too much on the outside and not enough on the inside will kill you. However we generally don't blame 'the blood' as the cause death. Rather we look for the person who made the stab wound or fired the bullets! In GDI engines, calcium is like blood. The question is why is it where it shouldn't be and what's causing oil to cycle round your engine in dastardly ways...

PS - Forget TEOST. It's won prestigious awards for being The Most Stupidest Lubricant Test Ever Developed. Just remember, no-one was ever stuck on the side of the road because their TEOST broke down...

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4040332/1

It seems Mobil1 5W20 both standard and EP are the best in terms of low (below 10%) NOACK and SAPS at 0.8% (lower to mid).

 

[Sourskittle]

What is there to figure out? It's a fact of life for DI engines and is made worse by EGR, which is necessitated by environmental regulations. You can't prevent it, but you can deal with it fairly easily with walnut blasting. All I can figure is Ford either thinks there is not enough demand for it to be profitable as a service at dealerships or they don't trust their techs to do it.

The problem is.... They built a product and they have NO INTENTION of standing behind it or beside it.

Mean to tell me Ford had no idea this was going to happen?

I think your 1,000% correct with your idea of ford not trusting techs to do it. And since it happens slightly after warranty is out, I guess its no big deal at all for ford... So that means they are released of all wrong doing? What is ford's claim to blame in all this? No bad rep? No lost money? No repercussions ?

We build an engine that is likely to need a cylinder head replaced or cleaned to the tune of $2,000 every 60k miles, and we basically don't care or offer a solution because either way, your going to buy another ford ( DSG ford focus owners know what I'm talking about. They all went out traded there junk focus in and got what? A focus ST? A mustang V6 or 5.0? Boy.... That's really hurting ford's feelings. That will teach them !! I buy a focus for $23k. 2 years and 10 trans service tickets later, I'm sick of it and ask ford to buy it back. Of course ford refuses. So you trade it in and get $8k for it because it has the "transmission that no body wants", and THEN, you buy a $28k focus ST, lmao.

I laugh.... But... How many 6.0L powerstroke guys got hosed on $50k trucks when they traded them in on 6.4L $55k trucks ? Then got hosed on trade in on a $60k 6.7L ?

The pattern is.... Build junk. People buy junk. People have issues and wanna get rid of junk. Give people less money for junk because its junk. Then sell them new junk that will rapid become bad junk forcing them to take less money for their junk for you to sell them MORE JUNK.

Its like zero accountability. And it blows my mind, people go through these issues and.... Buy another ford.

Such appealing cars.... Such cool engines. Nice driving cars/trucks. Poor reliability, and from my experience ( and other mechanics I know ), almost a total lack of support from Ford when you ask them to stand behind stuff. And I'm not talking modded up 400whp cars. I'm talkinh fusions. Focus's. Diesel trucks. Geezzzz.... I'm prob the worst one to get started on lack of standing behind a product because of mods.... They refused to replace the oil cooler on my buddies 6.0L diesel truck with 32k miles on it. It was bone stock minus a banks tuner. There is/was a TSB on those trucks for oil coolers failing. They refused to fix the truck unless he paid them $1700 !!! A 32k mile $52k truck. The tuner has 0% to do with a known problem.

So many examples and stories... I guess I should be super pro ford because I love my fist, but.... It would be nice if they could help the people that made them ENORMOUSLY successful over the last couple years by fixing things right, not refusing to work on a car with the air bag light on because the owner has a upgraded downpipe or change a known problem oil cooler because a truck has a tuner.... Even just meet some people half way !!!???? But why would they..... We're all lining up to buy a $46k ford focus, lmao.

Rant over.... Lol

I think I just talked myself into selling this... Any bids? Lol.

 

[FORZDA 2]

I can tell you for a fact that WMI with a very small nozzle or flow rate will keep the valves clean and in fact will clean dirty valves if run consistently over time. My Mazda 2.3 DISI in my MS6 taught me that for sure. Of course I ran the now defunct Labonte kit injected at the TB with a single nozzle. I will eventually install a WMI kit on the FiST. It has ~21k miles so far with OCC for the past 5k.

 

[Sourskittle]

I can tell you for a fact that WMI with a very small nozzle or flow rate will keep the valves clean and in fact will clean dirty valves if run consistently over time. My Mazda 2.3 DISI in my MS6 taught me that for sure. Of course I ran the now defunct Labonte kit injected at the TB with a single nozzle. I will eventually install a WMI kit on the FiST. It has ~21k miles so far with OCC for the past 5k.

Good point. I'm all for 100% fist participation in meth/water injection !!

 

[RAAMaudio]

We live in the land of castaways, nobody wanted most of those that came here, the rest came here to exploit them, not many people think beyond the video they are fed. Just the way it is though getting a little better over time, or is that just the optimist part of me talking?

A little over 3 years ago I bought a new $60k dually, got it for $47k. I looked at all of them just to satisfy my curiosity, the Ford interior seemed to have 4 different design teams involved in different areas, some was very very nice, some was incredibly mismatched, poor quality. The Dodge was the best in the inside, both of those had very poor history in reliability except the Cummins engine, at least that company knew they did not know how to build one, pay a ton for it and then have to pay more for the optional transmission that might last a bit longer. I bought a Chevy, best history in the Alison transmission and the Izusu Duramax is great as well. Interior rather simple and low grade but it works, one tiny problem in 3.5 years of use on the whole damn truck, HVAC switch failed, I tow a big heavy load and it is still worth what I paid for it. Of course I know I helped pay to bail out GMC, years ago the president of the company was getting grilled for the crappy cars the were making and his response was they were not in the business to build cars, it was to make money.

I see a ton of new Ford's with bolt on plastic fenders over the dually tires and wonder what makes somebody buy a $65k, or more, truck with crap like that and it still has the very mismatched interior.

Then again I had a C6 Vette, the Fiesta interior is far better, the $2500 Blose stereo from it and the Duramax dually went into the trash, pure sheat!

 

[RAAMaudio]

OK, done ranting for a bit, I could write quite a list of books on this stuff, glad we are finally waking up, we as in us, real people that have had enough

 

[dyn085]

I'm surprised that everyone thinks we're owed some kind of work. I don't think there is any other manufacturer that covers cleanings or replacements unless, just like Ford, it's within the warranty timeframe. If you don't want to deal with DI issues, don't buy another DI vehicle and you're good...


Until it's implemented on all vehicles...lol.

 

[70sstrat08]

I'm surprised that everyone thinks we're owed some kind of work. I don't think there is any other manufacturer that covers cleanings or replacements unless, just like Ford, it's within the warranty timeframe. If you don't want to deal with DI issues, don't buy another DI vehicle and you're good...


Until it's implemented on all vehicles...lol.

I'm not sure if they cover the cost but at least the other manufacturers have an approved cleaning method. Ford isn't giving us a lot here. The most frustrating part is according to Ford there is no solution beside head replacement.

If you don't like it don't buy it only works when consumers are educated about a platforms shortcomings. This is probably the first time a lot of people have run into this kind of issue.

There's a lot going in here. Some feel misinformed, some cheated and others left up a creek. It's pretty invalidating to say ahh don't be entitled Ford doesn't owe you anything. We're all car people here and have more of a connection to cars then anything else you can buy. In doing so we put a great deal of trust in a manufacturer.

 

[dyn085]

I'm not sure if they cover the cost but at least the other manufacturers have an approved cleaning method. Ford isn't giving us a lot here. The most frustrating part is according to Ford there is no solution beside head replacement.

If you don't like it don't buy it only works when consumers are educated about a platforms shortcomings. This is probably the first time a lot of people have run into this kind of issue.

There's a lot going in here. Some feel misinformed, some cheated and others left up a creek. It's pretty invalidating to say ahh don't be entitled Ford doesn't owe you anything. We're all car people here and have more of a connection to cars then anything else you can buy. In doing so we put a great deal of trust in a manufacturer.

I definitely agree with the lack of consumer education, but this has been a problem for well over a decade now, maybe even at or close to two. VW filed a patent back in 2002 addressing the issue with a proposed fix that, like all of the others, ultimately failed. Despite the fact that their idea didn't work, it should show that this isn't a 'new' issue-it's just new to many in this community because they didn't have a DI setup and probably didn't do any research into them.

That's not necessarily a member failure, btw. I didn't research DI until after I bought my first DI in 2011. But needless to say, that's why I run Mobil 1 EP, take a weekly trip of at least 30 minutes in each car (my commute handles that for me), and haven't wasted money on a catch-can.

Either way, we have it significantly better than most other DI communities. Imagine buying an RS4 and losing ten percent of your measured hp in just 10k miles. Imagine having to do a cleaning every 30k miles.

I know of ST's what are well over 100k that have had no measured effects of buildup or complaints of lost power. That doesn't necessarily mean that they haven't lost power, just that they haven't done any actual legitimate comparisons because they had no complaints. In all fairness, I've seen heads of other EB motors that had to be replaced at 30k under warranty too. Yes, we do sustain some build-up, but we really don't have any data to show exactly what degree of an 'issue' it is/isn't yet because it generally only affects certain owners.

How many FiST owners have gotten their heads replaced under warranty due to build-up so far? I can't think of a single instance, but if at all then it definitely hasn't been many.

 

[jayrod1980]

Wouldn't the ultimate fix be what Toyota and maybe a couple others do... Make the engine both direct and port injected. You get the cleaning properties and protection of port injection, with the fuel efficiency and power/high compression of a DI.

Also, I love the ecoboost 3.5. My wife's Flex has not been babied and has lived it's whole existence with a 60whp/60wtq tune and still runs great at 70k miles. Granted that's not a ton of miles, but I just changed plugs and air filter and other than oil in the intake, it runs great.

 

[Sourskittle]

Ford doing a port and DFI setup like Lexus started doing like 10+ years ago would cost ford like $0.30 per motor. We couldn't dare ask them to make that kind of investment in long term reliability. If they did, maybe people that bought a crappy car from them wouldn't be turning around and buying another crappy car from them, lol.

Tundra buddy told me yota saved $.053 cent per motor to switch from forged pistons to hyprotetic pistons at some point in the 4.7L V8 engines. Which meant his truck had to run like 6-8psi on this TRD blower while the older models ran 12psi and made like 60whp more....

How much you think it would cost ford to build a 2.0L ecoboost motor that didn't vomit pistons up randomly ? Keep in mind, the ENTIRE ENGINE cost for less than $450 to produce ( and they sell them for $6,000 ).

 

[OffTheWall503]

Only the low SAPS has been relatively undisputable. The others are still shots in the dark at best and there is evidence that low NOAK oils may be part of the problem.

I have to respectfully disagree. NOACK volatility is a measure of how resistant the oil itself is to burning. Therefore, it wouldn't make any sense to correlate any problems because of a LOW NOACK oil.

The Ford Motorcraft 5W-20 in our cars has a terrible NOACK rating of 15.2%. Compare this to 5W-20 synthetics today that range anywhere from 6 to 12%. Saying a low NOACK rating is bad for these engines is like saying that oil that burns easier is better. I don't see how that is the case.

Either way, I say switch to Mobil 1 which has a NOACK of roughly 9-10% and a SAPS of 0.8 (mid). If anything, it will only help. Not saying it would be the saving grace of these issues but anything helps. Especially if you have purchased this car new and want to nip this in the butt when it has low miles. Also, get an OCC and valve cover breather and you should be a lot better off.

The NOACK Volatility Test, otherwise known as ASTM D-5800, determines the evaporation loss of lubricants in high-temperature service. The more motor oils vaporize, the thicker and heavier they become, contributing to poor circulation, reduced fuel economy and increased oil consumption, wear and emissions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOACK_Volatility_Test

 

[dyn085]

The 2.0L has pretty much zero bearing on our 1.6L so there's really no point in constantly bringing it up as an example of our community. Besides, the majority of failures on that platform are just ring land failures which, while inconvenient, are definitely is not the worst possibility when speaking in terms of possible ways an engine can fail in relation to repair costs. It's still showing to be significantly stronger than previous comparable engines with a significantly lower failure rate.

 

[LedRobster]

Is Ford really proposing that people replace heads for carbon build-up? On my MINI it was ~$700 and a one day turn around for walnut blasting. It works great. I don't think the walnut blasting hardware is really that complicated/expensive, the issue is getting a fitting that matches the intake port to create a seal. Someone with a little know-how and a 3D printer could probably solve that easily.

Ideally, it's a process that should become standardized and be part of normal mileage based maintenance intervals. Replacing timing chain/plugs at XX,000 miles? Walnut blast while you're in there.

If Ford won't do it, hopefully smaller shops will see the money to be made offering the service. Worst case, you can do it yourself with a wire brush and a lot of patience.

 

[dyn085]

Currently yes, Ford replaces the head as they have not approved a cleaning process. With that being said, there are many FoST owners that have done their own walnut blasting and manual cleanings.

 

[LedRobster]

Currently yes, Ford replaces the head as they have not approved a cleaning process. With that being said, there are many FoST owners that have done their own walnut blasting and manual cleanings.

Wow, that seems insane. But I suppose it's generally on the customer dime.

 

[RAAMaudio]

WMI, OCC, whatever oil is the best, see what happens, that is how I am dealing with it. I do not consider that I have a warranty so for me I am just doing what I can and for the power I want as well, I plan to buy a very low mileage mileage junk yard engine and properly store it. But for most NOT getting any support from FORD sucks and is simply bad business on their part.

 

[BeansNCornbread]

I have to respectfully disagree. NOACK volatility is a measure of how resistant the oil itself is to burning. Therefore, it wouldn't make any sense to correlate any problems because of a LOW NOACK oil.

The Ford Motorcraft 5W-20 in our cars has a terrible NOACK rating of 15.2%. Compare this to 5W-20 synthetics today that range anywhere from 6 to 12%. Saying a low NOACK rating is bad for these engines is like saying that oil that burns easier is better. I don't see how that is the case.

Either way, I say switch to Mobil 1 which has a NOACK of roughly 9-10% and a SAPS of 0.8 (mid). If anything, it will only help. Not saying it would be the saving grace of these issues but anything helps. Especially if you have purchased this car new and want to nip this in the butt when it has low miles. Also, get an OCC and valve cover breather and you should be a lot better off.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOACK_Volatility_Test

Yes, but the test wasn't intended for the purpose people are attempting to infer including on BITOG since burn off is not linear. It has no relationship to oil escaping through the PCV as sump temps would never get that high. It was intended per the SAE to measure burn off IN THE RING BELT for the purpose of mitigating catalyst contamination. It is reasonably safe to say that most oils will demonstrate the same vapor behavior through the PCV given again the well documented information that burn off is not linear. I can tell you this for fact as my company changes oil types and sources in our machines we still produce the same waste oil amounts in our catch cans. I can also tell you for fact that higher NOAK produce less ash and film in our machines. Note also on BITOG the discussion you are largely reading is arm chair tribology and that the pro's (Molakule, Shannow, Tom in NJ for example) haven't and rarely chime in in those discussions. It is also reasonable to assert that if NOAK was relevant the OEMs would have jumped that route quite quickly and as discussed before the German OEM's have been spec'g high quality low NOAK oils all along and are experiencing at least the same propensity if not worse for intake valve deposits. Look up the paper I posted previously and look for the Caltex presentation. Both provide solid evidence in favor of higher NOAK. If MC blend was an issue evidence points quite clearly that it is because of the higher Ca content in the add pack. Finally, Pennzoil in one of their Q&A's clarified that NOAK has no relevance to the intake valve deposit issue.

I will say that Mobil1 is probably the number 1 or 2 choice in this context in my estimation given the studies and theory, but not solely for the NOAK. Mobil1 has increased their Mg while reducing Ca. Mg has been used in diesel oils for quite some time to mitigate exhaust valve deposits with the Mg acting as a species that destabilizes the others collecting on the valves.

 

[Sourskittle]

The 2.0L has pretty much zero bearing on our 1.6L so there's really no point in constantly bringing it up as an example of our community. Besides, the majority of failures on that platform are just ring land failures which, while inconvenient, are definitely is not the worst possibility when speaking in terms of possible ways an engine can fail in relation to repair costs. It's still showing to be significantly stronger than previous comparable engines with a significantly lower failure rate.

Lmao... Yea true.... An ecoboost 2.0L made by ford that is a DFI turbocharged 4 cylinder 16v engine is pretty much completely different from what we have. And a piston failure causing 100% engine tear down and most the time entire engine replacement is about the samething as a leaky oil pan gasket, lol.

 

[dyn085]

Lmao... Yea true.... An ecoboost 2.0L made by ford that is a DFI turbocharged 4 cylinder 16v engine is pretty much completely different from what we have. And a piston failure causing 100% engine tear down and most the time entire engine replacement is about the samething as a leaky oil pan gasket, lol.

Different block, headifold, different everything else. I guess I consider it different because of the fact that it's physically nearly 100% different as opposed to considering it the same because it's only similar in theory. It's like you saying that the K03 is the same as the KP39 because they're both turbos and made by Borg Warner.

I shouldn't even have to explain this.