[BigNorm4Life]

I think GM and Ford too dropped the ball on rectifying this issue... It is a real issue

Some of y'all are gonna call me crazy... But when it comes to Direct Injection ... Toyota's method on carbon issues is quite genius

I believe the Tech is in the Lexus 200NX with its turbo charged 4 and The Lexus RX series 3.5L V6... Along with the Toyota Tacoma and soon to be Highlander next year

How Toyota mitigated carbon issues on its DI engines is that it's actually runs a dual mode fuel system... Port injection which coats the back sides of the valves in fuel while at a stop light or idling but during load or WOT.. It's direct injection for maximum efficiency

GM should have not only implemented This tech in the LT series engines.. But also across the whole damn engine lineup... This goes for Ford as well. It's kinda funny cause FCA is also looking into DI but have the slightest idea on how to deal with carbon issues so they are taking their time as well with its development

Me honestly.. I think the whole top tier gas thing is bullshit! For my Fusion with its 1.6 Ecoboost engine... I already run 93 in it and that's enough, your not gonna run into too much carbon issues running premium gas... I just run Penzoil Platium Ultra Full synthetic every 10k miles and 2 bottles of techron every 10-12 gas runs.. What techron is usually 2 for $8 at autozone lol

You guys think DI is a nuisance... Wait until camless engines are the norm lol

[Lucely Engineered]

BMW's have had the carbon issues for many years. It is usually fixed with walnut blasting in mileage intervals. It was not expensive and not that big of a deal.

[BigNorm4Life]

Originally Posted by Lucely Engineered

BMW's have had the carbon issues for many years. It is usually fixed with walnut blasting in mileage intervals. It was not expensive and not that big of a deal.

How does that work in a reciprocal engine? In a turbo fan engine it's lovely.. We just run the engine lol

Edit Here's a video, pretty cool

But that would be a pain in the ass to do every say 30,000 miles... GM should offer a free maintenance plan like BMW that include this... Or make it cost no more than $150 plus labor

[Modshack]

Originally Posted by Lucely Engineered

BMW's have had the carbon issues for many years. It is usually fixed with walnut blasting in mileage intervals. It was not expensive and not that big of a deal.

VW/Audi as well.....50K is the general mileage when this needs to be done. Over on the VW forums there have been extensive tests with/without catch cans, and the conclusion is it makes no difference ...

[Boilermaker128]

Originally Posted by BigNorm4Life

How does that work in a reciprocal engine? In a turbo fan engine it's lovely.. We just run the engine lol

Edit Here's a video, pretty cool

But that would be a pain in the ass to do every say 30,000 miles... GM should offer a free maintenance plan like BMW that include this... Or make it cost no more than $150 plus labor

Good for profit since it can be a lengthy job to do right. Hard to say what intervals though, could use a boroscope to get an idea of how bad it is. I've got 230,000km on my DI engine, never a problem with it, nothing done for prevention, owned it from new, not planning to blast it unless some signs start to appear (mpg drop, power lose, stuttering)

[Mr. Wyndham]

Originally Posted by BigNorm4Life

Me honestly.. I think the whole top tier gas thing is bullshit! For my Fusion with its 1.6 Ecoboost engine... I already run 93 in it and that's enough, your not gonna run into too much carbon issues running premium gas... I just run Penzoil Platium Ultra Full synthetic every 10k miles and 2 bottles of techron every 10-12 gas runs.. What techron is usually 2 for $8 at autozone lol

What does the Octane rating of fuel matter to carbon buildup?

[mikeSS]

Originally Posted by Mr. Wyndham

What does the Octane rating of fuel matter to carbon buildup?

It burns cleaner, but even at that point it not like it makes a huge difference.

[mikeSS]

Originally Posted by BigNorm4Life

I think GM and Ford too dropped the ball on rectifying this issue... It is a real issue

Some of y'all are gonna call me crazy... But when it comes to Direct Injection ... Toyota's method on carbon issues is quite genius

I believe the Tech is in the Lexus 200NX with its turbo charged 4 and The Lexus RX series 3.5L V6... Along with the Toyota Tacoma and soon to be Highlander next year

How Toyota mitigated carbon issues on its DI engines is that it's actually runs a dual mode fuel system... Port injection which coats the back sides of the valves in fuel while at a stop light or idling but during load or WOT.. It's direct injection for maximum efficiency

GM should have not only implemented This tech in the LT series engines.. But also across the whole damn engine lineup... This goes for Ford as well. It's kinda funny cause FCA is also looking into DI but have the slightest idea on how to deal with carbon issues so they are taking their time as well with its development

Me honestly.. I think the whole top tier gas thing is bullshit! For my Fusion with its 1.6 Ecoboost engine... I already run 93 in it and that's enough, your not gonna run into too much carbon issues running premium gas... I just run Penzoil Platium Ultra Full synthetic every 10k miles and 2 bottles of techron every 10-12 gas runs.. What techron is usually 2 for $8 at autozone lol

You guys think DI is a nuisance... Wait until camless engines are the norm lol

Heres one thing I will never understand.

IF this problem was so bad, and wide spread. If engines are seeing problems around 50k miles or less. That means GM would be running into warranty claims left and right from customers complaining. I don't understand how GM is still making these engines if they have to paid dealerships to clean millions of engines over the warranty period. Which is 5 years/60k miles. well within enough time to see problems.


I can understand If the engine loses like 10-20HP, or maybe a few MPG drop. over a reasonable amount of miles, most customers won't be able to tell. From what people say on many forums, there isn't going to be any engines running to 100k miles anymore without a manual carbon cleaning.

[BigNorm4Life]

Originally Posted by mikeSS

Heres one thing I will never understand.

IF this problem was so bad, and wide spread. If engines are seeing problems around 50k miles or less. That means GM would be running into warranty claims left and right from customers complaining. I don't understand how GM is still making these engines if they have to paid dealerships to clean millions of engines over the warranty period. Which is 5 years/60k miles. well within enough time to see problems.


I can understand If the engine loses like 10-20HP, or maybe a few MPG drop. over a reasonable amount of miles, most customers won't be able to tell. From what people say on many forums, there isn't going to be any engines running to 100k miles anymore without a manual carbon cleaning.

I got two logical answer to that

1.Keeping the parts department busy and profitable

2. We are all Guinea Pigs testing real world performances of these engines

[Whoomba]

Originally Posted by ericspt

Turn off DOD and the meth in a FI setup eliminates the carbon build up problem.

More detail please. DOD?

[Whoomba]

Originally Posted by Blackdevil77

That would help prolong the problem. I thought our cars came with a catch can from factory that drained itself back into the oil pan?



Here's a thread on this topic over on the Chevy SS forums

http://www.ssforums.com/forum/engine...injection.html

If that picture is a DI engine intake valve then that oil gunk which is helped by a catch can.

[Alan47717]

Originally Posted by mikeSS

Heres one thing I will never understand.

IF this problem was so bad, and wide spread. If engines are seeing problems around 50k miles or less. That means GM would be running into warranty claims left and right from customers complaining. I don't understand how GM is still making these engines if they have to paid dealerships to clean millions of engines over the warranty period. Which is 5 years/60k miles. well within enough time to see problems.


I can understand If the engine loses like 10-20HP, or maybe a few MPG drop. over a reasonable amount of miles, most customers won't be able to tell. From what people say on many forums, there isn't going to be any engines running to 100k miles anymore without a manual carbon cleaning.

You're making the inconvenient point that pushers of issues like this don't want to acknowledge. If every DI engine built was susceptible to serious problems due to coking the consequences for manufacturers would be catastrophic. Dealership service departments buried (the comment about maintaining service department profits is just silly), engineering resources diverted to find solutions, etc. I was part of a task force once working on an issue affecting just under twenty percent of engines in one engine family. It was a nightmare, dealers were screaming, people were working twelve/fourteen hour days/7 days a week until the problem was solved.

Significant DI engine carbon buildup requires a significant source of carbon. Engines that had problems (and led to endless internet hysteria condemning all DI applications) had high oil consumption or high blow-by (often both). The 2.4L engine in the Equinox/Terrains was a prime example. Neither of my 2.0t engines uses any oil and I have zero concerns about carbon buildup causing me any problems.

And then there's diesels. Internal combustion engines with direct injection that run hundreds of thousands of miles with no problems. Simply amazing.

I've seen coking on carbureted engines, TBI engines, MPFI engines and SPFI engines. In all instances the carbon buildup was a secondary problem caused by something else, a PROBLEM somewhere else (over fueling, internal coolant leakage, oil consumption).

[Gunkk]

Originally Posted by Whoomba

More detail please. DOD?

Displacement On Demand. An old term. But it's an old thread. Congrats on your 7 year thread necropsy!

[302crossram]

Originally Posted by mikeSS

It burns cleaner, but even at that point it not like it makes a huge difference.

higher octane burns slower