IMHO, very true...and I have been saying this for many years, not just with Ford, but any "boosted" engine that relies on technology to "keep it together"..... and considering the EB engines are running at 16psi (max)….that is double what most any aftermarket company in the past 30 years (to date) has done or recommended for daily driver type vehicle....it is absolutely amazing what the engineers have done to make this engine be as smooth and provide drivability as they have done...seemless…….but, as things get older, tech devices tend to fail and maintenance (no matter what Ford says IMHO), has to be much greater ….as turbo's beat the crap out of engine oil..... and the real difference here is that when a failure occurs, it's going to be an expensive result, unlike a N/A engine which typically is more towords the "nominal" side of the spectrum.

 

So, with his mind set, we should go back to carburetors and point ignition.

 

There is an old saying, "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it", increased complexity comes increased vulnerability and this is and has been well seen. Here's the difference, when a failure occurs with high boosted engines, the damage is significant...…..thousands of dollars......even if you do the repairs yourself. With regards to carbs and ignition points, remember, ignition points ran NASCAR engines at 220 mph up through the late 70's.....they were the fastest cars on any track (faster than Indy)…..and one time, Yarborough lost a race because the points physically broke, so they are not perfect...just like computers and their software....and what most do not understand even with the new systems is the maintenance issues that come with it. In 1989, GM cars had computers that had more power than the computers on the space shuttles......and with it came 640,000 pages of troubleshooting guides/procedures....taking almost a decade for a obtainable, practical approach to be employed with regards to troubleshooting and maintenance related repairs....Oh, and yes I am into modern cars as well....re-tuning my 2006 Mark LT pickup......obtaining 330 hp and 400 lbs of tq…..of course in some eyes, this is an antique as well.

Yes, I come from a family who has been actively engaged in advance tech since the late 50's.....what todays engineers are accomplishing is nothing short of fantastic, but it is nothing new....it is almost all old tech that has been updated and applied to different elements....and before anybody starts saying hey, that didn't even exist before 1990's....well, wrong. The Phoenix Missile system as a quick example, my dad was one of the original program managers, he designed the wings & control surfaces. The original missile (AIM54A) was designed in 1959...100% analog, then in around 1965 the AIM 54C was born, 100% digital......, the phoenix was originally designed to be launched at Mach 3 at 80,000 feet, and flew at Mach 5+ with conventional or nuclear warheads. In it's ultimate delivery, it could track up to 24 targets at 200 miles out, ID the top six threats per aircraft and upon confirmation of the flight crew, take out each threat individually or all simultaneously (combat conditions the effective rate ranged from 87-92% including enemy employed electronic counter-measures- jamming). and mind you, the "super computer" and advance deep learning algorythems did not exists- this was 100% sliderule created (the Texas Instrument calculators didn't arrive until the late 60's)...…. initial test launched against "Live" drone fighter aircraft (up to Mach 1+- almost Mach 2)….yes, drone aircraft......including the F86 Saber....of the 1st 61 test flights off the coast of Catalina, 59 point blank direct hits, 1 near miss and 1 failure. In 1971 they tried to update the back half of the missile from hydraulics to digital (to the dismay) and objection of the engineers involved, but demanded by the Whitehouse & pentagon...….in a test lab in SoCal, the missile spontaneously activated with my dad's hand on the side of the missile, the rocket engine fired and blew the nose off, scrapnel flying......4 hours later fire fighters from LA City got the doors open...….my dad, a US navy rep and 2 college interns all walked out alive and unharmed (except for the dads watch which received a direct hit from a piece of scrapnel. In 1987 the next generation (phoenix) missile began...the AMRAAM (AIM120).....100% digital front to tail.....and the phoenix was officially retired a few years later.

Artificial Intelligence- nothing new, after the world announced in 1982 that is could not be done, in 1984 Hughes research Labs publicly announced in had created AI....by the end of the 80's it was installing fabric headliners in GM luxo cars.

In short, EFI is great......unless you have an aftermarket system that you need to troubleshoot....what in idiodic nightmare for anyone who has actually had to effect this!!!!!!! Increased HP (reality) from aftermarket EFI or point conversion kits is almost non-existent and demonstrated at Westech, EngineMasters TV shows, etc.....Are their advantages, sure...….but as I have demonstrated to numerous experts.....carbs, points and even drum brakes can operate as well as their OE modern equivalents......if they are assembled with the correct parts and properly set up......but that takes training, mentoring & a little bit of time...…...Hmm, just like todays cars, as mechanics spend up to 6 months of each year updating their knowledge.

 

Agree to disagree. Perhaps I am biased, since I'm a two time EB owner.

That video is a fluff piece. They are designed to get views. Thats it.
His facts are indeed facts. VVT has flaws. GDI has flaws. People with turbo charged vehicles (usually) drive them harder because they're more fun. But his opinions are also his opinions. Ford did a DAMN good job designing the EcoBoost engines. If they were prone to failures, would they be so successful? Nope. No amount of marketing can overcome massive failure rates. Facts are facts. The EcoBoosts are very reliable and successful engines. There have been and will continue to be refinements, but they are far from unreliable. Just ask anyone who owns one or a Ford tech. No offense to Scotty, but hes not really an expert.

 

He laughs at the fact that Ford is continuing to make updates to the engine design and that after some years they completely redesigned the engine. But every manufacturer does this to their engines. All engines are constantly improving and changing. Sometimes those changes fail, but without this there wouldn't be improvement.

I think the quote from above "Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it" hits the nail on the head. If people remember the 70's you paid 2500 for a new car, but you couldn't hop in and drive across country without a stop at a shop for a tuneup or tires or something that had broken. And you went through an exhaust every 3 years. I'll take a $2500 junker off craigslist right now over a new 1970's car if my goal is to drive to Cali and back in a week.

Scotty doesn't mind that he had to do a tuneup every 3k miles in his old cars because it took him very little time and money, and parts are cheap. But when you talk about the typical consumer who couldn't tell you where to put oil in their car, then the new cars (though more complex) are miles ahead.

 

Well said. Aside from oil changes, tires and brakes, new cars today are practically maintenance free for the first 100,000 miles.