** long read; think Ford has an oil issue which they don't want to admit

mahyarv14 · Mar 11, 2016

whirledpeaz said:
Think it's the other way around. If you have a barcode, the tsb applies.

Ah you're right. They put a check mark with the image that has the barcode then on the bottom say "Yes - this vehicle is not equipped with a high flow crankcase vent oil separator system. Proceed to Step"

Busser48 · Mar 11, 2016

mahyarv14 said:
I'm pretty sure the barcode is the new part and the QR is the old... no?

The check mark on the tsb sheet is bad not good, that means proceed onto replacing parts, not checking your ok to go.

Busser48 · Mar 11, 2016

mahyarv14 said:
Ah you're right. They put a check mark with the image that has the barcode then on the bottom say "Yes - this vehicle is not equipped with a high flow crankcase vent oil separator system. Proceed to Step"

Exactly

mahyarv14 · Mar 11, 2016

Busser48 said:
Exactly

Hmm. I have a barcode but it doesn't have the part number on it.

Just the barcode with "CC" printed below it.

Tune+ · Mar 12, 2016

Jonspeed said:
How is it not upgradable? Everything is upgradable, if not the internals then the whole pump as a whole could be. Like I said I'm not up to date with the latest EB happenings, but that's one thing I do miss about MSF, the extensive technological write ups and in depth break down of part engineering and fixes. This forum is mostly basic questions asking which exhaust is better lol.

The pump doesn't share share it's same design with any other vehicle. It's one of the fee HPFP'S on the market that is oil fed, and it is fed with a feed line. It does come apart, however there is nothing to be upgraded or changed in its current housing. Max pump lift is being achieved and the factory camshaft I'd 4 lobed instead of 3 like most vehicles in this family.

The current cost of a production run of an upgraded fuel pump is 300k for roughly 650 pumps. That is cost, you'll have to mark up to make it worth your while and nobody is going to ever sell 650 upgraded HPFP'S that will still have a limitation due to factory lift height. You would need to pair it with an upgraded exhaust camshaft with a larger lobe lift height in order to get more lift out of the pump, or even more duration. A lot of R&D will be needed, and it won't be cost effective as there are already port fueling options available and more to come.

There is a billet upgrade that is being tested but the company doing the testing is going to shit the bed for sure when I comes down to making power.

Keiferson22 · Mar 12, 2016

Just curious here, the OP said he gutted the PCV which means no check valve. So without some catch can apparatus on the clean side what would prevent the flow of crank case vapors from going through the intake side of the PCV system under boost? Wouldn't you essentially be allowing everything to flow right through the turbo, intercooler and intake manifold? I don'the really know this system well but that would explain oil in the throttle body no?

dgc333 · Mar 12, 2016

You are correct

Dave

Edkiefer · Mar 12, 2016

Keiferson22 said:
Just curious here, the OP said he gutted the PCV which means no check valve. So without some catch can apparatus on the clean side what would prevent the flow of crank case vapors from going through the intake side of the PCV system under boost? Wouldn't you essentially be allowing everything to flow right through the turbo, intercooler and intake manifold? I don'the really know this system well but that would explain oil in the throttle body no?

That is true "if" he wasn't also using a UPR dual valve CC which comes with check valve built into hoses .

Boosting Stangs · Mar 12, 2016

People please read the op's post. If you're having trouble finding it go to the bottom of this page and it will show 1 through 17 you get the one which is the first page close to the top maybe second paragraph. He clearly states he bought a UPR dual catch can prior to gutting the PCV.

mSTANG_1 · Mar 12, 2016

Looks like there's another person who unfortunately had his engine blown:
http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47330

This is scary...with all of the MODs done on my Mustang it's making me think twice.

PRG3k · Mar 12, 2016

mSTANG_1 said:
Looks like there's another person who unfortunately had his engine blown:
http://www.mustang6g.com/forums/showthread.php?t=47330

This is scary...with all of the MODs done on my Mustang it's making me think twice.

Very few details in that thread plus he has one post. Sounded like LSPI to me and not PCV/oil related. Waiting for him to post some more details.

DansEBM · Mar 12, 2016

Crap, luckily I do not have to drive my car at all if I don't want too, it's staying in the garage till we figure out how to fix this jack in the box.

Cobra Jet · Mar 13, 2016

Tune+ said:
Maybe a little stroke of coincidence and possibly some science behind it. So far I haven't been able to pin point it. I went as far as looking into cylinder fuel compensations and cylinder timing compensations to see if there was anything different with compensations per cylinder. Unfortunately Ford strategy for cylinder compensations per cylinder is only available up to 3,500rpms. However most failures happen under low RPM and higher load (.8-1.2% calculated), in this example specifically he was going up hill, not sure what gear, but not really beating on it and it let go. I hope I recall that correctly, so correct me if I am wrong Greg.

In the cylinder compensations that I can see, cylinder 3 seems to have the leanest compensation. The table is a multiplier so data of 1.00 = no compensation, and anything below it is leaner, and anything above it is richer. I see some .98x's in cylinder three under 1% load, and every other cylinder is .99x, 1.0x and 1.xx's. I highly doubt this has anything to do with well, anything but it is just something I looked into as I'm a digger when it comes to data and figuring out how things work.

There are new part numbers for the block and the shortblock from Ford since November of last year. Wonder what they are changing, they aren't saying 100% but I have a feeling....

Thanks, again Adam for the informative tech research.

Regarding the bold above - would those blocks be in the 16 EB's, or do you think those are slated for MY2017?

Mine is a December 2015 built EB... Wonder what block is in mine...?

Bullitt · Mar 13, 2016

DansEBM said:
Crap, luckily I do not have to drive my car at all if I don't want too, it's staying in the garage till we figure out how to fix this jack in the box.

Same here, fortunately I have another car to drive now too. Mine is going to stay a garage queen that goes out once or twice every couple weeks and that's it. Maybe I'll get over this paranoia eventually, I have just lost all faith in Ford when it comes to these ecoboosts. Unless my faith is restored, I'll just preserve it until I can afford to upgrade to a GT lol.

Buhbuhj · Mar 13, 2016

There's a whole lot of overreacting going on in this thread.

** long read; think Ford has an oil issue which they don't want to admit

mahyarv14

Member

Busser48

Well-Known Member

Busser48

Well-Known Member

mahyarv14

Member

Tune+

Well-Known Member

Keiferson22

Well-Known Member

dgc333

Well-Known Member

Edkiefer

Well-Known Member

Boosting Stangs

Well-Known Member

mSTANG_1

No Limit

PRG3k

Well-Known Member

DansEBM

Well-Known Member

Cobra Jet

Well-Known Member

Bullitt

Well-Known Member

Buhbuhj

Well-Known Member