FYI - Original vs. Re-designed Cam Phasors (3.5L, 3.0L and 2.7L)

[Lion77]

ECOBOOST CAM PHASERS. OLD VS NEW. HERE IS THE DIFFERENCE.

Really interesting video for those wanting to see what exactly fails in the phasors. The original design is DUMB! Whoever thought that was a good idea and didn't properly cycle test it should be reprimanded big time, but I have a feeling it's a contract design, not a Ford specific design.

The Infamoust 2st Gen Phasors in Gen 1 and Gen 2 EB 3.5L's.

Or

Re-designed Cam Phasor for 3rd Gen 3.5L, 2.7L and 3.0L production 2021 and later (yes, the updated design can be used in the original as a replacement and that's what was being done in the video of the vehicle being repaired).

The locking pin hole is fully supported with oil drainage slots vs. a channel which I suspect would fill with fluid and hydro lock it just like the tech suggested. New design is MUCH more robust in terms of wear and function. I'd image in you get phasor issues in a 2.7L or 3.0L it's more of a mfg. defect than design flaw like the original, which may give some more confidence in a warranty replacement.

Sponsored

 

[Lion77]

I've wondered what exactly failed in the original design for quite some time but could never find any articles exploring the actual phasor assembly itself, so I just wanted to share this with people. Also, I would imagine the original design is more sensitive to oil viscosity so synthetics and regular changes may be a good mitigation strategy.

I'll be doing 5k changes of full synthetic on my RR 3.0L even though it should have the new style phasor. My best friend has a 2021 ST with the 3.0L and no issue, 130k and counting, he does 10k intervals but mostly drives highway and does use full synthetic.

 

[LordRaptor]

I've wondered what exactly failed in the original design for quite some time but could never find any articles exploring the actual phasor assembly itself, so I just wanted to share this with people. Also, I would imagine the original design is more sensitive to oil viscosity so synthetics and regular changes may be a good mitigation strategy.

I'll be doing 5k changes of full synthetic on my RR 3.0L even though it should have the new style phasor. My best friend has a 2021 ST with the 3.0L and no issue, 130k and counting, he does 10k intervals but mostly drives highway and does use full synthetic.

How do you know if you have the new phaser? Is there a cutoff date on the window sticker?

 

[Awirez]

If the new design was introduced in 2021 and beyond, why do some people with the new gen Ranger report cam phaser issues? Still flawed?

 

[Lion77]

Could be manufacturing defect, but I am hard pressed to believe Ford is still using the old design in the 3.0L but not in the 3.5L and 2.7L. Also, there are other issues that mimic the sound, such as a bad waste gate on a turbo, bad chain tensioner etc. Could be another mfg. issue with some 3.0Ls that cause that.

The only way to know for sure would be if someone does have an issue and needs a teardown, see if they can get dealer pics of it disassembled. It's easy to tell once they pull that front cover off. That would answer the question definitively.

Also, I would make the argument that the new design isn't beyond having mfg. defects. What there is there's a bad batch of plunger springs and the locking plunger isn't engaging because of that instead of the actual flaw in the original design? What if some of them are machined out of tolerance? What if the plunger has burrs that prevent it from sliding in and out of the detent? Lots of things could go wrong not design related, but quality related.

I have not been able to find a single video or image of a failed new gen phasor showing that if that was actually the cause, what failed. Maybe some will pop up, but I have a feeling that problem is mostly solved and issues we might see are more mfg. quality related.

 

[Lion77]

Also, I might add another case example, my best friend from high school who is a military vet has a 2021 Explorer ST with 130k on it now. Has the same 3.0L and 10R60 trans. He runs 10k oil changes and isn't easy on the car, but always waits until it's warmed up before hooning, uses full synthetic motorcraft and factory oil filters.

It's just a single point, but so far, he has not had any issues, actually driving his ST is what made me give the RR a serious look after I was able to see how the 3.0L performed in the ST, especially with the higher miles now. Now the 2020 ST? I believe that would still have the old cam phasor design. Fast forward to 2024 and 2025, I really doubt they have any inventory of the old phasor design left and have completely transitioned to the new design in all Ecoboost V6's at this point.

Take a look at this: 2017-2020 Ford F-150 3.5L Ecoboost Startup Rattle Fix: Make Sure You Are Getting The Latest Phasers!

He explains the change over, but also why so many F-150's kept getting the old phasors. Basically, Ford wanted to use up existing stock first for warranty, even knowing the flaw and how quickly it would fail, they screwed customers instead of scrapping the bad inventory.

In my opinion, that was extremely shady and immoral. They should have transitioned to the new design for all warranty repairs. But he notes when the change occurred as per Ford. The first video I linked above mostly just shows the difference between the original design and the completely re-designed phasors.

I've also tried looking for rebuilds on 2021 and newer ST's and can't really find anything. The majority of issues seem to be with 2019-2020 MY, but even then, a lot of those are not cam phasor related, there some that had bad cylinders, rod bearings, head gaskets etc. which are all mfg. quality defects.

 

[Lion77]

A Guide to Ford's 2.7L, 3.0L and 3.5L Engines | DrivingLine

Looks like the 3.0L debuted in 2016, so from 2016-2020 MY, anywhere the gen 1 3.0L (and by extension the 2.7L) would have had the older phasor design just like the Gen 1 and Gen 2 3.5L Ecoboost V6.

We should do a community search and see if anyone can find on other forums a teardown of a 2021 or newer 3.0L or 2.7L. That would settle the issue, but for the life of me I cannot find a single one!

So far it's all the gen 1's produced from 2016-2020, unless it was another issue all together (i.e., one guy had a 2023 Explorer ST, but it as a bad cylinder, not phasor, I've seen that happen to the 5.0L's in the mustangs on the forums back when I had my GT, on rare occasion someone would get an engine with a major defect like an out of round cylinder).

 

[Lion77]

RMISC-24V635-2546.pdf

Ford Vehicles Recalled for Engine Issue | Local News | local3news.com

Found that for the 3.0L, but it was again, faulty manufacturing. Intake valve stems cracking. That has never been a widespread issue on any of the EB V6's, so this is an example of a quality issue from whoever manufactures the sodium filled valves for Ford. Stuff like that happens to any auto manufacturer.

Those valves must have been the COVID specials as 2022 is when a lot of mfg's started having major quality issues across the board.

 

[burbansk]

Hello Lion77 and thank you for the video's. You are correct when you said to use full synthetic oil. I use Amsoil Signature 5W-30 in my 2015 F150 3.5l . I also never let it go over 5,000 miles. My engine now has 140,000 miles on her with no issues. I am a retired FoMoCo Experimental / Prototype engine mechanic who has been with the Ecoboost programs from the very start. Keep that oil changed.

 

[Crapblaster]

I had a 2004 5.4L F150 with noisey cam phasers. It didn't just tick when first starting up but all the time. I sold it 210,000 miles and never replaced them. It was still running strong when I sold it.

 

[Lion77]

Hello Lion77 and thank you for the video's. You are correct when you said to use full synthetic oil. I use Amsoil Signature 5W-30 in my 2015 F150 3.5l . I also never let it go over 5,000 miles. My engine now has 140,000 miles on her with no issues. I am a retired FoMoCo Experimental / Prototype engine mechanic who has been with the Ecoboost programs from the very start. Keep that oil changed.

Do you know if the 3.0L in the Ranger Raptor is actual dual injection (port and DI)? There seems to be some skepticism by some on this forum claiming that it's the ONLY EcoBoost V6 that's still entire DI despite Fords own website as listing it as dual injection (port and DI).

I could try to verify on my own RR, but at 28F, windy and snowy out I'm not inclined to go poking around the engine bay right now lol.

2024 Ford Ranger® Raptor® Truck | Model Details & Specs | Ford.com

Ford lists both the 2nd Gen 2.7L and 3rd Gen 3.5L as dual injection, I have a really hard time believing the 3.0L would not have followed suite, especially by 2025. They do list the based 2.3L EcoBoost I4 as Direct Injection only, which makes sense since it's a base level "budget" engine and it may be less sensitive to carbon buildup.

 

[burbansk]

Port fuel and Direct Injection, plus 91 octane is required. We have the 2.7L in my wife's new Ranger which is also port fuel and DI but we can burn 87 octane. I would have loved to have purchased the new Ranger Raptor but it was almost $10,000 more than our Ranger and no A/Z plan.

 

[jrRaptor]

Do you know if the 3.0L in the Ranger Raptor is actual dual injection (port and DI)? There seems to be some skepticism by some on this forum claiming that it's the ONLY EcoBoost V6 that's still entire DI despite Fords own website as listing it as dual injection (port and DI).

I could try to verify on my own RR, but at 28F, windy and snowy out I'm not inclined to go poking around the engine bay right now lol.

2024 Ford Ranger® Raptor® Truck | Model Details & Specs | Ford.com

Ford lists both the 2nd Gen 2.7L and 3rd Gen 3.5L as dual injection, I have a really hard time believing the 3.0L would not have followed suite, especially by 2025. They do list the based 2.3L EcoBoost I4 as Direct Injection only, which makes sense since it's a base level "budget" engine and it may be less sensitive to carbon buildup.

The 3.0L Ranger Raptor engine is DI only. It has been debated ad nauseum. It has been proven it's DI only; a LOT of us have actually opened the hood to look. Believe me, we WANT direct and port injection but we didn't get it, despite what Ford planned and even said once upon a time or probably still does.

Thread about it here: https://www.ranger6g.com/forum/threads/port-and-direct-injection.8004/

Happy reading.

 

[burbansk]

The 3.0L Ranger Raptor engine is DI only. It has been debated ad nauseum. It has been proven it's DI only; a LOT of us have actually opened the hood to look. Believe me, we WANT direct and port injection but we didn't get it, despite what Ford planned and even said once upon a time or probably still does.

Thread about it here: https://www.ranger6g.com/forum/threads/port-and-direct-injection.8004/

Happy reading.

I was going by what Ford engine specs was saying. I will call my friend tomorrow who still works at EMDO ( Engine Manufacturing Development Operations ) and ask him to verify.

 

[Lion77]

That would be great. There is one possibility, those taking photos the DI injectors have not looked to see if Ford could have implemented a dual injection method like Subaru, where a single injector is used on the intake manifold ONLY for the purpose of fuel washing the intake valves. They are all assuming it's dual injector per cylinder and clearly, it's not from actual photos of the engine.

So that would be nice to clear this up once and for all, I just have not had enough time to look into it on my own RR due to being 23F out and busy. I don't really care either way, both of my Mazda's are DI only (2.5 Turbo in our CX-9, 115k runs great and 2.5 NA in my little 3, 49k and also runs great).

DI only seems to be more sensitive to maintenance snafus by the user, but my experience has been that with proper maintenance choices it's not an issue, especially with proper break in and ring seal.

Sponsored