Going a little off-topic with a reply but....
To be honest when I bought my truck I didn't really even consider a diesel mostly because of the way I use it, it's a Farm truck that does short trips mostly under a mile and sometimes under 100 feet countless times every day and every other week or so it gets hooked up to a big wagon or trailer that the 3V V10 plays with for 1-50+ miles.
Towing heavy isn't an issue for my gas engine it actually does impressively well for what I do but if I was going to do some very long highway trips only, a Diesel truck would be much more in my interest.

 

This issue has been limited to the 1.6L Ecoboost I-4. As far as I know the 3.5L hasn't suffered from this issue or at least nothing has been reported here on FTE. The ecoboost much like a diesel cannot be babied.

The next gen Ecoboost is likely to come out with two injectors per cylinder to completely eliminate this issue.

 

Actually, carbon build up on the intake valves is common across the board with DI engines. Early DI engines, such as the VW/Audi 2.0t engines, could experience the problem as soon as 60k miles. Dealers went to the extent of cleaning the valves for some owners preemptively as a final warranty service. The problem is that the crankcase blow by is sent back into the intake manifold for re-burn to reduce emissions. On a normal, port-injection system, the gasoline mix continuously cleans the intake valves. DI moves the injector into the cylinder itself - no more cleaning.

Toyota offers a hybrid port / direct system which probably solves the problem. If I was experiencing a Check Engine light due to dirty valves not cleanly seating, I'd probably pull a vacuum hose of the intake manifold with the engine running and have it suck down a bowl of Seafoam - which might take a few tries, but probably eliminates the problem.

 

Troverman is correct and just to add.. The original valve seating problem from carbon build up involved the number 2 and 4 cylinders on the Ecoboost V6 engines. That happens to be the cylinders where the crankcase fumes are vented. The concern was more blowby naturally occurs under higher amounts of boost, creating more carbon and soot to build up behind the valves. The current repair procedure from Ford is to pull the head and clean the valves affected. From what I've heard, Ford is working on some sort of machine that washes out the intake port with chemicals. There are owners who have been sold the BG System intake cleaner from independent shops, which has been proven by Ford will destroy the seals on the turbocharger. If an owner goes for any sort of chemical cleaning down the air intake, it will void the Ford warantee.

 

A couple of thoughts - first off, I am suspicious that turbo engines would have more of an issue than NA engines. The crankcase blow-by comes from under the pistons; from the crankcase. The extra air is above the pistons in the combustion chamber.

As for chemical cleaning, why would a flammable chemical cause an issue to seals? The turbo is post-combustion - all you're dealing with is hot gas. I would not hesitate to use seafoam. You can dump it in your gas or your engine oil. If it was wrecking engines, they'd be out of business. Drawing it into the intake manifold is the only way to be effective on a DI engine.

Removing a cylinder head is not an easy task, especially so on an Ecoboost engine. Dual cams, turbo plumbing, etc. That would be a very expensive non-warranty service. There are probably special cam locking tools required. I could be wrong, but I think VW had a way to clean the valves just by removing the valve cover. Probably by using a chemical cleaner and hand rotating the engine to open individual valves.

Nevertheless, I had not heard this was an issue on the 3.5L EB - although I wondered if it would be.

 

Expect a 3-4 towing mpg advantage with the 6.7 over the 6.2.

 

Blow-by is combustion byproducts, with combustion occurring in the combustion chamber. The higher the combustion (expansion of hot gasses), the more blow-by the piston rings into the crankcase.


According to Ford, the damage comes from altering the combustion mixture beyond what the computer regulates toward the hot side of the turbo. For example, injecting Seafoam(tm), or whatever magic elixir into the intake, does three things harmful to the turbo:

1. Because the chemical burns at a different rate and temperature to fuel, raw unburned chemicals create hotspots in the hot side of the turbocharger, potentially damaging the turbo seals.

2. Again on a DI engine, since the cold side of the turbocharger is designed for only fresh air, introducing chemicals or solvents into the air stream can dilute lubrication to the turbo bearings. Many of the new turbochargers for diesel and DI gas engines use ceramic bearings which can be destroyed by solvents introduced into the air stream.

3. Similar to #2, plastics or other materials damaged by injecting solvents into the air-only designed intake stream can fowl and damage the turbo.

Here are some links that will explain further: Induction Service Cleaners Can Damage Ford EcoBoost Engines - PickupTrucks.com News

3.5 Ecoboost Carbon Buildup

If you have a turbocharged Ford DI engine, you'll see the warning in your owners manual about not using Seafoam or solvents into the intake.


Yes it would be very expensive or not a do-it-yourself task, but is still Ford's recommended method to date.

 

Maybe you are correct on turbos seeing more blow-by. Typically though, a turbo would have stronger or an extra ring to prevent blow-by, knowing the engine would see boost.

I don't buy the chemical story. I read your link - a few things are incorrect.

The hottest a turbo will be is under maximum boost - when it's seeing the most and hottest exhaust flow and is compressing the most ambient temp air. The least heat a turbo will see is at idle - and that is when you suck in some seafoam. No one is going to spray directly into the air intake - the filter would block most of the chemical, not to mention you'd most likely damage your MAF and IAT sensors. If you did go this route, and some got past the air filter, yes, the chemical would flow through the turbo charged air circuit. I specifically said to pull a line off the intake manifold, so it sucks right in. The engine will run rough while you do this - codes may have to be cleared afterwards. If you get nice black exhaust smoke, you know its working. The chemical won't harm the plastic of the intake manifold. The chemical also burns faster than gas - in liquid form, it coats and dissolves carbon on the intake valve as it flows in - then burns instantly. It might raise the combustion temp slightly - but no where near max boost. I think FoMoCo would like to take your service dollars...

Plus there'd be no way for Ford to determine if any failures were caused by a chemical...

A new turbo, by the way, is about $700. Not thousands, as the article states.

 

My brother is a claims adjustor for an insurance company. He said that they have received several claims for catalytic convertor problems and turbo problems from the use of engine cleaning products. I couldn't tell you if it was from improper usage or if not all engines can be cleaned this way.

 

Here you go guys, check this thread out. I know you've all read some posts from this awesome OP and he is/was a Ford tech.

Read the whole t hing an watch his videos.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...st-owners.html

 

FYI, that's the same video that KelleyfromVA posted a couple of posts up from this one...

It's fine, I agree the best case scenario is to remove the heads and manually clean. But for those not wanting to invest a couple of thousand into this, I'm really surprised people think this is so bad. Seafoam is naphtha, diesel, and isopropyl alcohol. Naphtha dissolves build-up, such as baked on carbon deposits, back into a liquid form. The diesel acts as a lubricant, and the alcohol as a drying agent. So let's see - naptha used to basically be low-grade gasoline...just add lead. It won't harm your engine and is basically gasoline. The alcohol is essentially exactly the same as drygas...HEET, for example. Nobody thinks twice about dumping that down their tank. Finally, diesel. Everyone knows if you fill your gas tank with diesel, you have a problem. But the problem is limited only to your fuel system - the tank, the lines, the filter, the pump(s), and the injectors. The thick diesel can plug up any of these components. It also lights off at a much higher heat point than gasoline (less volatile). BUT....sucking in a small mixture of diesel with counterbalancing IPA and Naphtha which further dilutes diesel, does no harm. The good it does is provide lubrication to sticky valves. We are talking about introducing this mixture directly into the intake manifold. Dumping Seafoam into your tank will not help carbon buildup. Sucking it in will.

 

Well good luck with that. Please let us know how that works for your future Ecoboost engine.

Getting back to the discussion; it will be interesting to see how Ford evolves the Ecoboost V6 platform for trucks. If force feeding a small engine in tow/hauling situations leads toward reduced longevity, what harm will it do to Ford truck sales and reputation? Ford has a lot hanging on the promise.

I'll sit back with my gas gobbling V10 and watch from the sidelines.

 

Haha, thanks for steering us (me) back on topic. It's an interesting argument, but best left for another thread.

I'm all for another V10. Kind of gave Ford a little exclusivity. It just needs to have a little more power and torque, and use a little less fuel. How about adding a pair of cylinders to the 6.2L and giving it direct injection to the bosses for the injectors which are already in place?

 

Understood sir and thank you for pointing that out for us. The point that I'm trying to make is that in the video, the Ford tech is clear about how to help mitigate carbon build up on a DI engine simply by working it. I have plenty of friends who own HD pick ups and they are not grocery getters by any means. I suspect that most people with deep enough pockets to buy such a rig has a reason for it beside mall crawling.

Again, I'm not suggesting that a 3.5L V-6 is the right fit for a superduty but I am suggesting that a purpose built GTDI correctly sized and engineered for the superduty IS the right answer.

 

The Ford tech in the video never says to run your engine hard to prevent carbon...unless I missed something? Basic mechanical principles - it won't work. All modern engines "vent" oily vapors from the crankcase (mostly blow-by) back into the intake manifold, where it will pass through the intake valves when they open and be re-burned to meet emissions standards. If you could vent the vapors directly into the combustion chamber or just vent them to atmosphere, problem solved. We can't do either. Therefore, the oily vapor and incomplete burn particulate that blows by the piston rings ends up passing by the intake valves continuously while the engine runs. The intake valves are very hot, and this oily, particulate vapor that collects on the back of the valves becomes hard as a rock. With enough build up, over time, generally the correct amount of air cannot be fed into the cylinder, causing misfire. If it gets bad enough, the carbon can collect on the valve stem and cause valve seal problems, or it can build up on the valve seat and eventually cause valve seating problems which can result in misfire. Gasoline is a natural cleaner. With standard port injection, such as what you'd find on the 5.0L or 6.2L V8, fresh gas and air are also constantly flowing past the intake valves and continuously clean them while the engine is running. But direct-injected engines put the injector right in the cylinder...hence the problem. You can run your engine at full-throttle all the time and carbon buildup will still occur...because blow-by is occurring (if anything, at a higher rate than normal operation), and because oily crankcase vapors are still being vented. So nothing changes. The problem isn't because engines aren't running hot enough - it's because there is no fuel flowing past the back of the intake valves. There is no getting around this problem.
While I concede "some" chemical mixes may be hazardous, I highly doubt you'd experience any problems from seafoam, vacuum-pulled at idle.

Anyway, sorry for the diatribe. Basically the long winded tech said Ford told him not to do it - as a trained mechanic he apparently would have performed this service as the customer of the F-150 had requested. I think Ford is just covering their bases.