- Joined
- Aug 19, 2017
- Messages
- 3,296
- Reaction score
- 3,592
- Thread starter
- Staff
- #41
Just would like to add in case I have added some fear to some people's ownership experiences with DI engines.
There are a few different OEM approaches to this DI issue.
1) Ford/Lincoln have now abandoned this on their (3.7L IIRC) engine. I was looking at the Lincoln Continental lately, and was surprised to learn that Ford/Lincoln have ditched DI altogether on the 3.7L engine available on US Continentals, but not Canadian ones.
2) Lexus has the D4S system. It uses both port and direct injection. At high load = DI, at partial loads = PFI (port fuel injection). Lexus has patented this system which makes it hard for other OEMs to use this dual injection system, allegedly. That said, Lexus fuel economy blows because of this system (PFI = crap.)
3) Mercedes doesn't seem to suffer from excessive carbon buildup. MB started DI with their M276 engine which uses one air/oil separator on the V6 and 2 separate ones on the V8. There is a low and high impact oil separator. There are no systemic reports of DI engine woes.
4) Audi's 6 cyclinder TSI engine doesn't seem to suffer from this, but that engine was then subject to two separate class action lawsuits -unrelated to carbon/DI....the 4.0TSI engine seems to still suffer from this although it has a pretty elaborate air/oil separator. That said I remain hopeful that the next mass 6 cylinder engine (EA839) will keep the carbon issue at bay. I was impressed at how they designed the air/oil separator, and since the design of said separator is similar to the 3.0 TSI engine that seemed to deal with that issue well, I remain hopeful.
All this to say, that my experience with DI engines was what it was, and I bought my current Mercedes because it was the last year that it was not a DI engine. Now in 2018 I am forced to look at what car I want next, and they are ALL DI engines. I'm just now more careful to figure out what DI engines do not suffer from systemic carbon buildup problems and what the engines feature when it comes to air/oil separators. I don't want to bore people here, but it's neat to see how different OEMs are addressing this issue. Some have lowered combustion temperatures, some have added certain metals to the intake valves (to their detriment in some cases). All this to say - if you are a car lover like me, just do your research. Buying DI doesn't always mean =hell, but in my research, the Koreans (Hyundai/Genesis) and the Americans (GM/Ford) haven't addressed this well enough. That said, please take my last comments here about the Koreans/Americans with a massive grain of salt. I have not researched this as well as Audi/Mercedes.
I know BMW has struggled with this even with engine designs as of late, with the exception of the engines made in the last 2 years for the BMW 5 and 7 series as that was what I have researched in recent months.
There are a few different OEM approaches to this DI issue.
1) Ford/Lincoln have now abandoned this on their (3.7L IIRC) engine. I was looking at the Lincoln Continental lately, and was surprised to learn that Ford/Lincoln have ditched DI altogether on the 3.7L engine available on US Continentals, but not Canadian ones.
2) Lexus has the D4S system. It uses both port and direct injection. At high load = DI, at partial loads = PFI (port fuel injection). Lexus has patented this system which makes it hard for other OEMs to use this dual injection system, allegedly. That said, Lexus fuel economy blows because of this system (PFI = crap.)
3) Mercedes doesn't seem to suffer from excessive carbon buildup. MB started DI with their M276 engine which uses one air/oil separator on the V6 and 2 separate ones on the V8. There is a low and high impact oil separator. There are no systemic reports of DI engine woes.
4) Audi's 6 cyclinder TSI engine doesn't seem to suffer from this, but that engine was then subject to two separate class action lawsuits -unrelated to carbon/DI....the 4.0TSI engine seems to still suffer from this although it has a pretty elaborate air/oil separator. That said I remain hopeful that the next mass 6 cylinder engine (EA839) will keep the carbon issue at bay. I was impressed at how they designed the air/oil separator, and since the design of said separator is similar to the 3.0 TSI engine that seemed to deal with that issue well, I remain hopeful.
All this to say, that my experience with DI engines was what it was, and I bought my current Mercedes because it was the last year that it was not a DI engine. Now in 2018 I am forced to look at what car I want next, and they are ALL DI engines. I'm just now more careful to figure out what DI engines do not suffer from systemic carbon buildup problems and what the engines feature when it comes to air/oil separators. I don't want to bore people here, but it's neat to see how different OEMs are addressing this issue. Some have lowered combustion temperatures, some have added certain metals to the intake valves (to their detriment in some cases). All this to say - if you are a car lover like me, just do your research. Buying DI doesn't always mean =hell, but in my research, the Koreans (Hyundai/Genesis) and the Americans (GM/Ford) haven't addressed this well enough. That said, please take my last comments here about the Koreans/Americans with a massive grain of salt. I have not researched this as well as Audi/Mercedes.
I know BMW has struggled with this even with engine designs as of late, with the exception of the engines made in the last 2 years for the BMW 5 and 7 series as that was what I have researched in recent months.
Last edited: