ECOBOOST=dirty engine

[32MTX]

I think I've said some stuff on here before about how dirty direct injection engines run from lack of fuel over the intake ports/valves........

a company called BG makes a lot of automotive products and I mostly know them of their intake cleaning products. Of interest to you guys is they are using a 2010 SHO to test their products on. They have racked up 30k miles on it so far and have tracked progress of build-up inside the valve area.

http://www.bgfueltest.com/

check it out, get your engines cleaned inside regularily. I'd almost be doing it every 10k if I had one and could afford it.


hopefully not a repost, just thought it was cool they were using the ECOBOOST and thought i'd share


29k miles

 

[gmorrell]

I'll be very interested to see the results of their intake cleaning process and products. I have a similar gripe about my SVT Contour.

Guess which port has the fuel injector? This is near 100K miles.


This I believe is a combination of EGR and the V6 Duratec's known hyperactive PCV system. I solved the PCV problem with a coalescing oil trap in the crankcase ventilation line, just wish I'd done it a long time ago. The PCV goop also collects on the back of the throttle plate and causes it to stick in the bore, I'd taken to pulling the throttle body and cleaning it every 20K miles to keep it from sticking. The oil trap cured this problem, but getting the built-up crap off the intake valves and ports is a real challenge.

 

[n8rsk8r]

i know that all the automakers know about this. I bet it is someone out of the manufacturers that comes up with a solution or the next generation of fuel delivery.

 

[32MTX]

thx for the pic gary, man what a difference between those two valves........

and yes catch cans are great ideas to stop some of this from forming

funny my SHO has like 170k+ miles, has bad blowby and smokes a lil bit at wot, but the intake is damn near clean as what you would expect from a car with 10k miles...... you can almost eat off of it. I always use premium fuel and synthetic motor oil though

 

[lowc]

they have great products ive been using them for years now by far the best service they offer is the egr cleaner for the 6.0 ford deisles not to through you off topic. i highly recomend using their stuff for all apps.

 

[gmorrell]

thx for the pic gary, man what a difference between those two valves........

Disgusting, ain't it?

and yes catch cans are great ideas to stop some of this from forming.

Don't want to derail the thread, but here's the coalescing oil trap I did. It's a Parker/Balston 10F11ED with 1/4" pipe ports. They're about $50.


Here it is after just 250 miles. I have to empty it about every 1,000 miles. It doesn't look like much, a teaspoon of oil every tank of gas, but atomize that and smear it all over the inside of the intake and the valves...

 

[itguy08]

While it's an interesting test I wonder what those deposits really do. I mean sure it looks nasty but does it really effect performance at all? Or is it a case of: we want to find something wrong so we are way overly sensitive to it?

I track the MPG's with an app for my Droid and I'm at ~15k now and have not seen a sudden drop in MPG's. What I have noticed is that if I do a lot of city driving, the MPG drops to the 19's. Do a lot of highway and it's right up at 22-25....

I mean, the best thing would be dyno runs at every checkup as well as a quick trip down the 1/4 mile and 0-60 tracks. Sadly there are no initial dyno tests, just "before BG" and "After BG". The real interesting data would be: dyno, 0-60, 1/4 mile at 0, 5k, 10k, 15k, 20k, 25k, etc.... Then we could gauge just what effect these deposits have....

Then there is the other thing - a company that makes its living selling cleanup products is going to want to portray any deposits as the end of the world.

Ford tested the CR@P out of this engine and I'm sure they designed around any issues with these deposits. Or maybe they are just nothing to worry about... It is an engine - a dirty, nasty, and harsh environment. 0-6,000 explosions every second

It will be a very interesting test to watch.

 

[lowc]

any type of deposit build up is not good for any motor regaurdless of what the developer has tested or done to try and design around issues like this,that is why they recomend these different types of services.and if you really think about it any type of build up will effect air flow,fluid flow and over all performance. i cant see how a well known "clean up product " would be just putting out theorys about effects of deposits are bad for your engine. maybe i dont know what im talking about but i can tell you from experience that this companys products do make a difference after all ive been using them for the past 9years and the two shops ive worked at since first using it have now used only bg products

 

[32MTX]

their whole marketing at this is an answer to a call for help.

you might not be noticing it in the SHO world yet. But VW/Audi/Porsche have been running D.I. for years, with a lot more cars on the road and it has defintely been effecting them.

you will actually get to a point where the valve and surrounding areas will have so much gunk on it, that it will not fully seat and you will get misfires and running rough condition

 

[Phokus]

So is this why Shell has their nitrogen enriched Vpower stuff to "reduce" this?

 

[gmorrell]

So is this why Shell has their nitrogen enriched Vpower stuff to "reduce" this?

All the fuel additives/chemistry in the world won't help with reducing intake/port/valve deposits on a direct injected engine. In a DI engine, the fuel is injected directly into the cylinder, unlike a port fuel injected engine where the fuel is injected in the intake ports above the valves.

In port fuel injected engines, the fuel wash over the ports and valves will generally keep them free of deposits, but there's no hope for this in a DI engine.

The deposits you're seeing in the linked pictures from BG are a combination of oil mist from PCV flow and exhaust by-products from EGR. I'm assuming the ought-10 SHO engines have both EGR and PCV? The variable valve timing may eliminate the need for EGR. I'm not fully up on the nits and details of these engines.

Go back up an look at the pic of the intake port from my CSVT. This is a completely split port engine with the fuel injector in the low speed port, and uses a butterfly further up the intake manifold that allows air into the short runner/high speed port above 3500 RPM. The high speed port doesn't see air all that often, probably far less than 10% of the time the engine is running, yet that valve is just thoroughly caked with deposits. The valve and low speed port with the fuel injector is surgically clean.

The V6 SHO engines are similar design, but the port is siamesed just as it enters the cylinder head, both valves see air flow all the time, and the fuel injector washes the whole siamesed port and both intake valves, so if you use decent fuel and fuel injector cleaner religiously, the whole mess stays clean.

 

[abs99]

Although this looks pretty bad, just do some searches on the DI (FSI) Audi engines, those intakes/intake valves really sludge up badly! Also, Ford added an OEM, maintenance free, oil catch can in the PCV system on the passenger side rear valve cover on our engines which is supposed to reduce the build up. I think most of what we are seeing in the B&G test results is the result of EGR residue since it's not that oily looking.

 

[2010sho]

So what is the answer for the 2010 Sho?

 

[SHOZ123]

In line catch can, preferably in a relatively cool location.

 

[itguy08]

I'm not being a smart A$$ but can someone send over some links on the VW/Audi issues? I found a few posts in some quick Googling that there were "problems" but they were not anyone's experiences, just "I heard there were issues" or "I heard these engines gunk up".

What I'd be interested in are real Dyno #s. I mean if it's a real issue surely someone would have dyno'ed it and came to the conclusion that after *** miles there was gunk and I lost 2 hp and 1 lb-ft. I've not found anything like that. Lots of antecdotal evidence but nothing concrete like a dyno run.

I would have thought that BG would have done something like that as it would be a real good way to prove that their services work. I mean if I was at the dealer and they said "your car has 15k and we have this service that will give you back 2 hp/1lb ft or whatever (and I can see it)" I'd jump right on it. The only ones recommending this service is BG and the shops that sell it... Not to be a smart a$$ but it's in their interest to sell these additional services....

Not saying these deposits are not real or may not be an issue but I've not seen anything specific that has put #'s to this. I'm seriously interested in it.

I'm of the school of thought that with all the testing Ford did on this engine (if they are to be believed) if these deposits were an issue there would be an "intake cleaning" at some point along the 150k service intervals printed in the maintenance booklet.

Like I said it will be interesting to watch the test and see what happens going forward.

 

[EcoBrick Bob]

I have catch cans on both my G8 Gt's. Do you have a diagram as to where to put a catch can on EcoBoost engine. Mostly need the location of inlet and outlet locations on engine, as I can get enough hose and find a suitable location for a catch can.

Also looked up the product from BG and articles on cleaning EcoBoost intake system. When I attempted to look up the part numbers on their site, couldn't find any prices or data.

 

[lowc]

i can tell you that if you use bg from a dealership from day one while doing all your fluid changes at said dealer. bg will extend a warenty for your motor and drive train.now i would say that is a sure sign of confidents from the company

 

[n8rsk8r]

Disgusting, ain't it?



Don't want to derail the thread, but here's the coalescing oil trap I did. It's a Parker/Balston 10F11ED with 1/4" pipe ports. They're about $50.


Here it is after just 250 miles. I have to empty it about every 1,000 miles. It doesn't look like much, a teaspoon of oil every tank of gas, but atomize that and smear it all over the inside of the intake and the valves...

that looks like the water seperator from air compressor lines they sell at Lowes.. is that that piece? If so that is the WRONG piece as it is only rated to 150deg F.

 

[zak]

Had questioned the drivetrain VP at the last convention about this very issue. Was the only question that made him squirm a bit.

If I recall correctly (these conventions are somewhat of an exercize in sleep deprivation) he pointed me to a very fancy labyrinth type PCV filer they had down in the valley of the engine. Be nice to get a part number and retrofit it to my 95

zak

 

[gmorrell]

that looks like the water separator from air compressor lines they sell at Lowes.. is that that piece? If so that is the WRONG piece as it is only rated to 150deg F.

I didn't get it at Lowes.

As I'd posted, it is a Parker 10F11ED, purchased from Parker. It will remove water, oil, and submicron particulate from an airflow. I'm not ignorant on this stuff, I have plenty of experience with removing aerosols from pneumatic and high vacuum systems, stretching back to my first job in 1982.

http://www.parker.com/portal/site/P...extcat=10F+MINIATURE+COALESCING+FILTERS&Wtky=

I was aware of the 150F inlet temperature limitation when I embarked on this experiment, however, these devices don't cease to function or self-immolate at 150F inlet temp, they just may not work as well as intended, and may allow some mist to get past the trap. I was willing to live with that.

I measured the inlet temps, and subsequently installed a near 4 foot length of Aluminum tubing on the inlet line that wraps down and back up the firewall by the brake booster. If you've ever seen an SVT Contour engine bay, you'll understand why I don't have a photo of this particular piece of tubing. I lost a lot of knuckle skin just installing it. Think of it as a KISS intercooler.

I know there are plenty of shiny, colorful, expensive catch cans on the market, but I have no idea how effective they are, and neither, I suspect, do the folks who make them. I used equipment that I know works, and it appears to work well, as I can't find any traces of oil film in the intake anymore.

Your concern is appreciated, and now that I know how often it needs emptied, I've substituted a metal bowl for the clear polycarbonate bowl.