|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,357
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,357 |
Some thoughts after rebuilding a turbo:
A turbo is another system that further adds to the complexity of any modern engine. The heat a turbo is subjected to when towing and the rpms they spin is quite extreme.
Any bit of dust, like what could easily get through a k&n type filter, will [bleep] up the compressor wheel. Air must be perfectly clean, always.
On break-in: Any sort of debris like manifold gasket material, tiny metal bits, carbon or rust falling off the insides cast iron manifolds,will degrade the turbine wheel.
With a turbo you have:
An intercooler and extra pipes, hose clamps and rubber boots where leaks could occur.
More bearings, seals hard parts.
Extra electrical sensors where problems could occur.
Blow-off valves with springs, things and rubber diaphrams. More electrical sensors as well.
Turbos rarely ever last as long as the engine. The entire system will eventually need a rebuild. The exauhst side fasteners exposed to such heat, can actually shear off inside the housings or at the exauhst manifolds, when you try to remove the turbo. Requiring a new replacements of the turbo or even a manifold, rather than a simple rebuild.
To reduce turbo lag, two smaller turbos are oftentimes used, adding extra cost when your warranty expires. More turbos, more piping, more parts, more cost.
Diesel or gas, it's just another system that will need attention.
V type engines, turbos can oftentimes be extremely difficult to get to. Whereas inline engines, they're usually more conveniently located. I was watching a Ford Tech on Youtube describing some of the factors that destroy Ecoboost turbines. Ford has placed strainers in the turbo oil supply line. They will get packed full of carbon from cylinder blow by. Sayonara turbo One reason why most ford guys run the Coyote engines. I’d be surprised if more Coyote F150’s are sold than Ecoboosts (twin turbo). The Coyotes had an oil burn/loss issue that was pretty widespread. Impacted a lot of vehicles before Ford solved it. I know two guys who check the oil in their Coyote F150 with less than 20k miles on both, and maybe 1000-2000 miles after an oil change only to find the oil level wasn’t touching the dipstick. Turbo systems no doubt add complexity, more components that could potentially fail. However, I know quite a few guys that have them or have had them and the closest thing to a turbo failure on any of them was on my personal truck. I had a leak in a turbo coolant line/fitting that had to be repaired. The benefit of the turbos is that they can be tuned, as in the case of the Exoboost, to have a diesel like, or at least a more diesel like, torque curve in that it produces very high torque at low rpm. Keep that in mind when considering wear/tear on an engine, especially if you tow much. You have to run a traditional gas engine at much higher rpm to get equivalent torque output than you do a turbo engine. That’s a lot of additional wear on the traditional engine. This is one factor in the longevity of diesels, they run at much lower rpm than even the turbo gas burners. The coyote is no slouch for sure, but I really like low end grunt of the Ecoboost. Some say there is no replacement for displacement, but it turns out air density is a very much a viable replacement, it just takes some complexity to get it.
Don't speculate when you don't know, and don't second guess when you do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 17,243
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 17,243 |
I also know a guy with a newer F150 with Coyote that is having the oil consumption problem.
A friend has an oil/gas company and has been running Tundras for company trucks for a while. The last couple he bought have been the turbo models. Will be curious to see how they hold up.
Now with even more aplomb
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,852
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,852 |
The benefit of the turbos is that they can be tuned, as in the case of the Exoboost, to have a diesel like, or at least a more diesel like, torque curve in that it produces very high torque at low rpm. Keep that in mind when considering wear/tear on an engine, especially if you tow much. You have to run a traditional gas engine at much higher rpm to get equivalent torque output than you do a turbo engine. That’s a lot of additional wear on the traditional engine. This is one factor in the longevity of diesels, they run at much lower rpm than even the turbo gas burners.
The coyote is no slouch for sure, but I really like low end grunt of the Ecoboost. Some say there is no replacement for displacement, but it turns out air density is a very much a viable replacement, it just takes some complexity to get it. This is why we are now seeing the problems with the new Ford 7.3 gasser in trucks that pull heavy a lot. To make the power, the engines spins up to very high revs, and they are not holding up under that regimen. TINSTAAFL.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 29,383
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 29,383 |
I also know a guy with a newer F150 with Coyote that is having the oil consumption problem.
A friend has an oil/gas company and has been running Tundras for company trucks for a while. The last couple he bought have been the turbo models. Will be curious to see how they hold up. It probably has the Plasma sprayed in cylinder liners . I would get rid of ASAP.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 634
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 634 |
The benefit of the turbos is that they can be tuned, as in the case of the Exoboost, to have a diesel like, or at least a more diesel like, torque curve in that it produces very high torque at low rpm. Keep that in mind when considering wear/tear on an engine, especially if you tow much. You have to run a traditional gas engine at much higher rpm to get equivalent torque output than you do a turbo engine. That’s a lot of additional wear on the traditional engine. This is one factor in the longevity of diesels, they run at much lower rpm than even the turbo gas burners.
The coyote is no slouch for sure, but I really like low end grunt of the Ecoboost. Some say there is no replacement for displacement, but it turns out air density is a very much a viable replacement, it just takes some complexity to get it. This is why we are now seeing the problems with the new Ford 7.3 gasser in trucks that pull heavy a lot. To make the power, the engines spins up to very high revs, and they are not holding up under that regimen. TINSTAAFL. Dutch, I'm disappointed to hear this about the 7.3. What sort of problems are they having with them and how wide-spread are those problems? Thanks!
ttpoz
in silvam ne ligna feras
(don't carry logs into the forest)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,852
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,852 |
I was too, my son was ready to order a 2 ton with the 7.3 in it for his business. Cheaper, no emissions crap, and almost 1,000 lb lighter, what’s not to like. Our mechanic talked him out of it, he’s had three of those motors come in with major troubles, and none with the diesel. All in trucks that pulled heavy loads routinely. We didn’t get into the details of what rattled loose, exactly, but they were “rebuild the motor” type failures.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,608
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,608 |
The ford 7.3 gas motor is having camshaft issues. I'm not sure how wide-spread the issue is.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,357
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,357 |
I also know a guy with a newer F150 with Coyote that is having the oil consumption problem.
A friend has an oil/gas company and has been running Tundras for company trucks for a while. The last couple he bought have been the turbo models. Will be curious to see how they hold up. I’m curious on the Tundra twin turbo as well. It seems, by the numbers, they don’t quite have the performance of the Fire 3.5, but Toyota powertrains are typically bullet proof. The outgoing Tundra generation was in production for 10(+?) years. The Ecoboost has been out that whole time, so the bar was set. That’s a LONG time for Toyota to develop, test and verify a new powertrain.
Last edited by drano 25; 06/22/23.
Don't speculate when you don't know, and don't second guess when you do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 29,383
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 29,383 |
I also know a guy with a newer F150 with Coyote that is having the oil consumption problem.
A friend has an oil/gas company and has been running Tundras for company trucks for a while. The last couple he bought have been the turbo models. Will be curious to see how they hold up. I’m curious on the Tundra twin turbo as well. It seems, by the numbers, they don’t quite have the performance of the Fire 3.5, but Toyota powertrains are typically bullet proof. The outgoing Tundra generation was in production for 10(+?) years. The Ecoboost has been out that whole time, so the bar was set. That’s a LONG time for Toyota to develop, test and verify a new powertrain. Depending on how the owner maintains their vehicle will determine whether the turbos have a long life . I would assume their blocks are a cut above what most other manufacturers put out.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,360
Campfire Kahuna
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,360 |
The ford 7.3 gas motor is having camshaft issues. I'm not sure how wide-spread the issue is. When the 7.3 was introduced, Ford said it was designed for longevity in small trucks. It was supposed to be highly reliable.
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 21,796
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 21,796 |
The benefit of the turbos is that they can be tuned, as in the case of the Exoboost, to have a diesel like, or at least a more diesel like, torque curve in that it produces very high torque at low rpm. Keep that in mind when considering wear/tear on an engine, especially if you tow much. You have to run a traditional gas engine at much higher rpm to get equivalent torque output than you do a turbo engine. That’s a lot of additional wear on the traditional engine. This is one factor in the longevity of diesels, they run at much lower rpm than even the turbo gas burners.
The coyote is no slouch for sure, but I really like low end grunt of the Ecoboost. Some say there is no replacement for displacement, but it turns out air density is a very much a viable replacement, it just takes some complexity to get it. This is why we are now seeing the problems with the new Ford 7.3 gasser in trucks that pull heavy a lot. To make the power, the engines spins up to very high revs, and they are not holding up under that regimen. TINSTAAFL. You inadvertently answered an earlier question a bunch just threw BS at. Good diesels are built heavier because they have to be, it's not really why they last. They last, because they loaf. Doing good work at 1500rpm. Not going over 2000, pulling down to 1200, or lower. A big diesel has turned fewer revs at 500k than many gas engines at 300. And it may well hit a million without being opened up. Electronic fuel management has hugely increased engine life across the board. Gas and diesel. It is also responsible for extended service intervals. Well remember 3k on cars and 10k for trucks, we've doubled that while doubling engine life also. You know all that Dutch, others might not.
Parents who say they have good kids..Usually don't!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 46,745
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 46,745 |
I never thought I'd say it, but I've become somewhat of a fan of turbo engines in recent years. Have only had two, but both put down the low to mid-range power that the larger displacement, natural aspirated engine options could not make. Fuel economy was a fair bit better too. Time will tell on durability, I suppose. I had a F150 2016 ecoboost and loved it as well. There is no question that the engine will not be as durable. These new engines are stressed to the max, low ring tension, turbos. I have a 16 F150 with TT and it's chuggin along just fine.
Camp is where you make it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 46,745
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 46,745 |
Some thoughts after rebuilding a turbo:
A turbo is another system that further adds to the complexity of any modern engine. The heat a turbo is subjected to when towing and the rpms they spin is quite extreme.
Any bit of dust, like what could easily get through a k&n type filter, will [bleep] up the compressor wheel. Air must be perfectly clean, always.
On break-in: Any sort of debris like manifold gasket material, tiny metal bits, carbon or rust falling off the insides cast iron manifolds,will degrade the turbine wheel.
With a turbo you have:
An intercooler and extra pipes, hose clamps and rubber boots where leaks could occur.
More bearings, seals hard parts.
Extra electrical sensors where problems could occur.
Blow-off valves with springs, things and rubber diaphrams. More electrical sensors as well.
Turbos rarely ever last as long as the engine. The entire system will eventually need a rebuild. The exauhst side fasteners exposed to such heat, can actually shear off inside the housings or at the exauhst manifolds, when you try to remove the turbo. Requiring a new replacements of the turbo or even a manifold, rather than a simple rebuild.
To reduce turbo lag, two smaller turbos are oftentimes used, adding extra cost when your warranty expires. More turbos, more piping, more parts, more cost.
Diesel or gas, it's just another system that will need attention.
V type engines, turbos can oftentimes be extremely difficult to get to. Whereas inline engines, they're usually more conveniently located. I was watching a Ford Tech on Youtube describing some of the factors that destroy Ecoboost turbines. Ford has placed strainers in the turbo oil supply line. They will get packed full of carbon from cylinder blow by. Sayonara turbo One reason why most ford guys run the Coyote engines. I would disagree with that.
Camp is where you make it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,608
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,608 |
The ford 7.3 gas motor is having camshaft issues. I'm not sure how wide-spread the issue is. When the 7.3 was introduced, Ford said it was designed for longevity in small trucks. It was supposed to be highly reliable. 7.3 is a great gas motor. I'd gladly buy a super duty with that engine. The issues are rare. Back in the 90's when Toyota was in a fkn truck infancy (a v6 in a t100 was about the best they had), 6bt cummins and 7.3 powerstroke powered heavy duty trucks were doing the heavy work. Some people need an actual truck to do work, tacoma sure aint gonna cut it. I have towed heavy with the 7.3 gas truck, and I was very impressed. The transmission shift points was right, everywhere. Steering and brakes were amazing. Much more refined than my ole 7.3 powerstroke.
Last edited by mainer_in_ak; 06/30/23.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,303
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,303 |
The ford 7.3 gas motor is having camshaft issues. I'm not sure how wide-spread the issue is. When the 7.3 was introduced, Ford said it was designed for longevity in small trucks. It was supposed to be highly reliable. 7.3 is a great gas motor. I'd gladly buy a super duty with that engine. The issues are rare. Back in the 90's when Toyota was in a fkn truck infancy (a v6 in a t100 was about the best they had), 6bt cummins and 7.3 powerstroke powered heavy duty trucks were doing the heavy work. Some people need an actual truck to do work, tacoma sure aint gonna cut it. I have towed heavy with the 7.3 gas truck, and I was very impressed. The transmission shift points was right, everywhere. Steering and brakes were amazing. Much more refined than my ole 7.3 powerstroke. That’s a fact. If you really need a truck, Tacomas or that size truck ain’t going to cut it!
Semper Fi
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 17,243
Campfire Ranger
|
|
OP
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 17,243 |
To be fair, I think it depends on what you need the truck for. If it is to weave through old logging roads and down small trails with a moderate payload, then a compact truck like a Tacoma may be just the ticket. I've seen a single-cab Tacoma with 33" bias-ply mud tires fit in some tight spots and cross some creeks that I'd never attempt in a diesel 3/4 ton. I've also hooked up an F450 to loads I'd never dream of putting half of on a Tacoma. Both are trucks. Different needs.
I don't even have either at them moment. I'm rolling a turbo half-ton because I need some towing capacity but not on the level of a 3/4 ton, so I bought what met my needs.
Now with even more aplomb
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,852
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 12,852 |
The ford 7.3 gas motor is having camshaft issues. I'm not sure how wide-spread the issue is. When the 7.3 was introduced, Ford said it was designed for longevity in small trucks. It was supposed to be highly reliable. 7.3 is a great gas motor. I'd gladly buy a super duty with that engine. The issues are rare. Back in the 90's when Toyota was in a fkn truck infancy (a v6 in a t100 was about the best they had), 6bt cummins and 7.3 powerstroke powered heavy duty trucks were doing the heavy work. Some people need an actual truck to do work, tacoma sure aint gonna cut it. I have towed heavy with the 7.3 gas truck, and I was very impressed. The transmission shift points was right, everywhere. Steering and brakes were amazing. Much more refined than my ole 7.3 powerstroke. That’s a fact. If you really need a truck, Tacomas or that size truck ain’t going to cut it! Just to say it out loud, your 3/4 ton or 1 ton diesel is not a big truck. If you think it is, I'm putting 51,000 lbs on the trailer behind the Kenworth every Wednesday, and you're welcome to come show me how "big" your little dinky 3/4 ton truck really is. Horses for courses. Tacomas are great, durable, reliable little trucks, though I find the current mid-size Tacos neither fish nor fowl. Too big for many mountain roads and trails. If that's what you want, good for you. If you want a half ton, good for you. If you need to pull a horse trailer, buy a 3/4 ton diesel. If you need to make money, buy a class 6 or 8 truck. But good grief, one truck is not better than another because it's bigger than the other. And your weenie doesn't get bigger in a "big" truck, either.
Sic Semper Tyrannis
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 46,745
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 46,745 |
The ford 7.3 gas motor is having camshaft issues. I'm not sure how wide-spread the issue is. When the 7.3 was introduced, Ford said it was designed for longevity in small trucks. It was supposed to be highly reliable. 7.3 is a great gas motor. I'd gladly buy a super duty with that engine. The issues are rare. Back in the 90's when Toyota was in a fkn truck infancy (a v6 in a t100 was about the best they had), 6bt cummins and 7.3 powerstroke powered heavy duty trucks were doing the heavy work. Some people need an actual truck to do work, tacoma sure aint gonna cut it. I have towed heavy with the 7.3 gas truck, and I was very impressed. The transmission shift points was right, everywhere. Steering and brakes were amazing. Much more refined than my ole 7.3 powerstroke. That’s a fact. If you really need a truck, Tacomas or that size truck ain’t going to cut it! Just to say it out loud, your 3/4 ton or 1 ton diesel is not a big truck. If you think it is, I'm putting 51,000 lbs on the trailer behind the Kenworth every Wednesday, and you're welcome to come show me how "big" your little dinky 3/4 ton truck really is. Horses for courses. Tacomas are great, durable, reliable little trucks, though I find the current mid-size Tacos neither fish nor fowl. Too big for many mountain roads and trails. If that's what you want, good for you. If you want a half ton, good for you. If you need to pull a horse trailer, buy a 3/4 ton diesel. If you need to make money, buy a class 6 or 8 truck. But good grief, one truck is not better than another because it's bigger than the other. And your weenie doesn't get bigger in a "big" truck, either. LMFAO
Camp is where you make it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 481
Campfire Member
|
|
Campfire Member
Joined: Jan 2022
Posts: 481 |
about time Toyota, last good taco had a 4.0 with some torque and well tuned 5-spd....the minivan motor ones were hard to live with, would have only been survivable like the older ones if they had a truck motor lol
ford ranger 2.3 inline 4 turbo 10-spd (no manual) but you can get that motor with 7 Spd manual in bronco sadly...put it in the ranger ya dumb facks...toyota can't be only manual game in town! jeep gladiator has a manual but fack them, they will screw you on any warranty from any angle they can and that pentastar is no longer a reliable lump...so fack them too
Chev designed the 2.7 inline 4 turbo to be a truck motor and is now in the colorado/canyons and is one heckuva motor, 8-spd (lighter than the 10-spd and with all that torque...no need for the 10)
that looks to be a well though out displacement and power level for the taco...now if the daily livability improves like maybe not having to crack the knee off the dash when jumping in and head off the roofline at same time and feeling like sitting on the floor and in the cab of a 90's civic...well maybe they will have a decent mid size truck finally....
looks like ford went to the front of the line in reliability for midsize in consumer reports though, Toyota and honda tied for second or some shizzo, the ford is a pretty premium drivetrain and would be top contender, the drivetrain in the gm's already well proven since it's been out 5 years already without issues and just adding power and warranty, the 2.7 was actually one of only 2 motors gm engineers couldn't kill when they tried to kill it, it's moving their half tons along awesome and I chose it over the 5.3 because I did my research thoroughly and it's an amazing motor
anyway, will be fun to watch how the new turbo taco does over the next couple years and see if it can regain it's reliability top spot again, hope no issues lol
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 30,784
Campfire 'Bwana
|
|
Campfire 'Bwana
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 30,784 |
I wish they would allow the importation of Toyota diesel trucks. There would be one in my driveway even if the price bordered on ridiculous. yep me too
T R U M P W O N !
U L T R A M A G A !
|
|
|
|
|
346 members (257_X_50, 1_deuce, 10gaugemag, 2500HD, 260Remguy, 260madman, 41 invisible),
2,414
guests, and
1,240
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,860
Posts18,478,571
Members73,948
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
