Hey all you engine tech phobes - 2025 Maverick loses 12 hp and gains a GPF

Doesn't it have to be left running though to clean up, so now you're just wasting fuel?

it does use fuel, if you're not running the engine hard enough. But it does it when you're driving. Took half a quart of fuel to clean the one in my diesel, start to finish. If I work the engine hard enough, it might not need a regen.
 
That's what I would have thought, but I remember hearing from someone I work with that they had to leave their Ram running for a DPF clean. Maybe they misunderstood the process. I've not owned a diesel and I've never dealt with DPFs.

Maybe they did a manual (scan tool initiated, usually, sometimes with a dash button) regen, that would be done stationary. But it's not the normal way to do it.

Another possibility is that a regen was in process when he arrived, and he decided to eave the engine running until it finished. I have done that, though it's not required.
 
No, it clean the filter while driving, idling is probably the worst thing for a DPF.

I mean it cleans using extra fuel, either through cylinder injection or a dedicated injector into the exhaust like the Duramax engines. And it's going to do that every 150-600 miles depending on the vehicle.
 
I mean it cleans using extra fuel, either through cylinder injection or a dedicated injector into the exhaust like the Duramax engines. And it's going to do that every 150-600 miles depending on the vehicle.
Yeah that's the main way a DPF is cleaned but OEMs typically stop/pause the regen while idling, stopped, and/or in park and go into a keep warm condition. In low rate conditions, the risk becomes high that you might damage either the DOC or the DPF because the fuel isn't uniformly mixed in the exhaust when it hits the face of the DOC or DPF.

If the DPF is in front of the SCR you can also get Regen through the use of NOx and be able to extent the time between active regeneration, but that after-treament layout isn't common on the lighter duty diesel engines.
 
So, I know there's a large group of forum members who have a strong disdain for some of the newer tech on today's cars.

Some people dislike Gasoline Direct Injection because of the increased risk of intake valve deposits when a manufacturer can't design a reasonable intake valve stem seal that hold up over time.

You also hate small turbocharged engines, because they have more parts, more seals, increase demands on the cooling system, have after-run coolant pump systems, develop coolant and oil leaks over time as seals deform because of the long term heat exposure, require better quality oils, need more frequent oil changes, and just make you feel outdated and inadequate in life.

Other people don't like Diesel Particulate Filters on their diesel vehicles, because it causes their vehicles to have to go through regen cycles, wastes fuel, robs power, gets clogged up, and requires costly replacement. Plus all those darn sensors and coding just add to their misery at that technology.

Well, guess what.
Ford has decided that your favorite vehicle, the 2025 Ford Maverick, will now get a GPF (Gasoline Particulate Filter) for the 2.0 I-4 turbocharged engine.
And they stole 12 hp vs the same engine in the 2024 truck because of the GPF. PPF if you're from the UK, because, you know, Petrol instead of Gasoline.

So there you go.
What used to be your most acceptable cheap truck, first stopped being cheap, and now has become the first vehicle in the US market to come with a particulate filter for a gasoline engine.

Enjoy the video:


Disdain? Yes you could say I disdain manufacturers who cannot design in reliability for whatever mousetrap they invent.
 
Going against the grain here, but emissions isn’t really that big a deal to me. If it cleans up the environment better, then why not? If the equipment is unreliable and a headache to deal with, then I’d change my stance.

My bigger issue with modern cars is overbearing electrical complexity. Adding a filter doesn’t really contribute much complexity.
 
Going against the grain here, but emissions isn’t really that big a deal to me. If it cleans up the environment better, then why not? If the equipment is unreliable and a headache to deal with, then I’d change my stance.

My bigger issue with modern cars is overbearing electrical complexity. Adding a filter doesn’t really contribute much complexity.
I'm also one who's happy that emissions are being reduced. The "bad old days" were really bad actually.

Re: "If the equipment is unreliable and a headache to deal with,". Well that's the problem. My understanding is that the equipment is indeed unreliable and difficult to deal with. Even Mercedes, with all their money and resources, isn't able to fully figure it out.

Re: "overbearing electrical complexity". The guy in the video said it: more sensors and more wiring. And then more complex ECU software to monitor the sensors. If the engine decides it needs to go into limp mode, you may need to go back to the dealer to get it diagnosed as only the dealership computers can connect up to the ECU and decipher the readings. And the dealer may still get it wrong (e.g. the Mercedes thing all over again).

If it were only about a filter being added...
 
That's what I would have thought, but I remember hearing from someone I work with that they had to leave their Ram running for a DPF clean. Maybe they misunderstood the process. I've not owned a diesel and I've never dealt with DPFs.
I’ve been on many buses during a regen cycle for the DPF/SCR, usually the HOT EXHAUST/HIGH TEMP EXHAUST light will blink to warn the driver not to park underneath trees or over trash/grass and the exhaust will smell a little stronger. Usually happens on the freeway or in the city when stopped. Cummins seems to add more fuel during the regen cycle to heat up things.

On the pickup truck side of things, forced parked regens seem to be common thing. Unless you take the truck out on a nice, long drive to trigger a passive regen.
 
Back
Top