F150 Ecoboost Forum banner
21 - 30 of 30 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #23 ·
Simulation is coming along. Still tweaking inputs but we are getting there. But onto another subject, the port design. When I first looked at the ports I was intrigued I had a pretty good hypothesis of what it was designed for but not a 100% on why. I had presented the idea of gutting the head and doing what some call a "pocket port" but after a lot of research I decided against it. If I was building a drag car I would have no hesitation but since this will be a semi used commuter and hunting rig I can see the benefit of leaving the heads as is.

For a high level explanation the ports are designed for tumble not flow. But they are very capable of flowing what is needed for the power this engine is rated for plus more. If you need more flow you can always increase boost. This port design aids in getting a more homogeneous mix of fuel and air. With DI it can be challenging to get a good mix and can also cause cylinder wall wetting and piston top wetting. So by creating high amounts of tumble these issues are virtually eliminated. With the newer generation of engines they added back port injection which eliminates the need to solely rely on DI so the need for high flow injectors and high tumble is reduced. Thus no longer needing a masked ports.

If anyone is a real nerd for this stuff you can get the information straight from the horses mouth by reading the Fords SAE paper on the development of this head. Here's a link to the paper

Here's a couple fun screen shots from the paper.
Slope Triangle Parallel Font Drawing
Joint Shoulder Vertebrate Muscle Product

The images above show the port designes and the tumble flow at 5000 rpm.
Iyer, C. and Yi, J., "3D CFD Upfront Optimization of the In-Cylinder Flow of the 3.5L V6 EcoBoost Engine," SAE Technical Paper 2009-01-1492, 2009, SAE MOBILUS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #25 ·
I've seen those port "eyelids" defended by some pretty smart fellas. Ford didn't just design that head as an afterthought!
Good to see you come to similar conclusions.
Yeah I had a pretty strong suspicion on them butttt I was like how much can it really improve. Seems to do a pretty decent job and in the paper they mention that any flow loss can be fixed with more boost lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1 Posts
Newbie here, 2104 F150FX4 CREW, 3.5L, I've decided to go the CRP route with SPD adapters. (Leaking passenger side) Ive had one heck of a time removing the broken rear stud, Ive removed and drilled plenty over the years, but this one took the cake! way way too may hours drilling and scratching my head. I was able to drill out the broken stud completed, only slightly damaging the threads. I cleaned the threads in the head with a tap and the new stud threads in Ok, but not good enough for me. My plan is to use the stock M8 studs all but the rear hole, and install a single M10 at the rear. I even splurged and went to a M10Titanium stud and nut. In my head just having the rear stud should almost doubled in strength, that can only help prevent the cantilevered issue that I feel contributes to the failure (yes there are many factors). Plus I feel that taping the outermost hole with no water jacket risk, is a way better ideal than to add a helicoil, or just using factory head threads that maybe at 75% due to drilling out stud.

I am very nervous about my repair, once you go to M10, its hard to go back, Anyone want to chime in and tell me im Way off track? OR just keep on truckin'

Thanks for the post FraggyECO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #29 ·
Justafordecobguy The only thing I could see being a problem could be thermal expansion not being the same for all your bolts. I'd think that the higher clamp load would prevent a failure from occurring but that's the one thing I could see being a problem.
Also Titanium doesn't need to be as high of a torque as steel if it's a grade 2 or 7. I think for anyone in your situation the M10 is a good backup option. Way better then scrapping a head or just making an M8 work with an helicoil.

If you got a grade 2 bolt you would want to be torqued around 23 Nm for a grade 5 you would want to be around 60 Nm. I tested on an old head up to 60 Nm and didn't have a problem with the stud pulling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Discussion Starter · #30 ·
Well it's been a while, lots of other projects have been leaching my time. However we've got the short block built up and all torqued ready to drop into the truck. Plan to install it first without the heads to make it easier getting the transmission bolted back up.

On my cylinder heads I ended up buying 2 spanken new heads built with everything but buckets and cams. Ended up being great deals locally at $400 a pop and they included the injectors which I also needed. Little less exciting but after measuring all my components pretty much everything was out of spec on the original ones.

Got my upgraded studs installed in one head. Definitely an upgrade that needs to be done out of the engine bay if you are replacing them all. Had to use a crows foot and had to slowly torque each nut a little at a time to walk the manifold down due to the nuts only fitting where the manifold was fly cut. Fingers double crossed this doesn't fail in the time that I own this vehicle.

Automotive tire Bumper Wood Motor vehicle Automotive exterior
 
21 - 30 of 30 Posts
Top