Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Figure for everyone wondering what your intake valves will look like after 78k miles with no catch can, full synthetic oil changes every 5k and only premium fuel used.. see below. Motor was torn down for AFM lifter failure.

IMG_4397.JPG

Posted
1 minute ago, JLaw297 said:

Figure for everyone wondering what your intake valves will look like after 78k miles with no catch can, full synthetic oil changes every 5k and only premium fuel used.. see below. Motor was torn down for AFM lifter failure.

IMG_4397.JPG

Interesting.  I was kicking myself the other day for not having them take pictures of my intake valves when they did my AFM lifter replacement a couple months ago.  I'm pretty sure it's the cause of my (very slowly)  increasingly rough idle.

Posted

Same with my idle. I wish they had sent me a pic upon tear down so I could have had the heads sent somewhere to be walnut blasted before it was put back together.

Posted

Got to love DI.  I wonder if a regular treatment of the spray can CRC valve cleaner make any difference or would that happen eventually anyways?  That's pretty nasty looking for only 78K miles.   

Posted (edited)

Ummm that doesn’t look bad at all

 

its black and nasty looking but as far as Actual buildup not that bad

Edited by truckguy82
  • Thanks 1
Posted

Wow, that looks pretty bad. Only 78k miles? I've seen some other pictures on here and they look bad too. 

 

I do 5,00 mile oil changes too...and run a catch can. When I reach 70k miles I'm planning on pulling the intake off and doing a manual cleaning...wondering how it'll look (not sure how much help the catch can is actually giving). 

Posted
2 hours ago, truckguy82 said:

Ummm that doesn’t look bad at all

 

its black and nasty looking but as far as Actual buildup not that bad

Was thinking the same, not great but not awful.  Doubt that is causing any issues at all.

Posted

uless your loosing MPG's i wouldn't bother tearing the manifold off, your better off finding a private BMW shop that does walnut blasting and let them clean it correctly. or you guys can buy the vacuum blasting tool online, and get a 50lb bag of crushed walnuuts. and blow the weekend cleaning the valves.

Posted
10 hours ago, NomadicCPO said:

Was thinking the same, not great but not awful.  Doubt that is causing any issues at all.

+1

 

Not great but I've seen a lot worse. Either way, while you have the opportunity get it cleaned up JL!

Posted

Obviously, pulling port fuel injected heads would most likely reveal something that looked brand new with a few specs.  This is most likely gonna happen regardless and unfortunately quicker on GDI's and has nothing to do with OCI intervals at all.  Is it bad?  It's not great but it's not gonna do anything for your ownership life expectancy.  We all be coking.....................

Posted

That isn't bad if you ask me.  This is what I would call bad, picture of BMW valves. Before and after cleaning.

 

 

n54-valve-carbon-17076613_767005956788490_9148968870982189056_n.jpg

  • Like 2
Posted
2 hours ago, Jacoby said:

Those look horrible

Carbon buildup from di has been known to cut out like 25-30% of hp

 

while it looks bad compared to port injection, it looks fantastic for di. Probably losing like 5-10hp tops.

 

his is the worst ive seen for the lt motors, and its really not that bad

Posted (edited)

could also just install  hydro boost from a 2500 in place of the vac pump,  delete vac pump lines, and run breather filters on your valve covers.. problem would stop there..

Edited by flyingfool
Posted

Nasty. Now we know why Ford used their noodles and did DI + Port Injection. First time I thought I would ever give Ford credit over GM in the engine/powertrain department but in this instance they won and GM looks like the dummy. Trade them in before warranty is out. Motto of new vehicles beyond the year 2001. 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,778
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    daveishi
    Newest Member
    daveishi
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,189 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Because that is IDIOTIC, much like this question. They've already been forced to do it by past administrations - why would you roll that back when it's a GOOD thing?  WHO IS ARGUING FOR LOWER MILEAGE???? 😂  NOBODY IS!!   I'm certainly not! What I want is RELIABLE vehicles again that are worth the price paid!    I don't get your logic here ...   In 2003 I paid $2,200 for our '86 Grand Marquis. It's STILL running and I've never been inside the engine, aside for the timing cover since it was leaking, so I threw a new timing set in since that makes sense. Transmission is ORIGINAL. Electric pump in the gas tank is ORIGINAL. Rear end is ORIGINAL. I'd have to hit my head REAL hard to want to pay $60k or more for a car that still can't come close to the comfort, seating and storage space, or reliability of this one. Nothing is even in the ball park! Hundreds of thousands of brands and models have been built and sent to the crusher while this one keeps on going!   https://postimg.cc/Z9XRrCSg   I've got a whole fleet of cars, motorcycles, and a truck close to this age for summer and winter. No one could pay me enough to buy anything built this century. I have zero use for any it.
    • Since I'm the one who has to fix them when they break, I'll take vehicles over 30 years old all day, EVERY day, over ANY modern crap. Have you attempted any repairs on anything built after 2006? It's a friggin nightmare, and gets worse the newer the model year.    If I had the will or desire, I can make any car of any age outside of a Model T (I don't have THAT much will ...) just as powerful, comfortable, and have all the tech the new stuff does, and get pretty close in mileage, too. I prefer SIMPLICITY. The less the vehicle has, the less to fix WHEN it breaks, not IF.   I'm glad you snot-nosed punks don't like them. More for us, plus that keeps the prices from climbing more than they already have.👍
    • Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
    • Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
    • Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...