UPR Catch Can Contents at 25K Miles

[dtech]

Are you nuts? Uhhhhhh the 2.3T is actually really badass. Crazy good power and mpg, no oil consumption, very high longevity and durability. Toyota, Jeep, etc. are all garbage in comparison to the Cleveland 2.3T. The fuel and water in the oil is absolutely normal for a turbo in the winter. Do some research ??

I know you said "etc" but I certainly would have named Hyundai , cheaply made engines. Agree on the 2.3t overall design but some stuff like the coil moisture issue and egr issues could have been avoided with a little more focus.

Sponsored

 

[awd.nv]

Are you nuts? Uhhhhhh the 2.3T is actually really badass. Crazy good power and mpg, no oil consumption, very high longevity and durability. Toyota, Jeep, etc. are all garbage in comparison to the Cleveland 2.3T. The fuel and water in the oil is absolutely normal for a turbo in the winter. Do some research ??

What is the story with calling it the Cleveland 2.3L? Reminds me of the 351c

 

[theprinceofsnj]

I put on a catch can, to help reduce the buildup of carbon on the intake valves. My mechanic empty's it every oil change.

 

[GhostStrykre]

What a garbage engine design. Couple that with their stellar transmission and you can tell Ford saw us coming. Jus' sayin'.

my understanding is that there isn't an engine in existence that doesn't see moisture (environmental factors like humidity making a big deal here) make it past the piston rings and back into the crank case. lots and lots of manufacturers rely on owners ensuring that their vehicle gets up to operating temperature (above water's boiling point) so the moisture can evaporate and then pass out of the vehicle like other gasses.

so the water and other little bits of whatever substances finding their way to the catch can doesn't surprise me. probably present in every engine. they're all designed to pass it in some way or another, and some are better than it at others. which brings me to my point: i'm unaware of anyone having an engine failure on the 2.3L that the conclusion was that a catch can would have solely prevented the failure.

it's already difficult enough on manufacturers getting people to change their oil and do regular maintenance. introducing a catch can that has to be emptied regularly would find ford, or any manufacturer, getting blasted for being "high maintenance." i genuinely don't know if any mass production vehicle in existence right now came from factory with a catch can that needs emptying regularly. i'd be curious to know if one exists.

anyway, those are my thoughts in response to you saying the 2.3L is a garbage engine design. i actually think it's pretty good, but that's just my opinion. the transmission? yeah.. that could've been a lot better. i won't argue with you there. then again, i'm at 75k miles, every now and then the old girl gets rowdy and i tell her to calm down and she does. that's worked for me thus far.

 

[TJC]

my understanding is that there isn't an engine in existence that doesn't see moisture make it past the piston rings and back into the crank case

Your statement is worded as an "absolute" and it is true. But rarely are things black and white.

Back in the day ring tensions were much tighter in the cylinder, and much much less moisture made it into the crankcase. Modern manufacturers have reduced the ring tension in engines in search of higher gas mileage goals which does allow much more moisture into the crankcase.

Remember ring compressors and wooden mallets / hammers to drive piston into cylinders. Now a days you can squeeze the rings with your fingers while simply pushing the piston in. Sloppy loose.

 

[GhostStrykre]

Your statement is worded as an "absolute" and it is true. But rarely are things black and white.

Back in the day ring tensions were much tighter in the cylinder, and much much less moisture made it into the crankcase. Modern manufacturers have reduced the ring tension in engines in search of higher gas mileage goals which does allow much more moisture into the crankcase.

Remember ring compressors and wooden mallets / hammers to drive piston into cylinders. Now a days you can squeeze the rings with your fingers while simply pushing the piston in. Sloppy loose.

oh wow, this is a learning experience for me today. i didn't realize ring tension played into fuel economy. i'll have to go read up on it. very interesting!

 

[got3fords]

oh wow, this is a learning experience for me today. i didn't realize ring tension played into fuel economy. i'll have to go read up on it. very interesting!

It's probably the biggest source of friction in the engine.

 

[Rocketeer61]

my understanding is that there isn't an engine in existence that doesn't see moisture (environmental factors like humidity making a big deal here) make it past the piston rings and back into the crank case. lots and lots of manufacturers rely on owners ensuring that their vehicle gets up to operating temperature (above water's boiling point) so the moisture can evaporate and then pass out of the vehicle like other gasses.

so the water and other little bits of whatever substances finding their way to the catch can doesn't surprise me. probably present in every engine. they're all designed to pass it in some way or another, and some are better than it at others. which brings me to my point: i'm unaware of anyone having an engine failure on the 2.3L that the conclusion was that a catch can would have solely prevented the failure.

it's already difficult enough on manufacturers getting people to change their oil and do regular maintenance. introducing a catch can that has to be emptied regularly would find ford, or any manufacturer, getting blasted for being "high maintenance." i genuinely don't know if any mass production vehicle in existence right now came from factory with a catch can that needs emptying regularly. i'd be curious to know if one exists.

anyway, those are my thoughts in response to you saying the 2.3L is a garbage engine design. i actually think it's pretty good, but that's just my opinion. the transmission? yeah.. that could've been a lot better. i won't argue with you there. then again, i'm at 75k miles, every now and then the old girl gets rowdy and i tell her to calm down and she does. that's worked for me thus far.

Yep. My wife is used to me muttering "Find a gear already." I notice that the "improved" 10R80 supposedly has upgraded parts. I won't hold my breath waiting for a recall so that we can all enjoy the rewards of being beta testers.

 

[fusseli]

What is the story with calling it the Cleveland 2.3L? Reminds me of the 351c

They are made in the Cleveland, OH engine plant.

 

[fusseli]

I know you said "etc" but I certainly would have named Hyundai , cheaply made engines. Agree on the 2.3t overall design but some stuff like the coil moisture issue and egr issues could have been avoided with a little more focus.

For certain, or GM and their engines that burn oil and throw rods. My favorite are probably the prized but also gutless Toyotas. Driven a Tacoma or 4runner? They are terrible. The EB, especially 2.3, is an absolute champ in comparison to the competition IMO.

 

[LawnMM]

I put on a catch can, to help reduce the buildup of carbon on the intake valves. My mechanic empty's it every oil.

Mind asking your husband what they charge for that service? I'm curious what I'm saving ?

i'm unaware of anyone having an engine failure on the 2.3L that the conclusion was that a catch can would have solely prevented the failure

I'm unaware of anyone being molested by Bigfoot while camping in the woods, but I still bring a gun

it's already difficult enough on manufacturers getting people to change their oil and do regular maintenance. introducing a catch can that has to be emptied regularly would find ford

They aren't introducing it, it's already there. It's on the driver's side of the engine, and it doesn't have to be emptied because it just dumps the contents into the oil sump if I remember correctly.

Probably why people complain about their oil smelling like fuel. That alone is reason enough for me to add one in front of the factory model I can empty BEFORE the one on the side of the engine fills with crap and starts recirculating it through the motor ? via the oil pump.

I actually JUST emptied this out of mine today after noticing a little extra smell in the engine bay.

That ain't a cup of coffee. It's mostly water/condensation as we've had a bunch of moisture in Colorado the last week. Then mix in some oily congealed goo and a little bit of fuel and bingo! Ecoboost hot cocoa!

 

[GhostStrykre]

Mind asking your husband what they charge for that service? I'm curious what I'm saving ?


I'm unaware of anyone being molested by Bigfoot while camping in the woods, but I still bring a gun


They aren't introducing it, it's already there. It's on the driver's side of the engine, and it doesn't have to be emptied because it just dumps the contents into the oil sump if I remember correctly.

Probably why people complain about their oil smelling like fuel. That alone is reason enough for me to add one in front of the factory model I can empty BEFORE the one on the side of the engine fills with crap and starts recirculating it through the motor ? via the oil pump.

I actually JUST emptied this out of mine today after noticing a little extra smell in the engine bay.

That ain't a cup of coffee. It's mostly water/condensation as we've had a bunch of moisture in Colorado the last week. Then mix in some oily congealed goo and a little bit of fuel and bingo! Ecoboost hot cocoa!

you do you, boo

Sponsored