Ford's answers to the NHTSA 6.7 Investigation

NewsW wrote:

BenK wrote:


Detroit still doesn't get it...

I am rather sympathetic to Ford because they were (as a company) traumatized by the 6.0 debacle.

When all the shooting is done, Ford ended up paying out a lot of warranty claims that should never have been paid.

Warranty fraud on the 6.0 was rampant.

It is not clear to me that the product ever made money for them.

As a result, Ford developed elaborate enhancements and procedures to cut warranty costs.

A lot of that is in the software that since 2008, closely monitor what the customer is doing, logging everything, and quietly feeds the data back to Ford every time the vehicle is plugged in to a dealer computer.

Don't believe me? Just read the manual from the 2008 and later models and note the explicit advice to owners that Ford is collecting data (and authorization).

As a result of the new enhancements, it can be fairly said that a majority of claims involving tuners, emission tampering, etc. have been denied --- fairly.

A Ford tech today, on any major warranty claim, have to spend hours not fixing --- but documenting the repair with a elaborate ritual that is intended to limit (not eliminate) warranty fraud and abuse.

The problem is, sometimes, this hard line approach can make a mistake --- where the customer is right, and Ford and the dealers buggered up.

That is what happened in some cases with the CP 4 pump.

Thats their own mistake in many ways. Every other brand of diesel truck gets misused just as much. Fords engine wasn't built to handle the added stress. The way they handled it caused a lot of bad publicity even though yes in the end Ford was right for denying a lot of customers claims.

GM went about it a different way, they never really put up a stink, but also never really had as many issues either. They also have no money so maybe they aren't the smarter ones. What they did on the new LML was install the new "feared" Bosch ECM that does not allow the calibration to be read through the OBDII port. In doing this, they were able to gain legal power against tuners and such because the only legal way for any tuner to be able to tune the truck would be for the truck owner themselves to pull the tune and then alter it, anyone else who would gain access to a tune other than the trucks owner would be committing fraud. They also put a hold on the ECMs for 6 months, and any replacement ECMs require a lot of documenting before being sent out.

Needless to say, there are a few programmers out there today for it. GM has their butt covered, and nobody is out bashing GM for not covering their warranty claims. They continue to be very good about replacing parts unless it is obvious the aftermarket part caused the failure. GM builds a good powertrain, so they don't have to worry about going broke with warranty claims like Ford seems to be. Look at how much the injector issue caused GM. GM themselves wouldn't deny modified trucks because they knew the issue lied in their product, the injectors. The injectors were Bosch, so did GM blame Bosch? Not entirely, they knew it was a joint failure, internal parts of the injector were part of the issue, and the other half were the systems controlling the injectors and the environment they were in. Speaking of which, I need to get back to replacing the set I am working on now.

blackeyed1 wrote:
Keep beating the horse, be it either alive or dead, until the truth comes out. I have a 2008 6.4L that is alive and well for now, but I'll never know for sure it stays that way. some of you think it's no big deal, but if Ford or my insurance denies repairs or payment based on this pump or fuel issues, I for one could not afford $10-12,000 for a new engine. I do the draining, filters, etc regularly per the diesel supplement. But there is a fear each day I take it out that it could be my last. Would you like that feeling? I doubt it.
I do have a back up plan should I have a catastrophic failure that my insurance or Ford will not cover. But I sure won't say it here.

The 6.4s use a completely different siemens system.


The CP4 pump itself is less than $1000 through GM.

In my opinion it is very cut and dry regardless of how others try and spin it in Ford's favor. If there is a legit warranty issue, which Ricatic's and others certainly were, Ford needs to stand by there products. You shouldn't need a warranty to cover your warranty..:h. Other's can justify Ford's actions however they want and still continue to support them, to each there own but I just purchased a new truck without Ford even being in the equation, simply because they are not honoring there warranties and I will not give them my business. It's a shame too, I really like the look of the Ford HD's, the outward visibilty, payload and 6.2 motor.

I'm Rick James wrote:

rick83864 wrote:
I really thought I clicked onto a hot thread with a high hit count till I realized one poster had 68% of the posts :H
Enough typing already, maybe take a break and eat something :B
.

You must be referring to the newb that's averaging 28 posts per day. That guy has got some serious spare time.

yet can't figure out how to post a freakin' link.

jees.

NewsW wrote:

2003silverado wrote:
I don't understand why ford is denying there is a problem. On the first page of the article it states "Ford understands that there is no alleged defect with respect to any of its vehicles and is
providing this information as part of the agency's investigation of another manufacturer's
vehicles."

Give Ford a break.

That is the lawyering that has to go on the first sentence.

If they KNOW there is a defect, they have a finite period of time when they are legally required to report the defect to NHTSA or they are fined.

Based on evidence to date, there is no clear evidence that they know there is a problem yet.

Now, lets help everyone along to understand what the problem is.

I'm with you dude!

Examples of cases where Ford should not be warranting HPFP / Fuel system:

http://powerstrokenation.com/forums/showthread.php?t=121657

9 chance of of 10, this is a failed HPFP.

rick83864 wrote:
I really thought I clicked onto a hot thread with a high hit count till I realized one poster had 68% of the posts :H
Enough typing already, maybe take a break and eat something :B
.

You must be referring to the newb that's averaging 28 posts per day. That guy has got some serious spare time.

NewsW wrote:

gmcsmoke wrote:

You my friend need to wake up from the dream world you're living in. Because there's no way in BP or Exxon is going to pay a $12k repair bill because you claim "bad fuel".

My experience with major brands is, upon presentation of solid evidence, paid promptly.

FYI, I have also been paid promptly by major suppliers (e.g. Allied-Signal) when solid evidence of failure of their component was presented to them.

They were all more than fair.



Example of a solid "bad fuel" claim.

Tank nearly empty, XYZ pulls up to ABC Major Brand Diesel Station.

Engine, everything running fine.

Fills up with full tank of ABC Major Brand Diesel.

Engine starts, coughs, then dies, WIF light comes on.

Immediately towed to dealer, who discover 10+ gallons of water in fuel tank.

Contacted ABC Major Brand Corporate immediately.

(In background, ABC halts sale of suspect fuel from that pump, then sends out tech to check, and alas, find tank half full of water).

ABC Major Brands gulps...

And Pay.


What also helps:

No previous claims history (or similar claims).

No lawyer involved.

No claims for damages, etc.

Limited out of pocket claim (just the frigging bill, not padded).

No nonsense.

I'm not buying your fantasy scenario and neither should anyone else.

perhaps Ford should consider putting brochure in the glovebox stating the fuel system is not covered by Ford warranty, contact Bosch for warranty coverage. Treat the fuel system like tires.

Jarlaxle wrote:
Probably Ford dropping the diesel in the Econoline.

I am seeing more and more International and Freightliner ambulances lately. Saw one built on a new GMC cutaway van last week...sounded like Duramax power.

Down here the Navistar and Freightliner based rigs were the hot ticket item..........until the real estate implosion and resulting loss of property tax revenue. My former employer used to run Navistar and Freightliner based ambulances exclusively, now they're buying Dodge based rigs. Presumably, less expensive; I know the Navistar and Freightliner rigs were pricey before I retired, about $150K a copy and that was nearly 7 years ago! I do know that all the staff vehicles that were F-250 6.0's were replaced by F-150 gassers; I'll let you guess why.......;)

I really thought I clicked onto a hot thread with a high hit count till I realized one poster had 68% of the posts :H
Enough typing already, maybe take a break and eat something :B
Glad your getting to the bottom (no pun) of it Ric. I never did like the ULSD because of this very same issue, IT'S DRY FUEL. I won't bother posting the spicer report from 2007 again, the truth is not always something folks want to read.