cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Ford's answers to the NHTSA 6.7 Investigation

ricatic
Explorer
Explorer
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
Ricatic
Debbie and Savannah the Wonderdachsund
2009 Big Horn 3055RL
2006 Chevrolet Silverado 3500 Dually LTX with the Gold Standard LBZ Engine and Allison Transmission
2011 F350 Lariat SRW CC SB 4WD 6.7 Diesel POS Gone Bye Bye
1,199 REPLIES 1,199

4x4ord
Explorer III
Explorer III
BenK wrote:
NinerBikes wrote:
4x4ord wrote:
Am I missing something NewsW? It's not going to take much oomph to move 2.5 gals of fuel per hour even if it is at 29000 psi. Less than 1 HP anyway.


A motor capable of making 240 HP is going to suck down more that 2.5 gallons per hour, just in pressurizing fuel and sending it back/bleeding it off to the fuel tank hot. Same for one capable of 400 HP like the Ford 6.7.


You have to understand the association with both GPH and PSI/BAR

Maybe you would understand a ICE with 7.5:1 compression ratio vs one
with 20:1 compression ratio, both with the same displacement


I think I see what I was missing. I know nothing about these pumps but I do understand how PSI and GPM go together to determine the HP necessary to drive the pump. I am gathering that the CP4 is not a variable displacement pump? So if it is set up to pump say 30 GPH at 3000 engine rpm it will pump that much fuel regardless of what the engine is burning. So the energy stored in the 20 or 25 GPH of fuel that is pumped up to pressure and not being injected into the cylinders is being released back to the fuel tank in the form of heat. So what News is getting at is the pump itself could be acting like a 15,000 BTU heater and if the fuel level is low, the fuel could be getting hot? Is the draw back of a variable displacement injection pump the cost of it?
2023 F350 SRW Platinum short box 4x4.
B&W Companion
2008 Citation Platinum XL 34.5

NinerBikes
Explorer
Explorer
NewsW wrote:
That finger in the photo... did it get a squirt of diesel fuel at 30,000psi?


That is a free American Bird that flipped out when it saw a defective designed Bosch CP4.2 sh*t the bed in a 2010 Vw Touareg at a local VW dealership in Los Angeles CA.

NewsW
Explorer
Explorer
That finger in the photo... did it get a squirt of diesel fuel at 30,000psi?
Posts are for entertainment purposes only and may not be constituted as scientific, technical, engineering, or practical advice. Information is believed to be true but its accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed / or deemed fit for any purpose.

NewsW
Explorer
Explorer
I think we are at a point where preliminary policy recommendations can be made to end users who have experienced a problem.

Since this is a very small set --- and it appeared to have recurred with certain users, it cannot be ruled out that something specific to the users, operating, vehicle equipment involved is responsible.



Recommendations:

1. Damaging limiting retrofit.

A 30 micron or finer filter, sufficient to handle the volume of fuel, should be fitted in the low pressure fuel return line.

The goal is to reduce the ingression of metal particles etc. from a pump failure.



2. Fuel-Water Separator / filter

A fuel water separator ahead of the factory unit in the low pressure could be fitted to give a larger safety margin --- ideally speced to double the factory water separation capacity from abut 7oz in the Ford to at least twice that.


3. Operating changes

Fuel tank should not be run too close to empty, especially under warm / hot weather and when engine is working hard (e.g. heavy towing).

Suggest in summer months, down south, towing, that tank should always be at least 1/3 full.


When stopping after a hot run on a hot day, engine should be allowed to idle for 1 or 2 minutes or more to allow the fuel pump to cool.
Posts are for entertainment purposes only and may not be constituted as scientific, technical, engineering, or practical advice. Information is believed to be true but its accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed / or deemed fit for any purpose.

NinerBikes
Explorer
Explorer
BenK wrote:
NewsW wrote:
NinerBikes wrote:
NewsW wrote:
Niner:

Can you do some sleuthing on the belt drive?

http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Timing_belts.html

Use the table in the above link, do some measurements and you should be able to get a rough idea of how much energy / hp is being expended to drive the pump as per the chart: "Initial selection of Timing Belt ".

The pump using a timing belt is a good indication that it takes quite a bit of ommph to move fuel.

That will feed into a guess as to how much energy / heat is being dissipated into the fuel / engine area just from pumping the fuel.


14mm pitch, 30mm wide, and I know the pulley has a 3:2 drive ratio, overhead cam driven at 1/2 crank speed, HPFP at 2/3 crank speed. Redline at 5500 rpm. On my 2.0L the pulley speed is 1:1 5500rpm, same measurements on the belt. 30mm wide 14mm pitch. belt good for 130k miles. if you average 35 mph about 3700 hours life, might be higher than that to account for idle time in city traffic.



In both cases, you got all that energy dissipated into a single piston.

What is not released as mechanical energy (moving fuel) got to go as heat.

Double the load for dual piston 4.2 vs. 4.1

Use a safety factor of 100% (2X) on the chart to start....

That is a lot of energy.


Logical next step --- if one has instrumentation.

Measure fuel intake temp and how it changes as the tank gets empty on a real hot day, high rpm, high engine output.

Measure fuel exhaust temp.

HPFP temp in several different places.


Also a very bad idea using the timing belt. Thought it was the
accessory belt, not the valve timing belt

What is the belt's replacement requirement?


Before HPFP's, the timing belt was running an injector pump with a 100k mile or 7 year replacement suggestion. Since introducing the HPFP, with it's more efficient pump, replacement mileage has been upped to 130k miles, with no time limit as before. This is on VW's that run the HPFP at crank speed. the 3.0 liter using 2 cylinder heads on the HPFP is under driven with a 2:3 crank speed pulley ratio, as seen in the picture I posted the page before.

BenK
Explorer
Explorer
NewsW wrote:
NinerBikes wrote:
NewsW wrote:
Niner:

Can you do some sleuthing on the belt drive?

http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Timing_belts.html

Use the table in the above link, do some measurements and you should be able to get a rough idea of how much energy / hp is being expended to drive the pump as per the chart: "Initial selection of Timing Belt ".

The pump using a timing belt is a good indication that it takes quite a bit of ommph to move fuel.

That will feed into a guess as to how much energy / heat is being dissipated into the fuel / engine area just from pumping the fuel.


14mm pitch, 30mm wide, and I know the pulley has a 3:2 drive ratio, overhead cam driven at 1/2 crank speed, HPFP at 2/3 crank speed. Redline at 5500 rpm. On my 2.0L the pulley speed is 1:1 5500rpm, same measurements on the belt. 30mm wide 14mm pitch. belt good for 130k miles. if you average 35 mph about 3700 hours life, might be higher than that to account for idle time in city traffic.



In both cases, you got all that energy dissipated into a single piston.

What is not released as mechanical energy (moving fuel) got to go as heat.

Double the load for dual piston 4.2 vs. 4.1

Use a safety factor of 100% (2X) on the chart to start....

That is a lot of energy.


Logical next step --- if one has instrumentation.

Measure fuel intake temp and how it changes as the tank gets empty on a real hot day, high rpm, high engine output.

Measure fuel exhaust temp.

HPFP temp in several different places.


Also a very bad idea using the timing belt. Thought it was the
accessory belt, not the valve timing belt

What is the belt's replacement requirement?
-Ben Picture of my rig
1996 GMC SLT Suburban 3/4 ton K3500/7.4L/4:1/+150Kmiles orig owner...
1980 Chevy Silverado C10/long bed/"BUILT" 5.7L/3:73/1 ton helper springs/+329Kmiles, bought it from dad...
1998 Mazda B2500 (1/2 ton) pickup, 2nd owner...
Praise Dyno Brake equiped and all have "nose bleed" braking!
Previous trucks/offroaders: 40's Jeep restored in mid 60's / 69 DuneBuggy (approx +1K lb: VW pan/200hpCorvair: eng, cam, dual carb'w velocity stacks'n 18" runners, 4spd transaxle) made myself from ground up / 1970 Toyota FJ40 / 1973 K5 Blazer (2dr Tahoe, 1 ton axles front/rear, +255K miles when sold it)...
Sold the boat (looking for another): Trophy with twin 150's...
51 cylinders in household, what's yours?...

BenK
Explorer
Explorer
NinerBikes wrote:
4x4ord wrote:
Am I missing something NewsW? It's not going to take much oomph to move 2.5 gals of fuel per hour even if it is at 29000 psi. Less than 1 HP anyway.


A motor capable of making 240 HP is going to suck down more that 2.5 gallons per hour, just in pressurizing fuel and sending it back/bleeding it off to the fuel tank hot. Same for one capable of 400 HP like the Ford 6.7.


You have to understand the association with both GPH and PSI/BAR

Maybe you would understand a ICE with 7.5:1 compression ratio vs one
with 20:1 compression ratio, both with the same displacement
-Ben Picture of my rig
1996 GMC SLT Suburban 3/4 ton K3500/7.4L/4:1/+150Kmiles orig owner...
1980 Chevy Silverado C10/long bed/"BUILT" 5.7L/3:73/1 ton helper springs/+329Kmiles, bought it from dad...
1998 Mazda B2500 (1/2 ton) pickup, 2nd owner...
Praise Dyno Brake equiped and all have "nose bleed" braking!
Previous trucks/offroaders: 40's Jeep restored in mid 60's / 69 DuneBuggy (approx +1K lb: VW pan/200hpCorvair: eng, cam, dual carb'w velocity stacks'n 18" runners, 4spd transaxle) made myself from ground up / 1970 Toyota FJ40 / 1973 K5 Blazer (2dr Tahoe, 1 ton axles front/rear, +255K miles when sold it)...
Sold the boat (looking for another): Trophy with twin 150's...
51 cylinders in household, what's yours?...

NewsW
Explorer
Explorer
NinerBikes wrote:
NewsW wrote:
Niner:

Can you do some sleuthing on the belt drive?

http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Timing_belts.html

Use the table in the above link, do some measurements and you should be able to get a rough idea of how much energy / hp is being expended to drive the pump as per the chart: "Initial selection of Timing Belt ".

The pump using a timing belt is a good indication that it takes quite a bit of ommph to move fuel.

That will feed into a guess as to how much energy / heat is being dissipated into the fuel / engine area just from pumping the fuel.


14mm pitch, 30mm wide, and I know the pulley has a 3:2 drive ratio, overhead cam driven at 1/2 crank speed, HPFP at 2/3 crank speed. Redline at 5500 rpm. On my 2.0L the pulley speed is 1:1 5500rpm, same measurements on the belt. 30mm wide 14mm pitch. belt good for 130k miles. if you average 35 mph about 3700 hours life, might be higher than that to account for idle time in city traffic.



In both cases, you got all that energy dissipated into a single piston.

What is not released as mechanical energy (moving fuel) got to go as heat.

Double the load for dual piston 4.2 vs. 4.1

Use a safety factor of 100% (2X) on the chart to start....

That is a lot of energy.


Logical next step --- if one has instrumentation.

Measure fuel intake temp and how it changes as the tank gets empty on a real hot day, high rpm, high engine output.

Measure fuel exhaust temp.

HPFP temp in several different places.
Posts are for entertainment purposes only and may not be constituted as scientific, technical, engineering, or practical advice. Information is believed to be true but its accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed / or deemed fit for any purpose.

NinerBikes
Explorer
Explorer
4x4ord wrote:
Am I missing something NewsW? It's not going to take much oomph to move 2.5 gals of fuel per hour even if it is at 29000 psi. Less than 1 HP anyway.


A motor capable of making 240 HP is going to suck down more that 2.5 gallons per hour, just in pressurizing fuel and sending it back/bleeding it off to the fuel tank hot. Same for one capable of 400 HP like the Ford 6.7.

NinerBikes
Explorer
Explorer
NewsW wrote:
Niner:

Can you do some sleuthing on the belt drive?

http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Timing_belts.html

Use the table in the above link, do some measurements and you should be able to get a rough idea of how much energy / hp is being expended to drive the pump as per the chart: "Initial selection of Timing Belt ".

The pump using a timing belt is a good indication that it takes quite a bit of ommph to move fuel.

That will feed into a guess as to how much energy / heat is being dissipated into the fuel / engine area just from pumping the fuel.


14mm pitch, 30mm wide, and I know the pulley has a 3:2 drive ratio, overhead cam driven at 1/2 crank speed, HPFP at 2/3 crank speed. Redline at 5500 rpm. On my 2.0L the pulley speed is 1:1 5500rpm, same measurements on the belt. 30mm wide 14mm pitch. belt good for 130k miles. if you average 35 mph about 3700 hours life, might be higher than that to account for idle time in city traffic.

4x4ord
Explorer III
Explorer III
Am I missing something NewsW? It's not going to take much oomph to move 2.5 gals of fuel per hour even if it is at 29000 psi. Less than 1 HP anyway.
2023 F350 SRW Platinum short box 4x4.
B&W Companion
2008 Citation Platinum XL 34.5

NewsW
Explorer
Explorer
Niner:

Can you do some sleuthing on the belt drive?

http://www.roymech.co.uk/Useful_Tables/Drive/Timing_belts.html

Use the table in the above link, do some measurements and you should be able to get a rough idea of how much energy / hp is being expended to drive the pump as per the chart: "Initial selection of Timing Belt ".

The pump using a timing belt is a good indication that it takes quite a bit of ommph to move fuel.

That will feed into a guess as to how much energy / heat is being dissipated into the fuel / engine area just from pumping the fuel.
Posts are for entertainment purposes only and may not be constituted as scientific, technical, engineering, or practical advice. Information is believed to be true but its accuracy and completeness cannot be guaranteed / or deemed fit for any purpose.

NinerBikes
Explorer
Explorer
Jarlaxle wrote:
How big a bill is that? I'd guess north of $10K, minimum.


Covered under warranty, no charge, this time, to the owner... Outside of warranty? Oiy vay... if you have to ask, you can't afford it... probably 15 to 16k... Obscene for a $ 40-45k SUV.

Tell you how you can find out... call your local VW dealership and tell them your glow plug light and check engine light are on and your motor died getting on the freeway, and you have 80k miles on your 2010 Touareg. Ask how much to fix, you think it's a HPFP failure.

Jarlaxle
Explorer II
Explorer II
How big a bill is that? I'd guess north of $10K, minimum.
John and Elizabeth (Liz), with Briza the size XL tabby
St. Bernard Marm, cats Vierna and Maya...RIP. 😞
Current rig:
1992 International Genesis school bus conversion

NinerBikes
Explorer
Explorer
NewsW wrote:
Alright, while you are trading here...

I will be gone for most of this coming week... busy talking shop about fuel.


OMG! The sky is falling.... took my Passat in today for it's new car check up, and something terrible was up on the rack... a 2010 Vw Touareg TDI V6 with a destroyed Bosch V type CP4.2 HPFP.

Sure, sure, pics, or it didn't happen.

Fuel lines, new. old ones contaminated.



$7000 in junked out contaminated parts here, 6 injectors, fuel lines, one fuel pump.


Bosch CP4.2 HPFP is an Eager Beaver when it comes to eating itself up inside.



Grand scheme of things.



Bosch CP4.2 Shaving Creme.