I just read oil 101 so if the engine uses a 20wt everything will be ok!!!
Ford Ecoboost Engines
- Thread starter outoforder
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: CROWNVIC4LIFE
I am waiting for law enforcement down here in the jungle to test them out but it looks like the bulk of agencies [if not all] are going over to the Charger and Tahoe camp.
Looks like every agency down here is trying to get every last one of the remaining CVPI'S as I still see new ones still coming in.
The cops driving the Dodges have a hateful,spiteful scowl on their faces. The ones in the Crown Vics seem content,happy and sure of themselves.
I am waiting for law enforcement down here in the jungle to test them out but it looks like the bulk of agencies [if not all] are going over to the Charger and Tahoe camp.
Looks like every agency down here is trying to get every last one of the remaining CVPI'S as I still see new ones still coming in.
The cops driving the Dodges have a hateful,spiteful scowl on their faces. The ones in the Crown Vics seem content,happy and sure of themselves.
Pics are up in the linked site. Noticeably absent however, at least from this link, are views of the valves and intake manifold. Tops of pistons do show some carbon. Normal?
EcoBoost teardown pics.
EcoBoost teardown pics.
Reading further, a comment in the link says, "We didn’t get a photo of the valves, but they had carbon deposits similar to that found (and seen in pictures) on piston combustion surfaces." That's the pic specifically, I would have liked to see.
Read through this BG test using the ecoboost in the SHO Taurus http://www.bgfueltest.com/, the mpg loss due to deposits is enough to keep me away from it.
I'm not certain that the hard nature of the testing didn't actually help clean the valves, etc. But we may never know!
All in all, taken at face value, very impressive. A little leakdown in a 4 valver is nothing to get excited about.
All in all, taken at face value, very impressive. A little leakdown in a 4 valver is nothing to get excited about.
Originally Posted By: outoforder
What are the drawbacks of a direct injection engine?
The biggest is carbon deposits on the intake valves. Direct injection sprays the gasoline directly into the combustion chamber. Non DI sprays the gasoline into the intake port, upstream of the intake valves. Since gasoline contains detergents to fight intake valve deposits, spraying the gasoline downstream of the intake valves directly into the combustion chamber negates any benefits of the detergent. Carbon builds up on the intake valves, reducing air flow, and thus increasing gasoline consumption and lowering power and drivability.
What are the drawbacks of a direct injection engine?
The biggest is carbon deposits on the intake valves. Direct injection sprays the gasoline directly into the combustion chamber. Non DI sprays the gasoline into the intake port, upstream of the intake valves. Since gasoline contains detergents to fight intake valve deposits, spraying the gasoline downstream of the intake valves directly into the combustion chamber negates any benefits of the detergent. Carbon builds up on the intake valves, reducing air flow, and thus increasing gasoline consumption and lowering power and drivability.
I just read that the Eco Boost calls for a 30 grade oil. I'm getting conflicting reports on the Pentastar engine oil specs, some sources are saying 5W20 others 5W30. I also read Chrysler has plans of offering the Pentastar as a DI turbo engine. I wonder if DI engines require a 30 grade oil because of fuel dilution problems, and Chrysler is spec'ing the 30 grade ahead of the change to DI to eliminate confusion?
I'm not a fan of being the first to buy a new engine design, or major upgrade to an engine.
I'm not a fan of being the first to buy a new engine design, or major upgrade to an engine.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Have you watched for F-150 ecoboost torture test video's? At the least very entertaining.
http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/experiencef150/
I enjoyed the vidoes, but I wish they had torn down the engine, and looked at the valves and intake manifold area after dyno testing or at some point. Also would like to know what maintenance was done and what fluids used. As someone mentioned, the BG Ecoboost Taurus test with borescope views, would give one pause. And, I don't consider pouring the BG cleaner down the intake and/or scrubbing to be an acceptable regular maintenance solution. Then too, BG has some vested interest there too ie., selling product.
Just wish there were some satisfactory answers to the GDI valve/intake maintenance questions.
I just got back from the Detroit Auto Show yesterday, and they had the actual Ecoboost engine from the truck in the video disassembled and on display in 3 different cases. The piston crowns, ring belts, and combustion chambers all had a normal, thin coating of carbon. Nothing that I would consider abnormal. They only had one intake valve removed from a cylinder head, and its underhead fillet looked OK. Maybe you can look around on the NAIAS web site for pictures, or Ford's web site for an update.
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Have you watched for F-150 ecoboost torture test video's? At the least very entertaining.
http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/experiencef150/
I enjoyed the vidoes, but I wish they had torn down the engine, and looked at the valves and intake manifold area after dyno testing or at some point. Also would like to know what maintenance was done and what fluids used. As someone mentioned, the BG Ecoboost Taurus test with borescope views, would give one pause. And, I don't consider pouring the BG cleaner down the intake and/or scrubbing to be an acceptable regular maintenance solution. Then too, BG has some vested interest there too ie., selling product.
Just wish there were some satisfactory answers to the GDI valve/intake maintenance questions.
I just got back from the Detroit Auto Show yesterday, and they had the actual Ecoboost engine from the truck in the video disassembled and on display in 3 different cases. The piston crowns, ring belts, and combustion chambers all had a normal, thin coating of carbon. Nothing that I would consider abnormal. They only had one intake valve removed from a cylinder head, and its underhead fillet looked OK. Maybe you can look around on the NAIAS web site for pictures, or Ford's web site for an update.
Originally Posted By: outoforder
What are the drawbacks of a direct injection engine?
Drawbacks of a gasoline direct injection engine are:
1. Soot loading of the oil, somewhat like a diesel, due to incomplete mixing of fuel and air prior to combustion.
2. Heavy combustion chamber and valve underhead carbon deposits.
Advantages of GDI engines:
1. Injection of the fuel during the compression stroke cools the trapped combustion air, enabling the use of higher compression.
2. Injection of the fuel in the cylinder free's up volume in the intake port for charge air, improving volumetric efficiency by ~7%.
3. Injection of the fuel after the intake valve has closed reduces the probability that some of it will go out the exhaust during valve overlap.
4. Provides an opportunity for lean-burn, stratified charge operation. (But like JHZR2 points out, emissions regs make this difficult.)
In my job as an engineer working at a Tier I supplier of engine components, I know that EVERYBODY is working on DI. I think within the next 5 years, every engine will have it. Deal with it.
What are the drawbacks of a direct injection engine?
Drawbacks of a gasoline direct injection engine are:
1. Soot loading of the oil, somewhat like a diesel, due to incomplete mixing of fuel and air prior to combustion.
2. Heavy combustion chamber and valve underhead carbon deposits.
Advantages of GDI engines:
1. Injection of the fuel during the compression stroke cools the trapped combustion air, enabling the use of higher compression.
2. Injection of the fuel in the cylinder free's up volume in the intake port for charge air, improving volumetric efficiency by ~7%.
3. Injection of the fuel after the intake valve has closed reduces the probability that some of it will go out the exhaust during valve overlap.
4. Provides an opportunity for lean-burn, stratified charge operation. (But like JHZR2 points out, emissions regs make this difficult.)
In my job as an engineer working at a Tier I supplier of engine components, I know that EVERYBODY is working on DI. I think within the next 5 years, every engine will have it. Deal with it.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: A_Harman
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Have you watched for F-150 ecoboost torture test video's? At the least very entertaining.
http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/experiencef150/
I enjoyed the vidoes, but I wish they had torn down the engine, and looked at the valves and intake manifold area after dyno testing or at some point. Also would like to know what maintenance was done and what fluids used. As someone mentioned, the BG Ecoboost Taurus test with borescope views, would give one pause. And, I don't consider pouring the BG cleaner down the intake and/or scrubbing to be an acceptable regular maintenance solution. Then too, BG has some vested interest there too ie., selling product.
Just wish there were some satisfactory answers to the GDI valve/intake maintenance questions.
I just got back from the Detroit Auto Show yesterday, and they had the actual Ecoboost engine from the truck in the video disassembled and on display in 3 different cases. The piston crowns, ring belts, and combustion chambers all had a normal, thin coating of carbon. Nothing that I would consider abnormal. They only had one intake valve removed from a cylinder head, and its underhead fillet looked OK. Maybe you can look around on the NAIAS web site for pictures, or Ford's web site for an update.
Yes, I've followed it closely was actually the first to post the link to the teardown pictures on Bitog, which is on the previous page of this thread. At that point I hadn't seen the youtube which is now posted showing a singular intake valve. It still doesn't explain satisfactorily enough 'for me' the inconsistency between the shown truck test results and the previously mentioned/linked in this thread the Taurus Ecoboost now being done by BG. There was some mention of the truck ecoboost engine being somehow different than the Taurus. I read something about a rumor of timing tricks being used on the truck. If true, it's difficult to comprehend why that isn't being used by Ford in the Taurus ecoboost engine, doesn't make any sense to me. The BG Taurus ecoboost results appear very different from a valve results standpoint.
It's not just a Ford concern for me either, the same goes for Hyundai or any new direct injection engine. I'm just not willing to be a beta tester for direct injection. In five years the answer to easy maintenance for carboned valves may be answered, until then there are other choices and I don't have to deal with it.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Originally Posted By: TaterandNoodles
Have you watched for F-150 ecoboost torture test video's? At the least very entertaining.
http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/experiencef150/
I enjoyed the vidoes, but I wish they had torn down the engine, and looked at the valves and intake manifold area after dyno testing or at some point. Also would like to know what maintenance was done and what fluids used. As someone mentioned, the BG Ecoboost Taurus test with borescope views, would give one pause. And, I don't consider pouring the BG cleaner down the intake and/or scrubbing to be an acceptable regular maintenance solution. Then too, BG has some vested interest there too ie., selling product.
Just wish there were some satisfactory answers to the GDI valve/intake maintenance questions.
I just got back from the Detroit Auto Show yesterday, and they had the actual Ecoboost engine from the truck in the video disassembled and on display in 3 different cases. The piston crowns, ring belts, and combustion chambers all had a normal, thin coating of carbon. Nothing that I would consider abnormal. They only had one intake valve removed from a cylinder head, and its underhead fillet looked OK. Maybe you can look around on the NAIAS web site for pictures, or Ford's web site for an update.
Yes, I've followed it closely was actually the first to post the link to the teardown pictures on Bitog, which is on the previous page of this thread. At that point I hadn't seen the youtube which is now posted showing a singular intake valve. It still doesn't explain satisfactorily enough 'for me' the inconsistency between the shown truck test results and the previously mentioned/linked in this thread the Taurus Ecoboost now being done by BG. There was some mention of the truck ecoboost engine being somehow different than the Taurus. I read something about a rumor of timing tricks being used on the truck. If true, it's difficult to comprehend why that isn't being used by Ford in the Taurus ecoboost engine, doesn't make any sense to me. The BG Taurus ecoboost results appear very different from a valve results standpoint.
It's not just a Ford concern for me either, the same goes for Hyundai or any new direct injection engine. I'm just not willing to be a beta tester for direct injection. In five years the answer to easy maintenance for carboned valves may be answered, until then there are other choices and I don't have to deal with it.
I don't discount BG's activities in studying the effects of long-term deposit formation in the Eco-Boost engine, but they're approaching it from a different direction than Ford. Ford has done the torture test series on the F150 EcoBoost to demonstrate the viability of a 3.7-liter engine doing the job that used to be done by a 5.4-liter engine. Powering a full-size pickup, and rating it for towing 11,000 pounds with such a small engine is bound to make knowledgeable motorheads skeptical. I am. The Ford testing, tortuous though it may have been, took place over a period of a couple of months and involved aggressive duty cycles that kept the cylinder components hot. This tends to keep the heavy carbon deposits burned off.
But this is not the duty cycle that most people subject their passenger car engines to. Most people toodle around town making short trips, barely cracking open the throttle, with the engine bogging down around 1500 rpm all the time. This is the kind of duty cycle that leads to carboning over a period of years. I think this is the direction that BG is approaching DI engines from. They see a market developing in maintaining DI engines, so I wouldn't be surprised if they are running the engines on bad fuel and bad oil, and generally maintaining them improperly the way most people do. This would be important for them to evaluate the effectiveness of their cleaning process.
Since these engines are new on the market, I think it is important to follow the maintenance schedule and use the proper lubricants in the owner's manual to give the engine the best chance of staying clean. If it still has a problem, then let the manufacturer deal with it.
But this is not the duty cycle that most people subject their passenger car engines to. Most people toodle around town making short trips, barely cracking open the throttle, with the engine bogging down around 1500 rpm all the time. This is the kind of duty cycle that leads to carboning over a period of years. I think this is the direction that BG is approaching DI engines from. They see a market developing in maintaining DI engines, so I wouldn't be surprised if they are running the engines on bad fuel and bad oil, and generally maintaining them improperly the way most people do. This would be important for them to evaluate the effectiveness of their cleaning process.
Since these engines are new on the market, I think it is important to follow the maintenance schedule and use the proper lubricants in the owner's manual to give the engine the best chance of staying clean. If it still has a problem, then let the manufacturer deal with it.
Having the turboed engine do the work that a 5.4 engine does is no biggie when the engine is designed to hold up but what isn't realized by most of the people saying wow is that there is a much higher chance of catastrophic failure with the higher stressed engine. Now I do not know what safty or failsafe measures have been programmed but for example a boost sensor or a knock sensor fails what will happen when the truck is loaded to the max ,going up the Grapevine hill during a hot spell with a driver that has to be in the highest gear with the pedal to the metal so he can go up the hill at 44 mph instead of 38 mph with the load on the engine 25% less? I will let othere pay their hard earned dollars to road test the new engine so by the time I buy one the bugs will be worked out on their dime and time.
Quote:
I will let othere pay their hard earned dollars to road test the new engine so by the time I buy one the bugs will be worked out on their dime and time.
+1 Even though DI engines seem exciting, I'm willing to let others be the beta testers. I differ somewhat on the possible outcome. Still unconvinced the intake valve carbon issues are solved. Seen enough pics posted here and the current BG test, of severely carboned valves of other DI engines to be cautious.
Some suggest letting the manufacturer work those issues out under warranty. However, I don't see the carboned valves/intake as necessarily an engine failure issue, but rather a performance/efficiency issue. That is something very difficult for a DI owner to prove without things like boroscope views and expensive dyno testing, something the average owner can't provide to a service department or service writer. So rather than an engine failure, it's a gradual loss of performance and economy over time.
Fwiw, I'm referring to any of current DI production engines not specifically the Ford Ecoboost engine. Few years out I may feel different, but only time will tell.
I will let othere pay their hard earned dollars to road test the new engine so by the time I buy one the bugs will be worked out on their dime and time.
+1 Even though DI engines seem exciting, I'm willing to let others be the beta testers. I differ somewhat on the possible outcome. Still unconvinced the intake valve carbon issues are solved. Seen enough pics posted here and the current BG test, of severely carboned valves of other DI engines to be cautious.
Some suggest letting the manufacturer work those issues out under warranty. However, I don't see the carboned valves/intake as necessarily an engine failure issue, but rather a performance/efficiency issue. That is something very difficult for a DI owner to prove without things like boroscope views and expensive dyno testing, something the average owner can't provide to a service department or service writer. So rather than an engine failure, it's a gradual loss of performance and economy over time.
Fwiw, I'm referring to any of current DI production engines not specifically the Ford Ecoboost engine. Few years out I may feel different, but only time will tell.
In regards to the F-150 torture test for ecoboost engine.
It simulates 150,000 miles in 300 hours!
Thats an average speed of 500 miles an hour total [censored].
If you break it down to 100 miles an hour thats still 1500 hours.
If your running it 24/7 it would take 2 months and its totally unrealistic results who the [censored] averages 100 mph in daily driving. Full throttle up a grade for 2 months would be much less of a problem for the engine then say gridlock then sit over night, then go for coffee and sit for a couple days with [censored] gas, how about a million short trips to the store engine never warms up or the owner runs hard then shuts down immediately killing the turbo you get the picture. People average closer to 25 or 35 mph extending the hours to 4300 hours at least. How about testing with low grade oil and gas. The point, Test is not even close to what the truck will endure. Ford you have mail.
It simultaes 15,000 miles maybe 30,000 but thats it.
It simulates 150,000 miles in 300 hours!
Thats an average speed of 500 miles an hour total [censored].
If you break it down to 100 miles an hour thats still 1500 hours.
If your running it 24/7 it would take 2 months and its totally unrealistic results who the [censored] averages 100 mph in daily driving. Full throttle up a grade for 2 months would be much less of a problem for the engine then say gridlock then sit over night, then go for coffee and sit for a couple days with [censored] gas, how about a million short trips to the store engine never warms up or the owner runs hard then shuts down immediately killing the turbo you get the picture. People average closer to 25 or 35 mph extending the hours to 4300 hours at least. How about testing with low grade oil and gas. The point, Test is not even close to what the truck will endure. Ford you have mail.
It simultaes 15,000 miles maybe 30,000 but thats it.
Congratulations, you've just proved a total lack of understanding of the process of dyno simulation. The claim is not that they run the engine for 150K miles. It is that they put the engine through the abuse that an engine will typically see through 150K miles of use.
Can the F-150 do 500 miles an hour, not with a really tall gear.
Case closed Test bogus.
Case closed Test bogus.
Originally Posted By: Koz1
Can the F-150 do 500 miles an hour, not with a really tall gear.
Case closed Test bogus.
Sorry, I bow to your clearly superior knowledge on the subject. I just worked on advanced materials research for the Corvette engine program, WTH do I know...
Can the F-150 do 500 miles an hour, not with a really tall gear.
Case closed Test bogus.
Sorry, I bow to your clearly superior knowledge on the subject. I just worked on advanced materials research for the Corvette engine program, WTH do I know...
- Status
