Interesting Info on the I-4 EB

[chucky2]

so enlighten us how comparing an engine and issues from ...how many years ago????? is relevent to the 2.0 eco, because there is no such thing as progress in the auto industry....I beleive thats exactly the point richard is making Chucky...no sucking up, just a call out...

 

How is it not the same thing? LOL! You think in '93, '94, '95, etc. that comparing the then off the line new 3.8L of those days that were having HG issues to the bad Ford (and Big 3 in general) of the 70's and 80's isn't the same exact concern as comparing the current Ford - who's made up of mostly the same Leadership/"Leadership" of the 90's - to the Ford of the mid to late 90's when all those engines were having HG issues???

 

It's. The. Same.

 

They're a Corp. They'll do a cost/benefit (many of them), talk on the results, and chose a direction. Maybe that direction will be extending the warranty out to 10 years/150k. Which means the people who bought $40k vehicles run that purchase out to 12 years, 15 years, 180k, and the head nukes, or something related, they'll be SOL just like the folks with 3.8L's Ford Corp. knew would fail (or have a high likelihood of failing).

 

It's amazing to me that people who prefer one Corp. over another (which is fine, I prefer Ford over GM myself) actually think that Corp. is their friend, someone who will do them no wrong, who'd never ever never ever F them over so as to not take a 5c hit on their stock price. Please people, get a grip....

 

Chuck

[RichardJensen]

it's a concern

 

What's a concern? What is 'it'?

Edited April 25, 2011 by RichardJensen

[RichardJensen]

actually think that Corp. is their friend

Because if we find your language sloppy, your comparisons faulty, your logic deficient, your conclusions incoherent, we must, of necessity, have this attitude and no other.

Edited April 25, 2011 by RichardJensen

[akirby]

the current Ford - who's made up of mostly the same Leadership/"Leadership" of the 90's

 

Ford today is so different than Ford of the 90s it might as well be a new company. EVERYTHING is different.

[Deanh]

How is it not the same thing? LOL! You think in '93, '94, '95, etc. that comparing the then off the line new 3.8L of those days that were having HG issues to the bad Ford (and Big 3 in general) of the 70's and 80's isn't the same exact concern as comparing the current Ford - who's made up of mostly the same Leadership/"Leadership" of the 90's - to the Ford of the mid to late 90's when all those engines were having HG issues???

 

It's. The. Same.

 

They're a Corp. They'll do a cost/benefit (many of them), talk on the results, and chose a direction. Maybe that direction will be extending the warranty out to 10 years/150k. Which means the people who bought $40k vehicles run that purchase out to 12 years, 15 years, 180k, and the head nukes, or something related, they'll be SOL just like the folks with 3.8L's Ford Corp. knew would fail (or have a high likelihood of failing).

 

It's amazing to me that people who prefer one Corp. over another (which is fine, I prefer Ford over GM myself) actually think that Corp. is their friend, someone who will do them no wrong, who'd never ever never ever F them over so as to not take a 5c hit on their stock price. Please people, get a grip....

 

Chuck

basing ones opinion or train of thought on technology 16 years ago is a stretch Chuck.....and may be the reason your comments are being treated the way they are, yes the 3.8 had issues, hell 16 years ago I would venture to say that most manufacturers had more issues back then than now.....agree or not? So I wouldnt say it was loyal "suck up'...its adressing seriously flawed logic....hows that Honda Diesel running?....

Edited April 25, 2011 by Deanh

[papilgee4evaeva]

How is it not the same thing? LOL! You think in '93, '94, '95, etc. (tl;dr)

THIS is why your comparison is irrelevant.

 

You're close to the people who won't buy a Ford because of the Pinto fiasco from nineteen-before-I-was-born. REALLY close.

[chucky2]

basing ones opinion or train of thought on technology 16 years ago is a stretch Chuck

 

The tech itself is meaningless, it's the Corp. mindset at the Leadership level that matters. Right now we're still too early at the "New Ford" to know if that mindset has really changed (changed = better for customers), or if it's BAU with a friendly looking face on it (Mullaly). A good indication will be how the PTU leak issues will be handled in the future, and we won't know for another year or three on that.

 

.....and may be the reason your comments are being treated the way they are,

 

I could care less how someone that spreads FUD perceives my comments on an Internet message board. I'm for what's best for me and mine, not Ford Corp. That makes me critical of decisions that don't deliver the best benefit for myself. How Ford or RJ handle that is their problem, not mine.

 

yes the 3.8 had issues

 

It's not that it had issues: Every manufacturer has issues (unless you're VAG, then you have Issues haha). It's how the issue was handled that is the problem in that case.

 

hell 16 years ago I would venture to say that most manufacturers had more issues back then than now.....agree or not?

 

Agree. But again, for me, it's Corp. Leadership mindset. And so far for outside of warranty concerns, we don't have a good barometer on if the current Ford Leadership mentality has truly changed. When someone who has a '07 Edge with a leaking PTU seal, replaced once or twice or thrice already, has it again at 200k miles, will the current Ford Leadership step up to the plate and willfully and happily replace it? Or are they going to give the Dealership's the run around, which causes them to give the customers the run around, and not handle their mistake? Too soon to tell...

 

So I wouldnt say it was loyal "suck up'...its adressing seriously flawed logic....

 

If Mullaly came out tomorrow and said that Ford has recognized they screwed up, will offer Clean Diesel's alongside Eco/Egoboost, RJ would be in here extolling the openness, honesty, and vision of The New Ford. As we've already seen, comments from Ford folks themselves debunk past RJ reasons for not bringing CD options here. I really don't know what else to call him....Shill? Cheerleader?

 

hows that Honda Diesel running?....

 

Haha, just fine in the RestOfTheWorld. Then again, their solution for here was different from other manufacturers, and wouldn't have been cost effective for the auto trans option. The better question would be, how are those VW TDI's selling (for the past 3 years)? Don't know, all I hear though is they can't keep them on the lot, and are selling for MSRP/darn close to MSRP, which for a VW ain't too bad. But, CD can't be done here, Lutz (and RJ) said so....snicker...

 

Chuck

[chucky2]

THIS is why your comparison is irrelevant.

 

You're close to the people who won't buy a Ford because of the Pinto fiasco from nineteen-before-I-was-born. REALLY close.

 

I'll tell you (and RJ) what:

 

You prove to me that all the Leadership folks who directed their underlings at Ford to handle the 3.8L matter the way they did have been fired/"early retired", to all be replaced with folks who have publically stated they've "seen the light", and I'll retract my concern*.

 

*: Somehow someone needs a clarification on 'concern'. It means it's a.) a tech concern firstly on doing something new and creative with a major component that hasn't been vetted by history, and b.) a Corp. Leadership mentality concern that if a. backfires, the customer long term is left F'd with a thousand+ repair bill that never should have happened for the life of the vehicle (and since life of vehicle will need the same clarification, that means, say, 250k, or, when the doors fall off).

 

Chuck

Edited April 25, 2011 by chucky2

[akirby]

The tech itself is meaningless, it's the Corp. mindset at the Leadership level that matters. Right now we're still too early at the "New Ford" to know if that mindset has really changed (changed = better for customers), or if it's BAU with a friendly looking face on it (Mullaly). A good indication will be how the PTU leak issues will be handled in the future, and we won't know for another year or three on that.

 

So your entire issue is that you think Ford should stand behind problems after the warranty period? Sometimes they extend the warranty like Focus engines, heater cores and coils/cops.

 

If you want additional coverage then buy it. If Ford offered longer factory coverage it would just be added to the cost of the vehicle anyway. This way you only pay for it if you want it.

 

Expecting a company to cover all repairs for known problems after the warranty period without paying anything extra is unreasonable - and unheard of for high volume mass market auto mfrs.

Edited April 25, 2011 by akirby

[Deanh]

I'll tell you (and RJ) what:

 

You prove to me that all the Leadership folks who directed their underlings at Ford to handle the 3.8L matter the way they did have been fired/"early retired", to all be replaced with folks who have publically stated they've "seen the light", and I'll retract my concern*.

 

*: Somehow someone needs a clarification on 'concern'. It means it's a.) a tech concern firstly on doing something new and creative with a major component that hasn't been vetted by history, and b.) a Corp. Leadership mentality concern that if a. backfires, the customer long term is left F'd with a thousand+ repair bill that never should have happened for the life of the vehicle (and since life of vehicle will need the same clarification, that means, say, 250k, or, when the doors fall off).

 

Chuck

its pretty easy to see haow Fords mentality AND product has changed in 16 years chuck, it isnt subtle....and judging by the lack of cars in our service drive for anything other than routine maintenece, I somehow doubt your eco reservations are warranted,,, but they are warrantied....lol. As for the TDI's...I'll call that one out, pretty easy to find pages and pages of squeeky wheels screaming issues.....

[akirby]

b.) a Corp. Leadership mentality concern that if a. backfires, the customer long term is left F'd with a thousand+ repair bill that never should have happened for the life of the vehicle (and since life of vehicle will need the same clarification, that means, say, 250k, or, when the doors fall off).

So all you're really asking for is a lifetime bumper to bumper warranty. For free. Yeah, right.

[papilgee4evaeva]

I'll tell you (and RJ) what:

 

You prove to me that all the Leadership folks who directed their underlings at Ford to handle the 3.8L matter the way they did have been fired/"early retired", to all be replaced with folks who have publically stated they've "seen the light", and I'll retract my concern*.

Since it's impossible to know who told who to do what when and how, that's a fool's errand. And even if someone could dig that (probably very sensitive) information up from two decades ago, I have a feeling that you'd still dismiss it based on some other baseless nitpick.

[chucky2]

So all you're really asking for is a lifetime bumper to bumper warranty. For free. Yeah, right.

 

If it's been leaking, replaced or or two or three times, d@mn straight. That's not a factory component that was troublefree for 200 or 250k, and finally starts leaking. That's a multi event F up from Ford, that comes back to haunt the customer yet again.

 

Big difference.

 

Chuck

Edited April 25, 2011 by chucky2

[chucky2]

Since it's impossible to know who told who to do what when and how, that's a fool's errand. And even if someone could dig that (probably very sensitive) information up from two decades ago, I have a feeling that you'd still dismiss it based on some other baseless nitpick.

 

Which is why I said it'd be a concern of mine. Note the word 'concern' and the meaning of it. I didn't say nightmare, I didn't say doom, etc. etc. I just said concern.

 

If the 2.0L Ecoboost can put up the "diesel-like" numbers it's purported to have (Ecoboost is the reason/excuse afterall that CD just isn't possible here, even though it is), at say $2k or less for the 2.0L I-4 option vs. the normal V-6, it will be something I'll be buying when I'm due for another new vehicle.

 

But until there are many 250k 2.0L I-4 EB's running around w/o issue, I'll still have those concerns, until the real customer usage of the design is vetted by history.

 

Chuck

[chucky2]

its pretty easy to see haow Fords mentality AND product has changed in 16 years chuck, it isnt subtle....and judging by the lack of cars in our service drive for anything other than routine maintenece, I somehow doubt your eco reservations are warranted,,, but they are warrantied....lol.

 

That is indeed good news, that your bays are empty of non-maintenance work - truly great news. But, the 2.0L I-4 EB hasn't even been released yet, so, we'll get to see how that goes - long term. I actually don't have major issues with Ford's product for the past 16 years, except for some specific items. All things considered, I'd still rather have a 16 year old Ford (non-3.8L) than a 16 year old GM or Chrysler.

 

As for the TDI's...I'll call that one out, pretty easy to find pages and pages of squeeky wheels screaming issues.....

 

For the TDI's, you need to seperate out the VW from the TDI - which is hard. About the only large issue with the VW TDI is the HPFP, which is a total disaster. But, again, is that VW? Or is that TDI? I tend to say VW, because I don't recall hearing about any BMW or Mecedes CD issues with their HPFP's...

 

Chuck

[Deanh]

That is indeed good news, that your bays are empty of non-maintenance work - truly great news. But, the 2.0L I-4 EB hasn't even been released yet, so, we'll get to see how that goes - long term. I actually don't have major issues with Ford's product for the past 16 years, except for some specific items. All things considered, I'd still rather have a 16 year old Ford (non-3.8L) than a 16 year old GM or Chrysler.

 

 

 

For the TDI's, you need to seperate out the VW from the TDI - which is hard. About the only large issue with the VW TDI is the HPFP, which is a total disaster. But, again, is that VW? Or is that TDI? I tend to say VW, because I don't recall hearing about any BMW or Mecedes CD issues with their HPFP's...

 

Chuck

I admit to having reservations regarding the 3.5 eco...now I can wholeheartedly say i have none/ zero/ zilch/ and nada. Not ONE SHO has come back and the car/ engine is going on 2 years...ZERO issues...and now with implementation in the F-150 I would say confidence is high, even at corporate. When a manufacturer releases drivetrains in several lineups ( Flex/ SHO/ F-150 ) it speaks loudly, so I have no qualms about the 2.0 or the 1.6 being readied for release at all. Besides that it would be technology SUICIDE, something I sincerely doubt Ford would want any part of. As for the VW/ TDI...its both, VW is just a lousy manufacturer with reliability issues, the cars are great but nightmares for Daddys everywhere...because its blatantly obvious young Girls LOVE em. BMW/ Mercedes diesels....low volume, high ticket items are few and far between, so word doesnt get out if there actually ARE issues.....same can be said for Veyrons....not many out there, dont here much do we?.....

[akirby]

If it's been leaking, replaced or or two or three times, d@mn straight. That's not a factory component that was troublefree for 200 or 250k, and finally starts leaking. That's a multi event F up from Ford, that comes back to haunt the customer yet again.

 

Big difference.

 

No - it's not. A defect is a defect and a warranty is a warranty. If you want factory warranty coverage then you can buy it. If you don't want to buy it then you pay for the repairs or you get rid of the vehicle. That's how ALL vehicle warranties work.

 

Sometimes Ford extends warranties on their own. If not then it's up to you.

 

I had a 2003 Aviator with the 4.6 DOHC engine. It has a design flaw that sometimes causes the head to lose compression and requires replacement. Ours was replaced once under warranty and rather than buy the extended warranty we chose to get rid of it (for other reasons as well). I didn't whine about how Ford should cover everything. I knew the warranty and I made my choice accordingly.

 

You want extended warranty coverage for free and that ain't happening from anybody.

[papilgee4evaeva]

But until there are many 250k 2.0L I-4 EB's running around w/o issue, I'll still have those concerns, until the real customer usage of the design is vetted by history.

Again, it'd be a fool's errand to try to wait that long. 250K miles under normal driving (approx. 15K miles per year) would equal 16 years of driving. The vast majority of drivers don't keep cars that long, especially if they're cars that would be using the 2.0EB.

 

But hey, if you don't want to test it out, fine. Many more will do it for you.

[RichardJensen]

You prove to me

Where's your proof that there's a connection?

 

You make an accusation, you furnish proof. That's how it works.

 

As I said, your sloppy reasoning does not prove that I am, or that anyone else is a fanboy. That in itself is incredibly sloppy reasoning.

Edited April 25, 2011 by RichardJensen

[jpd80]

The tech itself is meaningless, it's the Corp. mindset at the Leadership level that matters. Right now we're still too early at the "New Ford" to know if that mindset has really changed (changed = better for customers), or if it's BAU with a friendly looking face on it (Mullaly). A good indication will be how the PTU leak issues will be handled in the future, and we won't know for another year or three on that.

That's only your timetable and your opinion, nobody here should even try to convince you otherwise.

If you don't trust Ford, then that's your business but please don't let your prejudices spill over,

you then become as bad as the the Ford cheer leaders you criticize.

 

People are coming back to Ford in droves, even in this still subdued market buyers are willing

to spend more than ever on their new Fords. I too will be interested at how quickly Americans

adopt new technology engines like Ecoboost I-4, the threat of even higher gas prices will burrow

away in people's mind and work wonders for sales as buyers invertible over spend buying more

vehicle and options they don't really need.

 

The real game changer is when Ford starts dropping serious weight out of it vehicles in a couple of years time,

couple that with the engine efficiency gains being rolled out today and the face of US vehicles will change completely.

[battyr]

Once the Exhaust gas exits the piston it's second last job is to turn the turbine, at the same time heat is absorbed from the exhaust by positioning the turbo housing in and around the cylinder head and cooling water channels. This also means that some of the now cooler gas can be drawn off and redirected into the combustion chamber on the next power stroke to absorb peak exhaust temperature and allowing much higher compression, boost and ignition while reducing the formation of NOX.

 

In the past, motor companies have tried to cool exhaust gas away from the exhaust system but always seem to run into problems with small passages needed for releasing heat coking up quickly. By cooling the gas slightly in the exhaust, they achieve mostly the same thing with more reliability and less plumbing.

 

It's funny to see commentators struggle with Ecoboost, they want to believe it just Turbo, Direct Injection and VCT but the "secret sauce" that makes it work so well eludes them, how come it's way better than anything put out by GM or Hyundai?

The answer is software, program management and strict control of parameters and use of increased EGR to control detonation under lean boost is the key. Normally, turbo engines under boost run much richer to avoid engine damage but using lean boost technology, the small Ecoboost engines operates detonation free on regular fuel and reacts like a large capacity engine on part throttle.

 

The engine also goes into Atkinson cycle under low load, making it act like an even smaller engine. This is the reason why the 2.0 Ecoboost in the Mondeo achieves even better fuel economy than the base LX 2.3 I-4, significant capacity reduction is achieved increasing the efficiency gains and giving diesel like fuel economy.

This makes much more sense. This is the type of thing that I was suspecting, but it was not stated.

[Extreme4x4]

What a very odd conversation. It started with a neat technical and engineering tidbit, and ended with the claim that any problem area of a vehicle should be covered for 250K miles...................... for free.

 

Wow. Talk about a stretch.

 

Based on Chucks "burden of proof," analysis, it amazes me that he can ever buy any vehicle. It would have to be a vehicle that is virtually unchanged for 16 years, to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it can reliably pass the magical 250K mile standard.

 

Might I suggest a good pair of walking shoes??

[Extreme4x4]

Oh, I forgot.

 

A couple of tidbits on Mike Levines PUTC ecoboost article.

 

The trailer that the 5.0 towed, and the one that the Ecoboost towed, were not the same. Yes, they weighed the same. The 5.0 had a V nose trailer, the Ecoboost had a blunt nose. This makes a huge difference in wind resistance, and there was alot of wind when he did that test.

 

As for the dumping of fuel. In the owners manual for the Ecoboost F150, it states that if you are doing sustained high heat or heavy towing, you should use Premium. Mike did not use any premium. All of his towing was done with regular. Based on that, yes, the system would dump more fuel under high strain, to protect itself. If premium had been used, with its higher resistance to detonation (read, slower burn), it is likely that the mileage would have been alot better.

 

Mike plans on doing a side by side towing/empty test between the EB and the 5.0, with equal trucks. This would end the speculation. The funny thing being, the 5.0 guys are desperate to paint the EB as a sham, or show that somehow Ford has artificially limited the 5.0 to let the EB shine. They latched onto this test as proof positive that the 5.0 is the better towing engine. They completely forget that the two vehicles were not tested at the same time, on the same course, or with the same trailers.

 

This is akin to me comparing 1/4 mile times between Firebird raceway in AZ, to those at Englishtown, and saying it proves something. All that it proves is 2 cars were driven at a track, just like the EB vs 5.0 tests prove that both are capable towers. The details are muddled at this point.

[chucky2]

I admit to having reservations regarding the 3.5 eco...now I can wholeheartedly say i have none/ zero/ zilch/ and nada. Not ONE SHO has come back and the car/ engine is going on 2 years...ZERO issues...and now with implementation in the F-150 I would say confidence is high, even at corporate. When a manufacturer releases drivetrains in several lineups ( Flex/ SHO/ F-150 ) it speaks loudly, so I have no qualms about the 2.0 or the 1.6 being readied for release at all. Besides that it would be technology SUICIDE, something I sincerely doubt Ford would want any part of. As for the VW/ TDI...its both, VW is just a lousy manufacturer with reliability issues, the cars are great but nightmares for Daddys everywhere...because its blatantly obvious young Girls LOVE em. BMW/ Mercedes diesels....low volume, high ticket items are few and far between, so word doesnt get out if there actually ARE issues.....same can be said for Veyrons....not many out there, dont here much do we?.....

 

Does the 3.5L also have this unique head design that the 2.0L will have, or is traditional?

 

Other than VW's HPFP issue, haven't heard of any diesel specific issues for the TDI's...but man, having the HPFP issue out of warranty is like the kiss o death...

 

Chuck

[chucky2]

No - it's not. A defect is a defect and a warranty is a warranty. If you want factory warranty coverage then you can buy it. If you don't want to buy it then you pay for the repairs or you get rid of the vehicle. That's how ALL vehicle warranties work.

 

Sometimes Ford extends warranties on their own. If not then it's up to you.

 

I had a 2003 Aviator with the 4.6 DOHC engine. It has a design flaw that sometimes causes the head to lose compression and requires replacement. Ours was replaced once under warranty and rather than buy the extended warranty we chose to get rid of it (for other reasons as well). I didn't whine about how Ford should cover everything. I knew the warranty and I made my choice accordingly.

 

You want extended warranty coverage for free and that ain't happening from anybody.

 

No, I never said I expected Ford to bump their official factory or ESP (which I do buy) warranties out to crazy high levels. What I said was that when there's known issues, the mentality of Ford Leadership should be that they're going to a.) solve those issues and b.) make sure the customer isn't F'd over by them for the life of the vehicle. And to do that properly, Ford Leadership's mentality can't be thinking the car is junked by the customer at 100k so that's all they have to worry about it for too. It may be shocking to some, but, there are lots of people that keep their bought new cars (which Ford Leadership hopefully has an interest selling more of in the future to the same people having issues today) for more than 5 years and 100k miles. Even more shocking is that these people don't part with $1500 like it's buying a Slurpee, that money means something to them. So when their 8 year old Taurus with 140k on it has it's 3rd head gasket blowout, the first two covered under warranty, they're not thinking, "Wow, this completely troublefree car that I gave Ford lots of money for just blew it's first ever head gasket - must be a freak case! I'll head on down to the Ford dealership and have them overcharge me by about 25% so I can give them some of my hard earned money on an issue they had no clue about, and pay for my rides first ever head gasket repair. Man, I really want to buy another Ford!"

 

Somehow, I don't think it's unreasonable for Ford to be stepping up to the plate there - at the Corp level, not hit or miss Dealership/Stealership level - and making it right with the customer.

 

You apperantly don't. How that helps Us (people not a multi-Billion$$$ Corp), I'm not sure, but apperantly you do. To each their own...

 

Chuck

Edited April 27, 2011 by chucky2