F150 Ecoboost Forum banner

1 - 20 of 183 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Ok, go easy. Some people on here are very quick to pounce.

I've seen a lot talk lately about needing a catch can or in 10,000 miles your turbo DI engine will be crap (I know I'm exaggerating here, but u get the point).....the sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!

I seen the pics of where the valves have deposits on them, but other than looking ugly, what will this do to my ecoboost?....lose 50% of my hp?..lose 10 mpg?...engine just stop working altogether????? I have a 2013 xlt with 3,000 miles and "plan" on getting 100k out of it....wishful thinking? Posters on here got me thinking that if I don't add all of this stuff (such as a catch can) on my brand new truck, then I will be lucky to get 50k out of this engine. This truck is a daily commuter with maybe a couple tows a year of a 4,000 lb travel trailer. I don't want to risk adding aftermarket stuff and accidently void the warranty in the process. How many ecoboost engines out there?...several hundred thousands? We know that 95% of the DI ecoboost engines out there today will never get a catch can installed. You would think that this would be MAJOR problem on the horizon then, right?

Soooooo, no sales pitch, is a catch can really necessary?....what will happen if I never get one?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,641 Posts
Ford spent years developing this truck and if this was a problem they would have fixed it! 2nd my finding is the a catch can only will catch 50 percent at best!
it's pretty well documented that direct injection motors have issues with valves getting dirty...
You can't expect Joe Average to check/clean a catch can regularly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
it's pretty well documented that direct injection motors have issues with valves getting dirty...
You can't expect Joe Average to check/clean a catch can regularly.
In an effort to educate myself more, I had some time and did a lot more research. I kept getting to the same conclusion. On today's (I said "todays") DI engines, the carbon build up is mostly entirely an issue of the past. I read a pretty good article about it....see the link below. Also, I quoted a small section where Ford was mentioned. This catch can thing reminds me of the splitfire spark plug, or the Tornado fuel saver thing or the fuel catalyst....you get the point.

Direct Injection Fouls Some Early Adopters - AutoObserver


"At the Detroit Auto Show in January, Ford was confident enough about its popular 3.5 liter EcoBoost direct-injection V6 to have technicians tear down an example engine that had accumulated the equivalent of 160,000 miles through an intentionally abusive regimen of log dragging, high-speed towing and desert racing. When they opened it up before a live audience, they found some light carbon deposits on the valves and pistons, but not enough to affect performance. In fact, the engine showed a loss of just one horsepower afterwards – roughly what Boyadjiev’s RS 4 engine lost every 500 miles.
Stephen Russ, technical leader for combustion for Ford’s 2-liter Duratec DI engine, said that similar to GM, engineers have determined the proper injection-timing calibration to help eliminate the carbon deposits. But Russ also said the technology of injection components – particularly the high-pressure solenoid injectors – has quickly matured, meaning excess valve deposits in most DI engines should become a thing of the past as these improved components are incorporated into production."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
Someone with some miles on their motor should check and see if there's deposits or not. I think there is a guy over on SSI's forum that was tearing into his, I believe its got about 110-115k on it. I'll have to see if I can find that and ask him if he's that far into it yet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Someone with some miles on their motor should check and see if there's deposits or not. I think there is a guy over on SSI's forum that was tearing into his, I believe its got about 110-115k on it. I'll have to see if I can find that and ask him if he's that far into it yet.

Yeah, please let me know. I would be very interested in what, if anything, he found.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
16 Posts
Yeah, I'm on the fence about this mod as well.. agree that it's possibly cheap insurance.. but if it's that good of an idea why didn't Ford add it to the engine's PVC system already? Other than the fact it requires owners intervention to check and drain on a regular bases?

And we're probably talk'n apples to oranges when you consider looking at the engines internals say at 100k miles when you take into consideration that one F150 owner uses his truck as a daily commuter, never tows, and pretty much babies his truck and does all his driving around town for relatively short distances and takes almost 9 years to get that 100k. Whereas another F150 owner drives the crap out of it, mostly highway, daily towing, off roading on the weekends and gets to 100k within 5 years... I'd almost venture to say that the one who babies his F150 actually is the hardest on the engine and has more carbon build up on the internals and might benefit more from the catch can? Of course I'm only guessing...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
In an effort to educate myself more, I had some time and did a lot more research. I kept getting to the same conclusion. On today's (I said "todays") DI engines, the carbon build up is mostly entirely an issue of the past. I read a pretty good article about it....see the link below. Also, I quoted a small section where Ford was mentioned. This catch can thing reminds me of the splitfire spark plug, or the Tornado fuel saver thing or the fuel catalyst....you get the point.

Direct Injection Fouls Some Early Adopters - AutoObserver


"At the Detroit Auto Show in January, Ford was confident enough about its popular 3.5 liter EcoBoost direct-injection V6 to have technicians tear down an example engine that had accumulated the equivalent of 160,000 miles through an intentionally abusive regimen of log dragging, high-speed towing and desert racing. When they opened it up before a live audience, they found some light carbon deposits on the valves and pistons, but not enough to affect performance. In fact, the engine showed a loss of just one horsepower afterwards – roughly what Boyadjiev’s RS 4 engine lost every 500 miles.
Stephen Russ, technical leader for combustion for Ford’s 2-liter Duratec DI engine, said that similar to GM, engineers have determined the proper injection-timing calibration to help eliminate the carbon deposits. But Russ also said the technology of injection components – particularly the high-pressure solenoid injectors – has quickly matured, meaning excess valve deposits in most DI engines should become a thing of the past as these improved components are incorporated into production."
BTW, this article was written over two years ago, so I would think that the improvements the major manufacturers were developing would had work their way in today's DI engines. I understand that Ford would want to keep the maintenance simple (the K.I.S.S. policy, right?) for the average Joe, but at the risk of major PR nightmare if the carbon deposit was this serious??....l have my doubts.

The more my commonsense kicks in, the more I think I'm answering my own original question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
The truck I was talking about has 110k miles on it, I asked if he's pulled it apart to the point he can see the tops of the valves.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
I think what those assuming Ford, or any other manufacturer would allow this don't realize these are not Ferrari or Maserati engines where a ton of $ goes into all aspects of every component. These are very tight budget controlled mass produced vehicles/engines.

This is hardly a Ford issue, it is ALL DI engines, and anyone wanting to see the extent, it is easy to find documentation. NO auto maker is going to go public and tell the world there is an issue, that dosen't happen. Look at GM with the Cadillac Northstar engine. They new for how many years the electrolysis issue was eating the head bolt threads causing failures but still made the engine for 9-10 years before discontinuing it? And the Ford 6.4 diesel engine that was nothing but trouble after the proven 7.3. And on and on. These are not $250-1 mil super cars where the engineers are given a ton of design and implementation leeway, this is a mass produced very competitive vehicle that has to fit into tightly controlled price-points and marketing target demographics as GM/Chry/Toyota/Nissan all are selling to the same market. The average consumer (99.9% I estimate) will never be aware of most inherent issues while they drive their vehicle the 3 year avg lease and trade for another, so that is all taken into consideration on how far a manufacturer goes in engineering. I have been a tech since 1974 (GM then) and have seen it all up close and personal. From the Pinto to the caddy cimmaron joke. I have made friends with several engineers over the years that their # one complaint is they may have a design change or addition to correct an issue or improve upon some system, etc. only to have it shot down by accounting, management, legal or other upper shirts even if it added a simple $1-2 total cost to the vehicle. It is all a science as to what is allowed and what is not, and this issue is really only known to the motorheads that dig into their vehicle and do their own maintenance. Look at the advertising that targets each demographic...it is all conditioning the last 2 generations to buy a vehicle, put gas in, and never even open the hood to check oil. Unless a DIC message pops up, then they never think of what goes on mechanically in their vehicle.

So we all know oil does no good in the combustion chamber. It reduces the usable octane, it causes detonation and incomplete burn which releases less energy (power) and poor fuel economy. The intake valve coking is a non argument as well as there are 100'000's of articles, photos, technical blogs on all of this....yet not a single manufacturer admits to it being an issue. GM's #1 warranty visit is for excess oil consumption. BMW it is the intake valve coking where they use a walnut shell media blasting process to clean. ALL have upper induction cleaning services they push to "restore lost power and fuel economy" by "loosening and chemically cleaning the intake valves" So that alone tells a story.

But lets move away from all the data available and documentation to your own vehicle. I ask anyone to take 15 minutes and remove your throttle body. Look at it and the gunk built up on it. Where does this come from? Now shine a light into the IM its'elf, or better yet a boroscope. What do you see? Saturated with oil. Now take the connection loose from the intercooler and feel inside....your finger comes out coated in watery oil that is built up inside it and the tubes/couplers.

If your really handy, go a bit further and remove the intake manifold, now look into the intake ports (the valves are right there) and see the deposits. The port, valve design, and any part of the induction system is designed to work very efficiently, and when there are deposits/gunk built up on any of these it changes the flow characteristics and reduces the volumetric efficiency of design.

See for yourself, and yes, the sales hype of the ineffective solutions along with ANY aftermarket part is from one end of the spectrum to the other. How many look at a part and see it advertised as "up to xxx hp gains!!!" when on average it is 1/2 of that figure.

So, try some of this and see.

In the mean time, here is an actually manually cleaning at 22K miles on a DI V6 engine:

Thought I would cover cleaning the intake valve deposits manually.


Tools needed are 10mm & 13mm socket & ratchet wrench to remove the IM, a 19mm (3/4") socket to turn the crank as you move from port to port to ensure both valves are in the closed position, various long picks or narrow flat blade screw driver, and a set of 1/4" hex end brushes that can be fitted to an extension and drill to clean the deposits, shop vac and compressed air nozzle to remove the deposits as you loosen and clean them from the valves. This can be done in 2-6 hours depending on the tools and how handy the DIY guy/gal is:



Brushes below show how they clog with debris, clean with brake clean between each port so they will still be effective.









This can be done by removing the intake manifold, plug each intake port with a clean rag or better yet blue masking tape to prevent any debris from falling into a cylinder that may have a valve open, start with cylinder/port # 1 and make sure the intake valves are both closed by looking into the port with a flashlight or boroscope.


The deposits will be anywhere from a thick "goo", to baked on rock hard...and so all know, upper induction cleaning is helpful, but you do not want to do it very often as the deposits when loosened while the engine is running, the smaller ones, will be forced between the piston and cylinder-wall and cause scouring. So ONLY do a solvent cleaning once in a great while, and with a good catchcan like the RX, you should have very little build up in the future. Below is a picture showing a low mileage piston with several upper induction cleanings done....if a little is good, a lot must be real good? No. There is a trade off for doing the easy quick fixes. Same as to much fuel treatment/injector cleaner will shorten injector life:



So after making sure the valves are both closed so no deposits can fall into the cylinder, start with the long pick or screwdriver work the biggest accumulation loose first (don't worry about scratching, the valves and seats are hardened steel and there will be damage done). Use the shop vac to keep sucking the debris as it is loosened. After you get as much pried loose this way, then start with the brushes. You will be able to get most all the deposits cleaned and end up with this when completed:



Vs this to start:



After you have completed one port, then spray compressed air into the port to remove any particles the vac did not and clean and tape up that port and move to the next.


I know this is not long and detailed, but should give most the steps to do this. The difference will be very noticeable in both power and fuel economy. Remember, it took time for this to gradually build up so most never notice the degradation but sure do the improvement after completing this.

Now on to some links on industry documentation on this (keep in mind not a single PR spokesperson for ANY of the worlds auto manufacturers admit this an issue):

What is Direct Injection and what are the advantages/disadvantages? | Car Match Blog

Ask An Engineer: GDI Problems In A Nutshell | The Truth About Cars

REVIEW: Cleaning of intake valves with BMW walnut shell blasting tool

Post#1 in this discussion has dozens of links to DI intake valve coking issues:

Audi FSI Engine Carbon Build-up Megathread

And the letters to Management of auto makers on the issue:

Official Letter to Audi of America Executive Vice President...Thoughts?

Direct Injection Could Be Maintenance Nightmare | The CarGurus Blog

The gooey truth about direct injection - Chicago Tribune

How To Clean BMW N54 Intake Ports and Valves with Walnut Shells | Eastwood Blog

Tons of technical papers here as well from the SAE engineers:
http://www.sae.org/servlets/product?PROD_TYP=PAPER&PARENT_BPA_CD=GV&TECH_CD=SI

So, good discussion started here, and with no sales pitch, ask more. This is like most any issue in the past with any auto manufacturer..."out of sight, out of mind", but very real, and a very preventable issue. Not so easy to undo after it occurs, but that I covered as well.

One final thing, as we install tons of these on small fleets of light trucks and vans for fuel savings alone (most do not care about longevity of the engine as they lease and trade every few years) these same fleet owners track expenses to the penny, and realize 1-3 MPG improvement per vehicle on average. You may want to contact one directly for actual results from someone NOT selling them.

Also, since most cans offered today do NOT stop or prevent these issues as they let so much oil past them, it is common to see a owner come in after having a can installed that allows pull through for 10-20-30k miles (and they empty them religiously) still have the deposits when they thought they were preventing the issue based on a manufacturers claims.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
One other thing to add is for those not wanting to have their engine running the best, lasting the longest, this should not be something to even consider buying. Most own their vehicle and are never aware of the issue, so if your in the mindset to trust in all cars/trucks being the best they could possibly be from the factory, all this is a waste of time & $. Same with adding a CAI or headers/exhaust, etc. This information is only for those that want to improve on, or make sure their baby has the best for as long as possible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
124 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
One other thing to add is for those not wanting to have their engine running the best, lasting the longest, this should not be something to even consider buying. Most own their vehicle and are never aware of the issue, so if your in the mindset to trust in all cars/trucks being the best they could possibly be from the factory, all this is a waste of time & $. Same with adding a CAI or headers/exhaust, etc. This information is only for those that want to improve on, or make sure their baby has the best for as long as possible.
So, the Ford ecoboost challenge was a big farce? Damn, cannot believe anyone....so disappointing.

So, slap on this big $300+ catch can (RX) and if I have a engine problem, then i better rip it off so Ford doesn't find a reason to not cover $1,000+ engine warranty claim....right?

I'm just curious, which catch can do u recommend?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
The Ford ecoboost is one of the best engineered V6 DI engines out there. The intake valve coking issue is less severe than say the GM 3.2 and 3.6L, and the Mini 4 cyl is probably the worst of all of them.

We have never seen a warranty issue denied with the RX can properly installed, but there are systems that defeat the crankcase evacuation functions (a can with a breather on it, a can that has both the celan and dirty side running to it, etc.) that would be grounds as they can and will cause premature wear and possible hydro-lock damage. In fact, with over 14,000 of the RX systems in use over the years, and many GM dealers the biggest buyers (no Ford dealers direct yet that I know of), Nicky Chevrolet in Chicago uses them exclusively on their famous Nicky signature builds, and most just for the oil ingestion valve coking issues. So I would not be concerned about any warranty issues, but each dealer service center makes their own decisions there. I had a brand new F-350 6.4 diesel and when the head bolts stretched and blew the head gaskets, the local Ford dealer voided my entire warranty because I had a CAI on it. I went to a nearby Lincoln Mercury dealer and they warrantied it anyway (they said they get alot of the other dealers warranty work that is refused), but it stretched them again and I did the ARP head stud fix myself...never an issue after that. The Magnasun/Moss act is clear about what can and cannot void a warranty, but that takes an atty to fight it.

There are several Vendors on here that carry the RX systems. :thumbsup:

The ecoboost, and any forced induction application would only be able to use the RX dual valve system to address it all properly, where a NA car (non boosted) can use one of the others mentioned for excellent results. The issue with forced induction and most cans is the boost pressure when in boost operation, and to date, the RX system is the only one addressing all of these functions. That is providing constant evacuation and oil separation at both boost and non boost operation, and addressing the fresh side (where the line runs from the drivers side cam cover to the main intake air tube) as this is a point of ingestion as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
314 Posts
Here they go showing you worst case and putting fear in you? Ford tore down that motor for all to see with video running where was all this build up you talk about?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,173 Posts
Here they go showing you worst case and putting fear in you? Ford tore down that motor for all to see with video running where was all this build up you talk about?

Instead of us throwing jabs at each other, and as I tear these down on a regular basis and perform the actual intake valve manual cleaning, how about just take a few minutes on your own to take the intake manifold off and see for yourself? I want no drama or fight....just sharing what is there for any to see. Does not take long to pull your IM and look for yourself. Then there is no opinions, or assumptions. I was not there to verify any of that video, and respect Ford to much to make a claim I don't know as fact so it would be stupid of me to make any claim on that particular promo video. All I am doing is sharing what I see first hand, and The Ford ecoboost has some of the least issues with this compared to others, but are still real and you can see yours for yourself so there is no question.

Here are an ecoboost at 67k miles before and after a recent manual valve cleaning:





Far less than an BMW, Audi, or GM DI engine, but still plenty enough to not want it affecting the volumetric efficiency of the design the engineers worked so hard to achieve.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,068 Posts
Very good info here! Thanks for sharing. .. im soo glad I made the move to buy a rx catch can. I will thank myself ever time I empty the can. It amazing what it catches uploadfromtaptalk1390434261162.jpg uploadfromtaptalk1390434279922.jpg

And this was only after 200 r less miles

got to get it!
 
1 - 20 of 183 Posts
Top