Forum Discussion
- No Turtle, your analogy is not mine. I am referring specifically to the oil pan. To use your analogy it would be an updated video driver, not an entirely new operating system. My point is many seem to condemn the pursuit of zero defects as bad. I think you have two entirely different arguments in your post above. One being a substitute and the other a refinement. Mine is not a 7.3, 6.0, 6.7 etc debate. The problem is many of these treads get so perverted you cannot follow them when the haters (not you) attempt to derail a discussion.
- I just heard on the tv that Ford is halting any further manufacturing of their Super Duty Trucks due to the fact that every engines junk....not one good one in the batch ...Wow we all knew that already,,,thanks to some.. Wake Up People
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
mich800 wrote:
Come on Turtle. You know out of the box the vast majority have no issues no matter the make. If I spend that kind of coin on a vehicle I EXPECT zero defects. Does it happen, absolutely not with ALL manufactures. Add to that you completely miss read my post.
Absolutely they all have problems.
BUT, to give you an analogy, would you rather have Windows ME or Windows 7? (after all, they both have problems)
Would you rather try to win money at the Black Jack table or Slots at a casino?
Would you rather have a 7.3 diesel or a 6.0. There is a HUGE difference between replacing a CPS on the road and replacing a head gasket. (both problems)
Or to hit closer to home on this thread. Would you rather have a weepy tranny hose or valve heads fall of the stems into the engine?
I want to make my odds as good as possible when I buy something as expensive as a pickup or something as cheap as a digital camera.
Like I said before. Ford has some problems with this engine and in 2015 they are addressing these problems. Good for them. It's very telling that all of the problems they are addressing are the ones that continually show up on the forums.
Sorry you think I misread your post.
It's really not telling. Revisions get made, should Ford fix problems that no one is experiencing? Of course problems that come up with the most frequency will be addressed. I've seen you and others bring that up like it's some kind of point. You should ask your "Tech" friends to explain "Project life cycle" to you.mich800 wrote:
Come on Turtle. You know out of the box the vast majority have no issues no matter the make. If I spend that kind of coin on a vehicle I EXPECT zero defects. Does it happen, absolutely not with ALL manufactures. Add to that you completely miss read my post.
Absolutely they all have problems.
BUT, to give you an analogy, would you rather have Windows ME or Windows 7? (after all, they both have problems)
Would you rather try to win money at the Black Jack table or Slots at a casino?
Would you rather have a 7.3 diesel or a 6.0. There is a HUGE difference between replacing a CPS on the road and replacing a head gasket. (both problems)
Or to hit closer to home on this thread. Would you rather have a weepy tranny hose or valve heads fall of the stems into the engine?
I want to make my odds as good as possible when I buy something as expensive as a pickup or something as cheap as a digital camera.
Like I said before. Ford has some problems with this engine and in 2015 they are addressing these problems. Good for them. It's very telling that all of the problems they are addressing are the ones that continually show up on the forums.
Sorry you think I misread your post.- Come on Turtle. You know out of the box the vast majority have no issues no matter the make. If I spend that kind of coin on a vehicle I EXPECT zero defects. Does it happen, absolutely not with ALL manufactures. Add to that you completely miss read my post.
- Huntingdog, theoretically both could be true. Back when steel prices went through the roof and now crazy oil prices. I suppose both could be true if not taken out of context of the economy. I don't know or care but I am sure someone could research that.
mich800 wrote:
DavinD wrote:
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
Running change= expensive which=
We f@%*#! up the first time so we will now go back to the tried and true design.........STEEL.
Couldn't be because of problems like this, could it? Naaaaaaaaaaaaaa!
Plastic is great to use on an engine. Just ask owners of GM intake manifolds. :B
Shame on them for trying a new technology that had potential to save money at the same time producing a stronger part. For shame...for shame. Then, to add insult to injury, they realized it wasn't working out and switched back. I can't believe a company would do that. :R
Mid year and running changes and evolution of a design happens all the time. No big deal. Ford decided to go back to steel oil pans. Ram fixed their huge def blunder. GM is fixing the deadly ignition switches and brake lines. GMC axed the rear steer. We should all be happy the mfg's correct and advance on their designs. We as consumers win.
We as consumers win? :h
I wouldn't feel much like a winner if I had to take my truck in for a CP4 fix or a turbo fix or a brake line fix or a deadly ignition fix after spending 60K on it!
Ricatic do you feel like a winner?
Silly me, I expect A product that I pay 50 or 60 grand to work the first time out of the box. Not go back to the dealer 3, 4, 10 times for a "oh sorry, we f@%^&*&@ up, please excuse the inconvenience of us having your truck, (which you make a living with) for a week or a month to fix your CP4 pump." "By the way, I hope you have 12 grand in your bank account because we won't pay for it."
I'm beginning to figure out how they sell these trucks and who they sell them too. :B LOLTurtle n Peeps wrote:
720Deere wrote:
You seem pretty fond of doing your internet research. Ford parts prices are posted all over the net.
I know you are very well informed and I don't need to tell you this, but the valves weren't "switched out in 15". The valves that they had trouble with were early job 1 2011 trucks.
Why yes I am, thank you very much.From the 2009 Innovation Awards wrote:
I remember that post.. The boys in blue really beat me up pretty good over that.
As a matter of a fact a member here must have a real good crystal ball. Man, I'll give it to him, he hit it right on the nose looooooooongggggggggggg before it even happened. Look at his post:Huntindog wrote:
This has been discussed before, and the following was given as Fords reasoning for the plastic oil pan.
The oil or sump pan on the 6.7 is manufactired from a Dupont 6/6 Nylon/Aluminium composite. It is said to be lighter, STRONGER, and less costly to manufacture than the aluminium only pans.
My concern is long term durability of the plastic pan.
Plastic degrades faster than metal over time. This process is accelerated with heat.
Oil pans rusting out became a problem when auto makers started using thinner, lighter less costly steel to make them.
Notice the similarities in the two highlighted statements? The auto makers like to focus on the lighter aspects of these designs,,,,but just how much weight savings does this gain? IMO, not much. They are more concerned about the bottom line. If they save a small amount, even only a dollar on a part, that dollar goes directly to profit. The consumer is the loser.
I can assure you that Ford is NOT using the same high tech very exspensive composites used in our nations best defense airplanes
I think that this is a primarily cost savings move by Ford. This plastic pan will likely perform well for Ford in the relatively short time that they have to warranty it.. I doubt that will be true long term.
OTOH...The Dmax uses a more costly aluminum oil pan. NO rusting out, and excellent long term durability
Funny thing is he posted this on 11/26/2011. Again, my hat is off to Huntindog for the crystal ball of the year award. Have any lotto numbers you can give me Huntindog? :B
About the valves: FMC disagrees with you.
Here is Fords own TSB:Ford wrote:
Some 2011-2013 F-Super Duty vehicles equipped with a 6.7L.............Bla, bla, bla, yada, yada, yada............
Try again, this is fun! :B
Interesting how when Ford went back to a steel pan that lower cost was again cited as a benefit..
And the boys in blue overlooked the similarities in the propaganda on both pans, jumping on the bandwagon as it Ford had reinvented the wheel, er steel pan.DavinD wrote:
mich800, I hope you noticed the sarcasm in my post. ;)
It wasn't directed at anyone specifically. I just thought your post tied into the comment better than on its own.- mich800, I hope you noticed the sarcasm in my post. ;)
