In 2009, BG purchased a 2010 3.5L Ford Taurus SHO with an EcoBoost™ twin-turbocharged direct injection V6 engine. BG was one of the first in the nation to receive this car, which, according to Ford, “has higher performance, better fuel economy and fewer CO2 emissions” compared to a naturally-aspirated engine.
But, we weren’t in it for the bragging rights; Ford’s pride and joy was to be our newest test vehicle. We named her Dottie.
Now, the fuel test has ended. Let’s take a look back and see what we’ve learned.
For the first 30,000 miles, we did not add any BG products. Every 5,000 miles, our pros performed an oil change, collected fuel system data using a scan tool, intake photos and performed a fluid system analysis. For the second 30,000 miles, we introduced BG products.
Basically, we wanted to educate ourselves on this twin-turbocharged direct injection engine so we could provide the best solutions to the automotive market.
To sum up our results, “Dottie has great acceleration power… as long as the engine is clean,” says Dustin Willhite, Director of Technology.
Even at the first check-up (5,000 miles), borescope footage showed intake valve deposits forming. At each subsequent check-up, we noticed deposit buildup continued in the intake valves and intake ports. There was heavy deposit contribution from PCV gases.
By about 15,000 miles, our drivers noticed a loss of power. Fuel dilution started at 10,000 miles and occurred in every check-up until 40,000 miles.
At the 30,000-mile service, our pros performed the BG Direct Injection Service and added BG 109 and BG 44K,® Part No. 208. Results of the service were 8.2 gain in horsepower and a whopping 20 ft. lb. gain in torque! An evident acceleration improvement was duly noted by our drivers.
Additionally, our borescope videos showed BG 44K® cleaned up piston top and injector deposits.
The results are in
Near the end of the test, at about the 55,000-mile point, our pros started noticing more performance issues.
The conclusion from the two-year test was that BG 44K® can help keep performance high (combustion chambers clean, injectors clean), until deposit formation on the ports/intake valves built up enough to affect airflow.
“Until design improvements address the negative contribution made by crankcase vapors (which create intake deposits), Direct Injection (DI) engines will continue to have intake deposit buildup issues. DI simply lacks the necessary and traditional fuel rinsing afforded by indirect injector spray. The high heat environment experienced by the fuel injector tip is also a major contributor to driveability issues,” says Dustin.
Solutions that specifically address reducing PCV vapors (engine oil evaporation) would be a welcome advancement by the manufacturers of DI engines. A combination of full synthetic, low volatility engine oil, combined with reasonable drain intervals would be one way to decrease these intake deposits. Dustin continues, “If DI is here to stay, then classical methods of engine ‘keep clean’ will need to be re-vamped to ensure trouble-free engine durability and performance.”