F150 2.7 22MPG vs Ram ED 23MPG

jus2shy wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:


OMG Don I did do my research :B and the what makes the difference is how the manufacturer handles the oil vapor. In my case Ford designed in a vapor oil separator for my engine while Chrysler decided to allow for this oil vapor to be regurgitated through your engine which is a bad idea in my opinion.

BTW... Just so you know "blow by" and "oil vapor" is two different issues. Remember I reported earlier that this guy has said some things that are not accurate this being one of them.

The Truth About Trucks

Man, that truth about trucks guy irritates me. He never gives any context when he compares components. Like comparing the 3-link ford suspension arms against the "then" Dodge 5-link suspension arm. Of course they're going to be massively different, one has 4 of those links while the other only has 2 massive links. But oh well, I digress.

As for oil blow-by, Ford's solution isn't 100%, but it does seem to get a good amount of the oil mist. However, I think Cummins does a better job, I've never seen a chevy's turbo so I don't know how they handle crank case oil mist or what their turbine looks like. This is a guy who was doing a swap on his turbo with a new wicked wheels turbine on the Ford forums (a mod I thought about doing on my Cummins): Ford Truck Enthusiasts.




Another FTE member who thought they blew a turbo, but apparently it's just normal oil accumulation: Ford Truck Enthusiast 2



Where as for my own engine, here's how much oil mist was on the front of my turbo. Only negative is that with Cummins' solution, you have to change a filter every 60,000 miles or so (not too hard, but it is a pricey unit at roughly 65 bucks a pop I believe)

I understand... but the intent of the video was to point out the separator unit. Having said that I'm sure it's not 100% effective, but something is better than nothing. I also agree the filter on top of the valve cover on the Cummins is a piece of cake to replace and again is better than nothing.