Oil for Reman 3.5L Ecoboost - Timing Chain Stretch

[Jetronic]

What is driven by the timing chain, directly or indirectly?

Reduce the power needed to be transferred by the timing chain. if thewter pump is driven by the timing chain, reduce the coolant viscosity (within reason, but no need for -40° freeze point if you don't seeless than 20°F), look into reducing friction in the valve train area (higher viscosity, friction modified oils are better than low viscosity, non FM oils), is this a direct injection engine with a cam driven fuel pump etc...

slower rising of the revs will help aswell.


And finally, repair the engine if and when timing chain noise occurs before you get resulting damage.

 

[abs]

Great point, and you are of course right. However, Ford has not acknowledged the issue with these engines. Ford is telling drivers that the condition is normal. On the F-150 with the Ecoboost engine, Ford does have a TSB out but requires that the chain stretch enough that the differential between camshaft timing and crankshaft timing is 6 degrees or more before they will replace the chain. In my case, I wasn't sure I was even experience a chain issue, I thought the rattle could have been from the variable timing cam phaser system and followed what Ford has been telling everyone: "It's normal wear, nothing to worry about, just drive it." Obviously THAT information was wrong and anyone experiencing the rattle sound on startup needs to do the following:

- Replace timing chain
- Replace water pump
- Replace all timing gears
- Replace chain guides
- Replace tensioners

To do the timing chain work I just described at the dealer is about a $2000 repair, give or take. The reman engine from Ford is more than $4k, new turbos (if I need them) another $1k and then labor on top of that. There is no doubt that it would be much better to just spend $2k at the first sign of trouble and move on.

If this gets bad enough, Ford may need to consider requiring a mandatory timing chain replacement (just like a timing belt on other vehicles) every 80-90k . . .

 

[abs]

Originally Posted By: Jetronic
What is driven by the timing chain, directly or indirectly?

Reduce the power needed to be transferred by the timing chain. if thewter pump is driven by the timing chain, reduce the coolant viscosity (within reason, but no need for -40° freeze point if you don't seeless than 20°F), look into reducing friction in the valve train area (higher viscosity, friction modified oils are better than low viscosity, non FM oils), is this a direct injection engine with a cam driven fuel pump etc...

slower rising of the revs will help aswell.



And finally, repair the engine if and when timing chain noise occurs before you get resulting damage.


Some additional information in my last post about the fuel pump, etc. Also, the cams drive bucket style lifters which may have more friction than a roller type lifter would.

I also believe that Ford's decision to place the water pump within the lubrication system is a major engineering design flaw. Had they used a timing belt to drive the pump, my engine would not have failed catastrophically when the pump dumped coolant into the oil pan. The other option would have been to keep the chain, make it shorter and drive the water pump off an external pulley which also would have eliminated this risk. In my experience, water pumps always fail, it's just a matter of time. Why establish a design with a flaw which engineers KNOW will cause major pain for owners down the road. To me it is unacceptable and arguably unethical.

Having said all that, the chain on this engine is quite long, the water pump is in the middle of the "V", here is a photo of the setup:

 

[Kuato]

Originally Posted By: abs


Some additional information in my last post about the fuel pump, etc. Also, the cams drive bucket style lifters which may have more friction than a roller type lifter would.

I also believe that Ford's decision to place the water pump within the lubrication system is a major engineering design flaw. Had they used a timing belt to drive the pump, my engine would not have failed catastrophically when the pump dumped coolant into the oil pan. The other option would have been to keep the chain, make it shorter and drive the water pump off an external pulley which also would have eliminated this risk. In my experience, water pumps always fail, it's just a matter of time. Why establish a design with a flaw which engineers KNOW will cause major pain for owners down the road. To me it is unacceptable and arguably unethical.

Having said all that, the chain on this engine is quite long, the water pump is in the middle of the "V", here is a photo of the setup:

Egads, what length is that, looks like more than 5 or 6 feet!

I agree, putting the water pump INSIDE the oiling system is a bonehead move. Like you said, guarantees an engine failure when the water pump goes.

 

[andyd]

Meh,a hydraulic adjuster. Isn't the mantra to follow company specs for oil viscosity etc? Fords are engineered to be assembled and sold, not serviced.

 

[Chris142]

Many motorcycle manufactures recommend a soak in 90wt for chains. Since 90 is similar to a 40wt I'm going to recommend a thicker oil. Maybe a 15w40?

 

[Roadkingnc]

The f-150 3.5 ecoboost is a completely different setup from the 3.5 used in the car line.

 

[abs]

Originally Posted By: Roadkingnc
The f-150 3.5 ecoboost is a completely different setup from the 3.5 used in the car line.


There are differences, but not entirely different, the underlying design is actually quite similar. The F-150 Ecoboost has the same timing chain configuration although the water pump is different, with a higher flow rates I assume. The engine is mounted longitudinally and that allows for larger turbos + higher output. I know that the camshaft timing starting in 2013 was variable on both intake and exhaust, I'd expect the F-150 engine to have that feature although the earlier engines did not. I believe the block is largely the same, possibly with some additional reinforcement for the extra HP - this I do not have information about. I'm not sure about other design changes (increased oil pump capacity, increased sump capacity, etc.). Suffice to say these engines are in the same family with similar underlying design but differences in implementation between the applications.

 

[abs]

Originally Posted By: Chris142
Many motorcycle manufactures recommend a soak in 90wt for chains. Since 90 is similar to a 40wt I'm going to recommend a thicker oil. Maybe a 15w40?


I was thinking about an HDEO like a Rotella 15w-40 although I have two concerns with that. The first concern is the level of SAPs in the diesel oils and the second concern has to do with cold flow properties. Since I know I need to get pressure to the timing chain tensioner quickly, I was thinking a 0w-30 or a 0w-40 might be better options?

Definitely open to suggestions on this.

 

[jdavis]

I'm glad I have no Fords.

I'd go with M1 0w-40, Castrol 0w-30 or 0w-40. You don't need a HDEO in this thing.

 

[Carbon12]

I think if I were in your situation I would use M1 0w40 going forward to combat the fuel dilution these are known for. I was shocked to read that Ford spec'd a 5w20 for these initially. UOAs posted on here show 5w30s being sheared down and diluted down to 20 weights. Starting off as a 20w and then being thinned by fuel is very concerning IMO. I can't imagine going up to a XW-40 would hurt anything since people on here do that anyway for engines spec'd for 5w30. I guess, in summary, you played it Ford's way and things didn't work out. Might as well try something different IMO. Good luck with new engine.

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: abs
Originally Posted By: Jetronic
What is driven by the timing chain, directly or indirectly?

Reduce the power needed to be transferred by the timing chain. if thewter pump is driven by the timing chain, reduce the coolant viscosity (within reason, but no need for -40° freeze point if you don't seeless than 20°F), look into reducing friction in the valve train area (higher viscosity, friction modified oils are better than low viscosity, non FM oils), is this a direct injection engine with a cam driven fuel pump etc...

slower rising of the revs will help aswell.



And finally, repair the engine if and when timing chain noise occurs before you get resulting damage.


Some additional information in my last post about the fuel pump, etc. Also, the cams drive bucket style lifters which may have more friction than a roller type lifter would.

I also believe that Ford's decision to place the water pump within the lubrication system is a major engineering design flaw. Had they used a timing belt to drive the pump, my engine would not have failed catastrophically when the pump dumped coolant into the oil pan. The other option would have been to keep the chain, make it shorter and drive the water pump off an external pulley which also would have eliminated this risk. In my experience, water pumps always fail, it's just a matter of time. Why establish a design with a flaw which engineers KNOW will cause major pain for owners down the road. To me it is unacceptable and arguably unethical.

Having said all that, the chain on this engine is quite long, the water pump is in the middle of the "V", here is a photo of the setup:

Unacceptable and unethical, BINGO. A major headache for anyone who owns one. A class action lawsuit is in order, if one hasn't already taken place.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: abs
Some additional information in my last post about the fuel pump, etc. Also, the cams drive bucket style lifters which may have more friction than a roller type lifter would.

I also believe that Ford's decision to place the water pump within the lubrication system is a major engineering design flaw. Had they used a timing belt to drive the pump, my engine would not have failed catastrophically when the pump dumped coolant into the oil pan. The other option would have been to keep the chain, make it shorter and drive the water pump off an external pulley which also would have eliminated this risk. In my experience, water pumps always fail, it's just a matter of time. Why establish a design with a flaw which engineers KNOW will cause major pain for owners down the road. To me it is unacceptable and arguably unethical.


Agreed. As we all know anything that makes it to 80k miles will likely never see any warranted repairs these days from Ford.

I am sorry to hear of a beta tester getting burned, but many of us have pointed out that these engines really haven't been around to accumulate the mileages required to reveal their shortcomings. Most folks I know with a 3.5 Ecoboost love the engine. I wonder if they still will at 150-200k miles?

 

[abs]

Right. I won't be buying another Ford anytime soon. Looks like the Mobile 0w-40 may be a very good option. I think it meets a bunch of the Euro specs.

I think I want an oil that meets at least one of these Euro specifications since they are focusing on wear rates, soot/particulate build up and coking as priorities above enhanced fuel economy. My reading of the Lubrizol chart I linked above shows these specific manufacturer oil specs to be the best for wear.

ACEA A5/B5-10
VW 507 spec
MB 229.51
MB 229.5
MB 229
BMW Long Life 01 FE
Porsche C30

Also, any thoughts on using a bypass filter to help with the wear issue? I still have to believe that the fuel dilution and particulate buildup in the oil could be part of the cause of the wear issue. The Amsoil bypass setup would cost me a few hundred bucks but would be worth it to me if it will help this issue long run.

 

[901Memphis]

A European 0w30 might not be a bad idea even Mobil 1 0W40, and if you have the space in the engine bay, bypass filtration will help keep the oil cleaner and extend changes too. I am certainly a fan of microglass synthetic media filters, you have plenty to choose from.

 

[SoNic67]

Not, time chain is not "wearing". Is not "stretching" either.

The chain TENSIONERS are the one that need GOOD oil pressure to keep the chain tight on gears.
Now, running oil with weight 20 sure satisfied CAFE and gas mileage improved a smidge. But, in time, also the engine wear increased and the oil pressure at idle decreased. Sure, it was past the warranty period, engineers are good at this kind of calculations.
When that happened, the chain tensioner didn't have enough pressure to work properly, probably the tensioner guides wore off very fast because of the rattling... The owner didn't care to investigate the rattling (maybe a 30 or 40 weight oil at that point would help) and eventually the guides broke and fell into the oil pan, and the chain skipped.

And the rest it happened...

 

[abs]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: abs
Some additional information in my last post about the fuel pump, etc. Also, the cams drive bucket style lifters which may have more friction than a roller type lifter would.

I also believe that Ford's decision to place the water pump within the lubrication system is a major engineering design flaw. Had they used a timing belt to drive the pump, my engine would not have failed catastrophically when the pump dumped coolant into the oil pan. The other option would have been to keep the chain, make it shorter and drive the water pump off an external pulley which also would have eliminated this risk. In my experience, water pumps always fail, it's just a matter of time. Why establish a design with a flaw which engineers KNOW will cause major pain for owners down the road. To me it is unacceptable and arguably unethical.


Agreed. As we all know anything that makes it to 80k miles will likely never see any warranted repairs these days from Ford.

I am sorry to hear of a beta tester getting burned, but many of us have pointed out that these engines really haven't been around to accumulate the mileages required to reveal their shortcomings. Most folks I know with a 3.5 Ecoboost love the engine. I wonder if they still will at 150-200k miles?


I think Ford is about to start experiencing some significant pain and going to lose a lot of customers they've worked hard to bring to the brand.

I think I drive more miles than the majority of folks in the general public (about 20k / year) plus I have the first year for the engine. So I hit the failure point before most people with Ecoboost engines would. My sense is that most people with 2010 model year vehicles may only have 60-80k on them at this point in time. If the failures generally occur around 100k miles, then we may see this starting to hit the media in the next 1-2 years. Then again, as some have pointed out to me on another message board, a single failure is not necessarily indicative of a broad issue, maybe my water pump or timing chain was faulty from the start or simply didn't reach it design life expectations for some reason or another.

One thing is absolutely certain, with enough time, we will have a definitive answer to these questions. My instincts tells me this will likely not play out so well for Ford.

 

[abs]

Originally Posted By: SoNic67
Not, time chain is not "wearing". Is not "stretching" either.

The chain TENSIONERS are the one that need GOOD oil pressure to keep the chain tight on gears.
Now, running oil with weight 20 sure satisfied CAFE and gas mileage improved a smidge. But, in time, also the engine wear increased and the oil pressure at idle decreased. Sure, it was past the warranty period, engineers are good at this kind of calculations.
When that happened, the chain tensioner didn't have enough pressure to work properly, probably the tensioner guides wore off very fast because of the rattling... The owner didn't care to investigate the rattling and eventually the guides broke and fell into the oil pan, and the chain skipped.

And the rest it happened...


I would agree that the plastic guides wore down causing some of the decrease in tension. Eventually the tensioner may have reached its point of maximum excursion at which point it was unable to maintain pressure on the chain. My understanding is that the chains themselves can wear at each pivot point, and for a long chain, this can also create slack for the tensioner to take up. In my research I know that the GM 6 cyl in the newer Camaros and also the Lambda platform are having timing chain "stretch" issues. These are also direct injection engines . . . Of course, the chain isn't really stretching, it just elongating from tiny amounts of wear at each pivot point along the length of hundreds of individual links each with pivoting wear points. Wouldn't you agree?

I don't think I had an oil pressure issue per se although a failing oil pump would certainly have resulted in lower pressure on the tensioner and caused issues at the chain.

I also theorized a possible issue with the tensioner itself could also have been partially at fault. If the seals between the tensioner and the oil supply were leaking then the oil pressure behind the tensioner would be low and not apply the right tension to the chain. I do not know how the tensioner is setup with respect to oil pressure.

Lastly, the chain has not "skipped", I can start and run the engine. I've posted a YouTube video 1-2 posts down which shows the failure mode I believe I experienced. The coolant pump failed early, I believe due to excessive vibrations in the timing chain due to slack, etc.

 

[abs]

Also, for anyone interested, here's a YouTube video showing the tear down of a 3.5 naturally aspirated engine in a Ford Flex with the essentially the same failure mode I experienced. If you jump to 24 minutes in, you can see the water pump failure, the bearing is wobbling and coolant is draining into the oil pan. Remember, the timing chain, water pump, cam phasers, tensioner and chain guides setup in the naturally aspirated engine shown in the video is identical to that in the 2010 3.5 Ecoboost.

 

[Roadkingnc]

F150 water pump is external eliminating the coolant in oil problem.