I highly doubt many direct injection owners have installed catch cans. You do have a warranty so if anything happens there is the warranty.

If you did want to install an oil catch can any aftermarket shop would install it for you. They will find somewhere to put it. I don't see many people doing this though.

How have these catch cans proven to have significant results?

 

I know guys with really old cars use a product called SeaFoam to rid of things like carbon buildup. maybe you'll want to try using it?

You're suppose to pour it in a 1/2 tank of fuel, drive till smoke stops coming out of your exhaust system for about 30-40 miles (i think) and then you're done.

 

Maybe this:

Valve cleaning method for direct injection spark ignition engine
US 6178944 B1
ABSTRACT
A control method and system is described for a spark ignited, four-stroke engine having multiple combustion chambers, each coupled to at least one intake and one exhaust valve, a fuel injection system for injecting fuel directly into each combustion chamber, and an electronically controlled throttle for throttling air inducted through an intake manifold into the combustion chambers. Additional fuel is injected during the exhaust valve overlap. This additional fuel is drawn from the combustion chamber into the intake manifold and subsequently inducted back into the combustion chamber past the intake valve, thereby cleaning carbon deposits from the intake valve and the surrounding surfaces.

Patent US6178944 - Valve cleaning method for direct injection spark ignition engine - Google Patents

 

Maybe this:

Valve cleaning method for direct injection spark ignition engine
US 6178944 B1
ABSTRACT
A control method and system is described for a spark ignited, four-stroke engine having multiple combustion chambers, each coupled to at least one intake and one exhaust valve, a fuel injection system for injecting fuel directly into each combustion chamber, and an electronically controlled throttle for throttling air inducted through an intake manifold into the combustion chambers. Additional fuel is injected during the exhaust valve overlap. This additional fuel is drawn from the combustion chamber into the intake manifold and subsequently inducted back into the combustion chamber past the intake valve, thereby cleaning carbon deposits from the intake valve and the surrounding surfaces.

The valve overlap was mentioned in the article as something that Audi has adopted to address this issue. Also they mentioned just driving the vehicle hard! The SeaFoam is great for engines with port injection, but the issue raised with direct injection is simply the opportunity for the cleaning solvents (whether it be additives in the gasoline or a stand-alone product like SeaFoam) to be able to physically make contact with the valve surface so as to clean them. And I wonder if the warranty would cover this, or whether it would be deemed a maintenance issue.... As to the efficacy of catch cans, I can only relate anecdotal comments from people who used them, in that the cans were in fact collecting oil vapors (which then condensed into the can and could then be literally poured off), and that when they pulled off their intake manifolds there was considerably less oil film deposits inside (compared to the condition prior to installing the catch can). Of course the type of filter in the can will make a significant difference; my understanding is that a good coalescing filter is ideal. Direct injection is fairly new technology, at least at the mass-production level of our cars, so I'm sure most people haven't given this a second thought, assuming they are even aware of it in the first place. Like a lot of these things, time will tell (along with the law of unintended consequences).

 

I like the driving the card hard part. That is always a good idea to get rid of any buildup in general

Also using good quality gas helps. Using a high quality - low ethanol gas with built in cleaners is a good idea (shell comes to mind)

 

I like the driving the card hard part. That is always a good idea to get rid of any buildup in general

Also using good quality gas helps. Using a high quality - low ethanol gas with built in cleaners is a good idea (shell comes to mind)

Fuel detergents do no good on DI engines. That is the problem... fuel doesn't touch the intake valves. How can detergents clean the valves then? Ford has a patent that supposedly helps by injecting fuel at the proper time so that SOME fuel burps back up the intake and hits the intake valves. From what I can see, BMW has the worst valve deposit problem so far. ha ha ha.

 

I have some good experience here so I figure I would chime in.

First off. Your valves do get very dirty with a direct injection system. I had a mazdaspeed 6 and did a thorough valve cleaning with sea foam and a rifle cleaning kit at 50000 miles. BMWs have the same issue (as mentioned, probably the worst). They recommend a dealership service to clean the valves. It costs about 1800 last i checked. They use a media blaster and walnut shell media from my understanding. There was a ton of carbon build up on my car and it was a full day affair.

Do do this job, you do t remove the valves. You take off the intake manifold to see into the head allowing you access to the valves.

Generally you manually crank the motor to close the intake valves allowing you to clean it out without getting anything into the cylinder. You can fill it with sea foam at this point to loosen the carbon deposits.

Oil catch cans do work wonders. I installed one and you wouldn't believe the garbage it pulled out. Felt much better seeing that it was not getting caked back on to the valves. Blocking the egr (exhaust gas recirculate) port also very useful but may require a chip to remove the engine fault code for it.

 

This thread begs the question - what do Diesel engines do about carbon build-up on their intake valves?
Diesels have been around as long as gas engines, and Diesels use a "dirtier" fuel, and at times do not have clean combustion (smoke and fumes).
I've never heard of carbon build-up on diesel intake valves.

Also, the only place carbon build-up would be detrimental would be on the seating surfaces of the valves. The only time the seating surfaces of intake valves are exposed to the combustion chamber is when the piston is drawing fresh air into the cylinder, so the airflow would tend to force gasses and particles away from the intake valves, making it hard for anything to deposit there.

And, under normal circumstances, our engines run extremely lean - thus having very little free carbon floating around the combustion chambers.

 

This thread begs the question - what do Diesel engines do about carbon build-up on their intake valves?
Diesels have been around as long as gas engines, and Diesels use a "dirtier" fuel, and at times do not have clean combustion (smoke and fumes).
I've never heard of carbon build-up on diesel intake valves.

I've torn down a diesel with 140k miles on it after it suffered a cracked block, and the heads and valves were in very good shape, without much carbon buildup. This was on a 7.3L powerstroke that has a crankcase vent going back into the turbo intake, but it also has an intercooler up in front of the radiator, that probably condenses out and collects the bulk of any oil vapor going thru the intake. So it's probably 99.9% air passing by the intake valves (also under pressure, so very little blowback from the combustion chamber.) Diesels also run cooler than gas engines, so the valves probably get nowhere near as hot.

Diesel fuel isn't really "dirtier" than gas, just has some heavier hydrocarbons in it. Rudolph Diesel ran his prototype compression ignition engine on peanut oil, and biodiesel use has been increasing over the years. Diesels run very lean, and unless they're overfueled (such as with chips, etc

), don't smoke, and that's just out the exhaust. The black smoke you see when an 18 wheeler is pulling hard is partially burnt fuel in the form of soot, because of a insufficient air (needs more boost).

 

Interesting discussion. I would think that Ford has witnessed these teething problems that BMW and others have had and has solved it. If not, millions of engines will be due for head removal and that means the end of Ford Motor Company.

One can always be proactive and install a water injection system which will, over time, steam those valve clean. One can also add Seafoam and other solvents to the water bottle. I'll have a look at this myself.

Lots of tubes in this machine. I haven't thought to look for the PCV. For the 2.0, there is only one vacuum tap above the throttle body. I tapped it to install a vac/boost gauge. I'll have to follow the tube to see if it leads to the crankcase.

No engineer here. Just messing engines since 16.

 

Most problems will be post-warranty, so of little concern to the manufacturers.
As one who usually puts 300,000 + miles on my cars, I have avoided buying ANY direct injection vehicle, mainly for this specific reason.

 

Another point to ponder:

I've been around the block a few times and have seen lots of things.
Almost everyone that warns of the evils of carbon deposits in an engine, seems to have a vested (financial) interest in getting people to pay them to remove the deposits.

As I said above, Diesel engines, since their inception in the late 19th century, have directly injected dirty fuel oil into air that is hot enough to cause spontaneous combustion - yet there is no carbon deposit panic in the Diesel world.

And, as Dville posted above, and I stated previously - Ford is staking its entire future on Ecoboost technology, and applying it to every vehicle they make.
I doubt that a company like Ford would recklessly apply cantankerous technology to American mass market production vehicles. I'm pretty sure they they've got it all covered and down pat.

BTW - I've seen signs in shops recommending a complete "decarboning" of an engine every 12,000 miles or less - "to restore lost power".

 

The Escape also has an intercooler. Virtually all turbos do.
Good point about the air under pressure being forced into the intake.
Maybe the engines affected by carbon build-up were normally aspirated.
I'll need to take a look to see where the line from the PCV enters the intake - it almost certainly must enter on the vacuum side, and not the pressure side.
For now, I'm not worried about carbon buildup.

 

I was just reading one of my car magazines and they were talking about this exact subject. The bottom line is that a little soot is meaningless and not to worry about it. I'll try to remember to take a shot of the article when I get home.

 

How about doing like we did in the old days, take your car out on the freeway and run the crap out of it to blow out the carbon.

 

I think a little soot isn't an issue but when you see chunks of carbon caked on to the valve stems, I can only guess it reduces the airflow to some extent. The chunks I was taking out of the head were a few millimetres thick which isn't insignificant.

I did notice smoother idle and quicker revs once cleaning this out. Some guys install methanol injection as well to keep the valves clean and reduce the boosted air temps allowing for higher pressure.

I can't imagine many people doing this on an escape though as these aren't exactly race ready cars.

As mentioned, I think ford has a good handle on the engine design and has it figured out from a longevity perspective (at least I'm hoping so)

Oh. One other thought. One of the sources of the buildup I noticed was from oil blow-by from the turbo that would smoke up. This is the main reason i blocked off the EGR.

 

DK - I read an article after a simple web search on the Audi and BMW problems. They did give the primary example of the Audi 4.2. It is an NA engine - and a great one but for that minor problem. The owner was obsessed and thought a dyno run difference of 10 HP was significant - maybe or maybe not. The cost today of pulling those heads has to be astronomical. Audi quotes $3200 for a timing belt change on the old V6!

Fchan - tell us which of the two engines you blocked off and how you did it. I'd just like to be directed to the right area. I would never block off that system. It is designed to keep moisture out of the engine and to reduce pumping losses. Install a catch can instead. Again - not a mechanic, just a shade tree kind of guy.

In my opinion, this problem reared its head long after the technology was released so it wasn't addressed. For these engines, cam timing, etc. should address it - conscious design. Still. a little water injection would work miracles if we had to do anything about it, not to mention running 87 octane. That would be a fun DIY project.

 

I blocked it off on the Mazda. This is independent of the pcv valve connected to the crank breather. That one was hooked up to a catch can. There was a company that made egr delete kits that removed block the line from the exhaust. From my understanding, the egr is a valve system that is normally closed but opened by the ecu. Carbon build up on the egr valve can result in a valve stuck open which would dump too much carbon onto the valves.
This may be unique to the Mazda engines on that generation, I am not a mechanic either and won't pretend to know more than I do

 

You must retain proper evacuation of the combustion by-products from the crankcase if you want long engine life, so deleting, or venting to the air defeats evacuation allowing the damaging combustion by-products to settle in the crankcase contaminating the engine oil.

They must be evacuated as soon as they enter as blow-by and are still in a suspended state (vapor/mist).

Here is a good video explaining proper evacuation. Most only think of crankcase pressure and over look this. The compounds that cause the damage are water, unburnt fuel, abrasive soot and carbon, and sulfuric acid for the most part:

PCV VALVE OPERATION - YouTube

And here is a great video on the deposits and what they cause:

Ford Ecoboost Warning Part 2 My Findings - YouTube

And anyone that doubts this is an issue, here is a link to pictures submitted by techs from every auto maker in the world showing all DI engines have these issues...and all are severe:

https://www.google.com/search?q=dir...600&bih=767&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=bzRZVKOqGYuSyAS0toLYAw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ

4th pic from the left, top row shows 140,000 miles on a port injection engine and of course zero deposits as the detergent fuel is constantly showering the valves preventing any deposits from forming:

But with direct injection, no fuel ever touches the backsides of the valves so these deposits build up rapidly, and for the past 20 plus years having work valve guides has been unheard of, and now were seeing worn guides at 20-30k miles as the abrasive buildup is constantly pulled up into the guides:

And of course seeing what is trapped there should be no one that wants this ingested into the combustion chamber:
RX Dual Check Valve Catch Can and 2013 Ecoboost F150 - YouTube

EGR valves have been done away with on most modern DI engines, so no longer a concern, but this coking sure is. To understand, the valves are designed to always be clean as far as air flow into the cylinder, so when disrupted each cylinder will get different levels of air entering, yet the injectors will still deliver the same amount of fuel into each so no two have the correct a/f ratio. Then of course over time these deposits also clog the ring grooves causing the rings to not move freely and then over time piston/ring/cylinder seal is affected.

Enough for my first post....anyone that wants to learn more, please ask on any part of how direct injection works, the advantages (many) over port injection, and the disadvantages (few).

Cheers!

 

Seafoam straight through the intake and into the engine: Let the engine get to running temperature, find a vacuum port that has plenty of suction, suck 3/4 of the can into the engine then shut off(engine will run rough and such), let the engine soak for 15-30, restart the engine and suck the remainder of the can into the engine to re-wet and loosen up the soaked gunk, then rev engine to 2500-3000rpm's until the smoke lightens up or disappears. Go drive the car rather spiritedly ensuring you have blown out all the gunk. Enjoy a cleaner engine.

 

I would be weary of this since there is nothing from Ford as yet. Due to this being a turbo boosted engine, there is a chance of the "buildup" and other additives doing damage to the turbo. If this would to happen, it will be an out of warranty replacement.


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

Absolutely correct. With any turbocharged engine, any debris no matter how small and insignificant can and will cause damage to the turbine blades when they make contact, and seafoam and other solvent based cleaners are absorbed into the coked deposits causing them to expand and break loose, and they are then expelled out the exhaust. When these hit the turbine blades spinning at 10-20k RPM damage occurs, and even slight damage throws off the balance and the ability to work properly. Ford does have a TSB on this. The other issue with any engine as we see this first hand when tearing them down, some of the smallet parrticles as well as some of the solvent always is pushed between the piston and cylinder wall and this causes scouring (scratches) in both the cylinder wall and the piston skirts. Not severe, but damage just the same. Then the final issue is most do not change oil and filter immediately following a upper induction cleaning service and some of the solvent and the debris washed with it that enters the crankcase contaminates the oil and can cause damage to rod and main bearings. As a rule on a NA engine one or two treatments usually wont cause enough damage to be noticeable, but some do this every 10k miles and it most definitely does. If anyone needs to see pictures I can post them showing. Lots of parts saved to show. Excellent post.

Another thread on the same subject: http://www.fordescape.org/forum/engine-technical-discussion/26545-ecoboost-engine-warning-induction-cleaning-warning.html Anyway to combine both threads?

From everything I have read so far, correct me if I'm wrong, Ford does not have an official cleaning procedure.

Good info Tuner Boost. I have read some of your posts on other Ford forums.

@Tuner Boost
Is the RX catch can just snake oil or does it work to prevent carbon buildup?
How hard is it to install an RX catch can on an Escape 2.0 l engine?

On any DI engine, these deposits are caused entirely by the oil mist and other compounds "baking" on to the back sides of the intake valves and the stems. Remove the oil and other compounds from the PCV vapors and the issue does not exist. The longest we have for a controlled test is 68,000 miles (installed right from the dealer) and at that mileage there is only a light chalky coating on the valves. Now with 99% of the "catchcans" on the market, since they only trap from 10-30% of the oil and other compounds there will be little prevention. To date, the only cans tested that catch most of this are the Saiku Micchi (SMC), the Elite E2, the Apex (copy of the E2) all at 80-90% effective and the RX at 95-98% effectiveness depending on how severe the oil consumption issue the engine has. You can take any of the big name little billet cans that are popular and install any of the brands listed in line behind them and they will catch as much or more as the first can in line. That tells mountains, but most never test to see and just go by advertised claims. So yes, guaranteed the few cans that actually do trap nearly all will greaty slow and reduce the rate of coking...or eliminate it all together. The other advantage of getting all the oil removed is detonation drops to near zero so those that log their car can see timing staying at optimum advance so 1-3 MPG improvement is standard with fleets buying and installing them for the fuel savings only. They could care less about the longevity as they trade every 3 years on average.

Here's another thread about carbon buildup: http://www.fordescape.org/forum/eng...orum/engine-technical-discussion/21242-what-about-water-methanol-injection.html
The PCV catch can might work, but you are altering an emission control device and its illegal especially if you have to get a smog inspection like we do here in California. The only way to clean the valves currently without damaging the turbo is to walnut shell blasts them with the valve closed and then blowout it out with compressed air.
Water/methanol injection might be a good preventive, because it keeps the intake valve cooler and has a little bit of a cleaning effect, but jury is still out.
Mark

If the system is one that retains the closed system, these actually reduce tailpipe emissions. A system like the RX is installed by dealers throughout the US and Canada.....in fact here is Rhineland Ford in Canada that did testing on problem ecoboosts:

.

Only in CA where CARB cert is required would it not be emissions compliant. Every other state the RX system is emissions compliant....but GM and Ford dealers in CA are installing these so not sure how it applies, but it is NOT CARB cert, so good concern.

On to water/meth injection. Water/meth injection does reduce the buildup...but only if used constantly, and most do not spray all the time or they would be filling the tank daily. The occasional spray has little effect on long term coking. Audi has tried similar with the turbo charged V8 DI engine by adding small port injectors to try and get the detergent fuel benefits on the valves, but in actual use it has only slight reduction in coking. The valves really can only remain clean if constantly showered in a detergent fuel or water/meth or similar.

And finally, here is a long term study showing the power degradation over time as the valves coking builds, and then is restored to as new with a walnut shell media blast service (you can also perform this with a assorted brush set and a die grinder with the same results):

Anyone doubting any of this...take a few minutes and remove your intake manifold and look in directly at your valves and see the severity. Another great post....this issue has just started to rear it's ugly head here in the states.


Here are links to videos on the 2 cleaning processes:

RX intake valve cleaning - YouTube

BMW N54 Engine Intake Valve Cleaning with Walnut Shell Blasting Equipment - YouTube

Most will first notice the issue as idle becomes slightly rough (the uneven air distribution) and a ever increasing "dead spot" when accelerating off idle. Most don't notice the power degradation as it is gradual, as is the fuel economy....but after a manual valve cleaning the difference is night and day.

 

Another thread on the same subject: http://www.fordescape.org/forum/engine-technical-discussion/26545-ecoboost-engine-warning-induction-cleaning-warning.html Anyway to combine both threads?

From everything I have read so far, correct me if I'm wrong, Ford does not have an official cleaning procedure.

Good info Tuner Boost. I have read some of your posts on other Ford forums.

@Tuner Boost
Is the RX catch can just snake oil or does it work to prevent carbon buildup?
How hard is it to install an RX catch can on an Escape 2.0 l engine?

 

Another thread on the same subject: http://www.fordescape.org/forum/engine-technical-discussion/26545-ecoboost-engine-warning-induction-cleaning-warning.html Anyway to combine both threads?

I can do that if y'all want, but it will insert posts from 8/7 to 8/11/14 in date order within this thread.

Having multiple threads on the same topic is pretty much par for the course in forums. But no problem doing it - let us know and Pilot or I can combine them.

 

Here's another thread about carbon buildup: http://www.fordescape.org/forum/eng...orum/engine-technical-discussion/21242-what-about-water-methanol-injection.html
The PCV catch can might work, but you are altering an emission control device and its illegal especially if you have to get a smog inspection like we do here in California. The only way to clean the valves currently without damaging the turbo is to walnut shell blasts them with the valve closed and then blowout it out with compressed air.
Water/methanol injection might be a good preventive, because it keeps the intake valve cooler and has a little bit of a cleaning effect, but jury is still out.
Mark

 

Good read ^^^ makes since.
Mark

 

One other interesting tidbit relating to this topic .... a statement buried in the '13-'14 Ford Escape Workshop Manual, excerpted below:

2013 - 2014 Escape - Procedure revision date: 07/11/2013
303-04E Fuel Charging and Controls - Turbocharger - 2.0L EcoBoost (177kW/240PS) - MI4
Diagnosis and Testing
.......
Turbocharger Internal Oil Leak Test
NOTE: It is normal for a small amount of combustion gas to pass into the crankcase. This gas is scavenged into the air intake system through the PCV system, which incorporates an crankcase vent oil separator. Some engine oil, in the form of a vapor is carried into the air intake system with the blow-by gases (this engine oil also contributes to valve seat durability).....

That last phrase in parentheses (bold added by me), whether we 'buy' the logic or not, gives a pretty good hint of how Ford might react to warranty claims relating to valve problems if one were to scrub some of that nasty oil mist/vapor out of the intake air. Darned if you do and darned if you don't :-0

 

I need to see if Road Race Engineering out of California still makes their atmospherically vented catch cans. They smell a bit but it would work for running silicone hoses from the crankcase and the head to the can. Just need to mount it somewhere low and cap off the intake nipples with rubber screw caps and zip ties.

 

That would fail a California smog inspection in short order. Thats just like having a road draft tube and they have be outlawed on new application since 1962.
Mark

 

Tuner Boost, first off if your product can get CARB certified for our Escapes I would be interested. Second what brings you to this board? Do you have an Escape? If you don't theirs nothing wrong with that, I've enjoyed your posts, but if your here just to pimp your wares I think full disclosure is in order. If you have an Escape that's great as you have incentive to help in our quest for an all around better driving experience.
Thanks
Mark

 

2 members contacted us to see if we would come on and enter a discussion on the issues with direct injection and the related issues. We do have a F150 EcoBoost 3.5 twin turbo. There are 2 other cans on the market that catch most of the oil mix as well, the SMC (Saiku Micchi), the ELite E2, and the Apex (a copy of the Elite E2). Routing and the use of checkvalves to prevent any boost pressure entering the crankcase are critical. As for the rest, most are only 10-30% effective so although they capture oil (even a beer can or mayonnaise jar will as well), they are letting most pass right through so they are little more than placebo's. Carb cert is in the future.

What one can do is a manual intake valve cleaning to restore the valve shape to original and see the improvement in power and smoothness. It is not difficult, it just takes time. Make sure all ports are taped off to avoid any debris from entering, and bring the one your cleaning up to TDC to make sure both valves are closed. Use compressed air and a shop vac to remove the debris as your cleaning. A die grinder or cordless drill with some long shaft brushes will allow you to get at all sides of the valves and intake port. When clean, blow debris clear and tape off and move to the next. Just take your time when removing and reinstalling the IM...the O-ring gaskets are reuseable many times, so only need to get the brush set. Amazon has many to choose from.

Well we don't know that necessarily. But what I DO know is that with two very modified vehicles I have use breather cans. Both have been driven to over 150,000 miles. And both were completely factory engines. Never had an issue. (Though I did change my oil at least every 3000 miles). I also can say I dropped my fair share of intercooler pipes and I never saw oil in the intake pipes with a breather can on mine. Other cars without them absolutely.

As far as emissions, well I live in PA and that part of the inspection is entirely visual. Just reconnect the rubber lines and you will always pass. Other states I don't know about.

We also do know that those intake gasses and oil run hell on your valves and guides over time on a DI engine.

For me, at least, I think the lesser of two evils is common sense here.

On the other hand, with 40 years of direct experience in demanding high profile venues, if anyone is going to have a better solution to an impending problem it would be you. So I'm all ears!

Your correct if you are changing oil often enough....but a simple BlackStone oil analysis will show the level of contaminates accumulating in the oil. I am referring to the actual wear on all moving parts over time. Most would not know the rate of wear w/out a tear down. When you do tear down, look closely at the bearings and journals. Those little "worm track" stains are the sulfuric acid attacking the bearing surface and the case hardened journal surface. Look on the valve train components....rocker arms with roller bearings (most modern engines or any after market) and you will see the corrosion attacking them as water and acid condense under the valve covers. This example is from only 6 months of breather alone:

The mild steel buckets are thin and when they are breached the needle bearings spill out. Always try to do the absolute best for any engine, race or street.

With all our race engines we run belt driven vacuum pumps to ensure immediate evacuation of all of this and also try to maintain 14-15" of vacuum to aid ring seal. This allows us to run a low tension ring as well for less resistance. We dont want ANY oil ingested and these engines have to repeat round after round as we win or lose far too often by 1/1000th of a second or less:

We constantly have DI engines in here for re-ring and/or intake valve/guide issues from this:

This is what you will find is evacuated and caught vs just venting:

Bottom layer settles to be mainly sulfuric acid and water, then unburnt fuel and water emulsified, then water and oil emulsified, and the very top oil alone settles out. Not what you want in the oil. We always have examples of engines that go miles against all odds, the occasional car comes in with no oil change for 50k miles and still runs fine not burning oil, etc. and the time a guys wife got in his new truck that he was doing the 1st change at 1000 miles and starts it up and drives off with no oil in it (the drain pan still under the truck), drives 20 miles to town, shops and drives back home clacking and rattling like crazy. He fills the oil and gradually all lifters free up and get quiet....last I talked to him he had close to 200k miles on it but the body was rusting off (WI). Aside from burning a qt every 2k miles, he says it ran fine. So, as a Professional race team owner, we look at every way possible to extend the life of not only the race engines that may be $20-$45k each, but the tow vehicles as well. So yes, you may very well get long life out of the engine, but it could have been better.

And have developed several FI systems for the new DI engines:

So, to understand crankcase evacuation, all engines need a filtered (and if MAF equipped a MAF metered source) fresh, or cleanside source that brings in clean air to make up for the foul/dirty air pulled out. This also aids in "flushing" these damaging compounds out. This clean air travels through the crankcase flushing the damaging foul vapors out the opposite side of the crankcase. Similar to a smoke filled room that has a vent filling it with smoke. Open on window and you relieve pressure and some smoke escapes, but until you can open a window on the opposite end, and have a fan pulling (evacuating) that smoke out, the room can never clear. The crankcase is similar. Most only think in terms of relieving pressure and are not aware of the damaging combustion by-products constantly entering as blow-by. They must be removed before they can settle and mix with the oil. And yes, a motor may still run and seem OK, but the increased wear does occur and can be seen when you tear down.

Good dialog here!! Keep it coming!

 

Moderator comment: While advertising is not allowed except in the Vendor/Sponsor section, it appears as though Tuner Boost has not given the name of the company he works for, and has mentioned competitor products as well (he named several in a PM). But please correct me if I'm wrong, either in a PM or here. The conversation is too technical for me and I haven't watched the videos, just skimmed the posts.
@pilotattitude

 

@Tuner Boost
IMHO you and other sources have made a case for the potential problems associated with 'dirty air' intake on DI engines. We can each decide if that's of concern to us and how we might address it.

I'd like to further my technical understanding of improving the quality of PCV via the use of 'catch cans' or other improved systems for separating undesirable oil/oil vapor/water from the intake air stream. If not obvious, my only interest is application to the 2.0l Ecoboost in the FE.

To that end I've studied info on the Rx Performance website (which presumably is valid for any brand of similar product). I've taken the liberty of downloading and 'altering' a schematic from that website to help with my questions (un-altered and my altered versions of the schematic are attached for reference).

Technical Q's, some which are specific to the Rx Performance product if you are able to answer:
1) Do any or all the "A-B-C" hoses between the engine connections and a catch can need to be sloped toward the catch can to prevent pooling of liquids in the hoses or 'backflow' to the engine? Hose "B" in particular since the PCV valve on the FE may be mounted a lot lower than most that are on the valve cover.
2) Does the "A" hose connection on the engine-end need to be located close to the turbo inlet, or can it be located near the airbox on the airbox outlet pipe (perhaps an easier-to-access location)?
3) What is the role of adding a vented breather (e.g. Rx Performance "Cleanside Separator") to an engine like the 2.0 Ecoboost which has a 'sealed' filler cap with no valve cover breather? Maybe I'm looking at it wrong but lacking a check valve that breather seems to be a vent-to-atmosphere connected to the non-filtered side of the airbox?
4) What's inside the Rx Catch Can (open space? baffles? mesh?) and can it be opened for inspection/cleaning?
5) Are the check valves used in the Rx Catch Can System integral with the catch can fittings, internal to the can or separate external pieces installed inline in the hoses between the can and the engine connection points? As the only 'active' component in the system are they generic replaceable items which can be inspected for correct operation and cleaned?
6) Is it correct that for optimal performance a catch can needs to be installed in a 'cool as possible' location such as in front of the radiator to help facilitate condensation of vapors to liquid in the can?
7) Is there any reason that the drain valve could not/should not be located on the bottom of an extension line remote and below the catch can to facilitate easier access for draining? There's very limited access to the area between the bodywork and the front of the radiator on the FE, making operation of a can-mounted drain valve located there difficult.

TIA, more Q's to follow I'm sure as this nimrod struggles to understand these systems and how they might be implemented on the FE. I really hope you're able to find and document a 2.0 Ecoboost installation for our enlightenment.