Jump to content

Custom Search





2019 Lincoln Aviator Introduced Here !


Welcome to Blue Oval Forums


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to Blue Oval Forums.  You must first register to create topics and post replies. Registration is a quick and easy process and only takes a minute.  Be apart of Blue Oval Forums by signing in or creating an account.
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members
  • Create a photo album and post images
  • Use the Shout feature and more. . .
Click here to create an account now.
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo
- - - - -

EcoBoost, as we know it, faces some big challenges !


  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,399 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 27 June 2016 - 06:27 AM

The "basic" EcoBoost technology was "invented" by Bosch and sold to more than just Ford (EU and US).  VW is the first to announce one possible solution to the problem !

 

Volkswagen may install diesel filters for gas-powered cars

 

The filters will be used in direct-injection turbocharged engines. Those engines can create more emissions than older, port-injection engines because the newer engines give less time for gasoline to mix with the air in the engine's combustion chamber.

 

 

The "new" 3.5L EcoBoost gets around this by using BOTH direct AND port fuel injectors.


  • 2b2 likes this







Lose this advertisement by becoming a member. Click here to create a free account.


#2 OFFLINE   DrivingEnthusiast.net

DrivingEnthusiast.net

    New BON Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Joined 10-November 16
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:Detroit
  • Current Vehicle:2005 Thunderbird

Posted 10 November 2016 - 09:52 AM

I have to admit I am more than a bit leery about anything VW is doing these days to try to rehab their image.

 

Toyota is using this type of dual injection system on some of their engines.
What's the advantage then of both direct- and port-injection?  


-JW

DrivingEnthusiast.net


#3 ONLINE   akirby

akirby

    fordmantpw's alter ego

  • Moderator
  • 29,369 posts
  • Joined 18-April 06
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Canton, GA
  • Current Vehicle:2018 F150 Supercab XLT Magnetic Grey 3.5LEB

Posted 10 November 2016 - 10:34 AM

I have to admit I am more than a bit leery about anything VW is doing these days to try to rehab their image.

 

Toyota is using this type of dual injection system on some of their engines.
What's the advantage then of both direct- and port-injection?  

 

Direct injection doesn't allow fuel to touch the backs of the valves whereas port injection does and that helps keep them clean.  I'm sure there are some other benefits.


  • 2b2 and Hugh like this

2018 F150 Supercab XLT Sport (Magnetic) - 3.5LEB
2016 Lincoln MKX Reserve (Luxe/Cappucino)


#4 OFFLINE   92merc

92merc

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,845 posts
  • Joined 19-October 05
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Bismarck, ND
  • Current Vehicle:2007Mercury Montego : 2003 F150 SuperCrew

Posted 10 November 2016 - 12:12 PM

The other issue is particulates.  For example, that's why some diesels have a filter, to trap the particulates. 

 

What's been noticed on gas direct injection engines, the particulates are also high.  But on port injection, it's better.

 

So the compromise is to use port injection for "normal" engine running.  But if you're at a point where more power is needed, it starts adding fuel through the DI ports.  At least that's how I understand it.  I've been known to be wrong...


  • 2b2 and rperez817 like this

#5 OFFLINE   rperez817

rperez817

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 784 posts
  • Joined 03-October 16
  • Region:U.S. Southern Plains
  • Location:Fort Worth
  • Current Vehicle:'17 Jaguar XF 20d; '04 Ford Ranger

Posted 10 November 2016 - 02:41 PM

The other issue is particulates.  For example, that's why some diesels have a filter, to trap the particulates. 

 

What's been noticed on gas direct injection engines, the particulates are also high.  But on port injection, it's better.

 

Yes sir! There was a study done in Germany a few years ago that confirmed this. It also found that GDI engines can emit 10 times more fine particulate matter pollution than clean diesel engines with DPF. http://www.transport...g_final_T&E.pdf


Native Texan sent to spread the message, "God Blessed Texas"  :) 


#6 OFFLINE   jpd80

jpd80

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,591 posts
  • Joined 02-June 04
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:My Happy Place
  • Current Vehicle:Falcon 302 V8

Posted 11 November 2016 - 09:55 PM

 

Yes sir! There was a study done in Germany a few years ago that confirmed this. It also found that GDI engines can emit 10 times more fine particulate matter pollution than clean diesel engines with DPF. http://www.transport...g_final_T&E.pdf

 And from the link provided we find that controlling GDI particles will be a lot easier

and cheaper to accomplish than with diesel engines:

 

Testing performed on behalf of T&E and others shows that without fitting a Gasoline
Particulate Filter (GPF) to the exhaust, GDI cars produce large numbers of particles.
 
GPFs are cheaper, simpler, more compact and more durable than those used in diesels,
since the higher temperature of the GDI exhaust prevents an accumulation of soot and
enables continuous regeneration of the filter.
 
The use of a GPF has the potential to reduce particle numbers by a factor of 1000 or more.

 


Edited by jpd80, 11 November 2016 - 10:00 PM.


#7 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,399 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 14 November 2016 - 11:05 AM

 

 And from the link provided we find that controlling GDI particles will be a lot easier

and cheaper to accomplish than with diesel engines:

There is an even cheaper and easier solution.  DON'T DO GDI or GTDI !

 

There have been studies done inside Ford that show both have very marginal "benefits" (power, fuel economy) over port injection.  In other words, it is mostly marketing hype !


  • rperez817 likes this

#8 OFFLINE   silvrsvt

silvrsvt

    Bite my Shiny metal ass!

  • Moderator
  • 18,927 posts
  • Joined 03-October 02
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Current Vehicle:2017 Escape SE AWD/2013 Taurus SHO

Posted 14 November 2016 - 03:08 PM

There is an even cheaper and easier solution.  DON'T DO GDI or GTDI !

 

There have been studies done inside Ford that show both have very marginal "benefits" (power, fuel economy) over port injection.  In other words, it is mostly marketing hype !

So basically your saying Ford should abandon its Ecoboost engines? For some reason, I don't see that happening.


"Hell, there are no rules here-- we're trying to accomplish something."
Thomas A. Edison


Ford Products owned though the years:
1986 Escort GT Race Red
1998 Mustang GT Dark Green Satin
2002 SVT Focus Satin Silver
2006 Mustang GT Tungsten Grey

2010 Escape XLT AWD Sport Blue
2013 Taurus SHO Ruby Red

2017 Escape SE AWD Platinum White

Future Fords:
2021 Bronco

20xx Mustang GT350 or the like

 

199923.png
 
photo-thumb-15254.jpg


#9 OFFLINE   92merc

92merc

    Blue Oval Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 1,845 posts
  • Joined 19-October 05
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:Bismarck, ND
  • Current Vehicle:2007Mercury Montego : 2003 F150 SuperCrew

Posted 14 November 2016 - 03:38 PM

I can see DI in a NA not really adding much to the game.  But DI and turbo's, it's needed.

 

You would also need a much larger and heavier NA engine to get the same torque the new 3.5 EB is churning out.



#10 OFFLINE   matthewq4b

matthewq4b

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 2,335 posts
  • Joined 11-January 04

Posted 15 November 2016 - 07:08 AM

Nothing new here.    The supplemental port injectors have been in use for a decade on EU DI gasoline engines.  The valve coking issue was already a well known issue in DI engines when the Ecoboost hit the market.  Basically Ford screwed the pooch with the Ecoboost engine by not having supplemental port injectors at release.   

 

The addition of the GDiPF was an inevitability with the higher particulate emissions this was discussed on the board years ago.


"You Can Never Have Too Much Power, Just Not Enough Control" :D

#11 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,399 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 15 November 2016 - 07:30 AM

So basically your saying Ford should abandon its Ecoboost engines? For some reason, I don't see that happening.

Marketing sells cars !



#12 OFFLINE   theoldwizard

theoldwizard

    Retired

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 5,399 posts
  • Joined 06-February 03
  • Location:SE MI
  • Current Vehicle:'98 E150

Posted 15 November 2016 - 07:35 AM

Nothing new here.    The supplemental port injectors have been in use for a decade on EU DI gasoline engines.  The valve coking issue was already a well known issue in DI engines when the Ecoboost hit the market.  Basically Ford screwed the pooch with the Ecoboost engine by not having supplemental port injectors at release.   

Please reference 2007MY EU engine with DI and PFI.

 

The NA release of EcoBoost on the 2010MY 3.5L Taurus was basically a Bosch design.  I can not prove it, but I highly doubt that Bosch recommended a second set of injectors and Ford just chose NOT to do it.


Edited by theoldwizard, 15 November 2016 - 07:44 AM.


#13 OFFLINE   matthewq4b

matthewq4b

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPip
  • 2,335 posts
  • Joined 11-January 04

Posted 16 November 2016 - 03:33 AM

 Modern GDI has been in use since 1996  the issue with valve coking has been well documented for over a decade. 

 

Since 06 Mercedes PSA and Alfa have used a spray directed injection system with a centrally located injector that washes the back of the valve with a short burst on the intake stroke. None of these engines have issues with valve coking.    Audi in 13 added a supplemental injector on it's 1.6L (EU Calibrations only)  this serves a few purposes  easier cold starts, lower NOX, lower particulate emissions and keeps the valves clean.

 

Not only was Ford was late to the party with GDI in the Ecoboost they then used the older and cheaper wall directed injection system that was know to have serous issues with valve coking in turbo applications.  Furthermore since these are turbo charged engines you cannot use induction cleaners like on a NA engine as it takes out the turbo's.  Ford has NO fix for the valve coking issue short of manual cleaning. Really makes you wonder what clown college they got their power train engineers from, or at the very least the fools that rubber stamped it.  People are resorting to catch cans on the PCV systems to collect as much crud as then can so the valves don't coke up really having to resort to that on what is supposed to me Ford's premier engine line.  That is what you do on your old worn out POS to keep all crud out of your engine not on what is supposed to be Ford's class leading power plants.

 

Further more the fix for it is idiot simple.. water methanol injection.  The vehicles already have a source of it on board....the washer fluid.  Winter time washer fluids are generally about 30%-50% methanol it would be simple enough to add, and would just need to be activated at times of higher engine load when blow by is at it's worst  this would have the effect of steam cleaning the back of the valves, and washing out induction system with the methanol not to mention it  would reduce detonation allowing for more radical timing advance (better economy) and lower NOX emissions.

 

Ya not an ideal situation but far a cheaper solution than pulling an engine apart to clean the valves. 

 

There was a time when Ford used the very best of available technology and led the industry, unfortunately that sure that sure has not been the case for a while now. 


"You Can Never Have Too Much Power, Just Not Enough Control" :D

#14 OFFLINE   jpd80

jpd80

    Member

  • Blue Oval Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,591 posts
  • Joined 02-June 04
  • Region:Decline
  • Location:My Happy Place
  • Current Vehicle:Falcon 302 V8

Posted 03 December 2016 - 04:41 PM

Only early DI engines have issues with coking, the later GM HFV6 with DI and Ford's own Focus 2.0DI

as well as all of the later Ecoboost engines have had no real issue with it. Think about it if coking had been

the major issue some think, it would be making headline news but guess what...nada zippo. It's a dead issue.

 

Mazda's own work on GDI and GDIT has shown that a lot of improvement is possible with tailoring DI's combustion

traits over those of simple port injection, it's not the 1990s and 200s anymore, many manufacturers are realizing

that the emissions profile and control afforded by DI is far superior to just squirting fuel into a manifold.

 

The cost of an exhaust particle filter for GDI and GDT is around $50 when first discussed by the EU ten years ago

and with wider spread applications thse days, I'd expect the cost now would be even lower and simply added

to the service schedule.

 

Ford is not going to drop Ecoboost, they see how it has grabbed the public's imagination and now, over 70%

of F150 buyers have switched to ecoboost, pFI V8s are being left behind, GM's 5.3 and 6.2 V8s are now DI

to stay in the game, without it they csimply can't deliver the necessary power and emissions profile.


Edited by jpd80, 03 December 2016 - 04:45 PM.









Custom Search


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Privacy Policy Terms of Service | DMCA ·