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

[thomasmnile]

NewsW wrote:

BenK wrote:

Bottom line for me is that this thread should NOT have to be...indicative of
pushing the limits and of the overly used computer simulations in exclusion of
real world test mules that they 'USED' to have fleets of.

From my point of view, also indicative of the engineers shooting in the dark
at a problem that they have not characterized well enough. Even think they truly
don't know what the root cause is. Another IMHO, think there are SEVERAL root causes
that might be multiplexing among themselves

That sounds about right... it is a set of causes that eluded the best minds at Bosch, at least circa 2009, when the design of the CP4 for the Ford 6.7 was frozen.

I remember the introductory marketing splash, the Mike Rowe videos on the website, etc. Seem to recall one of the development team for the engine state that a fleet of test "mules" logged like 2 million miles on this engine before full scale production began. Wonder what Ford's experience with the CP4x was with the mules??? :h

[Jarlaxle]

Artemus Gordon wrote:

JPhelps wrote:

This is making me ill

Not used to gambling? Well, you are gonna roll the big one when you sign on the dotted line for that new 450.
That is why you are feeling ill.
Don't blame the messenger.

Lol. I am a "big boy" and can assure you I am not the least bit worried! LOl!!!:C

Might not be too late: you may be able to cancel & order a 450 with the V10 instead of the $12,000+ hand grenade.

[ricatic]

Artemus Gordon wrote:

ricatic wrote:

Artemus Gordon wrote:
This is making me ill. Does anyone smell "dead Horse"! :Z

I must ask why are you bothering to waste your time here...no dog in the fight unless you have a truck other than the one in your signature...and by admission you are bored...opening a particular thread requires a specific action on a readers part...ignore what does not interest you...

Page 27...few posts like this one...I would say interest is high

Regards

Guess I am not as smart as you are, so I will do just that and ignore this thread. I do have many cars to answer your question. New F450 KR on order. Never had Ford or any manufacture not honor my warranties. Ever... My issue with the thread is I am not hearing new info. Repeating material already discussed over and over makes me feel that something else is up here. Just my opinion but Ford is getting a pretty good beating without any ability to comment. So far opinions without rebuttle. If I were Fords legal advisors I would be watching this thread very closely. Mostly one sided from what I read, but hey Ford while not perfect did not take bailout money. I like how my Ford dealer treats me and I like their products. Sorry I upset you, carry on!

Artemus

I was not upset with you...just wondering why you thought the topic was a dead horse. I see now that you have a new 6.7 truck ordered...congratulations...it is a fine truck.

Threads like this one have provided much needed information regarding the long term life of the HPF system use on your new truck. The information distributed in just this thread tells you that you need to make sure the fuel you burn meets Bosch's 460 scar lubricity specification. The better success of Canadian truck indicates that Bosch's warnings from 9/2009 are valid. Avoiding the dreaded HPFP failure is the goal of this discussion.

It would be nice if Ford owners could have the peace of mind of a certain warranty repair of the HPF system like GM owners enjoy. This discussion would have never taken place. Ford can fix the problem...just fix the trucks and find a solution to the problem on their dime...not on the backs of their hard working customers

There has been some thread rehash. It is inevitable in a thread that is now 29 pages long. I have no idea what else you might think is going on in this discussion. Like you, I have had warranty successes with Ford. This truck has been in the shop nine different times since new. 8 of those 9 times the repair was covered by warranty. It is the blanket denial of any HPFP claim that upsets concerned owners. There is no warning before it strikes...and is random in it's attack...no one is immune, especially if you travel. You may have a great dealer that you trust but no guarantee that you will be near him when it might break. BTDT...and the $10,030 invoice to prove it. If you look around at the Ford forums, you will find several HPFP failures that even the hometown dealer could not get covered for a very loyal customer. One guy has 4 6.7 trucks

Again, my apologies for not being clear with my comments

Regards

[Artemus_Gordon]

JPhelps wrote:

This is making me ill

Not used to gambling? Well, you are gonna roll the big one when you sign on the dotted line for that new 450.
That is why you are feeling ill.
Don't blame the messenger.

Lol. I am a "big boy" and can assure you I am not the least bit worried! LOl!!!:C

[NewsW]

BenK wrote:

Bottom line for me is that this thread should NOT have to be...indicative of
pushing the limits and of the overly used computer simulations in exclusion of
real world test mules that they 'USED' to have fleets of.

From my point of view, also indicative of the engineers shooting in the dark
at a problem that they have not characterized well enough. Even think they truly
don't know what the root cause is. Another IMHO, think there are SEVERAL root causes
that might be multiplexing among themselves

That sounds about right... it is a set of causes that eluded the best minds at Bosch, at least circa 2009, when the design of the CP4 for the Ford 6.7 was frozen.

[JPhelps]

This is making me ill

Not used to gambling? Well, you are gonna roll the big one when you sign on the dotted line for that new 450.
That is why you are feeling ill.
Don't blame the messenger.

[BenK]

Fascinating thread but not enough time to dive deeply enough to be able to
keep up (thanks NewsW for the stuff, but no time to read it at the depth needed
to discuss)

I think a view into corporate America on how it works, makes decisions, etc.

Bottom line for me is that this thread should NOT have to be...indicative of
pushing the limits and of the overly used computer simulations in exclusion of
real world test mules that they 'USED' to have fleets of.

From my point of view, also indicative of the engineers shooting in the dark
at a problem that they have not characterized well enough. Even think they truly
don't know what the root cause is. Another IMHO, think there are SEVERAL root causes
that might be multiplexing among themselves

Again, I am NOT a diesel guy. Almost went that way, but after reading up back
in the late 90's to early 2000's, decided too risky because overly complex and
immature regulations in the pipe.

[JPhelps]

Ford's own web site doesn't even say that this stuff is compatible with the 6.7 engine. They might be trashing your injection pumps by recommending you use this stuff and pushing its sales through their dealers. Pretty good marketing ploy. Pay Ford to buy your truck. Pay Ford for additive to ruin your pump. Pay Ford to replace your complete injection system. win,win,win.

PM22A

Note: This ultra-low sulfur formulation can be used in engines required to meet 2007 emissions requirements (e.g., Ford’s 6.4L diesel engine) and is backward compatible as well (i.e., can be used in Ford’s 6.9L, 7.3L and 6.0L diesel engines)

[NewsW]

Flashman wrote:


Not honoring warrantys is honorable??

Please explain

I believe Ford will come around to my view that they made a mistake in at least one case.

The science is not there yet, but we are getting closer.

Ford can make a mistake in good faith.

For example, with the infamous mystery fires that killed people.

Took a lot of independent work (not just in house by Ford) to solve that problem.

That was the Cruise Control Deact Switch Fires.

Once it was identified, they did make good.

Ford is generally an honorable company --- but sometimes, it takes them time to figure out, and do the right thing.

Be patient.

[Artemus_Gordon]

ricatic wrote:

Artemus Gordon wrote:
This is making me ill. Does anyone smell "dead Horse"! :Z

I must ask why are you bothering to waste your time here...no dog in the fight unless you have a truck other than the one in your signature...and by admission you are bored...opening a particular thread requires a specific action on a readers part...ignore what does not interest you...

Page 27...few posts like this one...I would say interest is high

Regards

Guess I am not as smart as you are, so I will do just that and ignore this thread. I do have many cars to answer your question. New F450 KR on order. Never had Ford or any manufacture not honor my warranties. Ever... My issue with the thread is I am not hearing new info. Repeating material already discussed over and over makes me feel that something else is up here. Just my opinion but Ford is getting a pretty good beating without any ability to comment. So far opinions without rebuttle. If I were Fords legal advisors I would be watching this thread very closely. Mostly one sided from what I read, but hey Ford while not perfect did not take bailout money. I like how my Ford dealer treats me and I like their products. Sorry I upset you, carry on!

[Flashman]

NewsW wrote:

thomasmnile wrote:

Are you concerned that Ford might hit you with a "SLAPP" suit over this?

IMHO, Ford is an honorable company, and to my knowledge, they have never filed a single SLAPP suit.

The closest example is a suit against "fordreallysucks.com" which failed.

Believe it or not, there are good people working at Ford, and in this case, I am willing to say it is a mistake in good faith --- until I see evidence otherwise.

Ford did make good the 6.0 eventually --- though it took time.

I have seen PLENTY of people trashing Ford unfairly --- and trashing Ford defenders.


I contrast Ford's behavior with a certain formerly Japanese controlled auto company that filed a suit against a computer firm to grab their registered domain name.

Not honoring warrantys is honorable??

Please explain

[NewsW]

If you don't like the thread / channel / magazine....

Don't read it!

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

Ric was there any peeling or flaking of the DLC observed by the DD people? Do you know how it is put on the pump bore? Or how it is finished fitted?

[Greg_Bunting]

As to 'dead horse', I disagree. I have no dog here, my only diesel being a Lister-Petter with no problems. But it is a fascinating thread from the troubles experienced to the solution conjecture. Keep it up - I'll be here reading. Serendipity!

[NewsW]

One of my strategies is to look at what they are publishing, presenting at conferences.

Generally, what is made public are information that is of limited technical value, the problem having been already solved and put in place, and is published to deter others (as in we solved that one, and you haven't), prevent others from patenting it (patent filing clock starts to run), or to goad the industry to a new standard (that they control)...

Working backwards, you also can guess what they didn't know a few years before the paper was published, and what flaws are likely to be in the older design.

A rash of publications by Bosch around 2009 is co-incindental with ULSD in USA, and CP4 introduction in 2007 (and early data in field coming in), and a few other events...