Fuel Dilution - DI Engines

[Bryanccfshr]

My main concern with GDI would be soot production.
If your exhaust has black soot around it, you have soot that is getting into the oil.
If you don't have any noticeable soot, it is less of a concern, different makes have different results. Fuel quality could be a factor.
I still don't think it is advantageous long term to have a solvent in the crankcase that also increase oxidation.

 

[Patman]

Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
When are they going to design FI that isn't CXXP?



The Corvette has had direct injection since 2014 and I haven't seen anyone on Corvette Forum reporting major carbon buildup issues at all. (or serious amounts of fuel dilution either)

And I don't think there have been too many problems with Mazda's direct injected engines either.

 

[StevieC]

Terry thinks it's not the injection setups or the parts used or the OE's fuel control in general but more the fuel quality that is the problem here which is why he advises of certain fuel additives to add to every tank of fuel depending on the application and fuel dilution shown to improve the combustion dynamic. He also says that fuel dilution seems to be a much bigger problem in colder states and provinces versus the warmer ones because of the amount of time the ECU spends in the richer mapping area.

His analysis aren't as cheap as a $10 wix kit but the information he gives you to go along with your UOA is invaluable and all the advice I have followed from him over the years with our family vehicles has lead to much better UOA's and longer OCI's where possible.

 

[tig1]

DI engines are tech in reverse.

 

[ka9mnx]

Originally Posted by tig1
DI engines are tech in reverse.

Well, not really. My son and I have had long discussions about DI and variable valve control throughout the 80's and 90's. His idea was solenoid operated valves that operated like a camera shutter. I always thought DI would be a remarkable improvement to the SI engine. I never thought it would work, though, because I figured the high cylinder temperature would ignite the fuel before desired. I thought injecting the fuel at the ignition time (like a diesel) would be the only way it would work, eliminating the spark plugs. Problem with that theory was there was not enough time for the fuel to mix with incoming air. When DI did appear I was a bit sceptical about the design.

We have both worked around diesels our entire life.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by tig1
DI engines are tech in reverse.


Naw. It's about being able to increase power AND meet mpg/emissions. It can't be done otherwise.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by tig1
DI engines are tech in reverse.


Naw. It's about being able to increase power AND meet mpg/emissions. It can't be done otherwise.

^^^ This, I just wish a lot more OE's took a better approach to it, in controlling valve deposits.

 

[WhizkidTN]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by tig1
DI engines are tech in reverse.


Naw. It's about being able to increase power AND meet mpg/emissions. It can't be done otherwise.

^^^ This, I just wish a lot more OE's took a better approach to it, in controlling valve deposits.


Toyota did. It's in their dual PFI/DI setups. Others are also going that way (Ford, Mazda,...). There are advantages of both that combine.

 

[WhizkidTN]

Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr
My main concern with GDI would be soot production.
If your exhaust has black soot around it, you have soot that is getting into the oil.
If you don't have any noticeable soot, it is less of a concern, different makes have different results. Fuel quality could be a factor.
I still don't think it is advantageous long term to have a solvent in the crankcase that also increase oxidation.


FWIW: I saw in my Polaris UOA a big decrease in oxidation figures and a reduction in loss of viscosity when I switched from M1 0W-40 (FS) to Castrol Edge 0W-40 oil. Main reason I switched. I ran the same Costco 93 octane (Top Tier) fuel and all my other variables stayed basically the same.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted by WhizkidTN
Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr
My main concern with GDI would be soot production.
If your exhaust has black soot around it, you have soot that is getting into the oil.
If you don't have any noticeable soot, it is less of a concern, different makes have different results. Fuel quality could be a factor.
I still don't think it is advantageous long term to have a solvent in the crankcase that also increase oxidation.


FWIW: I saw in my Polaris UOA a big decrease in oxidation figures and a reduction in loss of viscosity when I switched from M1 0W-40 (FS) to Castrol Edge 0W-40 oil. Main reason I switched. I ran the same Costco 93 octane (Top Tier) fuel and all my other variables stayed basically the same.


M1 0w-40 has a naturally high oxidation number due to what is assumed to be POE content. Viscosity loss difference is likely due to more VII in the GTL base of the FS vs more PAO in the Edge 0w-40.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by WhizkidTN
Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by tig1
DI engines are tech in reverse.


Naw. It's about being able to increase power AND meet mpg/emissions. It can't be done otherwise.

^^^ This, I just wish a lot more OE's took a better approach to it, in controlling valve deposits.


Toyota did. It's in their dual PFI/DI setups. Others are also going that way (Ford, Mazda,...). There are advantages of both that combine.


For sure... I had the D4-S with dual injection setup in the Highlander I had.

 

[Triple_Se7en]

Use top-tier fuel and no need for 93 octane, if acceleration doesn't ping or engine run a-foul. Change oil often and the Pennzoil Platinum claims to clean the engine best.

I plan on 5K OCIs.- SN Plus Dexos1/Gen2 oil - top tier 87 octane fuels (no ethanol) and hopefully no problems surface.

 

[Railrust]

Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
When are they going to design FI that isn't CXXP?



The Corvette has had direct injection since 2014 and I haven't seen anyone on Corvette Forum reporting major carbon buildup issues at all. (or serious amounts of fuel dilution either)

And I don't think there have been too many problems with Mazda's direct injected engines either.

Those people also don't drive their cars, their vehicles are sitting in their garages with $200 worth of the latest and greatest wax on their paint. Happy as clams. And some of these guys, despite not driving their vettes, have installed catch cans and change their oil every 3,000 miles using the very best oil they can get their hands on. They're show cars...weekend warriors to the ice cream stand to show off. Meanwhile on the Chevy Silverado forums there's guys pulling their intakes off trying to clean these things...loaded.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by Railrust
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
When are they going to design FI that isn't CXXP?



The Corvette has had direct injection since 2014 and I haven't seen anyone on Corvette Forum reporting major carbon buildup issues at all. (or serious amounts of fuel dilution either)

And I don't think there have been too many problems with Mazda's direct injected engines either.

Those people also don't drive their cars, their vehicles are sitting in their garages with $200 worth of the latest and greatest wax on their paint. Happy as clams. And some of these guys, despite not driving their vettes, have installed catch cans and change their oil every 3,000 miles using the very best oil they can get their hands on. They're show cars...weekend warriors to the ice cream stand to show off. Meanwhile on the Chevy Silverado forums there's guys pulling their intakes off trying to clean these things...loaded.





Huh?

 

[ChrisD46]

Originally Posted by wemay
Originally Posted by MCompact
Originally Posted by SteveSRT8
Only thing is despite endless discussions there have been virtually no cases of engine damage conclusively linked to it.


Who needs facts when we've got hundreds of unsubstantiated rumors?


...and, as has been said before, the fact is the vast majority... VAST ...of UOA lack elevated wear numbers, even with substantial dilution.

I'm not concerned as i'm currently running a 0W20 (Pennzoil Platinum) in the Sportage 2.4L and thus far (4th day) it's been extremely smooth and quiet. And yes, i have an email from the Service Mgr of one of the local KIA dealerships that says it's perfectly fine to do so because the important number is the 20, not the 5w vs 0w.
My OCI are 5K max.

*I do not believe that Hyundai / Kia recognize any 0W oils ... Only 5W and 10W for North America .

 

[Brigadier]

Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
Use top-tier fuel and no need for 93 octane, if acceleration doesn't ping or engine run a-foul. Change oil often and the Pennzoil Platinum claims to clean the engine best.

I plan on 5K OCIs.- SN Plus Dexos1/Gen2 oil - top tier 87 octane fuels (no ethanol) and hopefully no problems surface.


Just for clarification, Top Tier and ethanol free are totally unrelated.

 

[D45678]

Originally Posted by littlehulkster
Originally Posted by skyactiv
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
When are they going to design FI that isn't CRAP?

Fixed it for you!


You must not have ever owned a carbureted car. Carbs are absolute junk, and always will be. I'd take the worst EFI system ever designed over the best carbs. Unless, of course, you like constantly messing with your car but never getting it to really run right, or you love the feeling of never knowing if it's going to start or not.

EFI is the best thing on modern cars. It just works. Way more efficient than carbs, too.


You must not have experienced an 81-83 fuel injected Chrysler Imperial, those were real gems indeed.

 

[StevieC]

Originally Posted by CJWinWA

You must not have experienced an 81-83 fuel injected Chrysler Imperial, those were real gems indeed.


Absolute garbage. My dad did a lot of conversions on vehicles equipped with that system.

Years later a friend of my dad's that I keep in touch with that taught me a lot when I was a kid about computers told me about the story of that system and the vehicle he had at the time that would stall all the time because of it
and I asked my dad about it and he told me about the numerous ones he converted back to straight carb engines.

 

[D45678]

Originally Posted by StevieC
Originally Posted by CJWinWA

You must not have experienced an 81-83 fuel injected Chrysler Imperial, those were real gems indeed.


Absolute garbage. My dad did a lot of conversions on vehicles equipped with that system.

Years later a friend of my dad's that I keep in touch with that taught me a lot when I was a kid about computers told me about the story of that system and the vehicle he had at the time that would stall all the time because of it
and I asked my dad about it and he told me about the numerous ones he converted back to straight carb engines.


Chrysler offered a a kit to convert them to carburetors. It came in a wooden crate and contained everything from the carburetor to a new fuel tank. Everything in one box. Obviously there was an issue.

Going on thirty years ago I worked at a Chrysler dealer, and took a call from a guy who'd found a very low mileage Imperial, and asked if we would work on it. I had no clue what a disaster these injection systems were, but I learned quick. While Chrysler had some parts, others had to be sourced from a man who advertised in Hemmings, calling himself the "Imperial Wizard." The conversion kit was long out of stock.

In time the car was repaired, on the test drive the oil pressure light came on, it had plenty of oil, but had plugged the pickup screen with various stuff that had accumulated during its nearly ten years in storage. Apparently low mileage Imperials were often found in such a situation, then purchased by unsuspecting bargain hunters.

Next up, new engine bearings.

Never again was an injected Imperial allowed into the dealership. The first one ended up costing over $3,000.00 to repair in about 1989-1990.

 

[Railrust]

Originally Posted by PimTac
Originally Posted by Railrust
Originally Posted by Patman
Originally Posted by JohnnyJohnson
When are they going to design FI that isn't CXXP?



The Corvette has had direct injection since 2014 and I haven't seen anyone on Corvette Forum reporting major carbon buildup issues at all. (or serious amounts of fuel dilution either)

And I don't think there have been too many problems with Mazda's direct injected engines either.

Those people also don't drive their cars, their vehicles are sitting in their garages with $200 worth of the latest and greatest wax on their paint. Happy as clams. And some of these guys, despite not driving their vettes, have installed catch cans and change their oil every 3,000 miles using the very best oil they can get their hands on. They're show cars...weekend warriors to the ice cream stand to show off. Meanwhile on the Chevy Silverado forums there's guys pulling their intakes off trying to clean these things...loaded.





Huh?


Directed at the Corvette (no reports of carbon buildup comment). A 2014 Corvette, or a 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 or 2019, is not going to have many miles on it. Not a good indicator to provide evidence that there are not carbon buildup issues. Tough to prove that when the car has 12,000 miles on it over six years and the owner is changing his oil every 3,000 miles.

On the flip side, take a car/truck with direct injection and drive it 150,000 miles (every day use with 5,000-10,000 mile oil change intervals) and the carbon on valve situation will look a lot different. There are reports of Silverados with carbon buildup and plenty of owners installing oil catch cans to help prevent it.