Adding a weep hole to the intercooler (CAC)
- Thread starter 93Cobra
- Start date
shotime99 said:
Boost loss is so minimal that it doesn't hardly register any. The hole is just enough to get the crap out and maintain proper boost. The F150 eco guys have done it for years with no bad side effects. Mine has been drilled in the SHO for a while and it has been a huge improvement.
Ok, I sort of understand why some of the owners of early F150s were doing this. However, why would anyone do it to an SHO? What are you getting in your intercooler and where is it coming from? Seems to me that drilling a hole in an intercooler is not addressing the real problem.
John Miller
New member
So, argument about the validity aside, does the picture not show the optimum dill spot in the wrong spot for the SHO? Wouldn't the best spot be on the passenger side corner?
Its from my understanding there is very limited access through the drivers side cac so essentially drilling the weep hole on that side makes it more plausible if your up for the challenge,also glad the OP is satisfied with his findings and its working in his favor and surely his prerogative to do so but we need to move on to the next chapter since there was a similar post not to long ago from the OP. Z http://www.ecoboostperformanceforum.com/index.php/topic,5746.0.html
93Cobra said:
Apparently the climate in my area does not create this sort of "condensate." I would also be very concerned if I found a large amount of oil in the intercooler. I checked mine at 60,000 miles and it barely made a speck on the end of the dipstick and all piping was dry.
Brucelinc said:
The problem is that the condensate problem is NOT specific to region or climate. F150 folks have experienced it everywhere. Why take the gamble? You definitely don't want to find out the hard way that you had condensate in your intercooler... Will surface when you need full acceleration and the engine falls flat on its face. Why risk it? The hole causes no issues. Actually, the car performs better all around and is 100% more reliable
I simply don't think the problem is as pervasive on the transverse platform as you seem to think. And Bruce has certainly taken enough trips down the strip to test for an issue. It's possible that the issue is more pervasive in the 13+ and not the 10-12. Maybe it's simply the size of the intercooler that's keeping this problem from becoming a big one.
Condensate is not necessarily just water. Would like to see this setup survive heavy rains/standing water/etc. Plus I certainly hope whoever decides to drill their CAC is responsible enough to notify the next owner, or replace the CAC with a new unmodified CAC prior to transfer of ownership.
Condensate is not necessarily just water. Would like to see this setup survive heavy rains/standing water/etc. Plus I certainly hope whoever decides to drill their CAC is responsible enough to notify the next owner, or replace the CAC with a new unmodified CAC prior to transfer of ownership.
SHOdded said:
I had the same issue in both my F150 ecoboost and the SHO. The f150 had it so bad that it hydrolocked the engine (no weep hole). New one went it, and I drilled the weep hole to get by until selling it off. My SHO was drilled then too so that I didn't have the opportunity to lock it up.
The hole poses no risk for junk to get inside. The reverse happens... the junk is always kept out. Keep an open mind to this and research the wealth of info the f150 world before you completely disregard. I am only trying to help everyone out. I don't want anyone to go through what I have.
If I weren't keeping an open mind, this thread would not exist 
I realize this idea MAY have potential, but we need proper validation a) for a reason to do it, and b) the technical explanation of why & how it is safe to do.
Regardless, I think your point has been made, now it's up to others to ask the questions they have, and get into their own comfort zone.
I realize this idea MAY have potential, but we need proper validation a) for a reason to do it, and b) the technical explanation of why & how it is safe to do.Regardless, I think your point has been made, now it's up to others to ask the questions they have, and get into their own comfort zone.
People with the sho aren't having the issues with condensate for whatever reasons...look at the history here
Youve had 2 trucks and a sho with these issues....sometimes people make their own fortunes is all i can say to that....your situation is unique to say the least in terms of misfortune of ecoboost problems
The low frequency of issues here with the sho should be enough for people to question the necessity of this ill advised mod....ots awsome that it has worked out for you....but history has shown on this platform its just not required
Interesting point is ive been looking through the ecoboost codes and the " allowable wheel torque error " values are different between the f150's and the sho's and new f150's are closer to the sho's....very telling in my opinion
The intercooler block off mod from fors was a patch fix....the allowable wheel torque error was another, and more effective patch for the root cause, the ford torque based logic for misfire detection
Youve had 2 trucks and a sho with these issues....sometimes people make their own fortunes is all i can say to that....your situation is unique to say the least in terms of misfortune of ecoboost problems
The low frequency of issues here with the sho should be enough for people to question the necessity of this ill advised mod....ots awsome that it has worked out for you....but history has shown on this platform its just not required
Interesting point is ive been looking through the ecoboost codes and the " allowable wheel torque error " values are different between the f150's and the sho's and new f150's are closer to the sho's....very telling in my opinion
The intercooler block off mod from fors was a patch fix....the allowable wheel torque error was another, and more effective patch for the root cause, the ford torque based logic for misfire detection
SHOdded said:If I weren't keeping an open mind, this thread would not exist
Regardless, I think your point has been made, now it's up to others to ask the questions they have, and get into their own comfort zone.
Thanks - happy to answer anyone's questions.
I certainly will refrain from challenging what anyone does with their car. It was discussions like this that prompted me to check my intercooler and found nothing there.
I think I saw on a different forum that someone needed to suck "a lot" of oil out of theirs on a regular basis. I do not think that is normal or routine maintenance. I would not have been shocked to find a little bit in mine after 6 years and 60,000 miles but if I had found much, I would have been very concerned about turbo seals or other potential issues.
I think I saw on a different forum that someone needed to suck "a lot" of oil out of theirs on a regular basis. I do not think that is normal or routine maintenance. I would not have been shocked to find a little bit in mine after 6 years and 60,000 miles but if I had found much, I would have been very concerned about turbo seals or other potential issues.
FWIW, my 27,000 mile MKS that I purchased used showed about 1/3" of oil on the dipstick when I inserted it into the intercooler. I used an assortment of tubing, a brake bleeder container, and a household vacuum to suck out the oil. In the end, I did not get out very much oil, but it does bother me that ANY was present. I was hoping to see none. I would guess I evacuated about 1/2 oz.
That being said, if that was the amount present after 27,000 miles, I'm not sure it would ever reach a point of hydrolocking the motor. I will continue to monitor the amount to see if any action beyond a semi annual cleaning is necessary.
That being said, if that was the amount present after 27,000 miles, I'm not sure it would ever reach a point of hydrolocking the motor. I will continue to monitor the amount to see if any action beyond a semi annual cleaning is necessary.