Mar-01-2012 05:53 AM
Sep-30-2012 06:01 PM
NewsW wrote:
There is at present, no second source (not even remans) of the Bosch CP4.
Sep-30-2012 05:44 PM
blacksnapon wrote:
Heres the problem: If Rick would have had the original repairing dealer fix his truck, paid for it, he'd have left with his warranty very much intact. Having his truck towed away without repairs being made, shows deception on ricks part, calling for an instant and unreversible warranty revocation. Here's why......Even though he had his truck repaired by a Ford dealer (in his case Lincoln), theres no way that Ford can verify that the truck was repaired to specs using Ford parts. How'd you like to buy a used truck assuming that the warranty was good, then suprise! Water or not, wear damage or not, THATS WHY HE WAS DENIED FURTHER WARRANTY!
Sep-30-2012 05:42 PM
blacksnapon wrote:
Heres the problem: If Rick would have had the original repairing dealer fix his truck, paid for it, he'd have left with his warranty very much intact. Having his truck towed away without repairs being made, shows deception on ricks part, calling for an instant and unreversible warranty revocation. Here's why......Even though he had his truck repaired by a Ford dealer (in his case Lincoln), theres no way that Ford can verify that the truck was repaired to specs using Ford parts. How'd you like to buy a used truck assuming that the warranty was good, then suprise! Water or not, wear damage or not, THATS WHY HE WAS DENIED FURTHER WARRANTY!
Sep-30-2012 05:23 PM
Sep-30-2012 04:53 PM
blacksnapon wrote:
Heres the problem: If Rick would have had the original repairing dealer fix his truck, paid for it, he'd have left with his warranty very much intact. Having his truck towed away without repairs being made, shows deception on ricks part, calling for an instant and unreversible warranty revocation. Here's why......Even though he had his truck repaired by a Ford dealer (in his case Lincoln), theres no way that Ford can verify that the truck was repaired to specs using Ford parts. How'd you like to buy a used truck assuming that the warranty was good, then suprise! Water or not, wear damage or not, THATS WHY HE WAS DENIED FURTHER WARRANTY!
Sep-30-2012 12:40 PM
blacksnapon wrote:
Heres the problem: If Rick would have had the original repairing dealer fix his truck, paid for it, he'd have left with his warranty very much intact. Having his truck towed away without repairs being made, shows deception on ricks part, calling for an instant and unreversible warranty revocation. Here's why......Even though he had his truck repaired by a Ford dealer (in his case Lincoln), theres no way that Ford can verify that the truck was repaired to specs using Ford parts. How'd you like to buy a used truck assuming that the warranty was good, then suprise! Water or not, wear damage or not, THATS WHY HE WAS DENIED FURTHER WARRANTY!
Sep-30-2012 12:26 PM
Sep-30-2012 11:10 AM
NinerBikes wrote:
Bosch built ZERO redundancy into the HPFP, and evidently did zero research in HPFP failure modes.
Sep-30-2012 10:54 AM
stsmark wrote:
I missed the part where the clinical analysis provided here identified specific "batches" of pumps. Please provide a reference to the data. To isolate to batches is self defeating for this forum because it moves it from a design flaw to a manufacturing flaw.
Yes more than the pump itself, the flawed design is the fact it can do so much collateral damage with a failure.
Sep-30-2012 09:53 AM
stsmark wrote:
I missed the part where the clinical analysis provided here identified specific "batches" of pumps. Please provide a reference to the data. To isolate to batches is self defeating for this forum because it moves it from a design flaw to a manufacturing flaw.
Yes more than the pump itself, the flawed design is the fact it can do so much collateral damage with a failure.
Sep-30-2012 09:23 AM
Sep-30-2012 08:46 AM
NewsW wrote:stsmark wrote:alboy wrote:
So after all this speculating does anyone really have Real Facts that show it is a major problem with the new 2011 plus ford 6.7 diesels???
Frankly not that I have seen, warranty questions aside I think the actual failure rate is what would be considered normal attrition for the amount of units in service in regards to the 6.7.
"Normal" attrition is one thing.
"Normal" attrition not covered by warranty is another thing.
Depending on batch, there is a confirmed set of cases where an entire batch had failure rates in the double digit range.
If that is normal, I hate to think whether it applies to all vehicles.
Sep-30-2012 08:45 AM
NewsW wrote:stsmark wrote:alboy wrote:
So after all this speculating does anyone really have Real Facts that show it is a major problem with the new 2011 plus ford 6.7 diesels???
Frankly not that I have seen, warranty questions aside I think the actual failure rate is what would be considered normal attrition for the amount of units in service in regards to the 6.7.
"Normal" attrition is one thing.
"Normal" attrition not covered by warranty is another thing.
X2
Depending on batch, there is a confirmed set of cases where an entire batch had failure rates in the double digit range.
If that is normal, I hate to think whether it applies to all vehicles.
Sep-30-2012 03:07 AM
Sep-29-2012 08:44 AM
dougford wrote:1jeep wrote:
Too bad i traded in one of those horrible 6.4 diesels that had 100k miles with zero issues for this horrible 6.7!
Quick someone come take this thing off my hands before the fuel pump stops working!!
I'll give you 50 bucks for the 6.7. I'm tired of my 6.4, because at 30K miles, Ford contacted me and said I HAD to bring it so they could put new tires on at NO charge, because there had been reports of uneven tread wear on the Continentals when not properly inflated. Now I have to drive another 30K miles before I get to replace them myself...geesh...at this rate I won't get to shell out 700-800 bucks for another four years.