2024 intake valves

[Tim d]

1) Its a Mazda/Ford L5 engine in use since about 1990 with a different head and a turbo with DI on the EB and the Atkinson cycle valvetrain with port injection on the hybrid, and is damn near bulletproof.
2) Carbon buildup on DI engines from certain manufacturers is related to using incorrect fuel and oil. Ford does not have the problem unless you do not feed it correctly. Use the specified spec fuel and oil and you should get 1/2M miles out of this engine. BMW and Mini DI engines are messed up and are getting pretty famous for carbon. Use the wrong oil not meeting the required 961 or 962 specs, or non-TopTier fuel and you'll probably have the problem.
3) You don't need a catch can, as there is one built into the engine.
4) There is no missing turbo drain. Who stated that garbage?
5) The 25 EcoBoost has redesigned the intake manifold to allow for the addition of port injection, presumably to handle poor available fuel quality in several states. If you stick with TopTier certified fuels then the extra detergents should prevent any issues.
6) The engines are built to run on 87 octane. You do not need to waste your money on hi-test fuel ever. Some gas companies like Shell put extra detergents in their high-octane fuel instead of putting them in all grades, so take a careful look at what is in their fuel. As long as its TopTier certified fuel you don't need to worry.

Thx for the info!

Sponsored

 

[Brianx]

I know, not liking that

 

[Cherokee]

I've never seen a carbon issue on the 2.0 family.

The 3.5 GDI has had some issues on grocery getters.

Just put the pedal to the metal once a fuel tank and it'll blow itself clean.
It's the people that never go wide open that get carbon issues.

At the very least get into sport mode once every tank and
have a little fun watching the tach wildly swing about.

I like to do WOT on a steep climb now and then.

Interstate highway crawlers should have no problems.

 

[Cherokee]

The 2.0L Ecoboost engine in my opinion is rock solid and if driven and cared for properly should last me past my required life span of a quarter million miles.

The 2.5 is so underpowered you might as well buy a used Ecosport.

I drove one of those once, a dealer loaner while they replaced my 21 Bronco Sports rear end.
It was a noisy little puddle jumper. Would make a great city car or grocery getter.
As long as you and your family were really small peoples. And you didn’t need to get on the Interstate highways.

The 2L eco is great, has plenty of power for a mini pickup truck and a long track record. It needs frequent oil changes, 5,000 mile intervals should be safe.
Full synthetic even better after it’s broken in.
I’ll stay on roach oil till my 5k oil change then in goes Motorcraft full syn.

Party on my fellow fossil fuel burners :’P

 

[Timothyd]

The 2.0L Ecoboost engine in my opinion is rock solid and if driven and cared for properly should last me past my required life span of a quarter million miles.

The 2.5 is so underpowered you might as well buy a used Ecosport.

I drove one of those once, a dealer loaner while they replaced my 21 Bronco Sports rear end.
It was a noisy little puddle jumper. Would make a great city car or grocery getter.
As long as you and your family were really small peoples. And you didn’t need to get on the Interstate highways.

The 2L eco is great, has plenty of power for a mini pickup truck and a long track record. It needs frequent oil changes, 5,000 mile intervals should be safe.
Full synthetic even better after it’s broken in.
I’ll stay on roach oil till my 5k oil change then in goes Motorcraft full syn.

Party on my fellow fossil fuel burners :’P

I drove the 2.0 Mav for a year, now I have the hybrid for a year. While I did notice a slight difference when I was really pushing it in day to day operation-- no difference. Didn't tow with either although I did so some bed hauling.
Wondering about the long term longevity of the turbo.

 

[Master Blaster]

I drove the 2.0 Mav for a year, now I have the hybrid for a year. While I did notice a slight difference when I was really pushing it in day to day operation-- no difference. Didn't tow with either although I did so some bed hauling.
Wondering about the long term longevity of the turbo.

The turbo is solid, with both oil and water cooling and no coking on shutdown like much earlier turbos had. I put a bit under 200k on the earlier single-stage unit on a 2013 2.0 Fusion before I sold it, and it was really good. The only issue that I had with the 2.0 was a failure of the high pressure fuel sensor that caused the engine to quit 3 minutes after some warn-startup situations that almost caused several accidents, and cost $500 to fix after 5 dealer visits where they found no fault. I'm driving the hybrid now, with the same non-turbo engine as my 2012 and 2010 Fusions but with an Atkinson-cycle head. I agree that the engine have completely different manners, but both are highly capable for street use.

 

[Timothyd]

The turbo is solid, with both oil and water cooling and no coking on shutdown like much earlier turbos had. I put a bit under 200k on the earlier single-stage unit on a 2013 2.0 Fusion before I sold it, and it was really good. The only issue that I had with the 2.0 was a failure of the high pressure fuel sensor that caused the engine to quit 3 minutes after some warn-startup situations that almost caused several accidents, and cost $500 to fix after 5 dealer visits where they found no fault. I'm driving the hybrid now, with the same non-turbo engine as my 2012 and 2010 Fusions but with an Atkinson-cycle head. I agree that the engine have completely different manners, but both are highly capable for street use.

Okay, in 80's cars they didn't last that long but things have progressed since then.

 

[Master Blaster]

Okay, in 80's cars they didn't last that long but things have progressed since then.

I guess it depends on which engines. My highest mileage vehicle was an 87 Ranger with the original 2.8L V6 made in Germany, with 744K on it when I sold it with an emissions certification. My worst engine was in a 75 1200cc Toyota Corolla, with a cam lobe failure at 48k. My second and third worst engines were also from Toyota. I expect to get about 400k out of the Mav with the better oil and better engine management available now.

 

[Snox801]

I've had several super high mileage engines,
528,000 trouble free miles but the thing got wimpy, ya think !
394,000 blew a rear main seal due to worn out crank bearings
on an AMC engine designed in 1957 and converted
to EFI for my 1996 Jeep Cherokee.
Three Fords taken past 350,000

ALL WITHOUT Amsoil or any of the supposedly better products, seafoam, what ever.
The Cherokee was on roach oil at 5,000 mile intervals.
The 528k Tacoma was fed Mobil 1 full syn at 10,000 mile change intervals.
A buddy took his Tacoma to 500,000 on 10k intervals on the cheapest
roach oil Jiffy lube pumped out of the overhead 55 gallon barrels.
His ran stronger than mine did on Mobil 1 full syn.

All My Fords were fed Motorcraft blend when new and full syn from
the second oil change on and all sold still running like new.

Service your Maverick at the Ford Dealer, run Motorcraft parts and fluids and fagetaboutit.

The problem with your reasoning is you are comparing very old engine tecb to new stuff. You even said the jeep engine was designed in 57. What is happening now is because we have to meet new clean air standards and fuel economy. Manufacturers have to make changes that almost always reduce engine life.
you are also comparing Tacoma engine to ours. Vastly different. Those were so underpowered they should never break.
my longest lasting engine was a 2.3 in a ranger in 91. But the fact is that engine is not capable of making any power or passing emissions.

You could probably remove all the emissions and the turbo off your maverick and it would last a long time also.
So yes as technology that brings us 30-40mpg mini trucks that make very good hp we have new challenges to face. One can be carbon on the intake valves

 

[Snox801]

You are correct none were DI
I was not aware DI required anything special.
Next question how could Direct Injection be affected by Engine oil. Seems so unrelated to me.
What little I've read about DI and Port Injection shows me nothing that Indicates one engine oil is better than another.
I assumed it was all marketing tactics to get us to buy oils other than OEM

In all my miles in all my engines I've never had valves or pistons build up carbon to the point of needing attention as long as I kept a good PM schedule.

I should have asked why are the OEM Oils not good enough for DI ?

Please excuse my ignorance with DI I am just not good at asking the right questions sometimes.

Di carbon buildup is affect by engine oil. The carbon comes from oil vapor through the pcv. Either as oil being baked off form high heat or foaming. Both major hurdles for a turbo engine.

The more the oil can bake off during high heat and pressure the more will move through the pcv and attach to the back of the intake valves.
Well then we also have the issue of lspi. That is a major concern with small turbo di engine like ours.
In fact so much so that every manufacturer had to come up with new ratings for oil.
Take a look at a few threads on the focus site and you will see why oil does matter.

 

[Cherokee]

What Is ISPI ?

 

[Master Blaster]

The problem with your reasoning is you are comparing very old engine tecb to new stuff. You even said the jeep engine was designed in 57. What is happening now is because we have to meet new clean air standards and fuel economy. Manufacturers have to make changes that almost always reduce engine life.
you are also comparing Tacoma engine to ours. Vastly different. Those were so underpowered they should never break.
my longest lasting engine was a 2.3 in a ranger in 91. But the fact is that engine is not capable of making any power or passing emissions.

You could probably remove all the emissions and the turbo off your maverick and it would last a long time also.
So yes as technology that brings us 30-40mpg mini trucks that make very good hp we have new challenges to face. One can be carbon on the intake valves

All these people on this site complaining about intake valve carboning have no personal experience of it actually happening. They keet repeating stories of teardowns of 20-year-old Focus RS race-only models showing carbon. The fact is that the current 2.0 does not have this problem at all.

 

[Snox801]

What Is ISPI ?

Low speed pre ignition.
Cause by to much boost at to low of rpm with the Wong oil.
oil formulation has a lot to do also.

 

[Brianx]

For myself, my '24 valves are what they are so I use Top Tier gasoline and use full synthetic every 5K and we'll see.

 

[Snox801]

I bought my 24 in last week of March and have almost 50k on it now and my busy season is about to ramp up.
So I’ll know soon enough if I ever have an issue.

Sponsored