Long term reliability of the 2.3

[2ford]

It has nothing to do with gas and the oil .it is to stop the valves from cooking up and causing them not to close correctly. That will cause drivablity issues and a expensive repair

The coking on the valves restricts airflow which affects power, mpg etc.

Sponsored

 

[D Fresh]

if you can find a price....
googling around my area, most places want you to call for a quote, but some post prices.
i've seen $130 Canadian listed.
i gotta wonder why the call for a quote though

perhaps no two intake systems are alike and there is wide variances on labour involved to get to and clean the area??

Yep, pretty sure you hit the nail on the head. Most places will replace any gaskets removed during the process as well. Has to vary by engine/vehicle due to hours and materials. I've seen anywhere from $200-$750 quoted.

Co-worker has a newish WRX, said Subaru recommends blasting it every 30k miles and dealership does the service for roughly $400.

 

[Langwilliams]

While walnut blasting can be moderately expensive, chemical cleaners are fairly cheap. Not so sure about their effectiveness myself though.

Regardless, walnut blasting isn't that pricey.

The one article I read wasn't in favor of chemical cleaners because deposits could run through the spinning turbo causing damage when they exit the combustion chamber.

Does this walnut blasting involve removing the head? if so that price sounds crazy cheap.

I run top tier fuel to try to avoid the buildup on the valves. If anyone knows of an additive to run once a month or so I'd like to know what it is to run.

I'm wondering if anyone has ever tried viewing the valves with a borescope through the spark plug hole on a ranger with some miles on it to see the results.

Seems like someone would come up with a fog type cleaner that sprays into the intake with the motor being turned over but no firing to get a solvent on the valves, let it soak a while then start it up to burn off any deposits.

I'm not known for keeping my vehicles for a long time....4 years is a lot for me but this may change now that I'm retired.

 

[Langwilliams]

Ok I watched a video on it an see it just removes the intake. I didn't think they'd chance getting the material in the engine.

 

[D Fresh]

The one article I read wasn't in favor of chemical cleaners because deposits could run through the spinning turbo causing damage when they exit the combustion chamber.

Does this walnut blasting involve removing the head? if so that price sounds crazy cheap.

I run top tier fuel to try to avoid the buildup on the valves. If anyone knows of an additive to run once a month or so I'd like to know what it is to run.

I'm wondering if anyone has ever tried viewing the valves with a borescope through the spark plug hole on a ranger with some miles on it to see the results.

Seems like someone would come up with a fog type cleaner that sprays into the intake with the motor being turned over but no firing to get a solvent on the valves, let it soak a while then start it up to burn off any deposits.

I'm not known for keeping my vehicles for a long time....4 years is a lot for me but this may change now that I'm retired.

Ok I watched a video on it an see it just removes the intake. I didn't think they'd chance getting the material in the engine.

Yep, usually just the manifold.

I've landed on blasting over chemical if I ever need it due to the issues you've pointed out.

A fogger like that sounds nice, wish I knew of one.

 

[SFB]

Ok I watched a video on it an see it just removes the intake. I didn't think they'd chance getting the material in the engine.

I assume they would blast the valves on the compression stroke (valves closed) then vacuum out remainder?

 

[Samsquanch]

I assume they would blast the valves on the compression stroke (valves closed) then vacuum out remainder?

Bingo. They do one at a time while the intake valve is closed. There’s some fancy new system that has a vacuum hose on it which sucks the shells and carbon as they blast. I suspect any of the decent euro shops in your area could do it. I wouldn’t worry too much about the intake buildup until it becomes an issue. If the first gen 3.5 in the f150 and expedition is any indicator it might not ever become a large issue. They have sold a lot of those so there is plenty of data out there on them. Not too many reports of carbon fouling causing misfires and such. It’s a thing that can happen for sure but it’s not necessarily something you would worry about in the first 100k miles or more. Plenty of folks in f150s at 200k miles and never had walnut blasting done. The newer 3.5 solved the potential issue but even on the earlier motor there’s a ton of high miles trucks out there.

 

[Floyd]

It has nothing to do with gas and the oil .it is to stop the valves from cooking up and causing them not to close correctly. That will cause drivablity issues and a expensive repair

I guess I misunderstood your post to which I replied. Sorry to hear that your truck needs a catchcan, I don't really see the need. If I'm still around I'll report back every five years or so.
Personally I'm impressed with the OEM PCV system and expect it will be adequate for the life of the engine.

I did examine the catchcan for about a year, and considered it from every angle and heard every argument... I'm done considering a catchcan for the 2.3L Ecoboost . My truck won't be getting one and neither will my daughter's Mustang.
I do recommend Progard about every 10,000 miles though.

I really do hope you see 200,000 miles without problems... you can even attribute that to your catchcan if you want.

Anybody here have first hand experience with coked up valves on A 2.3L EB yet??

They've been around for 6 years now.

 

[Dmc]

I guess I misunderstood your post to which I replied. Sorry to hear that your truck needs a catchcan, I don't really see the need. If I'm still around I'll report back every five years or so.
Personally I'm impressed with the OEM PCV system and expect it will be adequate for the life of the engine.

I did examine the catchcan for about a year, and considered it from every angle and heard every argument... I'm done considering a catchcan for the 2.3L Ecoboost . My truck won't be getting one and neither will my daughter's Mustang.
I do recommend Progard about every 10,000 miles though.

I really do hope you see 200,000 miles without problems... you can even attribute that to your catchcan if you want.

Anybody here have first hand experience with coked up valves on A 2.3L EB yet??

They've been around for 6 years now.

You would probably need a mustang owner or a focus rs owner to answer that question. Even if it doesn't stop it fully I will be happy if it prolongs it from happiness I will be happy and well worth the cost .

 

[Floyd]

You would probably need a mustang owner or a focus rs owner to answer that question. Even if it doesn't stop it fully I will be happy if it prolongs it from happiness I will be happy and well worth the cost .

At this point I need neither, All Science is skeptical by definition, and I have examined this issue sufficiently to make an informed decision. I will remain open to further information as long as it is not second hand or anecdotal in nature.
In the mean time I expect the the same excellent service I have had in my last 14 new and dozens of used Fords, realizing that proper maintenance and operation is essential to longevity.
I do appreciate your concern, but this particular dogma has yet to be canonized.

 

[Langwilliams]

I had a 97 cobra an the 32 valve motors had dual intake runners....longer ones for low RPMs an shorter ones for higher RPM. The shorter ones were blocked by butterfly valves until a certain RPM then open in an effort to improve low end torque. The butterflies would build carbon up on them. The trick back then was to pull a vacuum line off the intake an dip it in a bottle of sea foam. Turn the key an shut it off. Let it soak for an hour or 2 then drive it like you stole it to burn the carbon out. I did this an it smoked like a train.

I'm hoping the top tier fuel an maybe a quarterly intake cleaner in the tank will prevent it for miles to come.

 

[Texasota]

I had a 97 cobra an the 32 valve motors had dual intake runners....longer ones for low RPMs an shorter ones for higher RPM. The shorter ones were blocked by butterfly valves until a certain RPM then open in an effort to improve low end torque. The butterflies would build carbon up on them. The trick back then was to pull a vacuum line off the intake an dip it in a bottle of sea foam. Turn the key an shut it off. Let it soak for an hour or 2 then drive it like you stole it to burn the carbon out. I did this an it smoked like a train.

I'm hoping the top tier fuel an maybe a quarterly intake cleaner in the tank will prevent it for miles to come.

I don’t think top tier fuel will help. With direct injection all fuel is injected directly in the cylinder’s combustion chamber which completely bypasses the intake valves. That is why they have coking issues compared to port injection fuel systems.

 

[Doc]

I don’t think top tier fuel will help. With direct injection all fuel is injected directly in the cylinder’s combustion chamber which completely bypasses the intake valves. That is why they have coking issues compared to port injection fuel systems.

Anyhoo I use 93 shell nitro ...

 

[Floyd]

I don’t think top tier fuel will help. With direct injection all fuel is injected directly in the cylinder’s combustion chamber which completely bypasses the intake valves. That is why they have coking issues compared to port injection fuel systems.

Of course top tier fuel will help.... with consistent blend stock and proper additive packages, the injectors will remain clean which will result in less fuel /oil contamination.
The fuel will also remain more consistent for better fuel management.
Clean air filters and proper oil change intervals with good oil will help as well.
Also wait until the engine has reached full operating temperature before spirited driving.
Top Tier fuel is more important for this issue than premium octane fuel.

 

[Texasota]

Of course top tier fuel will help.... with consistent blend stock and proper additive packages, the injectors will remain clean which will result in less fuel /oil contamination.
The fuel will also remain more consistent for better fuel management.
Clean air filters and proper oil change intervals with good oil will help as well.
Also wait until the engine has reached full operating temperature before spirited driving.
Top Tier fuel is more important for this issue than premium octane fuel.

Yes, top tier fuel has benefits, but I think Langley was suggesting that top tier fuel will help prevent carbon build up on the intake valves. At least that was the meaning I took from his post. It does not prevent that from happening in a direct injection fuel system as compared to a port injection system. This is a primary reason why multiple manufacturers have gone to dual injection systems.

Sponsored