Another motorcraft failure

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by Astro14
So, Ford is being bribed by Mann-Hummel?
I said might be. Not "is being" bribed. Get it right. It would explain why Ford persists in letting Puro make MC.

Originally Posted by Astro14
I mean, Ford, being bribed into making your selection, right?
You're way off again. Keep'em coming.
Of course the cartridge filters don't share much, if anything, with the heritage Puro-MC canister filters. Stating the obvious here. You're welcome!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by paoester
Seriously it makes you think high level Ford execs are being bribed under the table by Purolator (Mann-Hummel) execs to keep the contract...


I don't see any "maybe" or "perhaps" which would have changed the original meaning.
 
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by paoester
Seriously it makes you think high level Ford execs are being bribed under the table by Purolator (Mann-Hummel) execs to keep the contract...


I don't see any "maybe" or "perhaps" which would have changed the original meaning.


They're probably being "bribed" (in sense) by Purolator agreeing to give Ford a low bidder contract. That's typically why a company goes with certain vendors. Low bids are more prevelant with large volume contracts, another example is Walmart.
 
It's uncanny how similar your posting style (and frequency) is to someone who used to be on the board but isn't anymore. You're new though, right?

Originally Posted by paoester
Originally Posted by Astro14
So, Ford is being bribed by Mann-Hummel?
I said might be. Not "is being" bribed. Get it right. It would explain why Ford persists in letting Puro make MC.

Originally Posted by Astro14
I mean, Ford, being bribed into making your selection, right?
You're way off again. Keep'em coming.
Of course the cartridge filters don't share much, if anything, with the heritage Puro-MC canister filters. Stating the obvious here. You're welcome!
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
They're probably being "bribed" (in sense) by Purolator agreeing to give Ford a low bidder contract. That's typically why a company goes with certain vendors. Low bids are more prevelant with large volume contracts, another example is Walmart.
That is probably the likely scenario. It merely "makes you think" they are being bribed, as I said. The threshold of pain at Ford isn't high enough to make them change vendors.

I looked at the TSB Ford issued a few years ago about pieces of oil filter causing warranty issues some engines, and they might have a point it wasn't all Motorcraft filters causing the problem, to be fair.

They told dealerships to deny warranties if a non-MC oil filter was found & pieces clogged the valve controls etc.
 
Any torn Motorcraft should have the date code listed to see if it is recent or old production. Otherwise it isn't fair as they made an effort to test the filters, even more than other companies do. Ford is a huge conservative company and the vendor contracts are decades old. They specify and test the filters, but the best way they can know if defects are slipping through from the vendor is for people to send them the pictures. Very few people in the world are cutting open dirty oil filters to have a look inside. They will take notice and you can be sure the vendor will be contacted.
 
Originally Posted by paoester
I looked at the TSB Ford issued a few years ago about pieces of oil filter causing warranty issues some engines, and they might have a point it wasn't all Motorcraft filters causing the problem, to be fair.

They told dealerships to deny warranties if a non-MC oil filter was found & pieces clogged the valve controls etc.

Can you post the portion of the service bulletin that instructs the dealerships to deny warranty for non-MC filters? That's unusual isn't it? Can they actually do that? What was the service bulletin number?

I suppose they would direct the customer to the filter manufacturer for warranty, correct?
 
kschachn, Finally a non-trolling post. Congrats!

This was back a few years. They said it was ADBV material. They might have had a point, as I said above, about aftermarket oil filters.
I thought there was a more recent set of info on filter material clogging engines.
Here is the warranty-denial stuff:

Engine Damage / Non-Ford Oil Filters - All Model Years, All Vehicles
reference: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/881033-attn-use-motorcraft-oil-filters-only.html

A review of warranty claims indicates that engine damage caused by defective non-Ford oil filters is being claimed under Ford warranty.

The check valves in some non-Ford filters disintegrate causing small rubber debris (frequently red color) to migrate into the engine's oil passages where they restrict flow. This restriction causes components (such as the variable cam timing phaser) to fail, and causes engine knocking / ticking /rattles.

Please reference:

SSM #18921 (Published: 11/03/05)
SSM #19642 (Published: 03/01/07)
TSB #06-19-08
Repair of engine damage caused by defective non-Ford oil filters is not covered per Section 3 of the Warranty & Policy Manual.

Category: Powertrain - Engine
Do: Look for bits of rubber (frequently red color) when repairing damaged engines.
Don't: Submit a warranty claim for damage caused by defective non-Ford oil filters.


ZeeOSix had an interesting observation from https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3007899
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by k1rod
So I did a little poking around on the net and found that Ford had apparently experienced oil starvation engine failures resulting from the disintegrating of anti drainback valves in some aftermarket filters. Ford technicians were advised to look for small bits of rubber material (usually red in color) in the engine. If the telltale rubber bits are found, the warranty claim is denied.
The only way disintegrated ADBV material could get into the engine is if the media blew out or the bypass valve opened and let stuff by the media. Otherwise, the bits would be caught in the media as the ADVB is on the inlet side of the filter.


and here they don't mention adbv material explicitly:
Originally Posted by k1rod
Here is one I found.. 20780 1997-2009 MULTIPLE VEHICLE - 4.6L/5.4L - ENGINE TICKING AND/OR RATTLE NOISE.... DAMAGE TO ENGINES CAUSED BY AFTERMARKET OIL FILTERS ARE NOT COVERED UNDER WARRANTY. EFFECTIVE DATE: 05/25/2009
 
Ah, the ADB, not filtering element pieces. But thank you for the references and the information. I looked at TSB 06-19-08 (at least what I could find online), it doesn't say that exactly but it does say:

Quote
Check the type of oil filter installed on the vehicle. A dirty or clogged filter may cause a pressure drop. Look for aftermarket brands not recognized in the market or a production filter that has gone beyond the standard Ford recommended change interval.

Those SSM references are more restrictive apparently. So takeaway is that if an aftermarket product causes failure then the new vehicle warranty will not cover the damage, even if it is "recognized in the market", which I take to mean a major name brand. Makes you want to use an OEM filter (or any part really) during the warranty period, at least if you don't want to try and justify another decision to the dealer. In this case however, since it the thread is about Motorcraft filters you better document your purchase and OCI carefully.

I'm guessing you copied and pasted that information from this thread?

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=3007899

And speaking of non-trolling posts, well never mind. I did see where your language changed a bit.

Edit: Yes that's the thread.
 
kschachn, see the k1rod TSB I quoted above, for more explicit warranty denial wording, and in that one, they may have opened it up to the possibility of media, not just ADBV rubber, clogging.
Also the 11:38 point in the youtube video says "media": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tQbAC6TP3XY

I knew you could stay on subject, almost anyway, it's progress! Keep up the trend. Give the moderators a rest about you.
 
Originally Posted by paoester
I knew you could stay on subject, almost anyway, it's progress! Keep up the trend. Give the moderators a rest about you.

Please stop with the trolling in every one of your responses to me. From what I saw they don't need that much of a rest from me.
 
Originally Posted by mpgo4th
...There is a small tear at the bottom of one of the pleats near the glued joint. I thought the pleat came unglued but after moving it aside it's definitely a tear.


I am not trying to second guess you but a tear is usually caused by a 'lateral" force.

Example. Take a piece of paper and fold it lengthwise.Tearing it takes a twisting force applied "crosswise"or perpendicular to the fold.

I can understand a pleat-glue end-cap separation there at this location if the processing machinery didn't press the fold into the adhesive before it set,

But an actual "tear" seems to indicate that in processing a last minute lateral force was applied.

Even with an actual tear, how much fluid leakage is actually going to get through that small opening?

Any Debris sloughed off in the system to potentially clog passageways would also seem to indicate other material was left behind in the processing because how much material is actually going to slough off at the tear location?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by paoester
I looked at the TSB Ford issued a few years ago about pieces of oil filter causing warranty issues some engines, and they might have a point it wasn't all Motorcraft filters causing the problem, to be fair.

They told dealerships to deny warranties if a non-MC oil filter was found & pieces clogged the valve controls etc.

Can you post the portion of the service bulletin that instructs the dealerships to deny warranty for non-MC filters? That's unusual isn't it? Can they actually do that? What was the service bulletin number?

I suppose they would direct the customer to the filter manufacturer for warranty, correct?


They certainly could, and probably would. That goes for Ford or any other auto maker.
 
Originally Posted by kschachn
Those SSM references are more restrictive apparently. So takeaway is that if an aftermarket product causes failure then the new vehicle warranty will not cover the damage, even if it is "recognized in the market", which I take to mean a major name brand. Makes you want to use an OEM filter (or any part really) during the warranty period, at least if you don't want to try and justify another decision to the dealer.


Yep, and that's why most people here recommend using an OEM filter during warranty period. If not, and there is a filter caused engine failure, then you'll have to make the repair claim with the filter manufacturer's engine damage warranty.
 
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Originally Posted by mpgo4th
...There is a small tear at the bottom of one of the pleats near the glued joint. I thought the pleat came unglued but after moving it aside it's definitely a tear.

I am not trying to second guess you but a tear is usually caused by a 'lateral" force.


The tearing issue root cause is basically: Wide pleat spacing + brittle media + side force/bending due to oil flow = torn media.

There have been many photos of torn pleats at the base of the pleat where it's potted into the end cap that clearly shows the pleat was being forced sideways by the oil flow with put enough twisting force at the ends of the pleat (which cant' flex where it attached to the end cap). Example, which reflects pretty much 90% of the photos posted of torn pleats.

[Linked Image]


[Linked Image]


Originally Posted by MolaKule
Even with an actual tear, how much fluid leakage is actually going to get through that small opening?

Any Debris sloughed off in the system to potentially clog passageways would also seem to indicate other material was left behind in the processing because how much material is actually going to slough off at the tear location?


As the Ford SSM indicates, media can break loose from the torn area and get swept downstream into the engine.

Bottom line: Who really want's the media to tear on their oil filter?
 
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Any torn Motorcraft should have the date code listed to see if it is recent or old production. Otherwise it isn't fair as they made an effort to test the filters, even more than other companies do.


The filter reported here was made 3/19/19 ... so not that old. And this is way beyond the point where Motorcraft announced their adoption to USCAR-36 testing standards.
 
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Even with an actual tear, how much fluid leakage is actually going to get through that small opening?
Regardless, why would one knowingly pay and use a filter known to have issues? Is this a "fingers crossed and hope for the best" mentality (not you specifically, just a general statement)?
 
Originally Posted by 2015_PSD
Originally Posted by MolaKule
Even with an actual tear, how much fluid leakage is actually going to get through that small opening?
Regardless, why would one knowingly pay and use a filter known to have issues? Is this a "fingers crossed and hope for the best" mentality (not you specifically, just a general statement)?


Yeah, doesn't seem to make engineering sense. From an engineering viewpoint, you don't want any parts on a vehicle to fail, or fall short of their intended designed performance.
 
Pressure is all-equalizing. There is no more pressure on the "left" side of the pleat than there is on the "right" side of the pleat. Pressure will always first find the highest dP void to occupy first. It makes no sense to me that the pleat would "fold" over simply because of oil pressure. The pressure would be on both sides of the pleat equally PRIOR to passing through the media. It's not like the oil is only going to push on one side of the pleat, folks.

Let's play the D's advocate here for a moment ... Suppose the pleat were overly large in that it measured too big outwardly (in a radial sense). So it would be touching the can at the outermost point. Even if the oil filled one side of the pleat first rather than flowing over the pleat to the other side, it would likely move the pleat at a point of least resistance; that would presumably be the approximate middle (top to bottom) where it has the least amount of support (furthest from the points of attachment at the end caps). Where we are seeing these tears, near the end caps, means something has mechanically predisposed the pleat to tear there. If the media were simply "weak", it should fail where the least support exists. But as many have noted, it seems to be reasonably predicable in location. That would mean that luck or randomness isn't in play here. The only way for it to be predicted in a similar location is to have a mechanical influence. I suspect that something in the manufacturing process is crimping/pinching the media in that location, and weakening the media (or even tearing it) prior to use or shortly upon use.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
Motorcraft FL-2121
Replies
10
Views
2K
ZeeOSix
MuzzleFlash40
Mopar MO-339 4,500mi C&P. (Media Tear)
Replies
9
Views
482
MuzzleFlash40
A
Fram tg10575 Ford Coyote
2 3
Replies
50
Views
2K
Plawan
K
Motorcraft FL820S C&P - 3k Miles
Replies
9
Views
1K
ZeeOSix
paulri
Fram PH4967, 7988 miles C&P
2
Replies
37
Views
2K
paulri
Back
Top