Why new intake/manifold design for 2025 Maverick?

[Chapystick]

Except now word is there won't actually be any power loss.

I’ve heard many conflicts but the main point being that the power is reduced because of the added gasoline particulate filter in the new model year to meet some states emissions regulations. But apparently trucks ordered to states with no regulations didn’t get the GPF and therefore have the regular 250hp. Looking under my 25 I just got I don’t see anything other than the 2 cats, so that may have been true. I live in Iowa and my truck was ordered to a Nebraska dealership.

Sponsored

 

[FischAutoTechGarten]

So QuikRIck and FastMavericks can increase their horsepower and quarter miles without throwing error codes....

 

[Darnon]

I’ve heard many conflicts but the main point being that the power is reduced because of the added gasoline particulate filter in the new model year to meet some states emissions regulations. But apparently trucks ordered to states with no regulations didn’t get the GPF and therefore have the regular 250hp. Looking under my 25 I just got I don’t see anything other than the 2 cats, so that may have been true. I live in Iowa and my truck was ordered to a Nebraska dealership.

The point being even then engineering now believes that power will not be measurably reduced once the GPF is implemented in production.

 

[Chapystick]

The point being even then engineering now believes that power will not be measurably reduced once the GPF is implemented in production.

Didn’t notice the link, my bad.
There will be more things to clog for the people that do have it though

 

[Mark S.]

Dual injection to eliminate the valve coking... Gotcha. I'd hoped the new oil formulation/additives and a relocated PCV would have made this unnecessary.

If Ford did indeed add port injection to the 2025 2.0L engine, it did not do so because of valve contamination. "Expert" claims to the contrary, Ford solved the valve contamination issue on its direct-injection engines a long time ago. If your engine is experiencing valve contamination it's either been modified (software, downpipe, turbo, etc.) or one or more components in the EGR system have malfunctioned. From the linked article:

Peter Dowding, Ford’s chief engineer of powertrain gasoline systems, revealed a different strategy. Ford uses PI alone at idle and at low rpm for smooth, quiet, and efficient engine operation. As rpm and load increase, fuel delivery becomes a programmed blend of PI and DI. In contrast to Toyota’s methodology, Ford’s PI is always operating, responsible for at least 5 to 10 percent of the fuel delivery.

Dowding and his Ford engineering colleague Stephen Russ stress that carbon deposits on tailpipes and intake valves have never been an issue in their DI engines. Dowding adds: “Now that electric motors are being assigned increasing propulsion roles, our task is to improve engine efficiency whenever we can. Ford’s dual-fuel technology has already proven to be a valuable, cost-effective strategy in this effort.”

 

[Chapystick]

If Ford did indeed add port injection to the 2025 2.0L engine, it did not do so because of valve contamination. "Expert" claims to the contrary, Ford solved the valve contamination issue on its direct-injection engines a long time ago. If your engine is experiencing valve contamination it's either been modified (software, downpipe, turbo, etc.) or one or more components in the EGR system have malfunctioned. From the linked article:

That is a painfully objectively false claim, lol. If you have a PCV system drawing vacuum by being connected to the intake manifold and ANY oil gets through the PCV valve, it will coat the valves over time. Doesn’t matter if the engine is modified or not.
Only time will tell if the port injection at the low usage it has will keep the valves completely clean.

 

[OleKennyRoy]

No, they absolutely did it to solve valve coking, that's also why they changed the oil formulation. To suggest otherwise is simply being dishonest with one's self.

Now, if we add the caveat, within the first 36,000 miles, I might buy it. Or if they said never experience to the extent of brand X, maybe.

Every EcoBoost owner has experienced it whether they realize it or not. 2017 Focus ST bought brand new started exhibiting issues at around 40k miles with intermittent misfire during cold weather. Car was completely stock, only ever had premium (93 octane). Used CRC intake valve cleaner after at every oil change and it was better. Moved to Florida and well, it's not cold here...

Traded the car in at 12X,XXX miles for my first Maverick.

 

[Mark S.]

Every EcoBoost owner has experienced it whether they realize it or not.

This claim is as unprovable as it is unfalsifiable. I shared proof for my claim; where's yours?

 

[Chapystick]

This claim is as unprovable as it is unfalsifiable. I shared proof for my claim; where's yours?

With all do respect, your “proof” is literally “Stephen Russ stress that carbon deposits on tailpipes and intake valves have never been an issue in their DI engines.”
Which is a comically **OBJECTIVELY** false statement.

 

[Mark S.]

That is a painfully objectively false claim, lol.

I shared my proof. I've been operating Ford's with 2.0L EcoBoost engines since 2014. One had 140,000K miles before we traded it. It idled smoothly and got the same fuel mileage when we traded it as it did when we bought it.

and ANY oil gets through the PCV valve, it will coat the valves over time. Doesn’t matter if the engine is modified or not.

Ford's EcoBoost engines include an air/oil separator to prevent liquid oil getting to the valves. These engines have been in operation for over a decade. If widespread valve contamination were a problem we would know about it by now. Show me your data.

 

[Mark S.]

With all do respect, your “proof” is literally “Stephen Russ stress that carbon deposits on tailpipes and intake valves have never been an issue in their DI engines.”
Which is a comically **OBJECTIVELY** false statement.

Like I said, share your proof. These engines have been in operation for well over a decade. If there were widespread issues with valve contamination in the 2.0L EcoBoost engines there should be all kinds of reports from reputable press outlets. Please find them and report back.

 

[Chapystick]

I shared my proof. I've been operating Ford's with 2.0L EcoBoost engines since 2014. One had 140,000K miles before we traded it. It idled smoothly and got the same fuel mileage when we traded it as it did when we bought it.

I had a mazdaspeed MZR DISI, predecessor to the ecoboost. It idled smoothly and got normal fuel mileage even modified. The valves were caked to shit. Did you even look at your valves? Because that would be actual evidence.

Ford's EcoBoost engines include an air/oil separator to prevent liquid oil getting to the valves. These engines have been in operation for over a decade. If widespread valve contamination were a problem we would know about it by now. Show me your data.

If you are calling the PCV plate an AOS, I have bad news for you…
A real AOS isn’t foolproof either. You will still get oil bypass. Your best bet would be an oil catch can with filtering material and completely removing the oil buildup that enters

also, here’s multiple pictures of caked ecoboost valves, I guess

 

[Tim d]

No, they absolutely did it to solve valve coking, that's also why they changed the oil formulation. To suggest otherwise is simply being dishonest with one's self.

Now, if we add the caveat, within the first 36,000 miles, I might buy it. Or if they said never experience to the extent of brand X, maybe.

Every EcoBoost owner has experienced it whether they realize it or not. 2017 Focus ST bought brand new started exhibiting issues at around 40k miles with intermittent misfire during cold weather. Car was completely stock, only ever had premium (93 octane). Used CRC intake valve cleaner after at every oil change and it was better. Moved to Florida and well, it's not cold here...

Traded the car in at 12X,XXX miles for my first Maverick.

I almost have those miles on our maverick, we live in northern michigan, always use 87 octane, did initial and subsequent oil changes at fords recommended 5000 miles,never used a valve cleaner and no issues. Maybe the focus was a lemon?

 

[Chapystick]

I almost have those miles on our maverick, we live in northern michigan, always use 87 octane, did initial and subsequent oil changes at fords recommended 5000 miles,never used a valve cleaner and no issues. Maybe the focus was a lemon?

You can have caked valves without issues. Granted, newer engines are way less likely to have a lot of oil blow-by, but there will still be minor amounts. There’s a high likelihood you have some oil buildup on your valves and just don’t know. If it’s not causing you any serious issues, don’t worry about it too much. But it certainly wouldn’t hurt to check and have it cleaned if necessary.

 

[OleKennyRoy]

Very common on STs, I think we're seeing it less due to the oil formulation change https://www.api.org/news-policy-and...-oil-standards-good-for-consumers-environment

Sponsored