BBQ Tick After Oil Change...

[TheLion]

By the way, getting back to the purpose of this thread once again:

This is one of the primary reasons why the 5.0 is sensitive to oil viscosity and how that viscosity changes over the temp range. It uses floating roller rocker arms. If the lash adjuster (the cylinder with the cone shapped top on the opposite side of the rocker arm) isn't pushing the rocker arm against the cam lobe fully or with enough pressure (thus the rocker arm's fulcrum height changes as the lash adjuster is the fulcrum point), the cam lobe will smack against the roller and make a tick. The more lash there is (aka the less the pressure the lash adjuster is applying), the louder the tick will be. It may also vary as oil pressure varies with RPM. It's much more likley to tick at low RPM than higher RPM as oil pressure is less, but the valve spring pressure is the same and also as the oil thins (either from acids aka use or from temp or both).

My 5.0's been ticking off and on with PUP, never did it with MC semi-syn. It was really loud just a few days ago in a parking lot, almost sounded like something was wrong at first which caught my attention. But once it cooled off it was completely gone. As the oil thins, it seems to get noisier or with lots of stop and go when oil temps rise. I also noticed that PUP 5W-20 is much thinner at room temp going in (during oil change) vs. MC 5W-20 and immediately noticed the whole valvtrain was clankier despite it meeting Ford's own spec and being a factory speck viscosity. I will switch back to MC 5W-20 at the next oil change unless I can find something with a more suitable properties, but MC is probably more than good enough, so I may just stick with that.

This might explain (pending there isn't a major problem like a spun rod bearing) why some people get ticks some times and not others. It also explains why quite a few report ticking after the first oil change when many people switch to something other than MC 5W-20. Again this is assuming you don't have a defective lash adjuster or a rod bearing issue. The cam phasors (which there are 4 of) can also be affected by oil viscosity, too little and it may not have enough pressure to hold it's position (it's CTA or Cam Torque Actuated, so it moves position by using the valve spring energy, the oil is then pumped into to hold it's position once that is reached as oil is in-compressible).

Sponsored

 

[TheLion]

2015-17 GT dynos around 370-380 at the rear wheels right?
2018 GT dynos around 410-415 stock.
Scat pack dynos around 430-440
Camaro SS dynos around 415-420.

I'm not sure why you're saying that 15-17 Mustangs aren't down on power. All acceleration figures and dyno figures have the Mustang being slower. What are you arguing exactly? There's a reason why the 2018 is so much faster and walks the scat packs and camaros past 100mph stock for stock.

All conditions the same, drag radials, prepped track, stock everything else, the 2015-17 Mustang is slower than the competitors. End of story. That's why people mod their cars and not wait 2 years as you suggest. You go to the local drag strip and line up next to a 6th gen Camaro when you're both stock, you're gonna get spanked in the Mustang. Unless you have the 2018 10 speed.

And your still quoting peak power numbers....:doh:. I give up on this argument, I'll just post some info below and leave it at that. Anyone willing to think about the real results can see it for themselves based on the very dyno graphs your quoting.

 

[TheLion]

https://flic.kr/p/23YErp5

https://flic.kr/p/25CZJ3L

https://flic.kr/p/JAPLFs

https://flic.kr/p/25CZJ6m

Both dyno graphs were SAE corrected and both on Dyno Jets (+/-1% accuracy) inertia dynos, both result in an estimated 12% drive train loss which is typically 10% to 12% for manuals (calculated from peak figures as is typical). Notice the last table, which shows the 5.0 vs 6.2 power at each RPM as an absolute difference and as a percentage at that particular RPM. Negative numbers mean the 5.0 is making less power than the 6.2 at that RPM (also shaded in warm colors). Positive numbers mean the 5.0 is making more power than the 6.2. RPM matters. The net at the bottom is the total power DIFFERENCE sum over the rev range (not the total power), integrated using Riemann Sums with a resolution of 250 RPM steps.

If the 5.0 could only rev to 6500 RPM, it would be making 13.2% less total power than the LS 6.2 (or itself as it comes from the factory). That last 500 RPM allows it to make 13.2% more power than it otherwise would, bringing it's total useful power up to par with the LS. That's why the PP3, which not only adds more peak area under the curve (also useful power), but really adds power by extending the useful rev range out another 450 RPM to 7450 resulting in a total gain of another 13%.

Extending the useful rev range is only one way of making more useful power. The other is to user more gears with closer ratios to keep the engine running as close to the peak of it's power for as much of the run time as possible. Each method has it's limits in the real world on what can practically be done, each as losses (for example, adding more gears to the transmission adds more weight and increases the total time the car is de-accelerating between shifts, it's a trade off, give some, get some). Formula cars combine both methods to make the fastest road cars in the world, same with motor cycles.

First get S550's don't have a power problem. They have a power usage problem. All the power in the world isn't useful if you can't apply it. Look at the Teslas, the are pushing the limits of tires even with AWD. The latest Tesla roadster only pushes 700 lbs-ft peak torque. But it has a 0-60 of 1.9 seconds! Why? Because it HOLDs 700 lbs-ft of torque up to 14,000 RPM! Power just rises and rises and rises. But none of this matters because people want to believe something different...you can't teach stubborn!

 

[TheLion]

And one last hurra to show the area under the curves, see how the LS 6.2 Makes a little more from 2,000 to 6500? But that BIG chunk of area under the curve of the 5.0 from 6,500 to 7,000?:

There's a reason Ford went with smaller higher reving engines back when they abandoned the push rod design in the 80's and went with the modular 3-valve. There was more total headroom in higher reving engines when all the modern power adders were implemented (DI, VVT and broader rev ranges). You can't combine all 3 with big displacement engines because of practical physical limitations of tension and compression strengths of rods / bearings and pistons. The 5.0 with port injection and variable valve timing is making the same power as the larger displacement LS 6.2 with DI.

But the 5.0 can rev much higher without major rotating assembly re-work and can still have DI integrated in. Ford designed in purposefully headroom into the 5.0 from the start. They planned for DI and higher rev ranges, but didn't implemented them initially because they didn't' need to. it gave the 5.0 room to grow. The Gen 3 is mostly tapped out now, but also makes not only more PEAK Power which everyone is so uselessly obsessed with, but it revs out to 7500 to it's total power is substantially more. The second generation S550's (with the Gen 3 5.0's) would be even faster with some weight reduction and again, better IRS. Some work has been done to tighten it up, but it's still not at the level of the SS IRS.

If we're talking strictly engine power here, not gearing, tires, suspension and weight, which also each have a significant factor in acceleration. From an engine standpoint they chose wisely because the higher reving modular design allows the use of all 3 power adders (DI, Variable Valvtiming and Rev Range) without resulting in an engine that is very heavy and too bulky to fit in a chasis. The LS and Hemi are stuck with fixed valve trains and DI as their maximum due to the excessive weight and size that would incur by using VVT technologies.

So to make the most of their internal flow capabilities and limits with the fixed valve train, they make as much power in their shorter rev ranges as possible to compensate. It's just two different ways of getting there, but creating massive low end and mig-range torque to equal the total power of a higher reving engine is not practical unless you go with FI. But on NA engines, higher reving is the easier and more practical way to make the most total useful power. Why do you think the fastest motor cycles use high reving low torque engines instead of twin V's? But they don't "pull" like a harley does...so they must be slower...linear acceleration drawn out over a longer time span is going to "feel" slower than "peaky" and sudden acceleration compressed together even if it results in the same total acceleration.

The GT just can't get it's power down because of it's gearing, IRS and tires in factory form. That's why it's 0-60, the fastest rates of acceleration for any of these cars, as that's where gearing multiplication is the highest, is the worst of the 3 bone stock and why the GT's improve so much more than the other two with similar mods. There's more gains in a GT with suspension mods than there is with an SS. That's why most people who own SS's aren't really re-working the IRS because it's much better from the start from a sheer performance standpoint! So if you care about that 1.6% to 2.4% performance for bragging rights, re-work your IRS and tires first. Then with driving your 1/4 mile times will be neck and neck.

The GT's 60-foot times will be much better than the SS's because of the gearing, but the 0-60 times will even out if the GT has a properly set up IRS. GM was smart, they tuned the factory suspension and set up the gearing to make the most of the available power. It's all about efficiency. Learn from them and apply it to your GT, you might be surprised at how much faster it can run with no power adders.

 

[GT Pony]

My 5.0's been ticking off and on with PUP, never did it with MC semi-syn. It was really loud just a few days ago in a parking lot, almost sounded like something was wrong at first which caught my attention. But once it cooled off it was completely gone. As the oil thins, it seems to get noisier or with lots of stop and go when oil temps rise. I also noticed that PUP 5W-20 is much thinner at room temp going in (during oil change) vs. MC 5W-20 and immediately noticed the whole valvtrain was clankier despite it meeting Ford's own spec and being a factory speck viscosity. I will switch back to MC 5W-20 at the next oil change unless I can find something with a more suitable properties, but MC is probably more than good enough, so I may just stick with that.

I'm wondering if anyone's BBQ tick went away after they started using a thicker motor oil like 5W-30. If the tick is caused by thin oil, then I'd think going to a 5W-30 would help. If it didn't, then it's probably a mechanical flaw or damage issue.

 

[TheLion]

Which 5.0 are you using in your graphs? Gen 1 or 2?

Gen 2. Gen 1 5.0 made a little less power and had less headroom in it because of a number of changes made to the Gen 2 which has a lot of headroom built into it.

Technically the Gen 1 did also, Ford planned from the start for the Coyote 5.0 to eventually have a higher working range (aka more area under the curve), Direct Injection and to have a bolt on super charger kit.

Gen 1 vs. Gen 2 differences are:
- Larger intake valves
- Larger exhaust valves
- Revised intake camshafts
- Revised exhaust camshafts
- Stiffer valve springs to ensure the valves close completely at high RPM operation (aka avoiding damaging valve float), literally the same ones used on the Boss 302
- New cylinder-head castings which includes revised ports for a straighter path tot he valves to reduce intake and exhaust restrictions
- Sintered forged connecting rods that were used on the Boss 302 (aka the Road Runner 5.0) allowing for higher RPM operation reliably
- Redesigned piston tops with deeper cutout to clear the larger valves
- Re-balanced forged crankshaft that supports again higher RPM operation
- Charge Motion Control valves on the intake manifold which is mostly for improved idle, better low RPM fuel economy and emissions
- New cam phasors that have mid-lock capability for better control of valve timing over the RPM range

The Gen 2 was built for the PP3 rev range. This engine is being held back by the stock tuning and intake, which is certainly improved over the Gen 1, but there's a lot of room left to stretch its legs with the factory internals.

That is likely why Ford did what they did. They needed to compensate for the added weight of the S550 chassis over the S197, which ran a best time of 12.7 on the 1/4 mile and was about 3,600 lbs (almost 100 lbs lighter than the Alpha based SS which is at 3685~3720 range) and almost 100~175 lbs lighter than the S550 at 3705 lbs to 3770 lbs range.

But due to timing and competition, they likely chose a safe and more conservative power output and also positioned it right in between the outgoing S197's and Gen 2 S550's which would have DI.

The Coyote is meant to rev out. The Boss 302 ran a 12.3 on Motor Trend. That's as fast as the 2016 A8 Camar SS. But the Road Runner 5.0 in the Boss 302 only made 444 HP, a PP3 Gen 2 Coyote makes 472 HP with the same rev range. Given the added weight, they should run the same 1/4 mile pending you can get the power down.

I've seen Boss 302, like any other car, gain another 0.2 to 0.3 seconds on a prepped drag strip under the right conditions.

 

[TheLion]

I'm wondering if anyone's BBQ tick went away after they started using a thicker motor oil like 5W-30. If the tick is caused by thin oil, then I'd think going to a 5W-30 would help. If it didn't, then it's probably a mechanical flaw or damage issue.

Not necessarily. Remember the Gen 2's also have stiffer valve springs, some ticking could also be valve tap (closed valves) noise which is amplified more so in Gen 2's.

Valves, like any other part, expand and contract with heating and cooling. The exhaust valves are hollow and filled with sodium. The block is as thin as it an be and is aluminum. The cats are close to the headers...all these things make for more noise permeability and clatter, amplifying normal mechanical noise.

I'll bet Ford's test engines where clanky as all get after testing at WOT at 6,400 RPM (peak power) for 3,000 hours, then going to -40 and back up to 230 repeatedly (thermal shock), having heavy water spray forced into the intake (water ingestion to simulation heavy rain driving conditions) etc....but noisy or not, if they are working and within speck it doesn't affect operation even if it bothers the heck out of you. Lets face it, DOHC / VVT engines are noisy. Plain and simply. Companies like Mercedes who also use DOHC / VVT spend a lot of extra R&D and materials cost just to make them quieter and get rid of noises that bother people. But they also cost a lot more....that's part of why your paying the premium price, for the combination of refinement (comfort) and performance.

With a mass production lower cost car like the Mustang, your paying for performance with only an acceptable level of refinement. Your going to get some noise, chunkiness and even performance quirks (like the IRS issues) etc.

One example I can personally attest to of noise that sounds abnormal but is harmless (in Electrical Engineering) is coil whine. People HATE coil whine, it sounds like something is failing inside your power supply and it's going to blow up...yet there's nothing wrong with it and it just keeps working and working and working all while sounding like it's going to melt down in a giant arc flash of doom.

Yes, some ticking can be abnormal and an indication of an issue, some is not however. Some of the videos I posted illustrate major mechanical failures while others illustrate nuisance noise that is harmless.

DOHC / VVT is noisy, plain and simple. We'll see if the ticking (which didn't occur yesterday, but did this morning) on mine changes at my next oil change. I'm at 5k miles on the PUP and I go by severe service intervals of 7,500 miles even though the OLI says I have another 25% (when I'm at 7,500) based on heat, drive time and what ever other metrics it uses to calculate oil life expectancy. I have no indication there is anything mechanically wrong with the engine in my 5.0. It makes great power, its responsive, fuel mileage is where it should be, it's smooth, any noises at idle are not audible at higher RPM's or while driving etc. I just hear ticking some days (and not others) when idle or at very low RPM creeping along in a parking lot next to a wall that echoes the sounds, aka drive-through tick. I have just passed 15,000 miles and I go WOT fairly frequently (when I can safely play) on back roads, on / off ramps etc. so I don'y baby the car either. I bought a muscle car to experience it's power.

 

[VIPR01]

How many BBQ ticks turned into hours of wasted time sitting in a dealer waiting room, that eventually turned into the dealer offering up a short block under warranty, or “normal ops-could not duplicate.” It’s the fact that nobody wants to hear a brand new engine clapping around after signing up A. To make a heavy payment every month, or B. Dropping 32-40gs cash. Without diving into the research lab theory on oil, why can’t Ford deliver an answer on the data that’s been collected from these ticking issues after the 1st oil change?

 

[ponyv6]

I just came back from the dealer. got my loaner.
when I was waiting for the loaner, I was talking to service manager who just got a pp 401a 18 gt (03/18 built). it has 276miles on it completely stock. he just wanted to show me the car. while we were chatting, I heard it tick. I was like “is it me or you can hear it too?”. it turned out his car has ticking too. it was exactly same as mine . now I am hoping he will investigate to find out what it is.

 

[bl4d3runn3r]

I have the tick for over 6k miles now. Started even before the tick.
Will change to oil to ams oil 5w20 next time with ams oil filter. But before that I will go to the dealership

 

[jasonstang]

Just use MC 5W20 if you worried change every 3000 miles.
I have a feeling that MC 5W20 is pretty thick at room temperature probably more like a 10W20. Ford engines are known to make all kinds of noises when cold so they are formulating their oil to much thicker at room temperature.

 

[NoVaGT]

Soooo.....I gots the BBQ ticking.

I hear it when next to anything that sends the sound back at me. Seems to happen at 1500-2200 RPMs, under light nor no load.

Gonna go out right now and try a video, see if it happens when cold.

 

[JuRuKi]

I think I started getting the ticking after i switched to a different oil. My car was just fine for the first 2-3 oil changes with Motorcraft 5-20.
I've been running full synthetic for the last 3 oil changes and i got the ticking every time.
Would it be bad to switch back to Motorcraft?

 

[NoVaGT]

I think I started getting the ticking after i switched to a different oil. My car was just fine for the first 2-3 oil changes with Motorcraft 5-20.
I've been running full synthetic for the last 3 oil changes and i got the ticking every time.
Would it be bad to switch back to Motorcraft?

I seemed to notice mine after my last oil change, about 1k miles ago. I changed to Royal Purple, and now it's ticking.

Actually, it sounds pretty bad. I have to rev it to make the sound, I'll try to do that by myself here in a second.

Where do we post videos? Youtube?

 

[Nanashii]

Depending what happens with my car when I get it back I'm only using motorcraft.



Sounds like you have the 2200 RPM engine rattle.

What did they end up doing to your car? Are they taking things apart or waiting on the Hot Line?

Sponsored