Ford Ecoboost Engine Failure (TWICE)

[mk2driver]

Captain Muppet said:

Ben gaffney said:

I am a physiotherapist by trade with academic qualifications in chemistry and physiology.

I'm a CEng with a BEng, design engines for a living, have designed cylinder heads with integrated exhaust manifolds (IEMs) for two OEMs and I wrote a report on the Honda IEM patent about ten+ years ago.

Ben gaffney said:

... He said exhaust manifolds tend to be very hot components of a car, indeed “red hot” if the car is running at full power as might happen travelling up a large hill or mountain. He expected a “steam jacket” would surround the exhaust manifold from boiled coolant. The steam jacket would actually prevent the liquid component of the coolant from coming into contact with the exhaust manifold while the car is running at full power. Then when backing off from full power, the exhaust manifold would cool just enough for the steam jacket to dissipate allowing coolant to come into direct contact with the metal of the manifold. Due to the higher heat conductance of metal to water than steam to water, this would cause the dramatic spike in temperature observed...

I didn't do the Ford head, but I've done others. They don't work the way Mike thinks they do.

Exhaust manifolds glow red hot because they have 900 degree C air inside and nowhere for that heat to go except the nice insulating air around the outside of the manifold. So the manifold gets up to 600-700 degrees.

If you integrate the manifold into the cylinder head the heat can go into your coolant jacket, so it doesn't get red hot, in exactly the same way that exhaust ports in traditional cylinder heads haven't got red hot since shortly after the invention of the internal combustion engine.

Maybe more heat gets rejected into the coolant, but not a quantum leap in heat rejection. In fact a tightly designed IEM can have less internal surface area than a poorly designed traditional head (far fewer geometry restrictions due to loads of manifold fasteners).

You design the coolant jacket around the manifold to keep the velocity high enough to stop local hot spots causing steam pockets (so the coolant is never in the same place long enough to get too hot), yet never so fast that it can't absorb enough heat to cool the head or start to cavitate. This is the same process that is used for coolant jackets around traditional exhaust ports and combustion chambers.

Ben gaffney said:

Did not the designers of the ecoboost engine test it properly?

After initial design you go through several iterations of analysis and redesign, then several phases prototype testing until your production design passes the validation tests (durability, thermal cycle, vehicle testing, etc).

So to answer your question, no, the designers don't test it at all, but the development team do, and nothing gets to production without passing the corporate targets for durability. Just like it's been for decades.

Ben gaffney said:

Did they not care if these engines failed inside or worse still just outside warranty?

Yes, obviously you care if an engine fails. Best case you get dragged down to the test cell and shouted at, worst case is fire. Nothing gets my attention like an engine failure - you want to make damn sure whatever went wrong gets fixed.

Plus I know a few guys who worked on the K-series, poor bds.

As for the warranty, let me explain again to the internet how durability testing works. You set a target of 200,000miles, 300,000km, whatever. You test to that target, and strip the engine down to inspect everything and check it's within the pass criteria. No one tests beyond the targets. No one ever designs to make something fail just after that target. It's just impossible to design for that sort of controlled targeted failure in a complex mechanical system, and there is no motivation to try. I take it as a technical compliment but moral insult that anyone ever suggests it. I'm not a software engineer FFS.

After the durability target has been passed you should be left with a perfectly serviceable engine, but no one, not the designers, development team or Mike from your local garage will know what happens next because no one has the data.

Even if you worked on the project you'll only know about things that went wrong within the targets which were then beefed up - so they are not likely to be the thing that fails next.

Plus no one wants failures after warranty. No one benefits, except Mike in your local garage, who even if they are a franchised dealer won't be passing a penny back to the engineers who designed, tested and built the engines. It's just paranoia, except for those Renault headlight design guys who get 50 quid every time a Megane needs a new bulb.

It's ok though because Mike has "fixed" it for him by fitting a thermostat with a lower opening temp by the sounds of it lol!

Thanks for your post, I read the post about the "fix" and got annoyed so didn't reply. I work in powertrain for an OEM, not in engine design but calibration but have a Mech Eng degree specialising in engines

[Mercury00]

[Ben gaffney]

Thanks Captain Muppet and mk2driver,

Can I ask you Captain Muppet what the purpose of Honda developing and integrated exhaust manifold? I have had two Honda civics that I sold in working order at 300,000 Km.

With regard to mk2driver's comment that Mike fitted:

"...a thermostat with a lower temp by the sounds of it."

Mike did do this, but it wasn't enough to prevent the extraordinary temperature rise noted. So Mike changed the coolant return pathway to prevent coolant going straight from the head back to the water pump bypassing the radiator. Mike estimated 3/4 or so of the coolant was not traveling to the radiator. So he changed coolant pathway to make all the coolant flow to the radiator before it went to the water pump after it reached the new lower thermostat controlled operating temperature. This intervention prevented the temperature spiking noted.
Would this be something you would have considered doing if you had just had a replacement engine that overheated and blew a head gasket at 33,000 Km?

[amstrange1]

I certainly wouldn't be significantly changing the cooling loop designed and validated by an OEM's engineering team based on "estimates" from a back street know-it-all. If it cacks itself again, how do you think your warranty claim is going to go when they notice that Mike's been modifying things?

[mk2driver]

Ben gaffney said:

Thanks Captain Muppet and mk2driver,

Can I ask you Captain Muppet what the purpose of Honda developing and integrated exhaust manifold? I have had two Honda civics that I sold in working order at 300,000 Km.

With regard to mk2driver's comment that Mike fitted:

"...a thermostat with a lower temp by the sounds of it."

Mike did do this, but it wasn't enough to prevent the extraordinary temperature rise noted. So Mike changed the coolant return pathway to prevent coolant going straight from the head back to the water pump bypassing the radiator. Mike estimated 3/4 or so of the coolant was not traveling to the radiator. So he changed coolant pathway to make all the coolant flow to the radiator before it went to the water pump after it reached the new lower thermostat controlled operating temperature. This intervention prevented the temperature spiking noted.
Would this be something you would have considered doing if you had just had a replacement engine that overheated and blew a head gasket at 33,000 Km?

No I wouldn't, as others have pointed out an OEM goes to huge lengths to validate engine durability.

Unfortunately due to the nature of an engine being mechanical and made up of hundreds of components, sometimes things fail. That can be down to any number of things including but not limited to supplier quality issues, tolerance stack ups, build issues etc.

Obviously an OEM does not want even one engine to fail but given the fact that there will be a normal distribution on all of these things described above and therefore the engines themselves there will be failures.

Sometimes there are fundamental issues with design but I don't think the Ecoboost is one of them given the sheer number of them on the road. You always hear of the failures but nobody shouts about them when they don't.

For what it's worth I also drive an Ecoboost Fiesta and it has been 100% reliable although there is only 10,000 miles on it

[bobbo89]

NickCW said:

Got a few friends who are mechanics at Ford, not heard of any issues since the coolant pipes were replaced.

Brother in law works for Ford and I can only echo this

[DCLXIV]

Ben gaffney said:

Thanks Captain Muppet and mk2driver,

Can I ask you Captain Muppet what the purpose of Honda developing and integrated exhaust manifold? I have had two Honda civics that I sold in working order at 300,000 Km.

With regard to mk2driver's comment that Mike fitted:

"...a thermostat with a lower temp by the sounds of it."

Mike did do this, but it wasn't enough to prevent the extraordinary temperature rise noted. So Mike changed the coolant return pathway to prevent coolant going straight from the head back to the water pump bypassing the radiator. Mike estimated 3/4 or so of the coolant was not traveling to the radiator. So he changed coolant pathway to make all the coolant flow to the radiator before it went to the water pump after it reached the new lower thermostat controlled operating temperature. This intervention prevented the temperature spiking noted.
Would this be something you would have considered doing if you had just had a replacement engine that overheated and blew a head gasket at 33,000 Km?

So the engine reaches an operating temperature that Mike has determined, based on the fact that he thinks he knows better than Ford's engine design team. At this point, the coolant from the head goes straight to the radiator regardless of temperature, meaning that there is no further control of head temperature. This totally won't result in it running cold, causing poor performance and increased emissions resullting in a potentially shortened life for some components due to running for an extended period below the temperature they were designed for.

All this to avoid a failure caused by a faulty part, which has already been found and corrected by Ford.

Kind regards, an engine design engineer

Edited by DCLXIV on Saturday 9th July 20:53

[M4cruiser]

As it's an EcoBoost thread, may I say that this engine in the Fiesta "does my head in" anyway, and I'd always prefer a 1.25 4-cylinder.

But the EcoBoost seems to work much better in the Focus.

[Ben gaffney]

Thanks again for everyone's thoughts.

With regard to the recall of the known fault in the ecoboost focus, there was no such recall for the fiesta.

With regard to the emissions being higher now the engine runs cooler, I wonder if the drive towards lower emissions while still maintaining high power wasn't what led to the relatively high operating temperature for the ecoboosts that left them vulnerable to the kind of engine failure that I and others have experienced

I can't see how ensuring my engine meets with its emission standards could be a realistic concern of mine if the temperatures required mean the cylinder head coolant temperature reaches as high as 182 deg C.

With regard to the modifications causing too low a temperature, is not this mainly a concern at start up and/or in sub 0 deg C ambient temperatures? Would not a 5 to 10 min warm up before driving in a location with ambient temperature averaging between 9 and 30 deg C be adequate for engine longevity as it was for my two long lived Hondas?

DCXIV and others what maximum cylinder head coolant temperature would you feel most comfortable with in your car, 182 or 88 deg C?

Kind regards,

Ben gaffney

[valiant]

I could be wrong but wasn't the ecoboost engine in the Fiesta launched after the Focus and with the upgraded degas hose hence the lack of recall on the Fiesta?

The dodgy hose only affected early ecoboost engines as far as I'm aware.

[Otispunkmeyer]

oakdale said:

Mr2Mike said:

rovermorris999 said:

Indeed. It is eminently possible for there to be localised hotspots while the overall temperatures and pressures are within 'normal' limits.

It's not possible for there to be either water or steam present at 182 Celsius under typical cooling system pressures. Saturated steam at 182C requires about 10bar pressure.

Edited by Mr2Mike on Thursday 7th July 14:27

Who mentioned saturated steam?

The figures you are quoting are the saturation point of steam in the presence of water when the whole body of water is being heated.

With localised heating, superheated steam can exist at lower pressure if the local heating of the water causes cavitation and therefore insulation of the steam from the coolant.

There are agricultural soil sterilizers that emit 200 deg c superheated steam at atmospheric pressure.

Presumably there is glycol in there. It knocks a good 1000 J/kgK off the heat capacity meaning the fluid can heat up a little quicker than water. Plus it increases the saturation temperature though only by about 10 deg C for 50/50 mix.

[DCLXIV]

Ben gaffney said:

DCXIV and others what maximum cylinder head coolant temperature would you feel most comfortable with in your car, 182 or 88 deg C?

Whichever temperature Ford designed the engine to run at, ran computer aided analysis to verify, durability tested on an dyno and in vehicle and calibrated the performance and emissions against.

[Megaflow]

Ben gaffney said:

Thanks again for everyone's thoughts.

With regard to the recall of the known fault in the ecoboost focus, there was no such recall for the fiesta.

With regard to the emissions being higher now the engine runs cooler, I wonder if the drive towards lower emissions while still maintaining high power wasn't what led to the relatively high operating temperature for the ecoboosts that left them vulnerable to the kind of engine failure that I and others have experienced

I can't see how ensuring my engine meets with its emission standards could be a realistic concern of mine if the temperatures required mean the cylinder head coolant temperature reaches as high as 182 deg C.

With regard to the modifications causing too low a temperature, is not this mainly a concern at start up and/or in sub 0 deg C ambient temperatures? Would not a 5 to 10 min warm up before driving in a location with ambient temperature averaging between 9 and 30 deg C be adequate for engine longevity as it was for my two long lived Hondas?

DCXIV and others what maximum cylinder head coolant temperature would you feel most comfortable with in your car, 182 or 88 deg C?

Kind regards,

Ben gaffney

Sorry, but your 'expert' is wrong. To achieve a water temperature of 182 deg C without boiling, the cooling system would have to be pressurised to approx 12 bar, opposed to a more normal 1.5 bar. Ford are not going to sell a car with a 12 bar cooling system, the additional cost to make a cooling system capacble of 12 bar would be huge.

Also, if the cooling system was under 12 bar of pressure, when the hose in question failed, there is going to be no doubt it failed the very second it failed and people wouldn't be driving around with no coolant until the engine dies.

Interestingly, 182 deg F converts to 83 deg C...

[J4CKO]

M4cruiser said:

As it's an EcoBoost thread, may I say that this engine in the Fiesta "does my head in" anyway, and I'd always prefer a 1.25 4-cylinder.

But the EcoBoost seems to work much better in the Focus.

So the more powerful torquier engine does your head in when in a Fiesta, but not in a Focus, er, how does that work ?

Even the most powerful 1.25 is only 82 bhp and 84 lb/ft vs 100 bhp and 130 lb/ft ?

We had one as a courtest car, a 1.25, felt a bit lame after an Ecoboost.

weirdly, getting insurance quotes for my son, the Ecobbost was cheaper to insure than the less powerful 1.25, surely it just cant be done on capacity these days ?

[Mr2Mike]

J4CKO said:

So the more powerful torquier engine does your head in when in a Fiesta, but not in a Focus, er, how does that work ?

Even the most powerful 1.25 is only 82 bhp and 84 lb/ft vs 100 bhp and 130 lb/ft ?

The 1.25 was a really revvy little engine though, it made the old fiesta a lot of fun to drive. Most average drivers either don't want to, or unable to use a gearbox properly, so unless an engine makes loads of torque at low/mid RPM they will complain it feels slow.

[Ben gaffney]

Thanks again for everyone's thoughts.

With regard to the recall of the known fault in the ecoboost focus, there was no such recall for the fiesta.

With regard to the emissions being higher now the engine runs cooler, I wonder if the drive towards lower emissions while still maintaining high power wasn't what led to the relatively high operating temperature for the ecoboosts that left them vulnerable to the kind of engine failure that I and others have experienced

I can't see how ensuring my engine meets with its emission standards could be a realistic concern of mine if the temperatures required mean the cylinder head coolant temperature reaches as high as 182 deg C.

With regard to the modifications causing too low a temperature, is not this mainly a concern at start up and/or in sub 0 deg C ambient temperatures? Would not a 5 to 10 min warm up before driving in a location with ambient temperature averaging between 9 and 30 deg C be adequate for engine longevity as it was for my two long lived Hondas?

DCXIV and others what maximum cylinder head coolant temperature would you feel most comfortable with in your car, 182 or 88 deg C?

Kind regards,

Ben gaffney

[Ben gaffney]

Whoops accidental re-posting sorry. For what's worth my money's on a cooler running engine as modified by mike vine, a turbocharger specialist since 1975. I think the thermo cycling ecoboost with the exhaust manifold integrated in the cylinder head to lower emissions is vulnerable to inadvertent excessive temperatures spiking up to 360 deg F / 182 deg C in the cylinder head coolant.

I speculate this may be more of a problem for people that live on hills or mountains, which may explain why some of thes engines, that is, the ones that don't travel up steep hills before being switched off, have displayed longevity. High ambient temperatures such as in the tropics, eg, Thailand, or sub tropics like myself, south east Queensland Australia, may also be a factor.

Whether mike vine's intervention leads to my engine getting to 300,000 km like my two previous Hondas, only time will tell. Perhaps someone else will do some measurements like Mike Vine did and post their results.

Australians do modify things to make them last longer. Look what the RAAF did to keep their F111s operational for 40 years! Ha ha.
Kind regards and thanks again for everyone's input,
Ben gaffney

[EcoboostNightmare]

For anyone that has the Engine Failure / Blown Head Gasket due to Faulty Coolant System Issue on the 2012 or 2013 Focus EcoBoost 1.0L engine - please join my group

https://www.facebook.com/groups/FordEcoboostNightm...

I am going to head to head with Ford and also raising this with Trading Standards, Watchdog etc.

[valiant]

I'm not on FB but I presume you suffered a failure?

Has the recall work been done on your car prior to the failure? Did you receive the recall notice and what did Ford say when the failure happened?

[PeteB0]

PeteB0 said:

Thanks; I'll check ETIS this evening if I haven't had anything in the post. I purchased direct from FMCo so you'd hope they have my details...

Checking ETIS last year = no recall notification.

My DEGAS pipe (original, defective plastic job) at the weekend in rural Wales. No damage done luckily as it was timed very well and got towed home by the AA.

It's booked in tomorrow with the dealers who have been servicing since new, who maintain that the car is outside of the recall. A phonecall to Ford customer relations again says outside of recall, but the VIN is firmly in the right vintage, and the part is clearly the old one (brittle to the touch). I've made it pretty clear to them that the part should have been replaced FoC under the service recall, and I have no intention of accepting liability for the dealer costs this week.

I quite look forward to them trying to argue this one...