Zpak
Es Aich Oh!
Yeah that would be my question. If it’s not needed, where am I getting the ounces of oil from?
Catch can worth it?
- Thread starter Zpak
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
And I'm guessing your catch can is before the oil separator?
I'm not saying they don't catch oil, because they do. I'm saying I don't see owners without them having valve deposit problems like BMW and Mazdas have.
Are these preventing a problem that doesn't really exist on this motor?
Last edited:
SM105K
Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
They do, the EB 3.5's are plagued with gunked valves. The F150 and Explorer communities have numerous complaints about them. Even the Ford Techs say the EB 3.5's need a CC. However since we a such a small community, quite a few of us have CC's so you really dont hear about it much.
Livertrash followed Ford's lead for the longest time because Ford said the EB 3.5 didnt need a CC. Then Ford started having issues, so they did a 180 and said....yeah....they probably should have a CC. So Livertrash changed their tune as well and came out and said the EB 3.5 needs a CC so they start producing them.
Ford has made revisions to combat this issue. The biggest one is having the dual injection system.
Zpak
Es Aich Oh!
Exactly. If it wasn’t a problem Ford wouldn’t be implementing auxiliary port injection. Primarily for the purpose of valve wash.
No way is the dual system in response to valve deposits. That's just a side benefit. It gives the calibrator so much flexibility to use PFI at idle, DI at WOT and blends in between. The are trying to combat particle emissions without having to resort to particle filters much like the diesels. (There are upcoming regulations limiting particle mass, PM).
If you can get access to SAE papers, there's lot of great reading:
https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2018-01-1415/
Adding PFI to a DI engine is a non brainer and I'm surprised they aren't all doing it already. Just tap into the fuel line ahead of the HPFP, add a rail, injectors and some software.
If you can get access to SAE papers, there's lot of great reading:
https://www.sae.org/publications/technical-papers/content/2018-01-1415/
Adding PFI to a DI engine is a non brainer and I'm surprised they aren't all doing it already. Just tap into the fuel line ahead of the HPFP, add a rail, injectors and some software.
Amen. I've already firmly resolved that auxiliary injectors will be my solution when I run out of fuel. I see no value in those overpriced HPFP upgrades.
As far as catch cans go, I don't doubt they're beneficial. Though I do question the usefulness of dual valve versions on a street car, where 98% of its life is spent in vacuum rather than boost.
SM105K
Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
Adding a tradition PFI was a big reasons. Regardless of what you think, the auto manufacturers know and spend way more in R&D then you and I. The engineers didn't forsee in the future with the issues of DI motors and the intake valves. If they did they would have had dual fueling systems since day one. They are more expensive up front with R&D and manufacturing, so....unless a problem surfaced (which it did) there was no reason not to only have DI. The real world changes things....funny how that happens.
For the record, I believe every boosted car should have a CC.
luigisho
SHO Member
Ford Racing also now offers a catch can. The Ford one I looked at for my truck was a molded plastic unit. I surely believe that Ford went to additional port injectors to address the buildup issues. Most likely in response to work being done still under warranty.
Zpak
Es Aich Oh!
Yes, countless valve jobs under warranty. There was a service bulletin about it. If you can replicate X and Y conditions, start tearing into the heads. Sure the port injection has other benefits with fuel economy and what not. But, don’t think for a second that valve wash wasn’t a huge factor.
Ford absolutely saw the issues ahead of time. They codeveloped their DI engines with Mazda. Mazda engines had major intake valve deposits issues long before the Ecoboost family of engines came out.
luigisho
SHO Member
They also are aware of these same issues among other vehicles in the industry that use DI. No large international successful business is unaware of those type of issues in their own industry. This goes for the water pump design they incorporated in this engine as well.
SM105K
Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
And didnt do anything about it until it became a problem. One of the best solutions was PFI....
luigisho
SHO Member
I doubt that. There is too much cam stuff in the way. You need to go through the spark plug holes and look around. The bore scopes have the flexible end that can bend up and around to get different angles. There you can see valves in different stages of opening and closing. There are youtube vids with some footage of various cars valves.
Johnbigdog
SHO Member
I think it's been a long day for Luigi?
You should be able to get a bore scope into the map sensor hole, but it may be easier to prop the throttle body open to look at the back side of the valves?
I'll answer my own question with a yes. MAP sensor hole is in the direct top dead center of the intake - straight shot to the center cylinders.
This is with a super cheap ($15 Amazon) DBPower endoscope. 43,000 miles without a catch can, 10,000 more with (JLT). This is right and left valves for cylinder #4 (front, center).
I don't see a problem.
Last edited:
jgonza5
Member
Looks Good. Would be interesting to see a cylinder on the back side.
A few Fuel Questions:
Are you consistent on Octane & Brand?
Octane?
Brand/Top Tier/Discount?
Ethanol Content?
Run any Techron, etc?
If so, Interval?
luigisho
SHO Member
Good find!
Owning the older cars I had MAF on the brain. Those valve pics look cleaner than I would have guessed.
I bought the car with 33,000 miles on it from a retired couple. Since I have owned it:
A few Fuel Questions:
Are you consistent on Octane & Brand? Yes
Octane? 93, until E30 tune about 10k miles ago
Brand/Top Tier/Discount? Non-Top Tier only
Ethanol Content? E10 until E30 tune. Since then, 4-5 gallons flex fuel, topped off with 91-93.
Run any Techron, etc? Never. No sea foam, no fuel injector service, no anything.
Here are some high resolution pictures taken with a high end borescope. There is a powdery build up along the ports, but not really anything in the valve seat area to impede air flow.
I did both center valves on the front and rear bank. They all look the same.
If these were PFI valves, I'd rate them very good. As DI valves, I don't see any problem. If I had to guess, based on the appearance of the deposits, I'd say this is more likely from the EGR than PCV.
I did both center valves on the front and rear bank. They all look the same.
If these were PFI valves, I'd rate them very good. As DI valves, I don't see any problem. If I had to guess, based on the appearance of the deposits, I'd say this is more likely from the EGR than PCV.
Similar threads
