2.3 EcoBoost Carbon Buildup

[jdogi]

Checked out the two you mentioned and now understand. Looks like Ford created a passive no-maintenance device to help limit crankcase vapors going to the intake and therefore maybe possibly limiting or slowing build up. Understand manufacturers not installing catch cans from factory due to expense and fact that most folks would not check drain maintain them...heck I bet a lot of folks don't lift the hood anymore. So this appears to be an answer for that.
My only limited experience with a DI engine is our current 2019 Subaru Forester. Not turbo, just DI. Put a catch can on shortly after driving it off the lot...maybe 500 miles on the odometer. Have about 6k now. Check the can about every 1.5k. Have gotten at most maybe 1/4 cup of condensate total in that time.
Based on the fact that a couple of times the condensate was milky or grayish colored I don't think I'd put a more baffled plate on the 2.3. In fact I venture to say I'd want no baffles! My reasoning is that baffles will condense vapors and drain them directly back into the crankcase. If what I've seen in my again very limited experience is some condensed water and/or fuel vapors I wouldn't want to be dumping that back into my crankcase. Would rather collect and condense 100% of the vapors in the can and get rid of it but again I see why Ford would create a baffled plate. I will be installing a CC with stock baffle plate.

Interesting and a good point. It's definitely not unusual to see that milkiness in both the Ford EB, VW GDI PCV catch cans, yet I've never seen any evidence of it in the oil pan. My guess is that what little water condenses and returns to the pan just vaporizes again and eventually does make it out into the can/intake.

Sponsored

 

[jdogi]

TDI = Diesel Different beast all together the fuel alone is more oil (often times called an oil burner) and even thought the ecoboost has some diesel like design items implemented they are not a direct apple to apple comparison.

Well, technically, the D TDI is "Direct"... and I have no respect for VW trademarks. So, given that... no technically TDI does not equal Diesel Any way, I suspect that everyone else knew exactly what I was talking about, given the context.

I think it's high time that we #takeBackOurAcronyms from big German auto.

 

[BroAD]

One of my biggest concerns regarding the 2.3l versus the 2.7l is the type of injection. The 2.3l has direct injection but the 2.7l has both direct & port injection. And, since the M/T only comes on the 2.3l engine, it makes this decision even more challenging.

With direct injection engines only, there is a huge concern for carbon deposits on the valves. Since direct injection only injects fuel into the cylinder, it doesn't "clean" the valve stems which causes buildup.

This is big problem with my 2012 F-150 Ecoboost 3.5l engine where I have to spray CRC Intake Valve cleaner into the engine every oil change to ensure I don't have to use an aggressive technique such as walnut blasting to remove the carbon deposits. With a direct & port injection engine, fuel is both sprayed directly into the cylinder as well as the chamber before the valves.

Jason from Engineering Explained has a great video on the differences between direct injection and direct & port injection:



Hope this helps everyone or just adds more questions to your overall decision.

 

[buildbigboats]

An extensive discussion of catch cans, carbon buildup etc in a 2.3L on the Ranger Forum. Good pictures, recommendations questions. 25 pages. I started at newest and have worked about half way back.
https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/oil-catch-can-yes-or-no.1753/page-24

 

[DrewBronc21]

An extensive discussion of catch cans, carbon buildup etc in a 2.3L on the Ranger Forum. Good pictures, recommendations questions. 25 pages. I started at newest and have worked about half way back.
https://www.ranger5g.com/forum/threads/oil-catch-can-yes-or-no.1753/page-24

Great find. I bookmarked it. Those last couple of posts with the catchcan with a couple of inches in it are pretty impressive

 

[buildbigboats]

Video of Ford Performance oil-air separator (aka catch can) for Mustang and F-150. Poster on Ranger forum speculated that Ford is working on something similar for 2.3L

 

[Rick Astley]

Is it? I've not heard that, though I haven't really looked either. I have the 2.3 in an RS, and for what it's worth my Blackstone reports have come back with no signs of fuel dilution so far.

Yes, fuel dilution is a concern for the 2.3 motor across the board. You get the extra fun of head gasket failures with your RS! (A friend has an RS and has been tracking oil the last 20K miles via Blackstone, i'll reach out to see if he can provide his results and get them to you)

Fuel dilution is a concert, it isn't an issue that all owners have issues with.

Blackstone Labs is awesome! Was using them along with BobIsTheOilGuy to dial in the oil on my '05 short-track Evo 9 while pushing the Amsoil high-zinc formula out to it's maximum lifespan (turns out it was a tick over 10K oil change intervals with only lite track use)


Here's what a quick search through our joint Ranger account yielded:

fuel dilution in 2.3 motors

Amsoil article on oil for turbo vehicles, they mention fuel dilution benefits


Thread titled "Fuel in oil" that is now over 49 pages long

 

[aabsalon]

Yes, fuel dilution is a concern for the 2.3 motor across the board. You get the extra fun of head gasket failures with your RS! (A friend has an RS and has been tracking oil the last 20K miles via Blackstone, i'll reach out to see if he can provide his results and get them to you)

Fuel dilution is a concert, it isn't an issue that all owners have issues with.

Blackstone Labs is awesome! Was using them along with BobIsTheOilGuy to dial in the oil on my '05 short-track Evo 9 while pushing the Amsoil high-zinc formula out to it's maximum lifespan (turns out it was a tick over 10K oil change intervals with only lite track use)


Here's what a quick search through our joint Ranger account yielded:

fuel dilution in 2.3 motors

Amsoil article on oil for turbo vehicles, they mention fuel dilution benefits


Thread titled "Fuel in oil" that is now over 49 pages long

But isn't the 2.3 a different variant on the ranger?

 

[Rick Astley]

Video of Ford Performance oil-air separator (aka catch can) for Mustang and F-150. Poster on Ranger forum speculated that Ford is working on something similar for 2.3L

Mishimoto has already made a setup for the Ranger that is in full production and available. That would be the rout I go with at delivery. Traditionally I have not liked Misimoto products, but they seem to have stepped up the quality of materials greatly since my Evo days (now a half decade in the past)

 

[Rick Astley]

But isn't the 2.3 a different variant on the ranger?

As we know it currently, the 2.3 will be overwhelmingly same-content between Bronco and Ranger. There are head variations (RS) and valvetrain variations (Mustang) but they will all use the same injection cycles and have the same block, geometry and base component design.

My guess is that the only changes between Bronco and Ranger will be packaging and ancillary systems (alternator/charging, oil filter relocation, oil pan shape/design if necessary, etc) plus it's ECU tuning.

 

[aabsalon]

As we know it currently, the 2.3 will be overwhelmingly same-content between Bronco and Ranger. There are head variations (RS) and valvetrain variations (Mustang) but they will all use the same injection cycles and have the same block, geometry and base component design.

My guess is that the only changes between Bronco and Ranger will be packaging and ancillary systems (alternator/charging, oil filter relocation, oil pan shape/design if necessary, etc) plus it's ECU tuning.

Are you getting the 2.3 yourself?

 

[Rick Astley]

Are you getting the 2.3 yourself?

Yup! 2.3 with manual transmission. Figure the oil catch can and some 50K maintenance to remove carbon buildup will see the engine easily going over 100K miles. It's a solid motor with just a few little issues. No engine is without it's faults, they all have a "personality".

I would be looking elsewhere if the manual transmission wasn't offered just because I really like to drive a manual (and strongly dislike the 10-speed they put in Ranger). Figure I better buy a Bronco in the first 2-3 model years before the manual gets dropped!!!! HA HA HA!!!! We all know that only 1 in 50 Broncos will be manual....

 

[kodiakisland]

Dumb question, does installing a catch can void any warranties?

Aftermarket parts and mods only void warranties to the specific parts or system they replace. In this case, what would that be? Very unlikely any issue would come from a catch can unless you did something really stupid installing it.

 

[L8apex]

Yes, fuel dilution is a concern for the 2.3 motor across the board. You get the extra fun of head gasket failures with your RS! (A friend has an RS and has been tracking oil the last 20K miles via Blackstone, i'll reach out to see if he can provide his results and get them to you)

I believe the head gasket failures was attributed to RS motors being built with Mustang head gaskets. There should be a TSB or recall for your buddies RS if it was made during the affected build dates .

 

[Rick Astley]

Dumb question, does installing a catch can void any warranties?

The full answer to your question is the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, which was established in 1975 for consumer protection. All vehicle owners who modifiy their cars should be aware of this and have it at their disposal when it comes time to modify their car or interact with dealership warranty applicaiton.

Wiki link

Sponsored