DIY maintenance

[wildbill23c]

It is based on the 2.3 Duratec that first graced the Ranger in the 00's.

They changed stuff, I don't know what exactly but it isn't just a turbo kit on a old 2.3.

AFAIK PCV carbon buildup on the valves is the only real common issue with the Ranger 2.3. It is somewhat drivecycle dependant too, in my area (lots of highway driving) it is pretty much unheard of.

The earlier varients like in a Focus had headgasket issues but they fixed that before the Ranger came out (Ranger uses a different block and I think head too)

Hmm, ok thank you for the information. My issue is I only drive 8 miles round trip for work, so a new turbo charged ranger or bronco wouldn't be a good idea as a short range daily driver then. I don't drive out of town very often anymore so I guess I better skip the idea of a ranger or bronco in my future I don't want to have any issues, dealerships in my area are 35 miles away, and without any way to get home after having to drop off a vehicle for repairs, on top of that having no way to get a vehicle back to a dealer if it breaks down is not something I'd want to try to deal with. Its bad enough when I have a vehicle issue in town, but at least its only a 3-4 mile walk home depending on where I am in town at the time....I've had to make that walk several times...waiting 3+ hours for a wrecker where I live is very common...when my Jeep died last year on the side of a 2 lane highway during the summer I was stuck there for 4-1/2 hours waiting for a wrecker....so I can't chance stuff like that happening with a vehicle that would have to do to a dealer for warranty work, repairs, service, etc. Ran into that issue with my 08 Tundra and trying to get a rental car anywhere never seems to end well, there's just nothing out there.

 

[adsm08]

They changed stuff, I don't know what exactly but it isn't just a turbo kit on a old 2.3.

Block has new NVH ribbing, internals are forged, VCT was added over the older fixed cams, direct fuel injection, COP instead of coil packs, the head is VERY different. It uses what they call an "integrated exhaust manifold". There aren't four ports that a manifold bolts to, there are four runners to a single large port that turbo bolts over. Exhaust cam is different, to accomodate the mechanical high pressure fuel pump, it uses a mechanical vacuum pump driven off the intake cam, no EGR.

 

[19Walt93]

Hmm, ok thank you for the information. My issue is I only drive 8 miles round trip for work, so a new turbo charged ranger or bronco wouldn't be a good idea as a short range daily driver then. I don't drive out of town very often anymore so I guess I better skip the idea of a ranger or bronco in my future I don't want to have any issues, dealerships in my area are 35 miles away, and without any way to get home after having to drop off a vehicle for repairs, on top of that having no way to get a vehicle back to a dealer if it breaks down is not something I'd want to try to deal with. Its bad enough when I have a vehicle issue in town, but at least its only a 3-4 mile walk home depending on where I am in town at the time....I've had to make that walk several times...waiting 3+ hours for a wrecker where I live is very common...when my Jeep died last year on the side of a 2 lane highway during the summer I was stuck there for 4-1/2 hours waiting for a wrecker....so I can't chance stuff like that happening with a vehicle that would have to do to a dealer for warranty work, repairs, service, etc. Ran into that issue with my 08 Tundra and trying to get a rental car anywhere never seems to end well, there's just nothing out there.

An 8 mile round trip would be fine with an Ecoboost, turbochargers aren't rocket science- change the oil at least twice a year and run it.

 

[sgtsandman]

The turbos out now aren’t like the ones in the 80’s. Will a present day turbocharger engine be as reliable as a conventional internal combustion engine? Hard to say but the ecoboost engine family seem to be holding up ok so far. What has it been? 10 years now?

 

[wildbill23c]

An 8 mile round trip would be fine with an Ecoboost, turbochargers aren't rocket science- change the oil at least twice a year and run it.

The turbos I assume have oil that circulates through them, is that changed when you change engine oil or is that a separate task? Sorry probably sounds stupid but like I said I'm not a turbo guy, never owned anything turbo charged.

I do wonder why they went with turbo chargers instead of just supercharging them like Nissan did with the Frontiers several years ago? Is one better than the other?

 

[wildbill23c]

The turbos out now aren’t like the ones in the 80’s. Will a present day turbocharger engine be as reliable as a conventional internal combustion engine? Hard to say but the ecoboost engine family seem to be holding up ok so far. What has it been? 10 years now?

I'd wonder really if you maintain them properly, which I am wondering how much truth there is in that statement alone for the failures that my aunt is always talking about at the dealership. I often wonder if many of those failures are due to skipped regular maintenance? I mean didn't Ford have some turbo charged car engines in the 80's that are still actually on the road to some degree, and being pulled off engines from pick a part yards to be put on RBV engines? So if that's the case I'd think the turbos would be fine, I bet the electronics probably go haywire long before the turbos & engines fail unless of course they're not maintained.

Sorry I still love the old trucks, but just extremely curious as to how things will hold up over time, cool you get a 3 year warranty but what happens when you have to have something fixed on these trucks after the warranty expires? Are the repairs really that much more expensive than an older vehicle truly? In the way of parts, I know labor rates at shops vary from around $75 to well over $100 an hour for labor where I'm at....but are parts for today's vehicles really that much more expensive in terms of replacement cost and the number of times they have to be replaced, like alternators, water pumps, etc. I know a water pump for my 88 Bronco 2 is like $50 or less for example.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Hmm, ok thank you for the information. My issue is I only drive 8 miles round trip for work, so a new turbo charged ranger or bronco wouldn't be a good idea as a short range daily driver then. I don't drive out of town very often anymore so I guess I better skip the idea of a ranger or bronco in my future I don't want to have any issues, dealerships in my area are 35 miles away, and without any way to get home after having to drop off a vehicle for repairs, on top of that having no way to get a vehicle back to a dealer if it breaks down is not something I'd want to try to deal with. Its bad enough when I have a vehicle issue in town, but at least its only a 3-4 mile walk home depending on where I am in town at the time....I've had to make that walk several times...waiting 3+ hours for a wrecker where I live is very common...when my Jeep died last year on the side of a 2 lane highway during the summer I was stuck there for 4-1/2 hours waiting for a wrecker....so I can't chance stuff like that happening with a vehicle that would have to do to a dealer for warranty work, repairs, service, etc. Ran into that issue with my 08 Tundra and trying to get a rental car anywhere never seems to end well, there's just nothing out there.

The thing with the buildup on the valves, the 2.3 is direct injected, fuel is sprayed directly into the combustion chamber, not the intake port. So stuff from the PVC can accumulate on the intake valve, in severe cases it can make them run weird. There is a procedure for cleaning the valves and you can get a catch can that is supposed to filter it out (I need to check into one for our Bronco)

The early 3.5 EB was the same way. Eventually somebody figured out "hey this can be a problem" and the V6 Ecoboosts went to dual port, with an injector spraying into the intake port like they always have and one spraying into the chamber. This keeps the valves clean like apparently nobody knew they had been doing prior. The 2.7 in the Bronco is a dual port if you are concerned.

I am not overly concerned obviously.

The turbos I assume have oil that circulates through them, is that changed when you change engine oil or is that a separate task? Sorry probably sounds stupid but like I said I'm not a turbo guy, never owned anything turbo charged.

I do wonder why they went with turbo chargers instead of just supercharging them like Nissan did with the Frontiers several years ago? Is one better than the other?

Turbos have oil lines from the engine and use the engine's oil for lube.

Turbos are more efficient and simpler on the control side for an OEM.

I'd wonder really if you maintain them properly, which I am wondering how much truth there is in that statement alone for the failures that my aunt is always talking about at the dealership. I often wonder if many of those failures are due to skipped regular maintenance? I mean didn't Ford have some turbo charged car engines in the 80's that are still actually on the road to some degree, and being pulled off engines from pick a part yards to be put on RBV engines? So if that's the case I'd think the turbos would be fine, I bet the electronics probably go haywire long before the turbos & engines fail unless of course they're not maintained.

Sorry I still love the old trucks, but just extremely curious as to how things will hold up over time, cool you get a 3 year warranty but what happens when you have to have something fixed on these trucks after the warranty expires? Are the repairs really that much more expensive than an older vehicle truly? In the way of parts, I know labor rates at shops vary from around $75 to well over $100 an hour for labor where I'm at....but are parts for today's vehicles really that much more expensive in terms of replacement cost and the number of times they have to be replaced, like alternators, water pumps, etc. I know a water pump for my 88 Bronco 2 is like $50 or less for example.

The big thing is to not overestimate how good your modern engine is with modern oil. Ford kind of does it to itself to a degree too, even with my 2.8 (per the sales brochure) you can go up 7,500 miles on an oil change.

Lower middle of page 19:

https://www.therangerstation.com/resources/pdf_documents/1985_ford_ranger_brochure.pdf

And maybe in some lab condition they can, people look at the chart in the manual, underestimate what they are doing and run oil changes way longer than they should. They still do the same crap in new literature.

"I just have a short drive"

Short drives = short oil change intervals boosted or otherwise. Never fully getting up to temp is bad news for the oil.

"Oh, I live in the country the air is clean"

You also live on a gravel road with atomized rock in the air and your neighbor does fieldwork throwing dirt and dried powdered plants in the air.

Nobody thinks about stuff like that.

Glowing red for days on diesels with decent care turbos last darn near forever.

I opted for the 2.3 in our Bronco because it is a I4 and thus should be easier to work on than a DOHC V6, when its out of warranty, I will do as much as I can for repairs on it like I have the Edge before it. The thing will be a crappy race car or tow pig and as it sits it will have the most power of anything in my fleet even with the 2.3 (V8 F-150 included)

 

[sgtsandman]

One of the issues the 80's turbos had was oil coking in the bearings from a hot turbo and the oil just sitting in the turbo. I forget what the fix was for that but oil isn't allowed to just sit there now and cook inside the hot turbo. Whether it's a thermal differential circulation thing that is going on or what, I can't say but they came up with a solution to prevent the coking.

I can't say what the change intervals are on other ecoboost engines but the Ranger 2.3 recommends 10,000 miles or 1 year, which ever comes first. Bad idea in my opinion. Heck, I usually don't make the 7,500 mile change interval specified for my 2011. I do it every spring and fall for both and use whatever synthetic is on sale with a decent oil filter. I don't track the mileage so much for doing that. I just use the 6 month model. The synthetic just pads the "cushion" to that and keeps the inside of the engine cleaner as an added bonus. Depending on what is going on, mileage usually averages somewhere between 3,000 and 5,000 miles but it varies. Some years, if I'm on a deployment, I have less than 5,000 miles for the year and qualify for an exemption on emissions testing.

For the valve coking issue, I've been seeing different articles on the concern. Apparently, Ford installed an oil separator on the side of the block of the 2.3 ecoboosts for the PCV system that is supposed to address the valve coking issue. Time will tell how effective the system actually is or not. But they have tried to address the issue in any case.

From my understanding, superchargers, while great from low end grunt, are usually a larger package than a turbo and parasitic drag is considerably more than what a turbo imposes on an engine. There are pluses and minuses to both systems. It depends on what you are using them for as to which is the better option. Of course, there is the option Air Forces used around the WWII era where they used both.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

When I was daily driving a turbo Eclipse in the early 00's "turbo timers" were a thing. You shut the car off and walked away and it would idle for a couple minutes until things cooled down.

I was too cheap for that (and in college) so I just sat in it until it cooled down like I do with things I work hard. IIRC I did that for like 2min.

 

[19Walt93]

The turbos I assume have oil that circulates through them, is that changed when you change engine oil or is that a separate task? Sorry probably sounds stupid but like I said I'm not a turbo guy, never owned anything turbo charged.

I do wonder why they went with turbo chargers instead of just supercharging them like Nissan did with the Frontiers several years ago? Is one better than the other?

Like someone already said, the turbo is lubed by the engine oil. Turbocharging is more efficient than supercharging, the exhaust spins the turbo impeller and a supercharger is belt driven and eats power and mileage. We sold a pile of 3.5 Ecoboost F150's and I remember the shop having to replace 1 turbo on a 160,000 mile F150 that was used to tow a trailer full of welding supplies every day. We never took an engine apart. I bought a new 2016 Escape with a 2.0 Ecoboost and it's been flawless. It's also never been much over 3000 miles or over 6 months between oil changes with Motorcraft Synthetic Blend 5w30 and a Motorcraft filter. One of my high school classmates bought a VW small SUV a few years ago and believed the salesman when he said 10k for oil changes, at 5 years old and 30,000 miles she had to buy a turbo. Turbo's aren't the problem, lack of maintenance is.

 

[MikeG]

Just need oil that won't break down when hot, and don't shut the car off right after keeping your foot in the boost.

If Ford (or any OEM) doesn't spec synthetic oil for turbo engines, well, they are stupid. And if the owners are going to one of those oil quick-change places where they can't be sure what got put in, ditto.

 

[Dirtman]

I told my mom if she ever takes her edge with the ecoboost to a quick lube place I would punch her in the boob...

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Just need oil that won't break down when hot, and don't shut the car off right after keeping your foot in the boost.

If Ford (or any OEM) doesn't spec synthetic oil for turbo engines, well, they are stupid. And if the owners are going to one of those oil quick-change places where they can't be sure what got put in, ditto.

I think Ford calls for the same ol' Synthetic Blend 5-20 they do for everything else.

 

[19Walt93]

At least in 2017 when I retired, all the Ecoboost stuff called for 5w30. I've seen many, many vehicles exceed 200k with no problems running Motorcraft synthetic blend if it was changed regularly.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

At least in 2017 when I retired, all the Ecoboost stuff called for 5w30. I've seen many, many vehicles exceed 200k with no problems running Motorcraft synthetic blend if it was changed regularly.

I haven't really looked it up, I know there for awhile they were pushing 5-20 for everything but the 4.0, I didn't know they swung back to it for the EB's.