Help - what's that ticking sound?!

[Steve Addy]

I will say that the 5.4L is a bucket of ****e though....

Steve

 

[thechoochlyman]

I think my head parts are coming from ID Parts either today or tomorrow. Either way, I decided to use my free time to go ahead and swap the water pump and thermostat since they've been in there for 120k already. Honestly I really feel like they could have very safely made it to 180k. The water pump still felt nice and snug - not as much as the new one, obviously, but nowhere near worn out.

 

[garciapiano]

These water pumps are surprisingly stout... When I got my car I think the original was still on there after 400,000 miles and never leaked.... that said they don't make 'em like that anymore. Probably a good idea to change it.

 

[Steve Addy]

I think my head parts are coming from ID Parts either today or tomorrow. Either way, I decided to use my free time to go ahead and swap the water pump and thermostat since they've been in there for 120k already. Honestly I really feel like they could have very safely made it to 180k. The water pump still felt nice and snug - not as much as the new one, obviously, but nowhere near worn out.

I never replace a WP before it fails on these, since it's not driven by the TB I don't see any reason to do it before failure. And I have had newly installed pumps that have failed too.

Since you can replace it without disturbing the TB I see no reason to do it early, but that's just me.

Steve

 

[ToddA1]

In this case it’s not in your face, but when I swapped the AC compressor, it was only a few bolts away. I did it, just because.

-Todd

 

[thechoochlyman]

I never replace a WP before it fails on these, since it's not driven by the TB I don't see any reason to do it before failure. And I have had newly installed pumps that have failed too.

Since you can replace it without disturbing the TB I see no reason to do it early, but that's just me.

Steve

You're saying you can replace the water pump without disturbing the timing belt? I can't say I've tried to figure out the dynamics of that, but you do have to remove the bottom plastic cover that goes around the crank gear and the big aluminum pulley to access some of those bolts. I'm not saying it can't be done (because clearly you can lol) but it seems like it would be a hell of a job for sure. I was 5k away from my next timing belt change so I decided to go ahead and change it all since it was already torn down.

 

[Steve Addy]

You're saying you can replace the water pump without disturbing the timing belt? I can't say I've tried to figure out the dynamics of that, but you do have to remove the bottom plastic cover that goes around the crank gear and the big aluminum pulley to access some of those bolts. I'm not saying it can't be done (because clearly you can lol) but it seems like it would be a hell of a job for sure. I was 5k away from my next timing belt change so I decided to go ahead and change it all since it was already torn down.

Pull the alternator and detach and move the AC compressor out of your way and pull the bracket for those two and the WP housing is right there in front of you. Remove the nut from the T bolt, clamp the lower rad hose and pull the slip joint with the lower elbow, pull the WP housing mounting bolts (WP pulley too) and the whole thing can come out as a unit. This also lets you replace the housing to block o-ring and to the new t-stat outside the car (and upside down) so there's no struggle centering the stat in the opening.

A little blue thread locker on the WP housing bolts and you should be good for a reinstall, since they aren't TTY bolts I see no reason to replace them.

This is how you avoid disrupting the TB with a WP change.

I figured this out when I replaced the WP at the TB change once and it leaked after a few days on the road...I was bound and determined not to have to undo all that work just to get that thing replaced.

And as much as these early (old) engines probably aren't as refined as the ALH and beyond, at least if my WP fails it doesn't take out my timing belt (or engine) in the process.

Steve

 

[d24tdi]

I will say that the 5.4L is a bucket of ****e though....

Steve

Eh, maybe you mean the 3 valve 5.4L with endless valvetrain problems? I understand those are trouble from what I hear, but I have to say the old 2 valve 5.4L engines have always been absolute workhorses for me. I have had 4 of them including one currently, plus a 6.8L 2 valve in an F-450 in the fleet.... All have been rock solid reliable trucks and engines, all they want to do is run hard. They never leak, are happy to spin 5000 rpm for hours at a time, and are almost maintenance free. 300k plus miles no trouble with them. Get the plugs torqued right to avoid stripping the heads, and probably need one set of coil packs at some point, otherwise they are pretty bombproof, plus powerful and quiet. I think they are one of the more underappreciated engines of the last 30 years, though the upside to that is you can get a 5.4L or V10 truck for a fraction of what a (noisy, leaky) 7.3L Powerstroke equivalent would sell for.

That said, I like the look of the new 7.3L Godzilla too, probably would take one of those over the old V10. I think manufacturing efficiency was the logic behind the V10, back in the early '90s when many of their passenger car lines still had V8 engines under the hood, it was logical to be able to build the motors for everything from a Crown Vic or Mustang to an F-550 on the same line. Nowadays though, they're doing the 6.7 PSD in-house so they're set up for building the related big block gasser off of that equipment and can run production for the small bore passenger car and light truck V8s separately. So, in doing that, they have basically acknolwedged that an OHC V10 was not the ideal setup for a heavy truck, mainly just done for manufacturing economies. And now that they are doing the Godzilla it's probably a cheaper motor to build with fewer parts and less complexity.

Makes sense, and the Godzilla motor is a much more suitable spec for a truck than the V10 was, even though nobody could deny the V10 got the work done pretty well. Our V10 is at 245k miles and regularly pulls the truck loaded to GVWR at 15k plus a 7k lb trailer up the Continental Divide, in everything from negative temp blizzards to 110F midsummer.... Never complains. The old 460 was a strong runner too of course -- don't think they ever approached the power the V10 was able to produce at high RPM, but it would have been interesting to see what they could have done if Ford had decided to invest in a new round of development on the heads and induction system in the '90s like GM did with the Vortec rework on the SBC and BBC motors. The late 454 went from ~230hp to almost 300 with Vortec heads and manifolds and valvetrain... Easy to imagine a similarly modernized 460 that could have run with the late V10 no problem.

Pull the alternator and detach and move the AC compressor out of your way and pull the bracket for those two and the WP housing is right there in front of you. Remove the nut from the T bolt, clamp the lower rad hose and pull the slip joint with the lower elbow, pull the WP housing mounting bolts (WP pulley too) and the whole thing can come out as a unit. This also lets you replace the housing to block o-ring and to the new t-stat outside the car (and upside down) so there's no struggle centering the stat in the opening.

A little blue thread locker on the WP housing bolts and you should be good for a reinstall, since they aren't TTY bolts I see no reason to replace them.


This is how you avoid disrupting the TB with a WP change.

I figured this out when I replaced the WP at the TB change once and it leaked after a few days on the road...I was bound and determined not to have to undo all that work just to get that thing replaced.

And as much as these early (old) engines probably aren't as refined as the ALH and beyond, at least if my WP fails it doesn't take out my timing belt (or engine) in the process.

Steve

Yep this was exactly my method for doing a WP outdoors in a snowstorm a few winters ago on my B4. Works fine and was less of a fight than I had expected plus gives you a chance to replace the big O-ring where the housing meets the block. Similar reasons for me too, I had done the TB earlier that year.... nothing sucks up your enthusiasm like disassembling work you just did. Of course later that same winter the intermediate shaft seal tore itself to pieces on a -25F cold start, so I ended up back in the TB side of the motor again anyway....

I don't think the ALH is all that refined either although no denying it is a better engine in every objective way. But I think the main reason for less NVH in the Mk4 cars is the hard work VAG did on the new pendulum mounting system.... If you drop an ALH into a different vehicle for a swap, the vibes are about equal to an old AHU if both are mounted in a traditional way -- neither one is exactly a model of silence or smoothness.

 

[oilhammer]

The 2-valve Tritons can spit the plugs out, the 3-valve engines seize them in, and they have to be removed by special tools in pieces. Not sure why Ford struggled with something as simple as a spark plug, but they did. There are half-assed fixes for the 2-valves, and permanent fixes for them (requires pulling the heads off, which is a big job). But, so long as they don't spit the plugs out, and you don't get one that has an appetite for oil and is allowed to run low, they are pretty good engines. Ignition coils and throttle bodies once in a while, but the engine proper is pretty darn good. And yes, the noisy valve train is an issue with the 3-valve engines, too. There are updated parts for that, but it doesn't always fix it. Thicker oil, however, seems to work pretty well in them. An old school band-aid, but it works. We've also done lots of exhaust manifolds on all of them, but especially on the E-vans, and if there are broken bolts in the head, they suck to get out. I've also pulled heads off on plenty of them, the pickups are not so bad, you just lift the cab off. But the vans, not so much. You have to leave the head bolts IN the heads when R&Ring them, because they are too long to come up and out with the engine in place. Man our shop has (and continues to) service a LOT of Ford E-vans over the years.

 

[d24tdi]

Thicker oil, however, seems to work pretty well in them. An old school band-aid, but it works.

Interesting on that. I wonder if Ford's original 5W20 spec was part of the problem to begin with? All of our Tritons get Mobil 1 0W40 year round just because.... I have had folks laugh at me for using such fancy stuff in a beater Ford pickup motor, but hey, they seem almost immune to wear when running this stuff, even if the engine is getting a major workout every day.

The spark plug problems are hard to understand for sure. Someone told me that the final years of 2V engines got updated head castings with more threads for the plugs, but our current rigs (02 F250 5.4 and 00 F450 6.8) are not new enough for that so I do worry about them. Nevertheless it seems like spitting plugs only happens if they are under or overtorqued, no? I have heard of guys who had all 8 or 10 of them blow out, and others like me who have not ever experienced even one, knock wood, despite hundreds of thousands of miles combined running these motors.

 

[oilhammer]

Ford's original spec was probably more like 10w30. Remember, the Triton engines were the name given to the truck versions of what was originally known as the "Modular" engine family, that was rooted in its design way back in the late '80s. It came out in the new-for-1991 Lincoln Town car, which was the first of the updated Panther chassis cars. A lot of these engines that survived that long didn't respond well to the thinner oils, which I think are really just there to squeak a wee bit more MPGs and a wee bit less emissions to get past some benchmark, with no regard for longevity. Which is why when you look up oil specs on cars in Alldata and others, they'll spec one thing for US/Canada, and something else (pretty much always thicker) everywhere else. Toyota has 0w16 now. But that same Camry in Mexico? Nah, you can go ahead and put 5w30 in there, it's fine. Pretty sure the same environment exists in El Paso, Texas as exists across the border in Chihuahua

 

[thechoochlyman]

Got some severely-needed cleaning done on the head, intake, and a few small parts. No need in putting anything back together dirty! It took literal hours of soaking in the parts washer, picking, scrubbing, and die grinding. I think I disabled my EGR around 135k miles, but there was still quite a bit of sludge buildup in the head that I never got to clean out.







This was after running a 1-4-8 block over it with some wet 600 grit sandpaper.

 

[ToddA1]

You're saying you can replace the water pump without disturbing the timing belt?

I’ve done several. Faster to do it this way, than to involve the TB. AC compressor has enough slack to rest it somewhere without disconnecting the hoses.

-Todd

 

[d24tdi]

Toyota has 0w16 now. But that same Camry in Mexico? Nah, you can go ahead and put 5w30 in there, it's fine. Pretty sure the same environment exists in El Paso, Texas as exists across the border in Chihuahua

Somewhere I read something similar about the Ford Triton and Modular motors where 5W20 became the spec at some point for US models.... yet the same engines in Australian market vehicles continued to call for the original 5W30 spec. Granted they see more consistently hot ambient conditions down there, but the bottom line is as you say, the reason for the thinner oil spec in the US obviously was not with the engine's benefit in mind, but rather some fuel economy goal.

(Although when it comes to the Super Duty trucks, even that does not really make sense as they are not factored into CAFE or required to report MPG estimates at all... Maybe just for the benefit of dealer service depts in the US stocking only one grade of gas engine oil?)

Have to wonder how those Toyotas and Hondas specifying the 16wt oils will fare after a few hundred thousand miles. I have seen those bottles on the shelf and have to scratch my head. Seems like there must be less shortsighted methods of gaining a fraction of an MPG.

Sorry OP for the thread distraction into domestic gasser V8s, LOL. Nice looking work on the cylinder head there.

 

[oilhammer]

The newer Toyota and Honda 4 cyl engines are blowing up cam drives left and right. Some have a cold start death rattle 10+ seconds long after only 75k miles. Not to mention the increased oil consumption, which because there is no level sensor and the owners are just too dumb to know what a dipstick is and how to use it means even more problems. But the 2ZR-FXE 1.8L (the hybrid version in the 3rd gen Prius) blowing head gaskets and heads overshadows that... we had TWO of those in here getting engine replacements at one time just a couple weeks ago.

All the trucks have emissions standards to meet, regardless of GVWR, they still have something. Yes, it is 'easier' for the bigger ones, and that first tier hits at over 8500 GVWR, which is why conveniently all the Transits, Sprinters, Promasters, etc. all have their base GVWR starting right above that... literally, 8550 or 8600, and why the last few years of the "half ton" E-150 was really a 250 (8 bolt 16" wheels, big brakes, big diff, and, of course, 8600 GVWR) because the standard E-150 was only around 6000 GVWR. It was easier for Ford to just beef them up a bit, knock them up into that less strict threshold, than to try and make what was by then a truly ancient van pass the modern standards. The full ladder frame twin I-beam E-van chassis debuted way back in 1974, it got EFI on the 5.0L in '85, the 4.9L and 5.8L in '86, and the 7.5L in '87, got some IH diesel options, the E4OD transmission for everything but the 5.0L in '90, and its first facelift in 1992. Then in 1997 it got the new engines, they ditched the 4.9L and put the 4.2L in its place (which is a Windsor V8 based V6, stretched from the previous 3.8L version that was already over a decade old), then another front end facelift to provid for the intercooler for the 6.0L diesel, which they dropped a year later, a new dash around that time, and then finally (and currently) just cab-chassis only versions E-350 or higher. That is one heck of a long life. They got rear disk brakes as standard on the 250+ somewhere around the same time the 1997 engine change happened, too. They are a dinosaur but they are a lot tougher than the Transits.

The durability of new cars and trucks has for sure without a doubt from my experience gone backwards in recent years. And the cost of things continues to climb, and the number of nannyware junk they throw on there has also increased. I just have to last a bit longer, and I'll be out of it, and won't have to concern myself with it any more. It is pretty depressing, but what is even more depressing is we cannot get anyone to even service the stuff anymore. Our shop is so overwhelmed with work we turn stuff away daily now.

 

[thechoochlyman]

Ok, somebody educate me here. Was it not the 1Z/AHU that came with 7mm valves and the ALH that came with 8mm? ID Parts sent me 8mm valve stem seals with my 7mm valve guides and I just called to have the issue corrected. (They DO have the sizes correctly labeled on the site, but I didn't notice they were different because it was the only option for my car.) The guy I talked to swears up and down that it was the 1Z that came with 8mm and the ALH that came with 7.

 

[Windex]

1Z came with 8mm AHU came with 7mm

 

[thechoochlyman]

1Z came with 8mm AHU came with 7mm

Guess that's one of the few actual differences between the two, then. lol

 

[thechoochlyman]

Valve stems are in. Guess I'll have to wait another few days for the seals though.

 

[thechoochlyman]

Does anybody here know right off what the valve to guide clearance is supposed to be? None of my manuals had it. Just a general number I'm seeing seems to be about .001-.003 for intake valves and .002-.004 for exhaust valves.

 

[ToddA1]

Is your manual the Bentley? If so, I can’t help. If not, I can check mine.

I’m guessing they’re only providing a range, to allow for valve manufacturing differences.

-Todd

 

[thechoochlyman]

Yeah, I've looked all through my Bentley manual and didn't have any luck. The number I got above were just from some Googling, but I don't see why they wouldn't be good enough for this engine too. As long as they slide and don't stick that's about all that matters.

My exhaust valves are measuring .2733 and the intake valves are .2743. The exhaust valves all glide into the guides, but the intake valves won't fully insert without a little effort. I haven't actually measured the ID of the guides, but judging by fitment I'd say they all need to be opened up about .001 or a little more each.

The one thing I DID find in the manual is that the guides need to be reamed with a 7mm reamer. Assuming the guides have a perfect 7mm ID after reaming, it would give .0023 and .0013 clearance on the exhaust and intake valves, respectively. So it seems that's the clearance numbers they want.

 

[thechoochlyman]

Something else I'm mulling over. I've had at least two other people suggest that my problem could be a wrist pin, and I have no doubt that it's a possibility. Todd already said new valve guides fixed a similar problem he had, and it does make sense. When I listened around my engine with a stethoscope I localized it to the same area where my really loose valve guide was located. I really feel like it's 80% or more likely this will fix the problem, but I would really hate to tear it all down a second time. If it DID turn out to be a wrist pin I'd have to remove the head again in order to pull the piston, correct?

If it's a wrist pin making noise this badly I could probably hear or measure it by rotating the engine by hand, yes? I could put a mag holder on the deck and check what each piston does at the bottom of the stroke.

 

[ToddA1]

The one thing I DID find in the manual is that the guides need to be reamed with a 7mm reamer.

You lost me… you never stated what engine this is, but being in a B4, I’d assume 1Z with 8mm valves? Are you going to 7mm valves? This would be an upgrade, but I believe new seats will need to be installed.

I searched my A3 Bentley and came up with nothing. My B4 Bentley only says to use “hand reamer 10-215”. It seems as if this is just a 8mm reamer. Do some conversions and see if that agrees with the tolerances you found. I kinda agree with your logic, though. Exhaust stuff likely needs to be a LïL looser.

-Todd

 

[thechoochlyman]

You lost me… you never stated what engine this is, but being in a B4, I’d assume 1Z with 8mm valves? Are you going to 7mm valves? This would be an upgrade, but I believe new seats will need to be installed.

It seems I have an AHU and not a 1Z, because I double checked and did indeed already have 7mm valves.

 

[Steve Addy]

It seems I have an AHU and not a 1Z, because I double checked and did indeed already have 7mm valves.

Check your block for engine ID, if it's 1Z and you have a 7mm head then it's been replaced already. If it's AHU then your engine has been replaced.

Steve

 

[oilhammer]

The valve size change is a VIN split, not an engine code change. The early cylinder head was superseded to the newer one years ago, and then those became NLA. Our machine shop always puts the newer stuff in there anyway.

ETKA shows the VIN split at 1H-V-042 168/169 for the A3 Jetta (Typ 1H). Which is during the 1997 model year (the V), and fairly early on (the first digit of the serial number, the final six, is a 0). When I do a search in our system here of 1997 Jettas, pull up all the TDIs, which were not very many, I only show two cars to have been before this VIN split... the rest were after.

But oddly when you go to look at the B4 Passat, it goes by engine serial number, not VIN, and its more than one change but I suspect most of the early engines never even made it here as they were selling B4 TDIs in Europe in 1995.

But I have found errors in ETKA, too. I ran across a very early AWD (1.8t) 2000 Golf that had the small 280mm front brakes. The 1998 New Beetles were the worst, because it seemed like they were changing things weekly when they were assembling those.

 

[thechoochlyman]

This morning I went ahead and dropped the oil pan so I can pull the pistons. I knew it wouldn't take long and it would give me peace of mind to know everything on the bottom end is still solid.

I only pulled cylinder 2 for now and it feels great to me. No slop at all in the wrist pin and the bearings still look good with typical wear marks present.

Is there anything special I should do upon reassembly? I'll dab some assembly lube on the connecting rod bearing but I think that's probably all I need to worry about. I'm seeing only 20 ft/lbs for the connecting rod cap bolts, is that correct? Should I put on some blue/red loctite? The manual says I MUST replace the bolts if I remove them, but can I get by without it? ($7 each. lol)

I have a short video of the piston and connecting rod I pulled but it's not uploaded just yet.

 

[oilhammer]

Not sure why you are messing with the bottom end with the problem is in the top end. ?????

See post #54.

 

[thechoochlyman]

Not sure why you are messing with the bottom end with the problem is in the top end. ?????

See post #54.

I'm just OCD like that. lol Somebody gave me a hint of doubt and I couldn't help but look while I was here.

ACTUALLY... it's probably a good thing I did, because I found something not so good in cylinder 3.



The oil ring on this piston is COMPLETELY stopped up. And you can tell just how badly scarred the side of the piston itself is. The cylinder wall doesn't look great, but it could certainly be worse. I can feel the ridge with my fingernail. I think a new piston and some time with a honing tool could correct this, but I'm not the expert here.



Tell me what you guys think.