Warning To All Ford Ecoboost Owners

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Trav
Thats ridiculous! Most things are perfected enough, poor material quality, poor assembly, or a bad part is inevitable. Cars break down, always have always will but we usually know why they broke and how to fix it.
I know i can rebuild a transmission that will hold up in extreme conditions by adding upgraded parts and a high strength TC, how would you do it with a CVT?

Its possible that few year it wont be any big deal, just another transmission.
The problem with unproven tech is they don't know why or how they can fix it when things go wrong, it may take a long time in many cases before they resolve the issues.
In many cases it takes a total redesign of the part or the whole system and it may not be a retro fit repair.

In your case you are always claiming running around at 4500 rpm for some time to keep the valves clean, that IMHO is nothing more than a band aid for a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.



This is a rather ridiculous post from a typically sane poster. You can fix everything but don't know how to clean valves? Really? That isn't even a breakdown, just cleaning.

And my bandaid is not a bandaid. It is called being lazy. I'd rather just burn off the deposits than clean the valves. You don't have to. Your engine won't blow up if you let the deposits build up. It isn't like cars are failing out there because of it. This is the most ridiculous rant over something so stupid I have seen on this board in a while. Maybe sanity will return soon.


I can clean valves alright but why should i, when my old tried and proven FI cars don't need it. LOL

 

[MCompact]

I have to say that I am totally exhausted today; I could not sleep a wink the night before last because I knew that I would be driving my MS3 on a 276 mile round trip. Needless to say, the entire trip was a white-knuckled ordeal I awaited inescapable disaster to befall my car's unproven engine technology.

I breathed a sigh of relief as I pulled into my garage last night, but my anxiety remains; the seven year old car now has over 145,900 miles on it and only averaged 30 mpg for the trip. I'm virtually certain that a mechanical catastrophe awaits the next time I turn the key.

 

[millerbl00]

I slept great! My 2012 Chevy Silverado with 50k miles with its all IRON 4.3 and all STEEL frame got 24mpg and did not have to worry about any pesky potholes. Knowing the proven multipoint fuel-injection system and old style spark plug system would fire up every time with no carboning of the valves just made my drive to work!

 

[Mykl]

Originally Posted By: millerbl00
I slept great! My 2012 Chevy Silverado with 50k miles with its all IRON 4.3 and all STEEL frame got 24mpg and did not have to worry about any pesky potholes. Knowing the proven multipoint fuel-injection system and old style spark plug system would fire up every time with no carboning of the valves just made my drive to work!



Well, no matter what happens his vehicle from here on out it has already proven that it has lasted five years and 95,900 miles longer than your truck with (I'm guessing) roughly the same number of issues (none).

That's a lot of driving you need to do to catch up. Good luck with that.

 

[kschachn]

Lol good one.

Originally Posted By: MCompact
I have to say that I am totally exhausted today; I could not sleep a wink the night before last because I knew that I would be driving my MS3 on a 276 mile round trip. Needless to say, the entire trip was a white-knuckled ordeal I awaited inescapable disaster to befall my car's unproven engine technology.

I breathed a sigh of relief as I pulled into my garage last night, but my anxiety remains; the seven year old car now has over 145,900 miles on it and only averaged 30 mpg for the trip. I'm virtually certain that a mechanical catastrophe awaits the next time I turn the key.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Trav
Thats ridiculous! Most things are perfected enough, poor material quality, poor assembly, or a bad part is inevitable. Cars break down, always have always will but we usually know why they broke and how to fix it.
I know i can rebuild a transmission that will hold up in extreme conditions by adding upgraded parts and a high strength TC, how would you do it with a CVT?

Its possible that few year it wont be any big deal, just another transmission.
The problem with unproven tech is they don't know why or how they can fix it when things go wrong, it may take a long time in many cases before they resolve the issues.
In many cases it takes a total redesign of the part or the whole system and it may not be a retro fit repair.

In your case you are always claiming running around at 4500 rpm for some time to keep the valves clean, that IMHO is nothing more than a band aid for a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.



This is a rather ridiculous post from a typically sane poster. You can fix everything but don't know how to clean valves? Really? That isn't even a breakdown, just cleaning.

And my bandaid is not a bandaid. It is called being lazy. I'd rather just burn off the deposits than clean the valves. You don't have to. Your engine won't blow up if you let the deposits build up. It isn't like cars are failing out there because of it. This is the most ridiculous rant over something so stupid I have seen on this board in a while. Maybe sanity will return soon.


I think whether he CAN fix it or not is irrelevant, his point is that he shouldn't have to. For any other form of fuel delivery there has never been a reason to dig into the engine to clean the valves, which is an involved process.

I think there are three schools of thought presenting themselves in this thread:

1. Technology is constantly changing/evolving, might as well embrace it as it comes.
2. Advancements are bad. Boo, hiss, evil. Where's my carb and points?
3. Advancements without any immediate benefit to the consumer that have proven to be or may be problematic and can also be avoided, should be.

#3 strikes me as the group Trav is in. He doesn't see the immediate benefit of DI over port injection, a system that has proven to be reliable. He is arguing the same point for CVT's. I don't see him here arguing against turbocharged engines, which are becoming more common, nor against 8 and 9spd transmissions. Because while both are "new" in a sense, they are still both mature technologies and are likely to have fewer growing pains associated with them.

He has made a number of valid points as well pertaining to things like the Dexcool gasket fiasco, which nobody should have had to deal with. That was a solution looking for a problem. There was nothing inherently "wrong" with green coolant, other than it needed to be changed more frequently, and there were other long-life coolants on the market like G05 and its ilk that didn't have the same issues associated with them. Ultimately things were eventually sorted out with it but there were YEARS or issues and teething pains with a product that brought what to the table exactly? What ground-breaking benefit was there to the average consumer in having Dexcool foisted on them?

The consumer is ultimately the beta tester. Sometimes that can be a GREAT job! Other times it can be a royal PITA. When your job is fixing cars all day the last thing you want to be doing is fixing your own. I think this is where a lot of what Trav is stating makes sense.

 

[millerbl00]

Very Well said.

My other post was just humor. Although I expect my Silverado to have many trouble free years.

 

[leeharvey418]

Originally Posted By: Trav
Wrong! I have no problem adopting new technology when it brings me something i don't already have and i have a use for it.
A car could get me from point a to b quicker than a horse and cart and i don't have to worry about what i do with the horse when i get there.

You really don't know what driving was like in the early days, do you? You didn't hop in your car and drive as far as you wanted at anything resembling high speed. Heck, even sixty years ago, it was common practice to have more than one spare tire on long trips, simply because you could count on tires failing.

 

[millerbl00]

When I started driving I only drove 5000 miles max a year and got rid of the vechiles at 50k miles because they where shot.

Now I am up to 35k miles a year and I expect a vechile to last closer to 200k.

things have changed

 

[Trav]

Originally Posted By: leeharvey418
Originally Posted By: Trav
Wrong! I have no problem adopting new technology when it brings me something i don't already have and i have a use for it.
A car could get me from point a to b quicker than a horse and cart and i don't have to worry about what i do with the horse when i get there.

You really don't know what driving was like in the early days, do you? You didn't hop in your car and drive as far as you wanted at anything resembling high speed. Heck, even sixty years ago, it was common practice to have more than one spare tire on long trips, simply because you could count on tires failing.

How old are you 100 years or what. I did drive a T one time that you had to back up hills with or it ran out of gas. I drove a Durant touring car with mechanical rear brakes only. While i didn't own them i worked on them with the guys who did.

I have been doing this for 42 years don't tell me what i know and don't know about automotive tech.

 

[Cujet]

I have a couple of aviation borescopes. And I have a 2011 F150 Ecoboost. Eventually, I'll take a look at the intake valves. But for now, at 45,000 miles, it's running perfectly.

 

[MCompact]

Originally Posted By: Cujet
I have a couple of aviation borescopes. And I have a 2011 F150 Ecoboost. Eventually, I'll take a look at the intake valves. But for now, at 45,000 miles, it's running perfectly.


No it isn't- you only think it is. Your flawed technology is living on borrowed time.

 

[Trav]

 

[demarpaint]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: badtlc
Originally Posted By: Trav
Thats ridiculous! Most things are perfected enough, poor material quality, poor assembly, or a bad part is inevitable. Cars break down, always have always will but we usually know why they broke and how to fix it.
I know i can rebuild a transmission that will hold up in extreme conditions by adding upgraded parts and a high strength TC, how would you do it with a CVT?

Its possible that few year it wont be any big deal, just another transmission.
The problem with unproven tech is they don't know why or how they can fix it when things go wrong, it may take a long time in many cases before they resolve the issues.
In many cases it takes a total redesign of the part or the whole system and it may not be a retro fit repair.

In your case you are always claiming running around at 4500 rpm for some time to keep the valves clean, that IMHO is nothing more than a band aid for a problem that shouldn't exist in the first place.



This is a rather ridiculous post from a typically sane poster. You can fix everything but don't know how to clean valves? Really? That isn't even a breakdown, just cleaning.

And my bandaid is not a bandaid. It is called being lazy. I'd rather just burn off the deposits than clean the valves. You don't have to. Your engine won't blow up if you let the deposits build up. It isn't like cars are failing out there because of it. This is the most ridiculous rant over something so stupid I have seen on this board in a while. Maybe sanity will return soon.


I think whether he CAN fix it or not is irrelevant, his point is that he shouldn't have to. For any other form of fuel delivery there has never been a reason to dig into the engine to clean the valves, which is an involved process.

I think there are three schools of thought presenting themselves in this thread:

1. Technology is constantly changing/evolving, might as well embrace it as it comes.
2. Advancements are bad. Boo, hiss, evil. Where's my carb and points?
3. Advancements without any immediate benefit to the consumer that have proven to be or may be problematic and can also be avoided, should be.

#3 strikes me as the group Trav is in. He doesn't see the immediate benefit of DI over port injection, a system that has proven to be reliable. He is arguing the same point for CVT's. I don't see him here arguing against turbocharged engines, which are becoming more common, nor against 8 and 9spd transmissions. Because while both are "new" in a sense, they are still both mature technologies and are likely to have fewer growing pains associated with them.

He has made a number of valid points as well pertaining to things like the Dexcool gasket fiasco, which nobody should have had to deal with. That was a solution looking for a problem. There was nothing inherently "wrong" with green coolant, other than it needed to be changed more frequently, and there were other long-life coolants on the market like G05 and its ilk that didn't have the same issues associated with them. Ultimately things were eventually sorted out with it but there were YEARS or issues and teething pains with a product that brought what to the table exactly? What ground-breaking benefit was there to the average consumer in having Dexcool foisted on them?

The consumer is ultimately the beta tester. Sometimes that can be a GREAT job! Other times it can be a royal PITA. When your job is fixing cars all day the last thing you want to be doing is fixing your own. I think this is where a lot of what Trav is stating makes sense.


As usual, well said. Once DI is perfected across all brands it will be great. As several of us have stated it's just not quite there yet.

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: Trav


I have been doing this for 42 years don't tell me what i know and don't know about automotive tech.


Well said Trav most, of those posting and responding to you are NOT skilled, professional, and certified technicians.

Seems to me like some in manufacturing industry are trying to defend the indefensible. Which is developing a technology and delivering it half baked to customers, letting them bear the brunt of issues. This kind of attitude shows utter CONTEMPT for those that pay THEIR salaries, the consumer.

 

[Silverado12]

I'm kind of leery about the DI on the Equinox esp. after GM had to recalibrate the oil life monitor because engines were wearing out too early. Luckily, I'm an old timer with the 3,000 mile oil change mentality. Time will tell, but I'm sticking with my antique technology Silverado 4.3 and the Dodge 3.5 for now, and will see how long they last. I'm semi-retired, so no more buying new cars every 5 years.

 

[Cujet]

Originally Posted By: MCompact
Originally Posted By: Cujet
I have a couple of aviation borescopes. And I have a 2011 F150 Ecoboost. Eventually, I'll take a look at the intake valves. But for now, at 45,000 miles, it's running perfectly.


No it isn't- you only think it is. Your flawed technology is living on borrowed time.


Hahahaha, OK, I'll borescope it soon. It should be interesting.

 

[millerbl00]

Thanks, its look like I aint the lonewolf after all...


Originally Posted By: Silverado12
I'm kind of leery about the DI on the Equinox esp. after GM had to recalibrate the oil life monitor because engines were wearing out too early. Luckily, I'm an old timer with the 3,000 mile oil change mentality. Time will tell, but I'm sticking with my antique technology Silverado 4.3 and the Dodge 3.5 for now, and will see how long they last. I'm semi-retired, so no more buying new cars every 5 years.