Vids on YouTube about the 5.4 Triton Make Me Want To Back Out of this Purchase

[Ellison Brown III]

Looks like I’ll be getting my old EB back from my daughter. I ALMOST thought it would be a good idea to drop that 5.4 in my ‘90 YJ. Then I did some reading on it. Was quickly reminded why that would be a horrible idea.

Mine still runs pretty good at the moment. But, it’ll be just my luck that right after all that hard work, and fabrication/modification of parts to get that thing to work/ fit it’ll take a dump on me. So, I decided against it. I’ll keep an eye out for a SB Ford motor to drop in it. Or, a built 4.2liter. Gotta be something with more power than what’s currently in it.

 

[Steve Hartman]

"If the engine is that bad, how are they clocking 200,000+ miles?"

Seems like you answered your own question to me. Mine '07 (Expy-SSV) has 190,000 on it and I've only had an O2 sensor error on it. My 2001 Expy (also an SSV, (my first Ford) had 270,000 on it and never had a trouble light!

 

[TobyU]

For what it is worth, search specifically for anything and there will be an over abundance of results. In my opinion as a former "Ford' hater, I am on my third 5.4 Ford engined vehicle. The first was a 2004 F-150 that ran flawlessly pretty much until my former neighbor totaled (with close to 200K on the odometer) it in a wreck, my second was a 2004 Expedition that I sold to my current neighbor (with close to 200K on the odometer) that he still drives today and now a 2010 Expedition with 192K on the engine with no issues what so ever. Just ensure that the basic maintenance has been done: oil changes, transmission maintained, basic tune up (plugs, etc) and you would be amazed at how long and strong these engines run. Now, we each have our preferences and choices to make; however, don't let other people's overstated horrible experiences cause you to by pass what could be a decent vehicle. My two cents for what its worth.

You can't compare 2004 to anything 2005 and above because 05 is when they went to the cam phasers and all the problems began up until around 2009.
The standard two valve and even the 32 valve Navigator engines were pretty much bulletproof with most all them going 250k if not more without ever having so much as a valve cover removed.
Unfortunately, most new car engines are going the wrong way and people are accepting it too. Having to have a major repair which some people are not calling major like timing chains gears and cam phasers and VVT solenoids replaced between 85, 000and 110,000 is becoming all too common and we should never have had the situation occur.
Unfortunately there's not much you can do about it if you choose to keep newer vehicles. As of yet I won't do that but you know as we keep going further and further the old vehicles that I love now will be replaced by newer vehicles that will become those old vehicles and I'm not sure that I'm willing to risk it with most of those.
I bought a mint condition Navigator somewhere around 4 years ago with barely 100K on it and I chose to only buy an 03 or '04 because 05 had the lousy cam phasers and 06 had the ZF transmission that I feel is much less durable but regardless if there is a problem it will cost far more to fix and I can't simply run out to my local LKQ and pick up a 4r100 from tons of vehicles in the lot like on my year.

 

[TobyU]

It all just depends on how well it’s been maintained. But that can phasers and timing chains and guides are a common issue and the hydraulic lifter tic. But in reality they’re a great engine.

I don't know if I'd go as far as calling them great I would call them good. They're certainly not as good as the engines they replaced because this previous engines did not have the common issue of them failing.

 

[TobyU]

I have a 2011 with 60,000 miles and also had a 2014 which I traded in at 33,000 miles. Both had 5.4 / 3 valve engines and I have not had any engine issues with either. I religiously change oil and filter every 3500 - 4000 miles on all my vehicles and have heard that is a significant factor in the reliability of this engine.

I have a friend who had a 2014 5.4 3 Valve who drove it a lot (over 50,000 miles a year) and only changed his oil every 8,000 or so miles and lost an engine at around 150k.

To me, it would be important to know the maintenance history of the vehicle. For that matter, the same should be true of any used vehicle you consider buying.

The 5.4 3 Valve may have faults, but I will say it is a much better performer in a heavy vehicle like the Expedition than the 5.4 2 valve.

My guess is he really didn't lose an engine but just got talked into replacing the entire engine from the garage or whatever. If he change the oil even 8 to 10,000 miles it shouldn't have sludged up enough to have an actual lubrication failure which can happen and even on the two valve motors when it sludges up too badly but that takes less frequent oil changes than 8,000 mi.
I guess everyone has a personal threshold as to what they think is powerful or turkey enough etc but I would disagree on the 5.42 valve.
I've had several vehicles with 46, 54, 6.8 and we had a 2000 expedition four-wheel drive with the 5.42 valve in it for quite a number of years and never complained once about its power or torque etc.
In fact, we still talk about how much we like the fact that you barely had to touch the pedal and it would just go. It never felt sluggish or heavy or anything else.
Several other SUVs we have had since felt much more underpowered forcing you to give it a lot more gas and to actually increase the RPMs to go anywhere but the 5.42 valve didn't have to increase the RPMs at all. It simply had so much torque that it just was smooth and with ease.

 

[TobyU]

Currently have a 2007 Expedition with 216k miles that was purchased with 172k. As someone said on this thread, one of the main keys to keeping this engine running is frequent fluid changes. My engine oil is changed every 4k miles and my tranny fluid is changed every 25 to 30k. If the seller is meticulous and knows how to take care of a vehicle, he should have records to show. One looks at the vehicle's condition and maintenance records in an effort to reduce risk. However, let's face it, risk is there on the purchase of ANY used vehicle. You do your research, gather facts and go for it when comfortable. Would not hurt to have a mechanic look at the Expy also. One thing I would recommend, is to have enough cash on hand to handle cam phaser / timing chain repair job. This repair seems to be something that many on this site have come across as opposed to a full-blown engine replacement. Since my timing repair, I have had no issues and the engine has run flawlessly. Remember, just do your best to gather info to make the best choice possible. Good Luck!!!

That's what I told a friend of mine when he called me and said he was considering a Ford vehicle around 2005 to 7 with the cam phasers. I told him he may luck out but basis purchase price on the fact that there is a good likelihood he will be doing the cam phaser chain tensioner repair and it could cost you up to 2k.
For a lot of the years it was almost a matter of when not if. Of course people who buy vehicles with lower miles and don't keep them a long number of years are never going to run into the issue and the replacement cost won't be on them but these vehicles will still end up having this repair in most cases.
It's becoming sad that so many cars now are time bombs and you just don't want the vehicle to be in your possession when the failure occurs.
We didn't have these problems on a good number of engines for a darn good number of years.

 

[GlennSullivan]

My guess is he really didn't lose an engine but just got talked into replacing the entire engine from the garage or whatever. If he change the oil even 8 to 10,000 miles it shouldn't have sludged up enough to have an actual lubrication failure which can happen and even on the two valve motors when it sludges up too badly but that takes less frequent oil changes than 8,000 mi.
I guess everyone has a personal threshold as to what they think is powerful or turkey enough etc but I would disagree on the 5.42 valve.
I've had several vehicles with 46, 54, 6.8 and we had a 2000 expedition four-wheel drive with the 5.42 valve in it for quite a number of years and never complained once about its power or torque etc.
In fact, we still talk about how much we like the fact that you barely had to touch the pedal and it would just go. It never felt sluggish or heavy or anything else.
Several other SUVs we have had since felt much more underpowered forcing you to give it a lot more gas and to actually increase the RPMs to go anywhere but the 5.42 valve didn't have to increase the RPMs at all. It simply had so much torque that it just was smooth and with ease.

He absolutely lost the engine, valvetrain failure with valve into piston. My view of sufficient power may be different from yours as for most of the last 25 years, I've towed with my SUVs.

My 1999 5.4 / 2 valve was a dog, painfully slow with horrible fuel mileage when towing. Especially in hilly conditions, such as East coast to Midwest. I replaced the 99 with a 2002 7.3 Diesel Excursion and it was the best tow vehicle I have ever owned. Effortless towing under any conditions and decent fuel mileage even when fully loaded and pulling a trailer.

Fast forward to 2011, I purchased a 5.4 / 3 valve Expedition and while it was a substantial improvement over the 5.4 / 2 valve because of increased HP, TQE and chassis, the Excursion was still my choice for long distance towing (I had both of them for 5 years). I now have a 2017 Expedition as well as the 2011. The 2017 is now my choice as a tow vehicle over the 2011. Outside of towing, I enjoy driving both vehicles equally as much in all driving environments. The 2017 does however, get much better mileage under all driving conditions.

 

[TobyU]

He absolutely lost the engine, valvetrain failure with valve into piston. My view of sufficient power may be different from yours as for most of the last 25 years, I've towed with my SUVs.

My 1999 5.4 / 2 valve was a dog, painfully slow with horrible fuel mileage when towing. Especially in hilly conditions, such as East coast to Midwest. I replaced the 99 with a 2002 7.3 Diesel Excursion and it was the best tow vehicle I have ever owned. Effortless towing under any conditions and decent fuel mileage even when fully loaded and pulling a trailer.

Fast forward to 2011, I purchased a 5.4 / 3 valve Expedition and while it was a substantial improvement over the 5.4 / 2 valve because of increased HP, TQE and chassis, the Excursion was still my choice for long distance towing (I had both of them for 5 years). I now have a 2017 Expedition as well as the 2011. The 2017 is now my choice as a tow vehicle over the 2011. Outside of towing, I enjoy driving both vehicles equally as much in all driving environments. The 2017 does however, get much better mileage under all driving conditions.

I understand and agree with your experiences among those three vehicles. You certainly can't consider a 5.4 to valve to be anywhere near comparable to a 7.3 L diesel! I don't care what the manufacturer says with their crazy towing capacities etc. There is no comparison.

I will also say that the 6.8 L Excursion is also quite impressive. The diesel only has a little more torque but it also makes a heavier vehicle.
I have had several of these and I will say that the 6.8 is also effortless. That is a good way to describe it with towing. It doesn't really care or feel any different if you're empty or if it's towing thousands of pounds. You barely have to touch the gas and it just pulls the load uphill everything else.
The 5.42 valve is anywhere near close to that I agree but you should try a Chevy trailblazer with a 4.2 inline 6 if you want to feel a turd.
The capacities are right up there and everybody says they do just fine but that's only if you want to have the gas pedal pushed halfway to the floor or more! I don't like that kind of operation of a vehicle. I want it to be effortless like you said.
Also, as you stated your experiences and needs are different than most people.
We all know that trucks and even large SUVs were designed on truck chassis and to be heavier duty and tow etc but we also know that's not what it's panned out to be.
The vast majority of owners never even have anything hooked to their hitch and most could be owned without a hitch and the owners would never know it.
Many owners may have used the hitch one time or twice if you count the return for moving something once.
The vast majority of these vehicles are daily drivers, family transportation vehicles, grocery Gators and driving your kids and their friends around to activities etc so towing and power / torque is fairly unimportant.
I would venture to say that the overwhelming majority of SUV owners have never even had the gas pedal all the way to the floor and most haven't even had it over halfway down.
I'm fine with this as I feel it's the way it's supposed to be. These people drive me nuts that go out and buy a high performance SUV or whatever because they want to race people on the streets and win. It's an SUV, bah...

Oh, on your friend's engine loss. Sounds like he was really unlucky. I was just pointing out that that's not normally the end result of those or the reason they get an engine replacement. The two most common problems on those are spark plugs breaking off and the timing chain / gears / cam phasers and normally there's no breakage of chains or anything and no piston the valve contact.
Even when change and stuff break it usually doesn't do anything more than been the valves so then the heads have to come off but in that case most shops would recommend a replacement engine but like I said that normally doesn't happen. Normally there's just fault codes, running issues and ticking clacking noises like a diesel.

I feel that a lot of shops would rather make the money on a complete engine install than to just do a timing chain set because I know how shops are and that's why I can't stand them.
I figured he had some common more minor problem and was simply up sold or conned by the shop which happens more often than not.

 

[JExpedition07]

I enjoyed the 5.4L 3V, if Ford gave it steel tensioners and metal guides it would have had a much different rap surrounding it. The phasers themselves were never the problem. It’s all in lessons learned through generations of engineering. Constant improvement, sometimes there are hiccups and lessons learned on the ride. You’ll never escape complexity. Look where we are today, Ford offers a 400 horse V8 and a 400 horse TT and neither of which have the issues despite double the cams and phasers.

 

[TobyU]

I enjoyed the 5.4L 3V, if Ford gave it steel tensioners and metal guides it would have had a much different rap surrounding it. The phasers themselves were never the problem. It’s all in lessons learned through generations of engineering. Constant improvement, sometimes there are hiccups and lessons learned on the ride. You’ll never escape complexity. Look where we are today, Ford offers a 400 horse V8 and a 400 horse TT and neither of which have the issues despite double the cams and phasers.

But saying it that way sounds like they did the problems (eventually) and we don't have issues. When I'm actual practice...new problems are created.
They've been making the same basic type of engines for decades upon decades. They have had plenty of time and tries to perfect them.... But they don't want to completely!
They can't stop messing with them for several reasons. Govt regs and push for more this or less that and competition and marketing etc.
I have said before that the golden age of internal combustion engines is over.
They peaked somewhere from around 1992-2005 -ish.
Many shining examples from these times lasted 250k+ with not so much as a valve cover ever being removed!!
AND no chain issues etc and we won't even count timing belt ones because NO engine should need such an important and dangerous to fall part EVER replaced as normal required maintenance.
That entire era was a SCAM!
Regardless, they fix one issue and create another -or two.