ecoboost longevity

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: hatt
What's your question? We know if you abuse equipment it won't last. What about when you take care of it adequately.


No question. You are the one saying how expensive it is to repair these "complicated engines" or that "replacement is not an option because it is so expensive". And I pointed out it's not much more than the new 5.0. They are both expensive!

When you take care of it adequately it will give you long service life. Which, after 5 years we are seeing from the Ecoboost. Remember, a version of it came out in 2009 for the cars - SHO, MKS, Flex, MKT.

Quote:
Bottom line is that a twin turboed direct gas injection engine has a lot more stuff to go wrong than more conventional offerings. Just one example. What are the valves going to look like after 100K of short trips? No one knows.


Sure they have more things to go wrong. So does the 5.0 in your truck. I've got 2 turbos to worry about and that's about it - there is still advanced electronics, VCT, etc. in both engines. We know the EB is built stout so the mechanicals are up to the task.

I could care less what the valves look like at 100k. it's how the engine performs. According to one catch can salesman on the f150 forum I frequent, my SHO should have gummed up valves, no MPG and be pretty much dead by now cause I don't run a catch can. Guess what? MPG is the same as it was when new (and I have all the records to prove it), it drives perfect, and goes like stink.

Living in constant fear of the new must suck - those miss out on some truly great stuff.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: itguy08


Living in constant fear of the new must suck - those miss out on some truly great stuff.

Constant fear of new? It's an engine dude. You're being silly. I do let others work out the kinks before jumping into new $30K+ tech that really isn't doing anything for me. 5.0 has plenty of power for my purposes and any POTENTIAL gas mileage savings would takes years to payoff the Eco's $1000 premium at paper signing time. If the Eco got 200 mpg and ran off unicorn tears I would have gotten it.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: hatt
Originally Posted By: itguy08


Living in constant fear of the new must suck - those miss out on some truly great stuff.

Constant fear of new? It's an engine dude. You're being silly. I do let others work out the kinks before jumping into new $30K+ tech that really isn't doing anything for me. 5.0 has plenty of power for my purposes and any POTENTIAL gas mileage savings would takes years to payoff the Eco's $1000 premium at paper signing time. If the Eco got 200 mpg and ran off unicorn tears I would have gotten it.


Whatever. People don't all buy the Eco for the gas savings. They are minor and as you said take a long time to pay off.

Some like the diesel-like way it drives.
Some want the Max Tow packages (me) because they may tow an RV or other heavy item.
Some like power.
Some want the small fuel savings.

Some like the 5.0 - it does have a nice growl.

But to classify the EB as a trouble prone, expensive engine is stupid. It's been proven to be neither in the past 5 years. The truck and car versions are different but the mechanical bits are sound in both.

This paranoia about engines is hilarious. If you really think Ford is going to put a POS into it's top selling, top profit vehicle you need to have your head examined! They are not going to risk it all with a POS power plant.

In the end it's up to each as to what fits their needs.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted By: itguy08


Whatever. People don't all buy the Eco for the gas savings. They are minor and as you said take a long time to pay off.

Some like the diesel-like way it drives.
Some want the Max Tow packages (me) because they may tow an RV or other heavy item.
Some like power.
Some want the small fuel savings.

Some like the 5.0 - it does have a nice growl.

But to classify the EB as a trouble prone, expensive engine is stupid. It's been proven to be neither in the past 5 years. The truck and car versions are different but the mechanical bits are sound in both.

This paranoia about engines is hilarious. If you really think Ford is going to put a POS into it's top selling, top profit vehicle you need to have your head examined! They are not going to risk it all with a POS power plant.

In the end it's up to each as to what fits their needs.

Go ahead and quote where I said the Eco is trouble prone. All I'm stating is facts. Eco is more complex and has more things to go wrong down the road. If you can't accept that I don't know what to tell you.

And don't give me that line about Ford not putting out a POS power plant. I've been around a little. I had a 6.0 PSD buddy. My "paranoia" made me offload that thing as soon as the warranty ran out. I guess I should have stuck it out. That couple times it was in the shop for thousands of $$ in warranty work surely was an illusion.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: hatt

And don't give me that line about Ford not putting out a POS power plant. I've been around a little. I had a 6.0 PSD buddy. My "paranoia" made me offload that thing as soon as the warranty ran out. I guess I should have stuck it out. That couple times it was in the shop for thousands of $$ in warranty work surely was an illusion.


In Ford's defence, they didn't manufacturer that engine, or its successor, and those engines are what lead to the termination of the relationship between Ford and International.

 

[Jarlaxle]

No...but they DID crank the power and raise cylinder pressures too high!

 

[roadrunner1]

Well an interesting thread to say the least....

My wife has 15,xxx mi. on her 2.0 ecoboost Escape, without issue. All new cars are complex, turbocharged or not. A turbo is not a complex item, actually its quite simple in operation. I've had several in use for about 30 years in different engines, and have never had one fail.
I quite honestly don't understand the hysteria.

I also have owned two 6.0 Powerstrokes with over 350,000 mi. total, I still own the '07 with 208,xxx mi., the best trouble-free truck I have ever owned with tires and brakes the only expense.
If you owned one and witnessed a several thousand dollar repair under warranty whats the complaint? Ford picked up the tab correct?

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
No...but they DID crank the power and raise cylinder pressures too high!


With the updated head studs (which they all got somewhere around 2005) and an EGR delete they last just fine. They last just fine at even higher than stock power levels with a decent tune as long as those mods are done.

EGR coolers, injectors and head gaskets (on the early ones) are what seemed to most frequently kill them. And when the EGR cooler goes, it takes out the oil cooler usually too, rendering it ineffective yet many forget/don't know to change it.

My best mate is a coach and bus mechanic by trade and has worked on literally hundreds of vehicles with the DT466, DT444, VT365 and Maxxforce 7. He also owned an '05 'duty that had a tuner on it and towed to the limit of the truck regularly at a fair tick above the stock power level that it left Ford with. Never had a problem with it after "fixing it" (which is a rather extensive list....) and it still runs fine. At this point the powertrain appears to be on track to outlive the body of the truck.

He made it a point to show me the same failures he had seen on his truck (injectors, EGR cooler...etc) on the buses. Now, the EGR cooler failure was not quite as common on the buses (though it still happened), likely due to the much lower power level they operated at, which meant cooler EGT's. However, injector failure (and subsequently hosing a piston if not caught) as well as the popping of a head gasket on the earlier engines... Yup, it happened there too.

I think the one thing that Ford DID cause with their increase in the base HP level was the premature failure of the EGR coolers, which could, and often did, lead to catastrophic damage if the engine hydro-locked. My friend also thought their choice of coolant (they used G05 rather than using a diesel-specific coolant) was not appropriate for the application.

On top of that you had other fun things like IDM failures, the branch tube adapters failing (corrected in later years with AN fittings), aftermarket oil filters that didn't fit properly, plugged oil coolers.....etc. And a lot of that stuff was trickle-down/snowball.

Also, the EGR on the engine would lead to carbon build-up and the subsequent jamming of the control ring on the variable geometry turbo

 

[hatt]

Mine was an 06 so all the kinks weren't worked out by then, or I was unlucky. I think it was just the injectors that were giving the ongoing trouble on mine. And an oil leak.

I did remember cleaning out the EGR so the light would go off before taking it to trade.

 

[cptbarkey]

Originally Posted By: roadrunner1

I also have owned two 6.0 Powerstrokes with over 350,000 mi. total, I still own the '07 with 208,xxx mi., the best trouble-free truck I have ever owned with tires and brakes the only expense.


consider yourself very lucky friend.

 

[Nate1979]

Originally Posted By: cptbarkey
Originally Posted By: roadrunner1

I also have owned two 6.0 Powerstrokes with over 350,000 mi. total, I still own the '07 with 208,xxx mi., the best trouble-free truck I have ever owned with tires and brakes the only expense.


consider yourself very lucky friend.


Its hard to imagine using the word trouble-free and the 6.0 in the same sentence.

 

[Jarlaxle]

No kidding. I watched the 6.doh turn TWO companies from an all-Ford fleet to never buying another one!

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
No kidding. I watched the 6.doh turn TWO companies from an all-Ford fleet to never buying another one!


That's why Ford wouldn't repeat that mistake twice. I believe it was the poor 6.0/6.4 that got GM and Dodge into the 'heavy duty' market. Prior to the 6.0 Debacle, Ford OWNED that market. Now they are still #1 but by a very thin hair. There are many stories of people dropping Ford because of the 6.0/6.4.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
No kidding. I watched the 6.doh turn TWO companies from an all-Ford fleet to never buying another one!


That's why Ford wouldn't repeat that mistake twice. I believe it was the poor 6.0/6.4 that got GM and Dodge into the 'heavy duty' market. Prior to the 6.0 Debacle, Ford OWNED that market. Now they are still #1 but by a very thin hair. There are many stories of people dropping Ford because of the 6.0/6.4.


They even brought back the sterling name (for a second time) to take business away from Ford.

Ford sold their truck division to "sterling" aka Daimler, then they discontinued it. Then it was brought back again with Dodge cab/chassis trucks for a few years then stopped again.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
No kidding. I watched the 6.doh turn TWO companies from an all-Ford fleet to never buying another one!


That's why Ford wouldn't repeat that mistake twice. I believe it was the poor 6.0/6.4 that got GM and Dodge into the 'heavy duty' market. Prior to the 6.0 Debacle, Ford OWNED that market. Now they are still #1 but by a very thin hair. There are many stories of people dropping Ford because of the 6.0/6.4.


Ford DID read that mistake...the 6.4 was just as bad, the 6.7 is also a toilet.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
No kidding. I watched the 6.doh turn TWO companies from an all-Ford fleet to never buying another one!


That's why Ford wouldn't repeat that mistake twice. I believe it was the poor 6.0/6.4 that got GM and Dodge into the 'heavy duty' market. Prior to the 6.0 Debacle, Ford OWNED that market. Now they are still #1 but by a very thin hair. There are many stories of people dropping Ford because of the 6.0/6.4.


Ford DID read that mistake...the 6.4 was just as bad, the 6.7 is also a toilet.


Other than the issues with poor fuel and the injection pump (a pump which many other OEM's are also using...), what is making the 6.7 a toilet?

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: Phishin
Originally Posted By: rslifkin
Originally Posted By: Phishin
I can promise you that NOT many people on here have driven a turbo charged car with 200k miles on it. And if you have, you know it ran like a dog turd.


Not true at all. I've driven a turbo Volvo with over 200k (original engine and turbo) that ran just as well as another one with only ~50k on the motor and turbo. I've seen other turbo Volvos, Saabs, etc. over 200k with no issues, some pushing close to 300k.


I didn't say NOBODY. I said "NOT many people"....I'm glad you drove a Volvo with 200k on it and you think it ran just as well as another with 50k on it.

That's just the most RIDICULOUS statement I've ever heard. Nobody, and this time, I mean NOBODY, have a car with 200k miles on it that rides, run, and drives like an almost new one. NOBODY.

That's just insane.


Not at all.
We've had a number of cars that we drove past 170K and three that we took past 200K that were still running and driving very well with no major repairs along the way.
Take decent care of a car, fix the small, cheap stuff while it's still small and cheap and replace wear items like bushings and shocks/struts as needed, attend to engine and transmission service and any decent car will still be running and driving close to new as it approaches 200K.
We live in the southern part of the rust belt, and regular, careful washing even keeps the rust at bay for many years.
Nothing exceptional about a high mileage car running and driving well.

 

[fdcg27]

Originally Posted By: hatt
How many cars are on the road with 200K? Not many, and the ones that are are well maintained. They're not worth repairing anything major in most cases. Trucks on the other hand are expected to be on the road for decades and people are willing to pay for repairs. We'll see how the Ecos are holding up down the road. I suspect they won't be highly sought after.


Actually, survey data show that about one out of every seven cars you see every day has passed 200K.
You know those old beaters you see every day, especially in the lower income parts of town?
Most of those cars have passed 200K.
Most engines will survive well past 200K as long as the owner keeps oil in them. No meticulous maintenance required.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
No kidding. I watched the 6.doh turn TWO companies from an all-Ford fleet to never buying another one!


That's why Ford wouldn't repeat that mistake twice. I believe it was the poor 6.0/6.4 that got GM and Dodge into the 'heavy duty' market. Prior to the 6.0 Debacle, Ford OWNED that market. Now they are still #1 but by a very thin hair. There are many stories of people dropping Ford because of the 6.0/6.4.


Ford DID read that mistake...the 6.4 was just as bad, the 6.7 is also a toilet.


Other than the issues with poor fuel and the injection pump (a pump which many other OEM's are also using...), what is making the 6.7 a toilet?


That's the one...the $10,000+ ticking time bomb. Every Bosch CP4 is a hand grenade with the pin pulled.

 

[OVERKILL]

Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle

That's the one...the $10,000+ ticking time bomb. Every Bosch CP4 is a hand grenade with the pin pulled.


OK, but Ford isn't the only one with the "time bomb" and apparently the issue is with the substandard diesel in North America? Not that they shouldn't have done their homework but it really isn't an "engine" issue (IE, the 6.7 being a toilet) as it is a fuel pump issue, which I admit full well they should perhaps revisit, but it isn't an issue with the actual engine.