2001 Ford Focus 2.0L 4 Cylinder Valve Seat Problem

Great explanation! It makes a lot of sense, since they claim that the dropping valve seats are due to the cylinder head getting too hot (weak cooling system.

One question I have is the warm up time. Newer cars can throw a check engine light if the warm up time is too slow. Do you know if drilling out the head gasket will cause this to happen?

Thank you for your excellent answer!

Not sure really but where I live it can get down to -30 F and its normal to start a vehicle up dead cold with the heater turned on high which will make any vehicle take longer to warm up so I have some doubts on the whole check engine light issue in general.

To be honest a lot of small 4 and 6 cylinder engines will never get to their proper engine operating temps with the heater running on high in sub zero winter weather without being driven for a while so to me that says there is likely now warm up time out code.

We have a 4 cylinder Mercedes C230 Kompressor which had a check engine trigger from slow warm up. You're right about the amount of time it takes for an engine to warm up and the heater running will extend the warm up time. Maybe there is an outside temperature input, which compensates for longer/shorter warm up time.

1. Ford is responsible for bad design and/or poor quality control.
The machine shop is not reponsible unless they were specifically asked to change the others.
Their job was to repair the damage.
I'd ask the customer what he'd have said if you'd changed all the valve seats and re sleeved every bearing in the head, fitted a new camshaft etc (because it might have gone wrong) and presented him with a huge bill?
He'd have said... I only wanted the one seat changed!
Bottom line is the customer must specify exactly what he wants done, or if he wants your opinion he must say 'change x y z if you think it's needed' and then he's bound by your opinion. He can't have his cake and eat it too.
Maybe you want to make a small good will gesture, but if he doesn't fill you with good will you could suggest he take his custom elsewhere.

I get plenty of people tell me what they don't want when the job is done, but will not specify what they do want at the start.

Del

Del, Thanks for your response - I find this very helpful. I agree that Ford is responsible for a poor design, however Ford will not do anything to help my client. The mechanic is saying that he isn't responsible, because he cannot be an expert on all cars - he did a normal cylinder head repair job. He claims that the machine shop should have advised him of the problem this cylinder head has. I agree with him, but I'm not a mechanic and I don't know what the industry standard is.

As an autobroker, I rely on experts in other fields to give me sound advice. For instance, my mechanic will let me know if a used car is good - he puts it on the lift and checks the car for me. I understand a bit about cars, but I am not the expert and I rely on his advice. Same for my tire guy; he lets me know if putting aftermarket wheels on a car is advisable and what size is good.

I'm looking for advise for my client here and I appreciate your help.

you asked a handful there. let be just start by saying you never mentioned spring pressure. most valve failures lead back to springs and alignment/ clearances. if you don't verify seat pressure's you're putting the cart in front of the horse looking for answers on seat failure.

as far as assigning blame...since both you and your machinist know these monsters have a poor reputation you both did this customer a dis-service by skimping and only repairing one. take your pain and do this job correctly and move forward

Fredski, Thank you for responding to my question. In the case of the Ford Escort/Focus, the valve seat has a tendency to drop out of the cylinder head. It's a well documented problem and I think I've figured out why the number 4 cylinder is typically the culprit. The Ford problem is due to a poor design and many of these engines have been ruined when the valve hits the seat.

I'm trying to help my client figure out who is responsible for the repair. The mechanic is claiming that he can't know about all types of model specific problems and the machine shop should've told him. The machine shop is claiming that the mechanic didn't ask for the other work to be done, so they didn't do it. My belief is that the machine shop should've advised the mechanic that these engines have problems and that all valve seats should've been replaced.

I am an auto broker and I lean on many experts in the field to give me advice. I am not a mechanic and with the industry changing as quickly as it is, I work hard on keeping up with the new technologies and features on a car - I'm the one who demonstrates this to my clients. For used cars, it's a different story. I heavily rely on people to give me advice on a car. For instance, my wheel and tire shop warned me about struts going out early on 2007 - 11 Toyota Camry cars. So, when I'm appraising a trade in, I check the struts for leaks. I do the same when I'm looking for one for my client. Using the same logic, I'm of the belief that the machine shop should've advised the mechanic, but not being a mechanic, I don't know if this is the correct assumption.

Even if it drops a little, the valve can hit it and hopefully not break the seat - and of course pull it back in place.

With the correct materials and initial fit, it should never happen that a fit requiring a couple tons of force (when the pieces are cool) should be so sloppy that valve spring tension could pull the seat back into place. If the seat is moving at all, the fit is wrong, and will get even looser over time from wear.

Why is the problem only on the intake valve seat?

The problem is only on the intake valve seat because the intake valve seat is cooled by the blast of cool air and fuel that goes past during every intake event. In contrast, the exhaust valve seat tends to be hotter than the surrounding metal (this being why only exhaust valve seats "burn").

The fundamental problem is very bad design, of course.

The mechanic should have instructed the machine shop to do the job right the first time. The customer must be advised by the mechanic to do things correctly. This is not unlike the situation with loose valve guides on old Chrysler (Mitsubishi) 3.0 liter V6 engines, where any mechanic failing to advise his customer to redo the heads entirely (with valve guides that would not fall out) should have been shot.

The mechanic cannot blame the machine shop. It is the mechanic's responsibility, not the machine shop's, to know the characteristics and foibles of each car he works on. If the mechanic is charging money for his services, then he needs to be competent, which means knowing the product he's working on. You cannot be even halfway knowledgeable and fail to know that these engines are garbage and need to be modified.

In addition to fixing all the valve seats (in other words, a full rebuild of the head with modified parts), any affected cylinder should be taken down as well to check for piston cracks, bent rods damaged rod bearings, etc.

This engine, for example, is effectively scrap, if it is from a 12 year old car. Proper repairs would cost more than the car is worth.

K Fry, Thank you for your help on this. Not being a mechanic, I analyze things from an engineering point of view. Your take on the reason it happens on the intake valve is right on! I've read that putting Seafoam in the Ford Focus engine can cool the valve seat too quickly and cause the seat to drop. This is just like you said about the fuel cooling the intake seat.

Maybe the coolant was not filled properly and the head got hot and allowed the seats to move. Proper installation when I was doing it involved heating the head in an oven and putting the seats on dry ice after head was up to temp about 300 F-350 F the seats were installed and everything was allowed to cool. We never had any come out and all our work was performance use. I have had four Ford Focus and some had over 500 KM with no engine issues what so ever. My work was on GM aluminum heads and some foreign heads. To answer who is responsible you have to determine if the work was done correctly then if not you will have a case against the machinist/mechanic.

I read a response below which said that the seats would be loose if the engine overheated (which probably happened the first time). I like the idea of heating the aluminum head, then cooling the seat and pressing it in.

The four Focus cars you have are what year? I heard the cylinder head problem was on the Escort 1.9 (mid 90's and up) and the '00-'04 Focus 2.0 non-Zetec.

the ford motor is not the only vehicle to have this type of powdered metal seat Chrysler has it on the hemi V8 for about 6-8 years 1998-2005 or 2006. It is well documented that powdered metal seats will fall out. The standard procedure is to do all seats because if one seat came out the rest will follow. The (MACHINE SHOP/MACHINEST SHOULD KNOW BETTER UNLESS HE IS TRYING TO MAKE WORK $$ FOR HIMSELF) it is so bad on this type of seat that Chrysler will not warranty a repair if you don't purchase a Chrysler re-manufactured head that has had all seats replaced or prove that all seats were replaced after the first failure. The machine shop should know better on these types of seats no matter the manufacturer. Powdered metal seats just will not hold up to the rigors of a heavily used vehicle. All it takes is just one overheat and the seat is loose soon to fall out. have a whole pile of these heads laying in the shop floor just because of this very issue. It is just not worth the cost of doing the whole head if aftermarket heads are available usually a better performing head without further sorrow's.

I spoke to the mechanic about changing only one seat. He told me that the machine shop checked the other three for tightness (they hit the seat from the inside and listen for ringing). As an engineer, I find this a questionable test, since the metal will react much differently when hot (the seat may be tight when cold, but loose when hot).

I believe the machine shop should have brought up the issue of replacing the remainder of the seats, and then let the buyer beware.

By the way, there is another thread here about a guy with a good running Cavalier engine looking for a car to put it in. You might be able to get that engine for cheap. At least they don't drop valve seats. Sorry, I just had to do that.

Do you find fault in the mechanic who (as someone posted below) is like a general contractor. He is responsible for the entire job, which includes the work of his subcontractor.

If the mechanic was given the option from the machine shop, and the mechanic elected to just do one seat, then that mechanic should shoulder the financial responsibility. But, if the mechanic brought the option back to the end user of the vehicle, and the end user opted to just replace one seat, then the owner has no recourse, and must pay again. Thanks for responding back to all of us.

It's a damn shame that these problems happen. The mechanic should just take this as a lesson, and eat the cost. He can go after the machinist to recover any losses if he likes.

He is the "general contractor" here. You take the car to the mechanic to get it repaired, he does what's needed and approved by the customer. He removes the head and takes it to a specialist to repair it. Who the mechanic should have consulted with before proceeding with the repair and who should know every little fault in that particular head casting, and what needs to be done for a successful repair.

So should the blame be on the machinist? Or the Mechanic who trusted this machinist?

Who's fault it is doesn't really come into play. It was the mechanics responsibility to make sure the job was done correctly. For longevity.

When I tear something down that far, I always take the head to a machinist to rebuild it. To much labor not too.

Thank you for your point of view. I agree with your assessment and I agree that the mechanic is responsible for the machine shop he chooses. Same as if he purchased a re-build starter which goes bad after a week of use. But what about the warranty from the machine shop (or lack of one). If the machine shop is suppose to warranty the work, then should they also pay for the replacement parts (gaskets, seals, pistons and rings) plus the labor to tear down and put everything back together?

1a)Mechanic, the shop may only do what is asked of them, extra work, not specifically ordered, would be outside of the "contract".

1b) No.

1c) Customer should be friendly and pay for these as the longevity of the repair hangs on some of these and re-using the originally may not be good enough.

2a) The intake seats are far cooler and do not expand enough to sit in the probably "too large" holes cut for them. Normally such seats will be cooled with liquid nitrogen and then pushed into the recesses, so that they will never () fall out again.

2b) Exhaust valve seats are kept hotter than the head, therefore they expand more and therefore sit better and do not (yet) drop out. These should also be replaced at cost to the customer before one of them gets loose......a fully wrecked engine is on the cards if one drops at high speed......

3) I cannot follow your thinking on this point, I think that you are seeing a defective manufacturing process that Ford should 'fess up to and repair free of charge.....Has anyone checked as to whether the problem is well known or not?

How many miles has the engine got on it? Was the car always repaired etc at Ford? Does Ford want a class action suite? Japanese manufacturers would still repair this engine free of charge......

"YOU PAYS YOUR MONEY AND YOU MAKES YOUR CHOICE".....

Which is why I drive Mitsubishi since 1986 for my private cars......no problems at all.

Thanks for your input. The answer to #3 is yes, Ford knows about this problem, as it has happened far too many times.

Back in the 90's, Toyota had a problem with the V-6 engines in the Tacoma Pick Up truck. They kept blowing head gaskets. I heard it was from the heating and cooling cycle and the head would grow at a different rate vs the block. The head gasket would become damaged to the point where it would leak. Toyota fixed these as a silent warranty repair - if you brought your truck in, the dealer would fix it, even if it was out of warranty.

Another one is the Honda V-6 auto transmissions of the late 90's to early 00's. I know many people who received a new/rebuilt transmission in their Acura MDX, TL and CL and Honda Accord and Odyssey Van.

BMW fixed the V-8 Nikasil blocks from the mid 90's up to 100K miles.

Lexus and Toyota fixed the early 00's V-6 engine sludge cars that were not under warranty.

Why won't the big three fix poorly engineered cars when they're out of warranty?

Great and interesting post, many thanks.

My answer to your question is simply don't buy from the big 3.....I never do.

The nearest I ever got was buying a few Mazdas many years ago (affiliated with Ford for many years!).

Who do you think is responsible?
The design engineer.

You can't hold the design engineer at fault, since he is an employee of the company. If the company knows they put out a defective product, then they should do something about it.

Ford is not the only auto company to put out a defective product. When a company like Honda puts out a bad product, they are embarrassed and they do what they can to make it right to the customer. Toyota does the same, but not to the same extent as Honda. Nissan a little less than Toyota. Then we come to the big three, they let the public eat it when they mess up on a design. GM has had plenty of bombs (4-6-8 V-8, Olds 5.7 diesel (modified gas engine), Vega aluminum block, early fwd transmissions (on V-6 cars), etc). Chrysler too, with the FWD overdrive transmissions, V-6 Valve Guides, V-6 and Hemi V-8 Valve seats, etc. And Ford with their Diesel V-8's, Taurus transmissions, engine fires, etc.

Ultimately it comes down to the CEO of the company. The buck stops there. If the design engineer did not do his/her job then why is he/she there?

I agree with your assessment. Decades ago, I managed the service department for a motorcycle dealer. We sold Honda, BMW, Maico, and Bultaco. When something happened to a Honda that "just shouldn't happen," even if the bike was well out of warranty, they would cover it. We had some 500 fours with exhaust pipes that would start to rust after a few years. I'd write a quick note to Honda, and they'd pay for a full set of pipes (which at retail prices represented a very large portion of the bike's purchase price).

BMW was at the other extreme. We'd have brand new bikes that came from the factory with transmissions that were improperly shimmed, and so would start to pop out of gear within 100 miles or so. BMW would blame it on the customer or the dealer. (As if the dealer should, as part of setup, tear down the entire bike and reshim it.) The exhaust pipes would routinely turn blue -- something that would never happen to a Honda. BMW would blame that on the dealer and owner. The idea was that you had to run the bike rich for quite a while to build up a carbon layer on the inside of the pipes before driving it and tuning it normally. The idea did not work well in practice, so we had a lot of customers who thought they were "moving up" from a Honda, only to find that they were moving down in quality and customer service.

Hondas never leaked oil. If they did, something was wrong, and it would be fixed under warranty. BMW actually had to come out with a service bulletin to define "weepage" "seepage" and "leakage". Weepage was not to be covered under warranty, because it was caused by "normal" casting porosity.

I can imagine Ford explaining that not every Focus engine drops valve seats, and that therefore, the design must be OK. One has to expect random variability in any manufacturing process so that a certain percentage of engines can be expected to self-destruct. Please, dear customer, embrace the concept of statisical process control, entropy, and chaos theory, and fix your own damn car.

Great reply! I heard that Honda still retains much of the Japanese tradition of being ashamed of putting out a bad product. Over the years, Toyota has become more Americanized and Nissan has become more French.

Here's an example: The 2007 era Toyota Camry LE has had quite a few problems with the struts leaking. A couple years ago, my client had trouble on her 2007 Camry LE (26k miles on her car, but was past the 36 month term). The car was dealer serviced from new and she took good care of her car. The dealer told her that all four struts were leaking and she was billed over $1,200 for the repair (Toyota refused to fix it under warranty). My client was very upset about this and lost a lot of faith in Toyota.

I'd still take this over a car from the big three. My four year old GMC Sierra began having problems with the supplemental restraint system when the truck was a year old. When it was started, it would randomly show the message and shut off. It wouldn't restart for 20-30 minutes, leaving my crew unable to work. It has been to the dealer many times and still no fix. I'm disappointed, because the truck has 25K miles on it now and I don't have a lot of confidence in it. GMC has been friendly, but they haven't found the fix - and it's now out of warranty.

Take a look at this link. The 2001 Ford Focus has quite a few complaints about the engine. carcomplaints.com/ford/focus/2001/index.shtml