Believe it on the dilution. I had 1.6% and 2.1% running Ultra for 4K (2.1%) and 3500 (1.6%)
I just do 3K OCI's
OP-Delete the EGR's
I just do 3K OCI's
OP-Delete the EGR's
Last edited:
'11 EcoBoost F150, PU 5W-30 4908K miles
- Thread starter BeerCan
- Start date
- Status
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: INDYMAC
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
B&G's testing is biased. They want you to buy their cleaner....
It may be biased towards using their excellent products, but that doesn't make it inaccurate. This is a well known problem in Ecoboost and other DI engines. It's nice to see someone offering a possible solution.
On the other hand, Ford's F-150 Ecoboost 160,000 mile tear-down showed no valve deposit issues. B&G's "test" information also shows the Taurus AFAIK. Not even the same vehicle as the subject of this thread.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
B&G's testing is biased. They want you to buy their cleaner....
It may be biased towards using their excellent products, but that doesn't make it inaccurate. This is a well known problem in Ecoboost and other DI engines. It's nice to see someone offering a possible solution.
On the other hand, Ford's F-150 Ecoboost 160,000 mile tear-down showed no valve deposit issues. B&G's "test" information also shows the Taurus AFAIK. Not even the same vehicle as the subject of this thread.
IMO that is a lot of carbon/coke on those pistons. Probably the consequence of running a VERY rich tune to keep the engine together.
It's pretty obvious now that Ford and GM have some sort of proprietary tech to deal with valve deposits. I suspect the rumors of the VVT being used to enhance normal reversion are true, but I have no solid info.
ANYTHING B&G does is based on profit motive. Period.
It's pretty obvious now that Ford and GM have some sort of proprietary tech to deal with valve deposits. I suspect the rumors of the VVT being used to enhance normal reversion are true, but I have no solid info.
ANYTHING B&G does is based on profit motive. Period.
I certainly hope that they have fixed the problem with the Ecoboost engines. Not only for those that have bought them already, but because I am very interested in buying an F-150 with that engine. In fact, I almost bought one last summer to replace my 2000 Tundra. But none of the dealerships were willing to address the issue honestly with me. They just kept telling me to watch the video! I said great, I'll watch it again if you gaurantee in writing that you'll clean the engine free of charge if it's performance is ever affected by carbon build-up in the valve chamber. None of them would agree to it, so I decided to wait and see. So far, the tell tale signs are starting to show up.
Problem with those pics/teardown is that how they got 160K on a car so quickly.
Where's all the other valves... sheesh.
Meh, a daily wouldn't look like that. I'm with Steve on the pistons, they look horrid.
Where's all the other valves... sheesh.
Meh, a daily wouldn't look like that. I'm with Steve on the pistons, they look horrid.
Last edited:
Seeing those pictures makes me not want to purchase an EcoBoost engine. Terrible carbon issues... Would a good fuel cleaner like Redline SI-1 help with that?
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Of course they look good. However a better oil may have helped some what. Now badly carboned pistons will actually have the rings stuck to the pistons. Notice these are fully expanded. I have seen rings from engines where the rings were completely fused in the piston grove with no expansion at all.
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Of course they look good. However a better oil may have helped some what. Now badly carboned pistons will actually have the rings stuck to the pistons. Notice these are fully expanded. I have seen rings from engines where the rings were completely fused in the piston grove with no expansion at all.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Yup. So have I tig on a number of SBF and SBC engines that we (myself and friends) have had apart.
I doubt it saw a whole lot of boost to tell you the truth.
Those 160K miles were probably almost all highway miles.
Does the EB have the extra injector to help the valve deposits?
Those 160K miles were probably almost all highway miles.
Does the EB have the extra injector to help the valve deposits?
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: PZR2874
I doubt it saw a whole lot of boost to tell you the truth.
Those 160K miles were probably almost all highway miles.
Does the EB have the extra injector to help the valve deposits?
I'm guessing you didn't read up on the test eh?
The truck ran the Baja 1000 just before tear-down. Yeah, it saw a lot of boost.
Quote:
Nov. 20, 2010
3:17 a.m. (PST): Congrats to Ford! McCarthy's 2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost race truck (No. 899) with the torture-tested “hero” engine finished one of the most grueling desert endurance races in the world – the Tecate SCORE Baja 1000 – in 38 hours and 20 minutes, after 1,061 miles.
The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine used to power the race truck performed spectacularly in the harsh terrain and extreme temperature swings of the Baja California Peninsula. The truck endured hard accelerations – often at full throttle – and stiff decelerations across the mountains at temperatures that swung between freezing and 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
Though the EcoBoost engine entered the race with the equivalent of 10 years worth of rugged use, its inherent performance advantages – twin turbochargers and direct fuel injection – helped it complete the race.
"I’ve never seen anything like it in a stock engine – especially one that’s been through what this one has,” said driver Mike McCarthy. “This EcoBoost engine didn’t miss a beat. It took a beating and kept right on going. This is one tough engine."
I doubt it saw a whole lot of boost to tell you the truth.
Those 160K miles were probably almost all highway miles.
Does the EB have the extra injector to help the valve deposits?
I'm guessing you didn't read up on the test eh?
The truck ran the Baja 1000 just before tear-down. Yeah, it saw a lot of boost.
Quote:
Nov. 20, 2010
3:17 a.m. (PST): Congrats to Ford! McCarthy's 2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost race truck (No. 899) with the torture-tested “hero” engine finished one of the most grueling desert endurance races in the world – the Tecate SCORE Baja 1000 – in 38 hours and 20 minutes, after 1,061 miles.
The 3.5-liter EcoBoost V-6 engine used to power the race truck performed spectacularly in the harsh terrain and extreme temperature swings of the Baja California Peninsula. The truck endured hard accelerations – often at full throttle – and stiff decelerations across the mountains at temperatures that swung between freezing and 100 degrees Fahrenheit.
Though the EcoBoost engine entered the race with the equivalent of 10 years worth of rugged use, its inherent performance advantages – twin turbochargers and direct fuel injection – helped it complete the race.
"I’ve never seen anything like it in a stock engine – especially one that’s been through what this one has,” said driver Mike McCarthy. “This EcoBoost engine didn’t miss a beat. It took a beating and kept right on going. This is one tough engine."
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
Originally Posted By: INDYMAC
There are a few things that Blackstone is good at, but flash point and fuel dilution aren't included. The tip off to high fuel is the manganese. It comes from fuel additives.
Your engine is following the trademark combustion chamber and intake valve carbon build-up scenario as identified by B&G in their ecoboost engine tests (they also identified fuel dilution problems early on UOA's). It will require some cleaning.
Engine oil recommendation? Use what Ford recommends and take it back for warranty repairs when necessary.
Unfortunately, this is probably closer to being accurate IF the fuel dilution can definitely be 'confirmed'.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Additive levels seem low for Ultra - usually, Boron is 200+, and Ca is a bit higher.
Wear metals are higher from break in, nothing to worry about.
Ultra's now 'compliant' SN formulation = weaker add pack but perhaps lower noack still? lol, okay not getting started again. Resist, resist, resist!!!
Where are you getting the information the SN additive levels are less than SM? To be honest this report looks good, given the volatility of the DI gas engines.
I was actually posing that as a question (in a way to be light hearted) as it 'appeared' weaker to me than recent Ultra UOAs and around the time of SN introduction/VOA around this time as such on this site. I am used to seeing around 3,000 ppm of calcium for one in Ultra. Where as you could have fooled me if this was stated as being PP.
Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
Originally Posted By: INDYMAC
There are a few things that Blackstone is good at, but flash point and fuel dilution aren't included. The tip off to high fuel is the manganese. It comes from fuel additives.
Your engine is following the trademark combustion chamber and intake valve carbon build-up scenario as identified by B&G in their ecoboost engine tests (they also identified fuel dilution problems early on UOA's). It will require some cleaning.
Engine oil recommendation? Use what Ford recommends and take it back for warranty repairs when necessary.
Unfortunately, this is probably closer to being accurate IF the fuel dilution can definitely be 'confirmed'.
Originally Posted By: addyguy
Additive levels seem low for Ultra - usually, Boron is 200+, and Ca is a bit higher.
Wear metals are higher from break in, nothing to worry about.
Ultra's now 'compliant' SN formulation = weaker add pack but perhaps lower noack still? lol, okay not getting started again. Resist, resist, resist!!!
Where are you getting the information the SN additive levels are less than SM? To be honest this report looks good, given the volatility of the DI gas engines.
I was actually posing that as a question (in a way to be light hearted) as it 'appeared' weaker to me than recent Ultra UOAs and around the time of SN introduction/VOA around this time as such on this site. I am used to seeing around 3,000 ppm of calcium for one in Ultra. Where as you could have fooled me if this was stated as being PP.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
I was thinking the Baja is what carboned it up, LOL! All that boost at WOT, and the subsequent rich mixture to go along with it
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
I was thinking the Baja is what carboned it up, LOL! All that boost at WOT, and the subsequent rich mixture to go along with it
Nah, that's an Italian Tune up at its finest!
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Nah, that's an Italian Tune up at its finest!
Maybe it is from all the "block of ice" starts? LOL! Remember the other parts of the test?
Nah, that's an Italian Tune up at its finest!
Maybe it is from all the "block of ice" starts? LOL! Remember the other parts of the test?
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
That's what I was meaning, and yes... I read everything.
600 miles on the Baja is a far cry from 160K. Crud, 600 miles on a daily drive is a far cry from 1K that been beaten on
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
That's what I was meaning, and yes... I read everything.
600 miles on the Baja is a far cry from 160K. Crud, 600 miles on a daily drive is a far cry from 1K that been beaten on
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: PZR2874
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
That's what I was meaning, and yes... I read everything.
600 miles on the Baja is a far cry from 160K. Crud, 600 miles on a daily drive is a far cry from 1K that been beaten on
It was the Baja 1000, that's 1,064 miles (or something to that effect) and the last use the truck saw, which is why I made the comments I made.
The appearance of a piston, valve, chamber, spark plug can be changed within a matter of seconds if a significant change in the tune of a vehicle is made. I have enough experience in this area to be able to make that statement.
The last 1,064 miles of this truck's life, it saw a tremendous amount of WOT and boost. Meaning it was ingesting copious amounts of air and fuel at a safe (read: overly rich) factory tune level. This is likely why the piston tops look the way they do.
The build-up on the SIDES of the pistons may be from other conditions the engine experienced during its testing.
Despite what you argue, it is quite clear you are NOT familiar with the history of this engine prior to the Baja event. It was not simply slapped in a truck and run 160K then put in this race, nor was the race 600 miles.
Watch this video on what happened to this engine BEFORE it was put in the truck:
Then it was put in the truck and this was done to it:
THEN it was run in the Baja 1000:
Then it was publicly torn-down:
I don't think the engine's operating conditions during its life from manufacture to tear-down would be considered typical, do you? When is the last time you ran the Baja 1000 in a stock pick-up? I've never done it.... When's the last time you ran 85mph around a race track towing a trailer full of race cars? I've never done that either...... And of course when is the last time you put an engine in a giant deep freeze, turned it into a block of ice then fired it up and went WOT repeatedly? Yup, I've never done that either.
I think the piston TOPS look fine for the conditions it experienced prior to disassembly. I think the deposits above the topmost ringland are a little excessive, but given the engine's history, I really don't think they are that bad. And certainly better than many engines that we've torn-down that didn't see anywhere near the abuse this one saw.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Originally Posted By: OVERK1LL
Those aren't terrible carbon issues guys. this isn't a naturally aspirated engine, it is turbocharged, and subsequently must run richer to ward off detonation. For 160,000 miles and the amount of boost it saw through those miles, I'd say those piston tops look pretty decent actually.
Notice I mentioned the tune, as we know it is pig-rich under boost and other times as well to keep things cool.
But seriously, the amount of coked up deposits in the rings are what concerns me. The intake valves look great, but you can imagine the Baja 500 might just clean things out a bit.
What do you think?
That's what I was meaning, and yes... I read everything.
600 miles on the Baja is a far cry from 160K. Crud, 600 miles on a daily drive is a far cry from 1K that been beaten on
It was the Baja 1000, that's 1,064 miles (or something to that effect) and the last use the truck saw, which is why I made the comments I made.
The appearance of a piston, valve, chamber, spark plug can be changed within a matter of seconds if a significant change in the tune of a vehicle is made. I have enough experience in this area to be able to make that statement.
The last 1,064 miles of this truck's life, it saw a tremendous amount of WOT and boost. Meaning it was ingesting copious amounts of air and fuel at a safe (read: overly rich) factory tune level. This is likely why the piston tops look the way they do.
The build-up on the SIDES of the pistons may be from other conditions the engine experienced during its testing.
Despite what you argue, it is quite clear you are NOT familiar with the history of this engine prior to the Baja event. It was not simply slapped in a truck and run 160K then put in this race, nor was the race 600 miles.
Watch this video on what happened to this engine BEFORE it was put in the truck:
Then it was put in the truck and this was done to it:
THEN it was run in the Baja 1000:
Then it was publicly torn-down:
I don't think the engine's operating conditions during its life from manufacture to tear-down would be considered typical, do you? When is the last time you ran the Baja 1000 in a stock pick-up? I've never done it.... When's the last time you ran 85mph around a race track towing a trailer full of race cars? I've never done that either...... And of course when is the last time you put an engine in a giant deep freeze, turned it into a block of ice then fired it up and went WOT repeatedly? Yup, I've never done that either.
I think the piston TOPS look fine for the conditions it experienced prior to disassembly. I think the deposits above the topmost ringland are a little excessive, but given the engine's history, I really don't think they are that bad. And certainly better than many engines that we've torn-down that didn't see anywhere near the abuse this one saw.
- Status
