ShinerBock wrote:
There are also many fanboys here who do not like to tell the truth because it makes their favorite brand look bad. They are usually easy to spot because they will focus only on the bad of other brands and refuse to believe there is anything bad with their favorite brand. They also usually exaggerate numbers so take what they say with a grain of salt just as you would with a fanboy of an opposing brand.
Huntindog wrote:lenr wrote:I had the actual documents back in that time period. That was a couple of crashed computers ago, so I no longer have them.
When the CP4 failure rate first popped up from 2011 to 2013 there was some formal and maybe a review by National Safety folks. The Ford actual CP4 failure rate was 6 out of 10,000 with plenty of those being water, ethanol, DEF, or gasoline in the fuel, which is not the fault of Ford (or Bosch). I suspect as the motor and fuel industries have learned about the sensitivities, that the failure rate has gone down. Yes, it sucks if it happens to you, but the odds are low. I use Ford fuel treatment and try to buy from high volume stations to lower my personal risk.
But as I recall Ford had a failure rate about 1/2 of GMs. Ford was in the 2 per 10,000 range and GM was in the 4 range.
That did not jibe with what was being reported on the forums back then... At that time, there had not been a single GM report of a CP4 failure.... But there were a number of reports on Fords... Many of them being denied warranty.
I dug into those reports, and have idea why there was the discrepancy in the NHSTA reports and what was being reported on the forums.
It seems that the NHSTA only documents warranty claim failures. And since Ford was denying a good number of claims, then those claims would not be included in Fords failure rate.
GM was quitely fixing their failures under warranty, but their NHSTA failure rate was higher as a result... In reality, both brands likely had similar rates, though the Ford forums did have a number of reports of DEF mistakenly being put in the diesel tank.... It is likely that some of those people tried to get Ford to warranty this.... It is doubtful that many suceeded at that as Ford had a very strict protocol on how to check for DEF diesel contamination. So overall, I doubt that had much of an impact on the rate.
lenr wrote:I had the actual documents back in that time period. That was a couple of crashed computers ago, so I no longer have them.
When the CP4 failure rate first popped up from 2011 to 2013 there was some formal and maybe a review by National Safety folks. The Ford actual CP4 failure rate was 6 out of 10,000 with plenty of those being water, ethanol, DEF, or gasoline in the fuel, which is not the fault of Ford (or Bosch). I suspect as the motor and fuel industries have learned about the sensitivities, that the failure rate has gone down. Yes, it sucks if it happens to you, but the odds are low. I use Ford fuel treatment and try to buy from high volume stations to lower my personal risk.
lenr wrote:
Not positive but I believe that Canadian fuel has a higher lubricity standard than US fuel, which might explain a lower HPFP failure rate up North. However, something North of 99.94% of the 6.7s in the US also have no fuel pump problems with many of those with a failure being traced back to contaminated fuel.
