BBQ Tick Solved?

[Condor1970]

Plenty of GILfS driving 5.0’ where I live so don’t be to unkind
Make a good used car to buy as well...so they say.
Lead feet aren’t gender specific though...

I was being fecesius.

Plenty of GILfS driving 5.0’ where I live so don’t be to unkind
Make a good used car to buy as well...so they say.
Lead feet aren’t gender specific though...

I was being facetious.

Sponsored

 

[GT Pony]

And why some who have had success with "thicker" oil and tick alleviation
I'm not trying to have a game of wits with you. I just don't see how "film thickness" increases The size of a journal bearing at high rpm.

The super thin oil film thickness in the journal bearing is the only thing keeping the metal surfaces from touching each other. I'm going with a full synthetic 5W-30 with the next oil change to ensure there's a bit more film thickness going on in the bearings.

The oil film thickness that keeps journal bearings alive and healthy is highly dependent on the oil viscosity used, and the film thickness is also affected by the RPM of the journal shaft (due to the hydrodynamic lubrication phenomena). That's why lugging an engine with a high load at very low RPM is bad for rod and crank bearings - that's when the film thickness is the smallest and makes it more possible to get metal-to-metal contact in the bearings. Go Google journal bearing operation and study them a bit and you'll see what's going on. It's not as simple as you might think.

 

[careature]

The super thin oil film thickness in the journal bearing is the only thing keeping the metal surfaces from touching each other. I'm going with a full synthetic 5W-30 with the next oil change to ensure there's a bit more film thickness going on in the bearings.

The oil film thickness that keeps journal bearings alive and healthy is highly dependent on the oil viscosity used, and the film thickness is also affected by the RPM of the journal shaft (due to the hydrodynamic lubrication phenomena). That's why lugging an engine with a high load at very low RPM is bad for rod and crank bearings - that's when the film thickness is the smallest and makes it more possible to get metal-to-metal contact in the bearings. Go Google journal bearing operation and study them a bit and you'll see what's going on. It's not as simple as you might think.

I created this poll

https://www.mustang6g.com/forums/threads/bbq-tick-and-driving-habits.111227/

to see if maybe those who use high gears at low speeds tend to get bbw tick.

Myself guilty of following users manual gear/speed charts.. but honestly, below 2000rpms at 65mph at 6th gear feel a little reckless.

I got new short block and think of what I should change in regards to my driving habits.

 

[TheLion]

The super thin oil film thickness in the journal bearing is the only thing keeping the metal surfaces from touching each other. I'm going with a full synthetic 5W-30 with the next oil change to ensure there's a bit more film thickness going on in the bearings.

The oil film thickness that keeps journal bearings alive and healthy is highly dependent on the oil viscosity used, and the film thickness is also affected by the RPM of the journal shaft (due to the hydrodynamic lubrication phenomena). That's why lugging an engine with a high load at very low RPM is bad for rod and crank bearings - that's when the film thickness is the smallest and makes it more possible to get metal-to-metal contact in the bearings. Go Google journal bearing operation and study them a bit and you'll see what's going on. It's not as simple as you might think.

Your forgetting these are drive by wire. Back in the cable throttle days sure, you could force an engine into possibly unsafe conditions because you could force the throttle plate wide open, the PCM would have to run more fuel to keep from leaning out too much, but they could retard ignition some what, so timing advance was their only safety tool against rod bearing damage due to over loading at lower RPM before you achieve full oil pressure.

You have 0 real control over air, fuel and ignition now in modern engines. If the PCM wants to limit your torque output it simply won't give you more, heck it could even give you the finger on your dash display if it was programmed to do that....there's no reason in a modern engine you would run into unsafe operating conditions and over load the rod bearings at low RPM.

This has been gone over so many times on the Ecoboost forums because the 2.3L with the Ford Performance Calibration is spitting out 400 ft-lbs at just 3,000 RPM. So you load that sucker up down low and ride the torque as much as you can because to protect the cats they run super rich up top, so torque drops fast past about 5,500 RPM. That 2.3L is all about the base.

Look at the torque curves for the 5.0 on a dyno from 1,500 and up. They flat line it at lower RPM and taper way down at very low RPM, I'm sure they could give you more torque down load, but not safely. Look at the 5th gen LT1, it's making 350 ft-lbs at the wheels at just 2,000 RPM...as far I know 5.0's, LT1's and 392's are not throwing rod bearings left and right. As long as you don't exceed the maximum torque that can be applied at a given oil pressure and rpm, you won't collapse the film.

 

[Turbolag87]

im convinced that its piston slap/DI noises...ive heard ALOT of other engines make the exact same noise (6.7 diesel makes teh exact same noise) JUST SEND IT

 

[HermanGerman]

TSB for the Duramax Typewriter ticking.


https://www.hotshotsecret.com/diagn...vice-bulletins/2001-2015-duramax-ticking-tsb/

SERVICE INFORMATION
Some of the above vehicles may exhibit a random ticking noise that is most audible on an engine with a coolant temperature of 70°C (158°F) or higher and from idle to approximately 1500 RPM. The noise usually is most noticeable at the rear of the driver’s side front wheel well. Customers may also comment about hearing a tick noise inside the vehicle at idle such as when sitting at a drive through window. All 6600 Duramax™ diesel engines have this condition; however, some are more audible than others. Engine build variation from engine to engine contributes to differences in perceived volume. All Duramax™ engines are manufactured to very close tolerances to meet the durability and reliability standards.

This noise is caused by the relationship of the engine cylinder block, crankshaft journals, bearing inserts and the oil film. This relationship may allow a vibration that resonates through the cylinder block and is heard as a metallic ticking noise. The noise could be described as an irregular ticking or clacking sound, like random typing on a mechanical typewriter.

This condition has been present in diesel engines produced for the last 20 or more years. The overall noise reduction in engines produced today makes this noise seem new when, in fact, it was masked by other noises in the past. Many manufacturers such as Isuzu, Hino, Mitsubishi, and Nissan report a similar condition in their diesel engines. Testing and engine teardowns with this condition reveal no condition that would affect reliability or durability of this engine.

Dealers should not attempt to compare any customer vehicles exhibiting this noise with other similar vehicles as the noise is different from vehicle to vehicle and this may lead to the incorrect conclusion that the vehicle has a condition. This noise is a normal operating characteristic of the engine. This noise has no short or long term effects on the engine. Do not attempt repairs for this noise.

IMPORTANT:Replacing the engine or internal components for this noise will not reduce or eliminate the noise.
Please share the information found in this bulletin with customers who inquire about this condition. In the event they have additional questions or concerns, please advise them to contact Customer Assistance at the numbers listed below for further information.

 

[careature]

TSB for the Duramax Typewriter ticking.


https://www.hotshotsecret.com/diagn...vice-bulletins/2001-2015-duramax-ticking-tsb/

SERVICE INFORMATION
Some of the above vehicles may exhibit a random ticking noise that is most audible on an engine with a coolant temperature of 70°C (158°F) or higher and from idle to approximately 1500 RPM. The noise usually is most noticeable at the rear of the driver’s side front wheel well. Customers may also comment about hearing a tick noise inside the vehicle at idle such as when sitting at a drive through window. All 6600 Duramax™ diesel engines have this condition; however, some are more audible than others. Engine build variation from engine to engine contributes to differences in perceived volume. All Duramax™ engines are manufactured to very close tolerances to meet the durability and reliability standards.

This noise is caused by the relationship of the engine cylinder block, crankshaft journals, bearing inserts and the oil film. This relationship may allow a vibration that resonates through the cylinder block and is heard as a metallic ticking noise. The noise could be described as an irregular ticking or clacking sound, like random typing on a mechanical typewriter.

This condition has been present in diesel engines produced for the last 20 or more years. The overall noise reduction in engines produced today makes this noise seem new when, in fact, it was masked by other noises in the past. Many manufacturers such as Isuzu, Hino, Mitsubishi, and Nissan report a similar condition in their diesel engines. Testing and engine teardowns with this condition reveal no condition that would affect reliability or durability of this engine.

Dealers should not attempt to compare any customer vehicles exhibiting this noise with other similar vehicles as the noise is different from vehicle to vehicle and this may lead to the incorrect conclusion that the vehicle has a condition. This noise is a normal operating characteristic of the engine. This noise has no short or long term effects on the engine. Do not attempt repairs for this noise.

IMPORTANT:Replacing the engine or internal components for this noise will not reduce or eliminate the noise.
Please share the information found in this bulletin with customers who inquire about this condition. In the event they have additional questions or concerns, please advise them to contact Customer Assistance at the numbers listed below for further information.

"This condition has been present in diesel engines produced for the last 20 or more years."

Ford cannot use it as an excuse for petrol engines.

 

[GT Pony]

Look at the 5th gen LT1, it's making 350 ft-lbs at the wheels at just 2,000 RPM...as far I know 5.0's, LT1's and 392's are not throwing rod bearings left and right.

Maybe not "left and right" ... but your comment shown below from another thread did say you've seen them smoke bearings on a dyno run, which does load the bottom end pretty good at low RPM and WOT conditions.

I've seen LT1's seize multiple rod bearings on a dyno bone stock (over on the camaro6g forum), 392's have low rpm rattle just a thousand miles in etc....

As long as you don't exceed the maximum torque that can be applied at a given oil pressure and rpm, you won't collapse the film.

Who knows that that limit is? I highly doubt Ford or anyone else is sophisticated enough in their ECU programming to know what the rod and crank bearing minimum oil film thickness (MOFT) is at every second the engine is running. Everything I've read on journal bearings says as the viscosity goes down (oil viscosity used, or from heat, fuel dilution, etc) the MOFT goes down, and as the RPM goes down and the load goes up the MOFT gets even thinner. So going WOT at very low engine RPM could become a bad situation for MOFT in journal bearings.

 

[careature]

Maybe not "left and right" ... but your comment shown below from another thread did say you've seen them smoke bearings on a dyno run, which does load the bottom end pretty good at low RPM and WOT conditions.





Who knows that that limit is? I highly doubt Ford or anyone else is sophisticated enough in their ECU programming to know what the rod and crank bearing minimum oil film thickness (MOFT) is at every second the engine is running. Everything I've read on journal bearings says as the viscosity goes down (oil viscosity used, or from heat, fuel dilution, etc) the MOFT goes down, and as the RPM goes down and the load goes up the MOFT gets even thinner. So going WOT at very low engine RPM could become a bad situation for MOFT in journal bearings.

Ford's recommended 5 to 6th gear change speed is 46mph per user manual. I'm not comfortable at 6th even at 65 mph. And VAG gauge says the engine is not happy either.

 

[Condor1970]

"This condition has been present in diesel engines produced for the last 20 or more years."

Ford cannot use it as an excuse for petrol engines.

No, but I can see how the same physics "could" apply to the Coyote engines being a high 11:1 or 12:1 compression.

 

[TheLion]

Maybe not "left and right" ... but your comment shown below from another thread did say you've seen them smoke bearings on a dyno run, which does load the bottom end pretty good at low RPM and WOT conditions.





Who knows that that limit is? I highly doubt Ford or anyone else is sophisticated enough in their ECU programming to know what the rod and crank bearing minimum oil film thickness (MOFT) is at every second the engine is running. Everything I've read on journal bearings says as the viscosity goes down (oil viscosity used, or from heat, fuel dilution, etc) the MOFT goes down, and as the RPM goes down and the load goes up the MOFT gets even thinner. So going WOT at very low engine RPM could become a bad situation for MOFT in journal bearings.

So your suggesting they can't find it empirically? That makes no sense. It's not exactly rocket science to use a test mule, run it under your worst case expected conditions, find the failure point then use a safety factor to keep the engine from getting into those conditions. You don't have to go through the complexity of calculating fluid dynamics and loads...

They absolutely cap torque on the 2.3L EB's down low and same thing with the 5.0's to keep things in the safe operating range. They know how much oil pressure and flow is available at a given RPM as well as the torque being produced (Ford uses Torque Vectoring methods to figure out how much timing, fuel and air is needed to produce the desired torque).

Most after market tunes are pushing 450 ft-lbs down low out of the 2.3L but Ford Performance just caps it at 390~400. Nice and flat. Why? To protect the rods, pistons and bearings. But the stock 2.3L only spits out 320 ft-lbs...the 2nd gen 5.0 uses a far more complex PCM program than the 1st gen 5.0 and it's derived from the same torque limiting methods used in the whole Ecoboost engine series. If memory serves correctly, there are over 480 data tables in the 2nd gen control software where there were only a handful in the first gen.

So I completely disagree that you can push the engine into an unsafe condition by lugging when the ECU has complete control. You may see poor fuel economy and wear issues with heavy lugging over tens of thousands of miles, but an occasional 50% throttle in 6th gear to "slow pass" other cars on the highway isn't going to hurt. Heck the user manual itself is telling you to shift into 6th at 50 mph...even with my short 3.73 gearing, that's just 1500 rpm...what kind of idiot engine tuner would allow you to run timing, throttle and fuel that would throw rod bearings when they have full control over those inputs to the engine? Then have their technical writers write a user manual that tells you to run it at low RPM and offer a warranty on the car when it's going to throw rod bearings by running in a low RPM range?

What driver demands and what driver gets are some times mutually exclusive . I'll drop it, but we can agree to disagree on this one.

 

[TheLion]

Ford's recommended 5 to 6th gear change speed is 46mph per user manual. I'm not comfortable at 6th even at 65 mph. And VAG gauge says the engine is not happy either.

If you can prove your theory I'll accept it, but until then it's only speculation no different than mine. Diesel engines are high compression as is the 5.0. While one is gas and the other diesel fuel powered, they both operate off of the same basic principle of igniting chemical fuel to generate pressure to drive down a reciprocating piston assembly and convert that chemical energy into mechanical energy.

They both have pistons, rods, cranks, valves, engine blocks with cast iron cylinder liners, variable valve timing, electronic throttle, oil pumps, injectors etc. However they operate at different RPM ranges on average and share different component architectures, tweaks etc. to optimize them for the application. I see no reason why it's not possible however to share some similar characteristics in terms of mechanical noises in certain RPM ranges.

 

[Andy13186]

I just checked my old 2009 CTS-V's catch can that I took off after I totaled that car, it has just as much or more of that same gold metal.. That car had 93k miles on it and is a totally different engine so I do think the metal dust in catch cans is normal. Glad I have one though since I wouldnt want metal flakes to blow back through the engine.

CTS-V with Moroso can:

Mustang with JLT 3.0

 

[Andy13186]

If you can prove your theory I'll accept it, but until then it's only speculation no different than mine. Diesel engines are high compression as is the 5.0. While one is gas and the other diesel fuel powered, they both operate off of the same basic principle of igniting chemical fuel to generate pressure to drive down a reciprocating piston assembly and convert that chemical energy into mechanical energy.

They both have pistons, rods, cranks, valves, engine blocks with cast iron cylinder liners, variable valve timing, electronic throttle, oil pumps, injectors etc. However they operate at different RPM ranges on average and share different component architectures, tweaks etc. to optimize them for the application. I see no reason why it's not possible however to share some similar characteristics in terms of mechanical noises in certain RPM ranges.

The 2018 GTs have a spray in cylinder liner same as the voodoo, I dont think its cast iron. This is the main reason I suspect piston slap.

 

[Condor1970]

The 2018 GTs have a spray in cylinder liner same as the voodoo, I dont think its cast iron. This is the main reason I suspect piston slap.

I may agree with your theory, but only to a certain point. When I took mine out to run it hard at 3,500rpm for about 10 minutes in 3rd gear, I got home and found it wasn't making any ticking noise. It was very warm, and running perfectly. Quiet as a mouse. Maybe the thing got sealed up good and tight under all that heat. The next day, the ticking came back, though it seems to have been a little less. The only problem I can see with your theory is quite a few of these ticks have had the cylinders scoped, and they haven't found any scoring or other damage. It's a real head scratcher.

Regardless, I took it in to have the clutch checked after smelling it, and the Tech found some of the diaphragm leaf springs bent on mine. Probably from initial install, and was a matter of time before it wouldn't be engaging as well as it should. Anyway, the Tech also heard the ticking in the engine when he pulled into the garage. He is going to diagnose it further once the new clutch is installed, and everything is as it should be.

He told me flat out, Ford is "VERY AWARE" of this complaint, and it's a big discussion on the Ford Tech's forum. We don't have access to that, but Tech's all over the country are talking about it, and Ford engineers are definitely working on figuring out exactly what it is.

Sponsored