creeek, creeek, creeeeeeek they all came out no problemo. 100,000 miles. I bought the lisle tool on amazon for about 45 bucks and I'm glad I didn't need it. Took about 4 hours. I had to buy a 9/16" deep socket for the FPTZ1s (or whatever they are) and put the rubber from another small diameter spark plug socket inside. I wont try the hose technique. It looks like the two back plugs had some oil get up into the threads.

Some things I did: Started with engine hot, did pass side. Restarted engine, finished driver side. I read the block is aluminum and the plug threads are steel. Coefficients of thermal expansion are 26, 12 resp. So there should be less radial compression when heated up.
No anti-seize, no 25flbs, just 1/4 turn past tight. Used the vice to gap 2 plugs, the rest seemed to be close.

Thank you for anyone who helped me on this topic. This forum rules.

 

Hi & Welcome - even though you joined in 2006 !

Spectacular - Thanks for that!

What plugs did you select as replacements?


MGD

 

Yeah, I don't post much, but I read. I know a few of the guys in the stereo section.

I just checked the plugs and they are Motorcraft PZT1F, the same plug that came out.

BTW, thanks for all of your information on this topic.

 

I think you should play the lotto, - your lucky. AFAIK , it's recommended that you don't heat them up and the updated plugs are -PZT14F.

Congrats all the same

 

10-4

 

If you didn't put any on the shanks (ground sleeves), you should pull them and do so. You don't need to put it on the threads. High temperature nickel.

 

You should have put anti-seize on the shank. Thats the recommendation to keep then from sticking next removal..

 

You must be living right, bucko! Of course, if you hadn't bought the tool, 7 of 8 would have broken ( ; < ).

What gas do you use and did you put a deposit cleaning additive in the fuel before the job? There seems to be some correlation between the type of fuel used (Top Tier, high detergent gas) and the resultant lack of carbon deposits, and easy removal of the plugs.

In looking at those pics, I'd say you got the full use outta those plugs. You could drive a truck through those gaps. Look at the rounded electrodes and erosion on the grounds. Yeah, that 60K interval looks to be more optimal.

 

DISCLAIMER: do not try this at home, he is a trained professional !

I asked a long time family friend who has 26 years as a ford tech at the local dealer. He stated he gets the motor hot and uses a 3/8 impact to remove the plugs. He has not broken one yet.

It sent shivers down my back to hear this, BUT the man has no reason to lie and has done numerous plug changes in his 26 years!

and as another poster has stated Alum. expands more than steel when heated to same temp. enlarging the clearances so I would tend to believe the tactic.

 

Yeah, I'm lucky alright. Truck runs great, no more 4th gear miss at low rpm, lol. I think I'll do the plugs a little more frequently than the suggested interval. 60k or less makes more sense to me. My plugs do look pretty bad. In spite of all the high tech changes ford made, it's still an engine and I've never let plugs go this long in anything I've owned. Ive always run 91 octane either 76 or Chevron, sometimes Mobil. For some reason the truck never liked Arco (BP) around here even higher octane, despite the gas cap suggestion. I believe in paying a little more for the gas, truck seems to like it so much more. So I take it my plugs don't look like they have too much carbon compared to others. Never used any fuel additives, except for injector cleaner a month ago.

 

Well, Chevron is on the Top Tier list, along with the Texaco I was using... and also got all eight out. My mileage was ay under yours though. Good gas seems to make a difference with the deposits that lock the plugs in. More than likely a coupla tanks with a Techron additive would do the same thing.

BTW, my '05 manual suggest changing the plugs at 60K in "severe" conditions, which is defined as a lot of city driving. Someone on another thread said Ford has reduced the 100K interval to 60K, but I have not verified that.

 

I believe it. I used to work with a lot of research materials joining both mechanical and chemical. While I'm not sure what tolerances ford leaves for the ID / OD (inner diameter, outer), or the specific alloys they chose, you can calculate the gap and the stresses (stress reduction in our case) due to heating.

Or maybe it had nothing to do with it at all...I'm just saying from my experience and what makes sense to me.

 

Mr. Jim - they did in Canada - it would be rather odd if they did not in the US of Eh!

AFAIK, the problem does not disappear at the border.....

MGD

 

That's because Arco and BP gas is not the same, in spite of the fact that BP owns Arco. Arco gas is dog ****. The only stuff in California that's worse is Costco gas.