CarbonSteel's Journal

[PWillette]

@PWillette - getting closer. Have both sending units now. OEM uses an o-ring so I will need to see if the OEM opening in the block is machined in any special way versus the adapter.

The OEM sending unit does have a flat shoulder so I could use a copper or aluminum gasket to seal if the o-ring presents a problem.

More to follow...

Sounds like everything coming together...appreciate the update!

Sponsored

 

[CarbonSteel]

Added the Ford hitch and the Ford Accessories (Lumen) 4/7 pin connector and wiring harness. It was fairly straight forward and @Mr Toad's videos were a big help. The connectors were a serious PITA more from orienting the wires into them in the correct way versus anything else. This document will be a great resource as well - Lumen Trailer Tow Harness Installation Instructions.

A few deviations--I wrapped the entire harness with another layer of harness electrical tape for additional protection and I tossed the zip ties that were provided and used metal tab locking zip ties to ensure they would not loosen.

I had to remove both driver's side fender well liners (front and rear), there is no way that I could have routed the wiring, connected the ground at the rear wheel well and added all of the wiring to the two main connectors without doing that. I did have one casualty which was one of the fender flare locks lost one of its ears:

I had planned for that and bought some spares. I also bought more of the fender liner plastic screws from Amazon and they are better than the OEM.

I did not remove the wheels and I think it is fine to leave them in place. Otherwise, the module installation was simple and there is no need to remove interior side panel, you can move it to the side and gain enough clearance. I did use my own mounting nuts (6mm x 1.0 serrated flange nuts) versus the garbage that Ford supplies.

While I have the rear bumper off (I have seen that you do not have to remove the bumper to install the hitch and that is not possible given the length of the hitch bolts), I plan to run the stainless flex hose for the rear air compressor mount and the wiring for the rear axle temperature sensor.

One issue that I had is the right rear parking sensor connector would not fully engage (though I thought that it did) and so I had a parking sensor error when I started it back up. A little WD-40 in the connector solved it.

A few photos:

From the back of the 7 pin connector:

Passing by the fuel filler lines:

Ground connection:

Headed towards the front:

At the front body mount:

Routed inside the front fenderwell:

Connectors inside the front fender:

All complete:

 

[CarbonSteel]

Thought I would post a few things about filters, fluids, and oil change intervals. As some of you have surmised, I am more than a bit meticulous about maintenance and I am not suggesting that anyone should follow my regimen.

There are many ways to arrive at the same destination and nothing wrong with following the OEM recommendations if that is what works for you.

These are things that I have done through the years and for most (even many) may be overkill, but fluids and filters are cheap as compared to the cost of components. I also send every fluid change out to have an analysis done which gives me great insight into how well an oil holds up in a particular engine, transfer case, transmission, or axle.

UOAs have also detected issues typically before any other method would and has saved me a few times. Again, overkill for most everyone, but we all waste money on vices and hobbies and this is just mine. I do not claim to be an expert so use this information at your own choosing. The data for filters are for the 2.7L Ecoboost engines.

FILTERS:​

Air Filters:

Of the three typical filters on a vehicle (air, oil, and cabin), more thought can be placed into oil filter selection when the air filter plays a vital role in oil life. Sounds a bit crazy, right? If you consider the main thing an air filter traps is silicon and when silicon finds its way into an engine, it is an abrasive that accelerates wear and subsequently oil contamination.

A UOA will give you the amount of silicon (once the break-in residuals have made their way out) and when silicon begins to increase, then either there is a leak (faulty seal or tear in the media), or the filter has loaded up to the point where it is allowing silicon to pass through.

Unlike an oil filter, an air filter becomes more efficient as the surface of the media becomes loaded right up to the point of it needing replacement. Which is to say, many of us replace the air filter far too soon. Visual inspections will show if the media has torn or failed, but the only way to determine if a filter has reached the end of its life is with a restriction gauge which most, if not all, of us never use.

Here is a good example of one (WIX 24801):

So, what are we looking for in a great air filter? One that has been tested using ISO 5011 and has a stated efficiency level of 99% or higher and is not so restrictive that it impedes air flow into the engine. We also do not want to err on the side of too little restriction since that typically means the filter is allowing silicon to pass through in larger quantities. This can be a tall order because unlike oil filters, not many air filter manufacturers in the automotive sector publish these numbers.

Here is an air filter spreadsheet that I created with all of the common filters I could find for the 2.7L Ecoboost. There are not as many out there as there are oil filters. I am not a fan of oiled gauze filters because the increased flow comes at a price--less filtration and given the 2.7L has twin turbochargers, you absolutely want to trap as much silicon as possible.

In addition, one can take the chance of ruining air intake components such as the mass air flow sensor (MAF) or manifold absolute pressure sensor (MAP) by adding too much oil to the filter. It is a delicate balance between enough oil to trap contaminates versus too much which finds its way into the intake system. For me, it is not worth it and so if I choose to deviate from the OEM brand, I would use a very high quality dry synthetic media filter instead such as the aFe Dry S, Purolator One, or S&B Dry Extendable as they all use synthetic media.




Oil Filters:

I have spent hundreds of hours digging into the minutiae of oil filter construction, reviewing dissections, and overall filter quality. I tend to collate filter quality into 3 categories--media quality and efficiency, overall construction quality, and cost.

For many things, short of having access to a multimillion-dollar lab and a controlled testing environment, we have to rely on industry standards and specifications and to some degree customer reviews. For filter media, if I do not see an efficiency rating listed using ISO 4548-12 standards, I am left (as are all of you) guessing at how efficient a particular filter is.

Filter efficiency refers to a measure of a filter’s ability to collect and retain particles of a specific size. For example, if a filter can collect and retain 95% of particles that are 25 micron-sized or larger, the filter can be said to be 95% efficient at 25 microns. In other words, a micron rating of 25 at 95% efficiency. The same filter may also be able to collect and retain 20% of particles that are 5 microns or larger. In a such case, the filter can be said to be 20% efficient at 5 microns or have a micron rating of 5 at 20% efficiency.

What you are seeking is something on the order of ≥99% efficiency at 20 microns. Filters that have this level of efficiency are typically the best in their class with the exception of bypass filtering systems which can go down to 2 microns, but such systems are typically not cost effective for the average user.

We also have to keep in mind there are different media types such as cellulose, cellulose-synthetic blends, and full synthetic. The best filters will have full synthetic media because it typically has a higher efficiency rating and can trap more contaminates for a longer period of time versus a cellulose counterpart.

So, what does this mean for me? It means that if I want "the best" that may not be "the cheapest" choice and could mean (depending upon my chosen oil change interval) that I am wasting part of the filter's life. How's that? Imagine using a 12-foot ladder to climb out of a 4-foot-deep hole. Would a 4 or 5-foot ladder have sufficed? The same applies for some filters whereas if a filter has a stated service life of 20,000 miles and it is changed at 5,000-mile intervals, you may be choosing a filter that far exceeds your needs.

That is, of course, unless there are features the 20K filter provides that a lesser filter does not, and you are willing to accept the cost delta between the two. This is exactly my use case; I want the best filtering I can buy with the best media there is without worrying about cost (within reason).

So that brings us to filter choices. Which is best? It all depends...

For those seeking maximum filter efficiency with very durable media, you will certainly be looking for a mesh backed synthetic media filter. There is also unbacked synthetic or synthetic blend media as well as cellulose media.

Here is an oil filter spreadsheet that I created with all of the common filters I could find for the 2.7L Ecoboost with the highest efficiency synthetic backed media filters at the top.

FLUIDS:​

Engine Oil:

Some of the most spirited conversations that I have either been in or observed have been related to engine oil. Everyone has their favorite "flavor" and within reason all of them accomplish the exact same thing. In the days of MPI fuel injection, longer oil change intervals were possible. I, myself, ran 15K mile and beyond runs between oil changes. However, to do so requires close monitoring of the TBN (total base number) to ensure that active additive remains in the oil that can neutralize the acids which are created as a by-product of combustion. With that said, such long drain intervals are not feasible with the engines and fuel delivery systems of today.

Direct injection systems will result in most, if not all, such engines suffering from fuel dilution that causes the viscosity of the oil to be substantially reduced as the miles are stacked on. Even more so in the winter or if short tripped whereas the oil does not reach proper operating temperatures for a long enough period of time to cause the extra fuel to evaporate. The 2.7L engine has dual injection--both MPI for low and medium speed operation and DI for high speed or heavy load operation. The intent of MPI was to reduce fuel dilution, though from my minimal experience thus far, I am still seeing fuel dilution.

Which may cause a question--what is fuel dilution? Simply put, fuel dilution indicates the amount of raw, unburned fuel that ends up in the crankcase of an engine. The fuel contaminates the oil and lowers its viscosity and flash point, creating friction-related wear almost immediately by reducing film strength.

Why are direct injection engines more susceptible to fuel dilution versus their multi-port injected (MPI) counterparts? Truth be told, even MPI engines can suffer from fuel dilution, but it typically does not happen at levels that impact the oil viscosity. DI engines on the other hand, attempt to improve engine efficiency by injecting fuel directly into the cylinder, allowing for tighter control of the combustion event. It can leave the engine more prone to dilution if the fuel washes past the rings into the oil sump.

As noted in the above linked page, the industry has established some general guidelines for acceptable percentages of fuel dilution, and they are:

• Gasoline engines: 2.4% maximum
• Diesel engines: 3.4% maximum

These limits are somewhat conservative, because I have seen some engines (particularly early DI designs) reach levels greater than 5% in both fuel types while not displaying signs of excessive wear. Ultimately, additional wear will occur at some point and it can depend on how long the diluted oil remains in the engine.

To put this into better context, note the amount of fuel that is in the oil in the spreadsheet below based upon percentage of fuel dilution versus sump size (I used 6 quarts--192 ounces as the base):



With that in mind, I want an oil that does a number of things, namely:

1. Remains in grade, meaning that at the end of the run it still has the viscosity of an xW-30 oil and has not either sheared or become diluted to a viscosity less than xW-30.

2. Has an adequate Total Base Number (TBN) level at the end of the run meaning that it still has some active additive in it and is still neutralizing combustion by-products that are created which contain acids.

3. Is a full synthetic and is one of the upper tier synthetics such as Castrol, Kendall, Mobil 1, Pennzoil, Valvoline, and the like. I have never seen a need to go to a boutique (Amsoil, Red Line, Royal Purple) type engine oil.

4. Is readily available and is not overpriced.

I was not impressed at all with the Motorcraft Synthetic Blend that was the factory fill in my 2.7L. In less than 1,000 miles, it was already an xW-20 viscosity. For those who run the factory fill until the iOLM says change it, the oil would be far too thin to provide adequate protection in a high-output twin turbocharged engine. Needless to say, Motorcraft engine oil is not on my approved list.

For me, this is why UOAs are so important so that data is available to make informed decisions. For example, the fact that fuel dilution caused the viscosity to drop below the range of an xW-30 which is 9.3 to 12.5 cSt @ 100°C was learned as a result of a UOA.

The factory fill was 8.9 cSt @ 100°C in 1,000 miles. To ensure the oil remains in grade, I would want to choose one from the sheet below that is closer to 12.5 versus 9.3 unless the OCI is quite short or UOAs are used to monitor viscosity reduction.

Here is an engine oil spreadsheet that I created with most of the oil brands that meet the Ford specification--which is not to be confused with APPROVED by Ford. The WSS specification is not very difficult to meet and in the specification itself (I purchased it so that I could have a better understanding of what it takes to meet it), the two requirements that it states is API SP and ILSAC GF-6A. Nearly every oil on the shelf these days can meet those specifications, but of course, one must choose the oil they are comfortable using.



Transfer Case Fluid:

Because there are no combustion by-products in a transfer case and temperatures are typically moderate, I have never seen a need to use a special fluid or even a synthetic. It is inherently better to replace the fluid on a more frequent interval versus buying a high dollar synthetic and stretching the interval. Keep in mind that a transfer case has a non-pressurized and non-filtered oil supply and short of magnetic fill/drain plugs catching iron based wear metals, the only thing to remove all wear metals is to change the oil.

Based upon the above, I will stick with Motorcraft Mercon LV fluid. It is relatively inexpensive, readily available, and typically holds up well. There are a number of other fluids that are approved by Ford as shown in the spreadsheet below:




10R60 Automatic Transmission Fluid:


This is a fluid where I will rarely, if ever, deviate from the OEM. Definitely not a fan of multi-vehicle or "one-size fits all" fluids. Because they have to work in a multitude of transmissions, there is compromise everywhere and I have no desire for those compromises to impact the operation or longevity of my transmission. Attempting to save a few dollars typically results in having to spend exponentially more.

In the case of the 10R60 that uses ULV fluid, there are only 3 choices which have been approved by Ford and I suspect that Conoco/Phillips 66 (who also makes Kendall) is making the Motorcraft branded fluid for Ford as they have typically for the Motorcraft engine oil.

Here is a spreadsheet with the details of the ULV fluids:




7MT Manual Transmission Fluid:

As with the transfer case and the axles, the oiling system in a manual transmission is neither filtered or pressurized. In addition, like an axle, there are high physical shearing forces present as the gears are pressing the fluid in and out of them thousands of times per minute. This ultimately results in a reduction of viscosity of the fluid as well as wear metal contamination over time. The only way to remove the wear metals and restore the viscosity is to replace the fluid.

Rotating gear sets typically produce the majority of the wear metals during the first 10K miles of operation and taper off despite longer runs between oil changes. For me, this is why it is important to change fluids early in such equipment. Though, if one feels more comfortable following the OEM recommendations, one simply needs to be aware there is no such thing as a "lifetime fill" unless one considers the eventual failure said lifetime.

There are not a lot of choices for alternatives for the OEM fluid and none of the alternatives have Ford approval. For this reason, personally, I would not deviate from the OEM fluid. There is likely little to be gained and if anything, and since the Ford fluid is a full synthetic, it will be robust. If someone knows of additional fluids that should be added to the list, please PM me.

Here is a spreadsheet with the details of the DCT fluids:




Axle Fluids:

Second only to engine oil discussions, the passion surrounding gear oil selection is often a well debated one--sometimes with merit, other times not so much. Dana 44 Advanteks are stronger than their predecessors, in some areas, and the same in others, but there are still issues. For example, in the rear axle, in order to reduce the ring gear size from 8.89" (226MM) to 8.66" (220MM) and retain the same strength, Dana changed the metallurgy and the teeth angle. The latter was to reduce noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH). In doing so, from my observations, a few things happened due to these changes.

- They produce more wear metals for longer periods of time than any other axle I have used or maintained. The Ford 9.75" axle in my F-150 FX4 was fully broken in by 15K miles and produced less and less metal despite longer runs between oil changes. This is how a typical axle should behave--not so with the Dana 44 Advanteks.

- They run much hotter than previous generations. This could be due to a number of things such as the reduction of fluid capacity (though Ford has a decent amount in its rear axles) and the reduction of fluid viscosity. Dana specifies 75W-140 in all of their Advantek axles, but OEMs (in the quest for CAFE credits aka higher feelt MPG) often reduce the viscosity in an attempt to save a few drops of fuel.

- Not Dana's fault, but the OEMs also choose to install an axle that meets minimum requirements. Think about it, the rear axle under your non-Raptor Bronco is smaller than a 1980s Ford Mustang. Which do you think has the higher load on it? Ford would have been wise to install a D44 (220) in the front of all non-Raptor Sasquatch models and a D50 (Raptor size ring gear axle) in the rear. The Raptor should have had D60s in the front and rear (6 or 8 bolt axle flanges).

The heat generated by these axles (even unloaded) versus previous generations is substantial. In the Jeep Wrangler (which shares the same rear D44 as the Bronco--Jeeps front axle has a slightly larger ring gear; 210MM versus 190MM), the higher temperatures combined with a reduction of fluid capacity and viscosity has resulted in higher failure rates.

Here is a prime example. This is my (now retired) 2019 Rubicon running down the highway, unloaded at 75MPH at 95°F ambient temperatures. I saw upwards of 250°F at times and the primary reason that I run 75W-140 gear oil in my axles. I am in the process of adding a temperature gauge for the rear axle in my Bronco.

So, where does that leave us? Well, you can increase the axle fluid capacity by installing a cover that holds slightly more. This could extend your oil change interval, but like transfer cases and manual transmissions, the oiling system in an axle is not filtered or pressurized and is subject to dramatic shearing forces--the ring and pinion are crushing the oil as it moves in and out of the teeth which means the oil viscosity can be reduced. If you start with a low viscosity oil, there is nowhere to go but lower from the moment you install it in the axle.

The best practice would be to change the fluid early and often to remove all of the wear metals and then settle into a reasonable oil change interval after that. I would not run anything but 75W-140 oil in the rear and the same in the front if one desires. In no case, would I run a conventional oil or anything less than 75W-110.

Here is a spreadsheet with the details of the various gear oils:




Which brings us (finally) to oil change intervals. For the person who has leased their vehicle or does not plan to keep it for any length of time, please accept my apologies for you having to read this far. Forget everything that you have read and simply change your engine oil (only) when the system tells you to, add fuel, change the tires, and drive it. Turn it in or sell it and move to the next vehicle. None of this applies to you and the "lifetime fill" for everything except the engine is "good enough".

For those who plan to keep their vehicles for quite some time or "forever" (I tried to have the Wrangler be my forever vehicle, but the 3.6L in it quickly saw to it that I would soon be starring in the sequel to Tom Hanks' Money Pit, so it had to go), then this entire post is likely for you. With said, there are plenty of people who never do any of this and their vehicles last a long time. Whether that is coincidence, pure luck, or a testament to the OEMs quality, is anyone's guess.

Hopefully, though, the OCIs listed below have a logic to them given the information that I have shared under each subsequent section above. Again, I am not suggesting that anyone follow my regime. It has been called out as overkill, over maintenance, and unneeded extra expense. For the casual off-roader or pavement prince/princess owner, that may be 100% accurate.

For me and given the cost of everything except fluids and filters and my time, I am confident that if something breaks, it will not be due to poor maintenance or inferior quality maintenance products.

OIL CHANGE INTERVALS (OCI):

Front And Rear Axles

​

OCI Number​	Fluid Mileage​	Vehicle Mileage​
1​	2,500​	2,500​
2​	2,500​	5,000​
3​	5,000​	10,000​
4​	10,000​	20,000​
Subsequent​	30-50,000​	---​

Engine

​

OCI Number​	Fluid Mileage​	Vehicle Mileage​
1​	1,000​	1,000​
2​	1,000​	2,000​
3​	3,000​	5,000​
Subsequent​	5,000​	---​

Transfer Case

​

OCI Number​	Fluid Mileage​	Vehicle Mileage​
1​	2,500​	2,500​
2​	2,500​	5,000​
3​	5,000​	10,000​
4​	10,000​	20,000​
Subsequent​	30-50,000​	---​

7MT Manual Transmission​

OCI Number​	Fluid Mileage	Vehicle Mileage
1​	2,500​	2,500​
2​	2,500​	5,000​
3​	5,000​	10,000​
4​	10,000​	20,000​
Subsequent​	30-50,000​	---​

10R60 Automatic Transmission

​

OCI Number​	Fluid Mileage​	Vehicle Mileage​
1​	10,000​	10,000​
2​	1,000​	11,000​
3​	1,000​	12,000​
4​	1,000​	13,000​
5​	2,000​	15,000​
Subsequent​	50,000​	---​

Ford Bronco 10R60 Capacity vs. Old Fluid Remaining With Each Change

​

Fluid Change Number​	Total Fluid Capacity​	Total Old Fluid Remaining​	Percentage Of Old Fluid Remaining​
1​	13.1​	8​	61.07%​
2​	13.1​	8​	37.29%​
3​	13.1​	8​	22.77%​
4​	13.1​	8​	13.91%​
5​	13.1​	8​	8.49%​
6​	13.1​	8​	5.19%​
7​	13.1​	8​	3.17%​
8​	13.1​	8​	1.93%​
9​	13.1​	8​	1.18%​
10​	13.1​	8​	0.72%​

I will leave you at this point with my chosen fluids and filters. Please let me know if anyone has any questions, I am happy to answer them and help in any way that I can.

Front Axle	Amsoil Severe Gear	75W-110 or 75W-140
Engine Oil	Mobil 1 ESP	0W-30 (Year Round)
Engine Oil Filter	Fram Endurance	FE-11955
Engine Air Filter	Undecided	Undecided
Transfer Case	Motorcraft	Mercon LV
Transmission Fluid	Motorcraft	Mercon ULV
Transmission Filter	Motorcraft	L1MZ-7A098-A
Rear Axle	Amsoil Severe Gear	75W-140

​

 

[87-Z28]

Wow. I think you may be even more of a nerd than I am. that’s a compliment by the way. Love it. Thanks again for doing most of my homework.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Wow. I think you may be even more of a nerd than I am. that’s a compliment by the way. Love it. Thanks again for doing most of my homework.

You are welcome.

I still have some editing to do, but wanted to save it to prevent losing it in a draft.

 

[redone17]

Wow. Incredible post. Lots of crossover information for the 2.3L. Obviously, the only difference being the oil filter. We have a thread discussing those options for anyone interested.

I appreciate the attention to detail. While I’ve been researching extended warranties - I feel like this is a better solution and would be more apt to follow a slime regimen than invest in “insurance” that is a warranty. The Bronco was my first new vehicle and already I would have done a few things differently even at 30k. But, thanks for posts like this I get to learn a ton. So, thankful for that.

S&B also make a dry air filter. I’ve been running that for the past 5k or so. So far, so good. But, I won’t get another UOA for 5k miles or so. I have the aFe in the Ranger. I only have one UOA on that vehicle so far (bought it used at 28k).

Thanks for the effort you put into these spreadsheets.

Any thoughts on fluids for manual transmissions? I know it’s not your priority - but do you share the same opinions with sticking to OEM?

 

[CarbonSteel]

Wow. Incredible post. Lots of crossover information for the 2.3L. Obviously, the only difference being the oil filter. We have a thread discussing those options for anyone interested.

I appreciate the attention to detail. While I’ve been researching extended warranties - I feel like this is a better solution and would be more apt to follow a slime regimen than invest in “insurance” that is a warranty. The Bronco was my first new vehicle and already I would have done a few things differently even at 30k. But, thanks for posts like this I get to learn a ton. So, thankful for that.

S&B also make a dry air filter. I’ve been running that for the past 5k or so. So far, so good. But, I won’t get another UOA for 5k miles or so. I have the aFe in the Ranger. I only have one UOA on that vehicle so far (bought it used at 28k).

Thanks for the effort you put into these spreadsheets.

Any thoughts on fluids for manual transmissions? I know it’s not your priority - but do you share the same opinions with sticking to OEM?

I missed that S&B dry media air filter on their site (now added)--thanks for that. I added a section for manual transmissions and will insert some data there soonest!

 

[KRAKEN]

Lots of terrific info... thanks for compiling & sharing.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Just a few steps left to install the trailer brake controller followed by some Forscan work and the 7/4 pin trailer wiring, trailer hitch, and trailer brake controller project will be complete!

No way was I going to drill a hole in the console and do all of the work to route the wiring to it. It would be in the way and stick out like a sore thumb there...

 

[CarbonSteel]

Made a run down to New Mexico and grabbed a modular bumper for $200. Has a few scratches, but nothing some paint won't fix and it included the sensors.

Picked up a set of BRaptor driving/fog lights for $150 locally that included the covers.

Just need to follow @2door+ @flip's post on how to install the lights and I'll be on the way.

 

[redone17]

It really is a nice bumper. I think it’s designed extremely well.

 

[CarbonSteel]

And just like that, the mechanical part of the trailer towing wiring, hitch, and brake controller work is complete!

 

[flip]

Nice score.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Nice score.

I may need your assistance, kind sir, on the fog light wiring. The capable bumper lights are two wire and the Raptor lights are four wire. I'll have to build an adapter like 2Door did.

 

[CarbonSteel]

@redone17 - let me know if you have any questions; the manual transmission stuff is there and the document is complete (for now).

https://www.bronco6g.com/forum/threads/carbonsteels-journal.86135/post-2174811

Sponsored