Ford's answers to the NHTSA 6.7 Investigation

[ricatic]

There was a request for a link to Ford's answer's to the NHTSA investigation posted on a previous thread, since closed. Here is the link:

Ford's NHTSA Answers to the 6.7 investigation

This PDF is over 20 pages long. There are some interesting statements contained in the documents. My favorite is the one where Ford says they buy the pump from Bosch as a "black box" and do no testing of the component. It is closely followed by the tantamount admission that the pump will not provide a long service life when exposed to the poor lubricity fuel found in the US. You will have to do the math using the sales versus failure tables for the US and Canadian trucks. Eye opening difference to say the least...

Regards

[NewsW]

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.

[I_m_Rick_James]

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.

[Biggziff]

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.

[hawkeye-08]

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.

[thomasmnile]

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.......;)

[45Ricochet]

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.

[Jarlaxle]

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.

[thomasmnile]

Jarlaxle wrote:

NewsW wrote:

thomasmnile wrote:

NewsW wrote:


We got users (Rick for example) saying "I got a real problem"

And THATis the bottom line! The man spent a bunch o' money on what he thought was a reliable vehicle, only to be blown off by its manufacturer and a dealer, with a claim (not clearly substantiated to him) of water in the vehicle's fuel.

With a much touted and newly launched vehicle, seems to me that Ford which apparently doesn't have a firm understanding of what's going on, should repair the vehicles with this problem, thoroughly analyze the problem to identify it, correct what can be corrected, and if there is a problem with the Bosch components, take it up with Bosch and not drill the customer.

Ford can't afford another 6.0 chapter in their history..............

I have said it before, but I am trying to find a solution to this issue that do not require Ford being a villain.

You can't. That is simplky not possible, because Ford IS a villain here!

I honestly think they were misled by Bosch into how reliable the pump is and how it is "impossible" for it to go bad if fed proper fuel.

Quite possible...of course, that being the case, GM was duped the same way. However, GM is standing behind their trucks, while Ford seems to be claiming, "Our engine is perfect, therefore it's your fault."

And, the blue oval on the grille says FORD not Bosch! Seems like customer goodwill is lost in today's corporate culture. These vehicles are some of Ford's biggest sellers (and most profitable). Maybe Ford doesn't need all those sales? :S

Locally, I have a number of local fire department ambulance fleets running more and more Dodge 4500/5500 based bone boxes. Wonder why............

[blackeyed1]

Enough reading for tonight. Head hurts. ha!

[NewsW]

blackeyed1 wrote:
Maybe I misread an earlier post regarding bio-diesel recommendation. Since I moved back here to Michigan, I will not use bio-diesel in my truck. I do use the cetane booster from Ford. I also keep an envelope in my glovebox with at least past 3 months of fuel receipts.

Ford specifies a maximum biodiesel blend content that can be used but do not require or recommend it.

Use more than that... and it is warranty void time if you have a problem.

Ford branded cetane booster is the way to go... sure safe vs. 3rd party brands.

Keep the receipts --- good for you... in case of trouble.

[blackeyed1]

Maybe I misread an earlier post regarding bio-diesel recommendation. Since I moved back here to Michigan, I will not use bio-diesel in my truck. I do use the cetane booster from Ford. I also keep an envelope in my glovebox with at least past 3 months of fuel receipts.

[NewsW]

blackeyed1 wrote:
Ford or whomever said that using a % of biodiesel helps lubricity. I know that when I had to use biodiesel in my 6.4L (that's all I could find) in Illinois before I moved here to Michigan, my truck ran terrible and lousy fuel mileage on it. Now that I can get regular diesel up here, my truck runs alot better. So I don't know whose leg is being pulled anymore.

Don't think Ford ever officially advised anyone to use biodiesel blend to get better lubricity.

There is a lot of biodiesel boosters (many raiding burger stands for raw materials) claiming miracles with biodiesel.

I personally would not let biodiesel touch mine -- though in many places it is hard to not have some as it is required by law.

Name brand fuel is what I would buy, and save the receipt each time.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

Engineer9860 wrote:
Alright, since nobody wants to sell me their 6.7L PSD truck by the lb., let me ask a serious question.......

I haven't seen any discussion on this, but I have had some thoughts after something that happened to me recently.

A while back I dumped out some older diesel fuel that I had stored in a sealed plastic container.

In the fuel was a large glob of what I believe to be algae. It was a nasty green glob. This plastic container was not contaminated before I saved this fuel from the frame filter (primary) on my 2008 6.4L work truck.

So, was this algae? What effects would something like this have on these newer fuel systems?

It could be but when I think of algae I think black. It look like black slime. It takes a while for it to turn black though. When young it's kinda clear and real sticky. This is what glued up my shut off solenoid in my diesel.

Any water in a HP common rail is bad. For the 6.4 it REAL bad.

[blackeyed1]

Ford or whomever said that using a % of biodiesel helps lubricity. I know that when I had to use biodiesel in my 6.4L (that's all I could find) in Illinois before I moved here to Michigan, my truck ran terrible and lousy fuel mileage on it. Now that I can get regular diesel up here, my truck runs alot better. So I don't know whose leg is being pulled anymore.

[NewsW]

8iron wrote:

In this case "bellyaching" did have an effect on enforcement and certainly has the policy makers attention. Only the foolish and the extremely arrogant ignore the power of public opinion. Think BP’s Tony Hayward, AIG and every US Bank exec.

Last I checked, Hayward is making a fortune in his new job, BP stock is pretty much back to normal, and bankers in the US is back to business as usual with fat bonuses paid out for christmas.

How much impact do "public opinion" has on what we now call EPA 2010?

Or the forthcoming fuel economy standards?

Or the virtual banning of non ULSD from use?

Can you show me one legal sale of an onroad light duty vehicle built this year that do not meet EPA 2010 and FMVSS on the date of manufacturer where there are not legal workarounds (like emission credits)?

There is not one case I am aware of.

So much for the opposition to EPA 2010.

Oh, I do hear of garages fined $$$ by EPA for modding emissions gear.