LSPI : Only A Turbo GDI Issue ?

[cristo]

My 2009 MINI JCW Clubman was giving me
super knock and fuel shutoff DTCs once
every few weeks since I bought it a year ago
(only 37k on the odometer now), and after I
changed to SN+ oil a few months ago, it
hasn't done it once.
No CEL but could see it when scanning for
pending codes after feeling the brief fuel
cutoff happen. Just a fraction of a second
usually when accelerating in the 2K - 3K
RPM range.

 

[4WD]

Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by 4WD
Yeah … Kia does not have this issue, right ?
And Dexos is Ford, right ?
No other but Ford ! Awesome ...Ž

Ford has never specified dexos (which is a GM spec). Ford has their own oil specs.

The Ford oil specs that end in -B1 have been updated with LSPI tests.


Guess nobody can recognize obvious sarcasm and the reason = when just earlier I mentioned the work Mobil and GM did on LSPI … and in two other threads how myself and others use Dexos as a standard even in non GM.
I own 3 GM, one Ford, and one Dodge … know OEM specs for all …
Are we saying Kia is not a subject vehicle?

 

[wemay]

Not me. KIA and Hyundai have there fair share

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by 4WD
Yeah … Kia does not have this issue, right ?
And Dexos is Ford, right ?
No other but Ford ! Awesome ...Ž

Ford has never specified dexos (which is a GM spec). Ford has their own oil specs.

The Ford oil specs that end in -B1 have been updated with LSPI tests.


True .. but Ford never specifies a GM dexos specification. That was my point.

 

[Virtus_Probi]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by 4WD
Yeah … Kia does not have this issue, right ?
And Dexos is Ford, right ?
No other but Ford ! Awesome ...Ž

Ford has never specified dexos (which is a GM spec). Ford has their own oil specs.

The Ford oil specs that end in -B1 have been updated with LSPI tests.

True .. but Ford never specifies a GM dexos specification. That was my point.

Just thought the -B1 info might be useful in thread about LSPI...haven't seen it discussed too much on this site, probably about 0.001% of the coverage that d1G2 has had here.

 

[4WD]

Was it not you who requested a smiley face if someone is being sarcastic or J/K … ? I did that …
Again, there is no one on this site who thinks Ford came up with Dexos and the majority here know Dexos 1.2 means LSPI mitigation in the formulation … tick that box.
So my point was folks are saying this is a Ford concern only. I'm not a big Ford fan, still don't think that's true …

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by 4WD
Was it not you who requested a smiley face if someone is being sarcastic or J/K … ? I did that …
Again, there is no one on this site who thinks Ford came up with Dexos and the majority here know Dexos 1.2 means LSPI mitigation in the formulation … tick that box.
So my point was folks are saying this is a Ford concern only. I'm not a big Ford fan, still don't think that's true …


i didn't see a smiley face after your comment of; "And Dexos is Ford, right ?" So it sound like a serious comment to me.

And yeah, I agree LSPI is not just a Ford problem, as many others have chimed in with other engines that can experience LSPI.

 

[4WD]

I'm sure you have done Risk Assessments and FMECA's at work …
So, even at very low probability … LSPI can bring some horrible consequences …
Surfing around some car member sites … it seems to be fairly well communicated …

 

[ZeeOSix]

Of course. LSPI (super knock) is operating conditions dependant: ie, high throttle load/boost at low RPM - engine "lugging" at large throttle opening. Of course some engines of the same type (small displacement, boosted, DI) may be more prone to LSPI depending on how the ECU has been tuned, level of boost produced at low RPM, etc.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr
Originally Posted by edyvw
Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr
No reports of LSPI in toyota engines with the D4S
At lower speeds the port injection is also operating,
And compression ratio is dropped at low speeds with modified Atkinson equipped engines,

Are you referring to 8AR-FTS engine?
2.0ltr engines are mostly not prone to it. LSPI is most problematic at lower displacement spectrum.
If you referring to naturally aspirated engines with Atkinson cycle, there ain't torque at lower rpms. there AT ALL!



True about the torque at low rpm, the low rpm low load mode is to go Atkinson. Pulling a trailer or going up a steep incline from a stop the valve and injection mapping changes. The point is the power band avoids the issue of LSPI.


I agree with another poster when I had the 2012 BMW 328i with the 2.0 GDI turbo, I ran acea A3 oils and never had a problem. That engine was a fun one.

Still in 2GR-FKS etc. there is no low end torque compare for example to VW VR6 3.6 where max. torque is at 2,750rpm. LSPI is problem on turbo engines.

 

[DavidJones]

I frequent 3 of the largest F150 sites and only see LSPI mentioned only because someone reads about it somewhere else. I don't believe LSPI is an issue on current Ecoboost truck engines. It was also said that the F150 Ecoboost engines were prone to carbon build-up issues and that has proven to be not true also.

 

[wemay]

Originally Posted by DavidJones
I frequent 3 of the largest F150 sites and only see LSPI mentioned only because someone reads about it somewhere else. I don't believe LSPI is an issue on current Ecoboost truck engines. It was also said that the F150 Ecoboost engines were prone to carbon build-up issues and that has proven to be not true also.




I don't doubt they've made strides but there has been some deposit issues with EB in the past (video 2015). How widespread? I couldn't say.

 

[caprice_2nv]

I watch some of that guys videos also. He seems to be a good source of info.

 

[DavidJones]

Originally Posted by wemay
Originally Posted by DavidJones
I frequent 3 of the largest F150 sites and only see LSPI mentioned only because someone reads about it somewhere else. I don't believe LSPI is an issue on current Ecoboost truck engines. It was also said that the F150 Ecoboost engines were prone to carbon build-up issues and that has proven to be not true also.




I don't doubt they've made strides but there has been some deposit issues with EB in the past (video 2015). How widespread? I couldn't say.



There are NO deposit issues with the Ecoboost truck engines. Period. The guy in the video was/is wrong. Other DI engines may suffer from it but Ford did their homework.

I challenge you to find an example. One.

 

[caprice_2nv]

Originally Posted by DavidJones
Originally Posted by wemay
Originally Posted by DavidJones
I frequent 3 of the largest F150 sites and only see LSPI mentioned only because someone reads about it somewhere else. I don't believe LSPI is an issue on current Ecoboost truck engines. It was also said that the F150 Ecoboost engines were prone to carbon build-up issues and that has proven to be not true also.




I don't doubt they've made strides but there has been some deposit issues with EB in the past (video 2015). How widespread? I couldn't say.



There are NO deposit issues with the Ecoboost truck engines. Period. The guy in the video was/is wrong. Other DI engines may suffer from it but Ford did their homework.

I challenge you to find an example. One.


That guy is a Ford tech and has worked on them/taken them apart. Where is your expertise coming from? The internet?

 

[DavidJones]

This video was from a few years ago, when the assumption was the Ecoboost engines would be like some other brands that had carbon issues. I think if you'll actually listen to the whole video he notes towards the end that, so far, carbon hasn't been an issue with the Eco's. 4 years later it still isn't an issue. I claim no expertise. Being a regular member of a few of the largest F150 sites on the internet, IF there were a carbon issue with the F150 engines, somebody would have complained. Posted a picture. Told their story. They haven't.
Again, find me that person.
I'll wait.

 

[caprice_2nv]

Originally Posted by DavidJones
This video was from a few years ago, when the assumption was the Ecoboost engines would be like some other brands that had carbon issues. I think if you'll actually listen to the whole video he notes towards the end that, so far, carbon hasn't been an issue with the Eco's. 4 years later it still isn't an issue. I claim no expertise. Being a regular member of a few of the largest F150 sites on the internet, IF there were a carbon issue with the F150 engines, somebody would have complained. Posted a picture. Told their story. They haven't.
Again, find me that person.
I'll wait.



Okay, I won't argue with that. I know this is getting off topic but what is the most common Ecoboost problems? I personally know someone with a Taurus sho that "needed turbos" and he worked at a Toyota dealership but wasn't up to the task. It went to a Ford dealer and got new turbos to the tune of a couple thousand or close to it. Then it turned out the motor was toast (likely caused by debris from the turbos). Several thousand dollars later it has a new used engine and runs again. I know he's not the only person who has had an ecooboost failure, so I'm just curious.

 

[stanlee]

Originally Posted by avi1777
Originally Posted by stanlee
Originally Posted by LotI
LSPI seems to be a Ford thing. Why else would they use an Ecoboost for GF-6 testing.


Exactly! This is ridiculous, all the measures taken to combat this just for ecoboost. FORD should be the ones building/tuning engines that don't do this. I've had two direct injection engines from 2007 (VW 2.0L FSI and BMW N54) aftermarket tuned for all the turbos were worth (incl ethanol on the N54 and eventually a turbo upgrade on the VW) and never heard of any of this nonsense until Ecoboost started blowing up. Who in the world wants an engine that is an oil choice a way from blowing up. Low rpm, high boost and small turbos have been a bad combination for reliability since the 90's and Corky Bells Maximum boost was the turbo bible. Non the less with technology advances everybody else has managed to do it reliably except Ford.

the 2.0 turbo cadiilac ats and cts are blowing as well,a lot of them.


Ok Ford and GM, same difference. Throw Chrysler in there when they join the 21rst century. Audi, VW, BMW, Mazda, KIA, Hyundai and everybody else not named those 3 don't have this issue. To fix it lets force oil companies to reduce one of the most effective detergents they use. Sounds like a great idea said no one.

 

[DavidJones]

Originally Posted by caprice_2nv
Originally Posted by DavidJones
This video was from a few years ago, when the assumption was the Ecoboost engines would be like some other brands that had carbon issues. I think if you'll actually listen to the whole video he notes towards the end that, so far, carbon hasn't been an issue with the Eco's. 4 years later it still isn't an issue. I claim no expertise. Being a regular member of a few of the largest F150 sites on the internet, IF there were a carbon issue with the F150 engines, somebody would have complained. Posted a picture. Told their story. They haven't.
Again, find me that person.
I'll wait.



Okay, I won't argue with that. I know this is getting off topic but what is the most common Ecoboost problems? I personally know someone with a Taurus sho that "needed turbos" and he worked at a Toyota dealership but wasn't up to the task. It went to a Ford dealer and got new turbos to the tune of a couple thousand or close to it. Then it turned out the motor was toast (likely caused by debris from the turbos). Several thousand dollars later it has a new used engine and runs again. I know he's not the only person who has had an ecooboost failure, so I'm just curious.


Some very early 3.5's had an issue with water in the intercooler. Some early 3.5's ate cam phasers. Some 2016 2.7's had cylinder head issues that I think had something to do with a bad batch of valve guides. I'm sure there are other things, but since I've been paying attention it seems that the F150 Eco's have proven to be very reliable. I'm not aware of a turbo issue and seldom see them mentioned unless somebody considering an Eco asked the usual question about turbo longevity. I have a friend with a 2.7 that is approaching 300K (southeastern delivery) and he's done nothing but regular maintenance. My personal 2.7 has been perfect for 49,500 miles.

I'd buy another.

 

[caprice_2nv]

So even if his turbo failure was a one off, it doesn't change that when something goes wrong it costs minimum $5000 if it takes out your engine.

When the vehicle is worth as much as an f150 you're not going to just write it off. I will continue to not recommend them to friends and family based on my personal and second hand experience unless someone has lots of money for when bad things happen.