Direct Injection issues still a problem?

[sciphi]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Can you elaborate on a fuel wash? Wouldn't that contribute to fuel dilution, and the need for shorter OCIs? That certainly isn't helping conserve resources or protect the environment.


Fuel washing over the intake valves like in a multi-point fuel injection system.

Of course, having an auxiliary injector in the IM for fuel washing does defeat the purpose of tighter control of when fuel enters the cylinder.

 

[SteveSRT8]

No one here honestly believes a domestic automaker will put out a motor with a known defect, do you?

I am not familiar with anyone but Chrysler's durability testing, but they all run engines for quite some time before release to the public. The 6.1 in my car was real world road tested for almost 2 years prior to its sale.

I would be willing to bet a sizeable sum of money that Ford and GM have this issue worked out already, as there is no way either could survive a major setback. GM has already announced DI V-8's are coming next year, it's just the way we're headed.

 

[Nick R]

I just think that there are a lot on BITOG who will never trust direct injection, no matter how much it's proven or tested. That is their decision of course, but still. What are these same people going to do when GMs first HCCI engines come out? Gasoline engines that operate like diesels under most conditions. IE compression ignition with Direct Injection.
http://www.dailytech.com/GM+Hopes+to+Hav...rticle15204.htm

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
I just think that there are a lot on BITOG who will never trust direct injection, no matter how much it's proven or tested. That is their decision of course, but still. What are these same people going to do when GMs first HCCI engines come out? Gasoline engines that operate like diesels under most conditions. IE compression ignition with Direct Injection.
http://www.dailytech.com/GM+Hopes+to+Hav...rticle15204.htm


If that engine is anything like when GM thought they could take a 350 and convert it to a diesel engine I'll pass. In the example you mentioned, I'll let the early buyers do the testing for me, then read the reports. If it looks good, and I need a vehicle, and like the vehicle, then I'm in. If not I saved myself a lot of money and a headache.

 

[dishdude]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
If that engine is anything like when GM thought they could take a 350 and convert it to a diesel engine I'll pass. In the example you mentioned, I'll let the early buyers do the testing for me, then read the reports. If it looks good, and I need a vehicle, and like the vehicle, then I'm in. If not I saved myself a lot of money and a headache.


You do realize you are going back over 30 years? I think it is safe to say engineering and R&D have come quite a ways since then.

 

[jim302]

Ford, GM, Toyota, and Hyundai don't seem to have many complaints about direct injection problems. Sure, some designs from other manufacturers have had issues, but that doesn't mean the technology itself is bad. There will always be good and bad implementations of anything.

For the designs that are prone to intake valve deposits, I wonder if something like 3M's DIY fuel system cleaner would help. It includes a bottle of fuel injector cleaner, throttle body cleaner, and a special aerosol cleaner that you run directly into the throttle body with the engine running. This extra cleaner should clean off the intake valves.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
No one here honestly believes a domestic automaker will put out a motor with a known defect, do you?

I am not familiar with anyone but Chrysler's durability testing, but they all run engines for quite some time before release to the public. The 6.1 in my car was real world road tested for almost 2 years prior to its sale.

I would be willing to bet a sizeable sum of money that Ford and GM have this issue worked out already, as there is no way either could survive a major setback. GM has already announced DI V-8's are coming next year, it's just the way we're headed.



Exactly!

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
If that engine is anything like when GM thought they could take a 350 and convert it to a diesel engine I'll pass. In the example you mentioned, I'll let the early buyers do the testing for me, then read the reports. If it looks good, and I need a vehicle, and like the vehicle, then I'm in. If not I saved myself a lot of money and a headache.


You do realize you are going back over 30 years? I think it is safe to say engineering and R&D have come quite a ways since then.



Look at who made the comment....enough said

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
If that engine is anything like when GM thought they could take a 350 and convert it to a diesel engine I'll pass. In the example you mentioned, I'll let the early buyers do the testing for me, then read the reports. If it looks good, and I need a vehicle, and like the vehicle, then I'm in. If not I saved myself a lot of money and a headache.


You do realize you are going back over 30 years? I think it is safe to say engineering and R&D have come quite a ways since then.


I know how long ago it was I lived through it, and many other blunders. My point is I'll let the new design be tested by the early buyers of the technology, if it's good I'm in. I bet a lot of owners of some of the first generation of any new technology with problems wished they took that approach.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
If that engine is anything like when GM thought they could take a 350 and convert it to a diesel engine I'll pass. In the example you mentioned, I'll let the early buyers do the testing for me, then read the reports. If it looks good, and I need a vehicle, and like the vehicle, then I'm in. If not I saved myself a lot of money and a headache.


You do realize you are going back over 30 years? I think it is safe to say engineering and R&D have come quite a ways since then.



Look at who made the comment....enough said


Yep, and look who defends it. If DI was perfect why all these threads about it? I'm sure its evolving and will be perfected, then we can look back and laugh.

 

[supton]

I'll think I'll wait on DI. Nothing wrong with letting others pay for R&D (by being early adopters). I did take a chance and buy my VW, first year in the US with the PD motor; but it had been sold in Europe for something like four years by then. [Never mind that we got a different EGR system, which was problematic; and we did get soft cams and a funky oil requirement. And some balance shaft issue on the Passats, and DMF clutch issues, and...]

Once proven I'll have no issue using it, though. I had no problems using biodiesel, or switching to diesel in the first place.

 

[GMBoy]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
Originally Posted By: dishdude
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
If that engine is anything like when GM thought they could take a 350 and convert it to a diesel engine I'll pass. In the example you mentioned, I'll let the early buyers do the testing for me, then read the reports. If it looks good, and I need a vehicle, and like the vehicle, then I'm in. If not I saved myself a lot of money and a headache.


You do realize you are going back over 30 years? I think it is safe to say engineering and R&D have come quite a ways since then.



Look at who made the comment....enough said


Yep, and look who defends it. If DI was perfect why all these threads about it? I'm sure its evolving and will be perfected, then we can look back and laugh.


The threads are here because, like other issues on BITOG, some people obsess. Again - yes DI has had issues BUT NOT WITH GM OR FORD. It was Audi, VW and some others that have had serious issues and that was probably because they were the first with it. That is why I defend GM on it. You would too if you had the facts and data. This and that I own a 2008 DI Cadillac CTS coming up on 60k miles and no issues, no carbon.

 

[1999nick]

Originally Posted By: jim302
Ford, GM, Toyota, and Hyundai don't seem to have many complaints about direct injection problems. Sure, some designs from other manufacturers have had issues, but that doesn't mean the technology itself is bad. There will always be good and bad implementations of anything.

For the designs that are prone to intake valve deposits, I wonder if something like 3M's DIY fuel system cleaner would help. It includes a bottle of fuel injector cleaner, throttle body cleaner, and a special aerosol cleaner that you run directly into the throttle body with the engine running. This extra cleaner should clean off the intake valves.


The trouble with this is, with DI, none of the fuel passes over the intake valves to clean them.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Not to be a spoiler but have you actually seen the intake valves?

 

[cptbarkey]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: mechtech2
There is no fix for keeping the intake valves clean. The have tried upstream injectors to deal with this, but then you don't really have DI only.


yes there is. The variable valve timing can be set up to allow enough reversion to clean the valve. Plus the factories are fitting vapor seperators to keep oil vapors from condensing in the intakes.


Yup. The GM HFV6 engins have both of those. VVT replaces EGR and the PCV section seems to contain something other than simply the PCV valve.

the amount of plastic in that engine screenshot just astounds me. 15 years from now... ugh.

 

[yonyon]

There's the plastic hoses and quick-connects on the PCV and coolant lines and then the little grey locking clips on the connectors for the coils.... what other plastic bits look problematic?