Cam Phaser Issue & Warranty Info

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

OP
OP
jmar311

jmar311

Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Posts
41
Reaction score
8
The recall was a new calibration that prevents the wear from developing. If you had it done in the required timeframe you got extended coverage pro-rated by mileage. That expired at the beginning of the year though.
Ok. And my argument is when my truck goes to the dealership for every service the service advisor/ techs *should* see that and perform this....especially when i ask every time. Never happened.
 
OP
OP
jmar311

jmar311

Member
Joined
May 2, 2018
Posts
41
Reaction score
8
I guess. But I didn't ask for it to be.
Well me neither but just hoping that's my case as well but I'm asking for it. Did you have a service advisor or service manager/director execute this for you?
 

STHenry

Active Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2016
Posts
82
Reaction score
49
Location
So Cal
I just had the cam phasers replaced on my truck today. Service advisor said everything was covered under an emission warranty and I paid nothing out of pocket. It was a nice surprise for me anyhow. Good Luck with your repair.
 

ba123

Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2021
Posts
31
Reaction score
8
Location
california
The reprogram did absolutely NOT prevent the cam phaser issue.

I had it happened to me...TWICE!

All regular dealer service, oil changes, updates, I have the extended warranty, so no reason not to bring it in.

It's a faulty design, period.

*** and Ford knew this, which is why they put out another tsb saying they cover a % or the repair based on miles...we talked about this on another thread.
 
Last edited:

FordTechOne

FRF Addict
Joined
Jul 29, 2019
Posts
6,418
Reaction score
12,547
Location
Detroit
The reprogram did absolutely NOT prevent the cam phaser issue.

I had it happened to me...TWICE!

All regular dealer service, oil changes, updates, I have the extended warranty, so no reason not to bring it in.

It's a faulty design, period.

*** and Ford knew this, which is why they put out another tsb saying they cover a % or the repair based on miles...we talked about this on another thread.
Wrong. Your questionable and anecdotal claims do not change the facts. But continue preaching like you have the slightest clue what you’re talking about. Claiming “faulty design” when you don’t have any understanding of how VCT even works is a comical statement at best.

The new calibration wasn’t even available until July of 2021. Claiming you had 2 subsequent phaser replacements after that does not add up at all.

There was no “TSB” regarding pro-rated repairs. That was program 21N03, which was released with recall 21B10. The reason for the pro-rated coverage was to encourage owners to have the preventative update done and cover those that were already at higher mileage with existing wear.
 

spack

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2023
Posts
33
Reaction score
39
Location
Chester Springs Pa
FordTechOne would you mind critiquing my diatribe here: it’s pure speculation of course. Interested in your point of view.

In more sophisticated VVT implementations there is a specific valve and oil pathway which can control unlock and lock of the locking pin. This presumably allows more positional control over the rotor before the lock pin is engaged or disengaged.



Ford’s lock action seems to be somewhat secondary to overall oil pressure. When pressure is dropped on engine shutdown, that bias spring that you can see on the outside of the phaser, pushes the cam towards the middle, and the lack of oil pressure allows the pin to fall into the hole under the pin’s spring force. There is a bit more to it I know. There is oil control to the locking pin on one of the rotor leafs. So programming can help by controlling angles before engine shutdown. I see also that the HL3Z-***-CD backing plate has a redesigned locking hole which looks as though it would improve the ability to unlock the pin at lower pressures. Old is on the left. New is on the right in the included pictures.



One of things I’ve noticed in pictures of newly failed phasers (ones that have not been allowed to rattle for 10k miles) is the hole that the pin is meant to lock into is worn in a very specific pattern. It’s only on the side furthest from the filling channel. The opposite side is pristine. (Shown in the left picture). There’s an erosion that is deepest at the location that once was the rim of the hole. How did that erosion develop…. Suppose at least some of the time, the lock pin doesn’t make it into the hole, because the parking spring is not quite strong enough to overcome an opening intake or exhaust valve when the engine just comes to rest. Now we restart the engine. The cam sprocket moves rapidly carrying the pin to the hole, but the camshaft doesn’t move at all until that pin slams into the far side of the hole. Just a little material excavation ensues. Repeat that over and over. That may not be what happens. Another possibility... Suppose on engine stop the pin does make it into the hole but in order to seat, it has to displace oil which takes time. Then suppose that infernal auto start/stop kicks right back in with the pin just barely seated. Same thing…one side of the hole takes a hit. Or perhaps another possibility is the pin is just not unlocked enough at idle or low pressure situations and the pin bangs on the rim of the hole. Although I’d expect that to be more symmetric wear.



I could see where update 21b10 makes things better for phasers that have not yet developed a problem. And I might even be able to see how it makes things worse for phasers that have.



I’m curious; is the ML3Z-*** part better than the HL3Z-***-CD? Some seem to think so. I have my doubts based on these pictures and the wording of the #3 and #4 supplements
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0246.jpeg
    IMG_0246.jpeg
    131.7 KB · Views: 24
Top