CP3 in Ram verses CP4 in Ford and GM

[labren]

Is there someone that could possible explain the difference in the cp3 system that is in a Ram verses the cp4 system that is in a Ford? The high pressure Fuel Pump, is it just a brand difference or an older version? Thanks for any input on this.

[Cummins12V98]

rhagfo wrote:

bucky wrote:
I'm glad I knocked the snow off my truck yesterday when it got all the way up to 20 degrees. I'm going to go hug my VP44 right now.

Yep, and to think the VP$$ (AKA injection pump), was considered the weak point of the 24V 2nd gen Cummins! The issue was really the weak a** stock fuel pump. Just didn't supply enough pressure and volume to cool the electronics of the VP44.
I guess that is one reason the value of these TV keep gong up, I can replace the Fuel pump (AKA Lift Pump), VP44 and the six injectors for right around $2,000.

The guy I bought my 98 from in 01 bought a late 01 with the VP44 he has at least 300K on his stock lift pump and injection pump. I keep telling him to change to a stronger lift pump because it will fail. Been doing so for 200K! He just laughs at me. He does run AMZ/OIL fuel condition and Cetane Boost. Maybe that stuff really does work!

[rhagfo]

bucky wrote:
I'm glad I knocked the snow off my truck yesterday when it got all the way up to 20 degrees. I'm going to go hug my VP44 right now.

Yep, and to think the VP$$ (AKA injection pump), was considered the weak point of the 24V 2nd gen Cummins! The issue was really the weak a** stock fuel pump. Just didn't supply enough pressure and volume to cool the electronics of the VP44.
I guess that is one reason the value of these TV keep gong up, I can replace the Fuel pump (AKA Lift Pump), VP44 and the six injectors for right around $2,000.

[bucky]

I'm glad I knocked the snow off my truck yesterday when it got all the way up to 20 degrees. I'm going to go hug my VP44 right now.

[Huntindog]

Travlingman wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

NC Hauler wrote:

Garry&Gayle wrote:
There is a thread on the DieselStop forum about documented HPFP failures, been open for quite some time and there are not that many cases that are documented. I would think from this thread that the CP4 pump grenades on a regular basis but that's not the case; since GM and Ford outsells the Ram by several percentages points we are going to hear about more issues with these trucks. When you rely on fuel lubrication for the pump it just becomes necessary to use a quality fuel additive to increase that lubricity along with proper maintenance plus draining your water separator, don't wait for the idiot light to come on. JMO
Got a 2015 Ford F350 Platinum CCDRW 4X4 on order after giving the Ram considerable test driving

Odd, that contradicts what is said about ULSD by the manufacturers of these vehicles....no additives necessary....now understand, that's not "MY" stand, but I've read it about the GM/Chevy Ram trucks in their owners manuals...It's stated that IF ONE chooses to use an additive, THEN there is a recommendation, I believe for GM it's Stanadyne, (sp?)

BUT again, I don't know about Ford, but when I owned Chevy that took ULSD, no where in my owners manual did it recommend using a fuel additive, in fact, in some manuals, it states, "no fuel additives needed"....same with Ram...it's there for the research....again, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with using a fuel additive, BUT I see no where FROM THE MANUFACTURER that it is HIGHLY recommended, if recommended at all for one to use a fuel additive to help with lubricity to help keep the HFPF in great working condition....just saying, IF it was THAT important to the care of the injectors, fuel pump, etc.....to keep from having warranty issues with the fuel system...you would think it would stick out like a sore thumb in the manufacturers owners manual that fuel additives are a MUST......Haven't seen that.

I would think that when BOSCH was doing R&D on their CP4 HPFP, part of the testing would have to take into consideration the lubricity of the USLD fuel and how it would affect the HPFP over a certain length of time, (at least 3/36)....I mean, they HAVE to cover themselves for any possible failures...So one would think that "IF" a fuel additive HAS to be used to maintain the integrity of the CP4 fuel pump....it would have been passed on to the manufacturer of the engine/manufacturer of the vehicle....but I've NEVER seen a "CAUTION", or a "YOU MUST USE", type of information in the owners manual that states you MUST use a fuel additive to maintain the integrity of our (BOSCH) CP4 fuel pump. Should have been thought out in the manufacturing process of the pump itself.

....and the water in the fuel, yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what can happen in that case..if water get's in, then yeah, big issue, but having owned diesels for almost 14 years, I've never had the first water issue to date...I know one can, but it never happened with any Chevy or Dodge/Ram I've owned...

Again, someone show me where it is RECOMMENDED by the truck manufacturer that a fuel additive is a MUST....it HAS to be used.....I'm talking Ford, GM or Ram, and show where it states it's needed to keep the fuel pump lubed properly to help it last longer than the short time frames we've read about failures in...and for as much as it can cost, one would think the information to use fuel additives would be written on a sheet of paper and announced when vehicle is purchased.

I know about all the other research and all the arguments on how ULSD needs an additive and how low the lubricity is, but again...that's "others" discussing the merits of fuel additives...heck, it's what they sell, what do you expect from them? I'm talking about the actual manufacturer/warranter of the vehicle.....what is THEIR take on it...If it was that important, I would think in an owners manual it would be stated to add a fuel additive "X" amount of times a year, a month, a week, at fill ups etc...not seen it...BUT that is extra money which manufacturers would have to pass onto the consumer....sort of like extra cost of DEF, BUT that isn't anywhere near as costly as adding a fuel additive every other tank fill up or more or less often...to me ONE would be too many.

GM frowns on using additives in my manual.

Interesting thing about Ford. They were (still are?) having the dealers make purchasers sign a paper about the use of their additive (PM22 ?) being mandatory. There were some other things such as mandatory draining of the water separator at very frequent intervals.I have seen these papers posted on the net. It seems that follow thru from the dealers was/is inconsistent on this.

Since you have saw this document, and would know where to find it, please post it for others to see. When I bought my Ford, I never signed this document. I have never met any Ford driver who has signed this document you speak of. It does say in owners manual that one should drain the water separator, did in my Chevy manual too. It also says that if you want to use an additive, they suggest you use PM-22A. My Chevy said they suggested Stanadyne. It doesn't say it is mandatory you have to use PM-22A. On this document you speak about, what does it say is the consequences of not doing this?

I fully understand you wanting proof but,

It has been awhile. It was posted on several sites. IIRC, even here. A quick search attempt failed just now.. The Archive function isn't working.
Norsky knows what I am talking about... I am sure that Fish could find it really fast, or confirm it's exisitence LOL... Not in this lifetime. Fish bleeds Ford blue, and would love to deny it's existence.

I will try again later, as this search may take a while, and I will be too busy for a few days to play on the computer. Maybe some one else will have it posted by then.

It was a very strongly worded document. As I said, not all dealers were making owners sign it. Likely as it had potential to cancel a sale.

IIRC, the consequences of not following the instructions was a warranty cancelation.

I found the fact that it even existed scary.

[FishOnOne]

Travlingman wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

NC Hauler wrote:

Garry&Gayle wrote:
There is a thread on the DieselStop forum about documented HPFP failures, been open for quite some time and there are not that many cases that are documented. I would think from this thread that the CP4 pump grenades on a regular basis but that's not the case; since GM and Ford outsells the Ram by several percentages points we are going to hear about more issues with these trucks. When you rely on fuel lubrication for the pump it just becomes necessary to use a quality fuel additive to increase that lubricity along with proper maintenance plus draining your water separator, don't wait for the idiot light to come on. JMO
Got a 2015 Ford F350 Platinum CCDRW 4X4 on order after giving the Ram considerable test driving

Odd, that contradicts what is said about ULSD by the manufacturers of these vehicles....no additives necessary....now understand, that's not "MY" stand, but I've read it about the GM/Chevy Ram trucks in their owners manuals...It's stated that IF ONE chooses to use an additive, THEN there is a recommendation, I believe for GM it's Stanadyne, (sp?)

BUT again, I don't know about Ford, but when I owned Chevy that took ULSD, no where in my owners manual did it recommend using a fuel additive, in fact, in some manuals, it states, "no fuel additives needed"....same with Ram...it's there for the research....again, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with using a fuel additive, BUT I see no where FROM THE MANUFACTURER that it is HIGHLY recommended, if recommended at all for one to use a fuel additive to help with lubricity to help keep the HFPF in great working condition....just saying, IF it was THAT important to the care of the injectors, fuel pump, etc.....to keep from having warranty issues with the fuel system...you would think it would stick out like a sore thumb in the manufacturers owners manual that fuel additives are a MUST......Haven't seen that.

I would think that when BOSCH was doing R&D on their CP4 HPFP, part of the testing would have to take into consideration the lubricity of the USLD fuel and how it would affect the HPFP over a certain length of time, (at least 3/36)....I mean, they HAVE to cover themselves for any possible failures...So one would think that "IF" a fuel additive HAS to be used to maintain the integrity of the CP4 fuel pump....it would have been passed on to the manufacturer of the engine/manufacturer of the vehicle....but I've NEVER seen a "CAUTION", or a "YOU MUST USE", type of information in the owners manual that states you MUST use a fuel additive to maintain the integrity of our (BOSCH) CP4 fuel pump. Should have been thought out in the manufacturing process of the pump itself.

....and the water in the fuel, yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what can happen in that case..if water get's in, then yeah, big issue, but having owned diesels for almost 14 years, I've never had the first water issue to date...I know one can, but it never happened with any Chevy or Dodge/Ram I've owned...

Again, someone show me where it is RECOMMENDED by the truck manufacturer that a fuel additive is a MUST....it HAS to be used.....I'm talking Ford, GM or Ram, and show where it states it's needed to keep the fuel pump lubed properly to help it last longer than the short time frames we've read about failures in...and for as much as it can cost, one would think the information to use fuel additives would be written on a sheet of paper and announced when vehicle is purchased.

I know about all the other research and all the arguments on how ULSD needs an additive and how low the lubricity is, but again...that's "others" discussing the merits of fuel additives...heck, it's what they sell, what do you expect from them? I'm talking about the actual manufacturer/warranter of the vehicle.....what is THEIR take on it...If it was that important, I would think in an owners manual it would be stated to add a fuel additive "X" amount of times a year, a month, a week, at fill ups etc...not seen it...BUT that is extra money which manufacturers would have to pass onto the consumer....sort of like extra cost of DEF, BUT that isn't anywhere near as costly as adding a fuel additive every other tank fill up or more or less often...to me ONE would be too many.

GM frowns on using additives in my manual.

Interesting thing about Ford. They were (still are?) having the dealers make purchasers sign a paper about the use of their additive (PM22 ?) being mandatory. There were some other things such as mandatory draining of the water separator at very frequent intervals.I have seen these papers posted on the net. It seems that follow thru from the dealers was/is inconsistent on this.

Since you have saw this document, and would know where to find it, please post it for others to see. When I bought my Ford, I never signed this document. I have never met any Ford driver who has signed this document you speak of. It does say in owners manual that one should drain the water separator, did in my Chevy manual too. It also says that if you want to use an additive, they suggest you use PM-22A. My Chevy said they suggested Stanadyne. It doesn't say it is mandatory you have to use PM-22A. On this document you speak about, what does it say is the consequences of not doing this?

All this document was is to show proof the salesmen went over the truck with the owner so he or she knows how to maintain it properly. The new diesels with the special oil(CJ4) to protect the DPF, fuel filters, DEF fluids (where to fill)because a lot of new diesel owners don't have a clue about this stuff and as a result weren't maintaining the truck properly and claiming they didn't know. There's people to this very day still add DEF fluid to the diesel tank because they didn't know better. And in the Ford diesel supplement manual it does not specify you have to use a fuel additive. Exception would be the antigel additive to prevent diesel fuel turning into a wax. The dealer I purchased my truck from did not have me sign such document nor was it discussed.

They sky is not falling... :B

BTW... I suppose GM is not worried about fuel gelling.

[The_Mad_Norsky]

I had a copy of the document on my computer, but since trading vehicles, deleted the copy I had.

I do not recall signing this either when I purchased my 2011 Ford.

[Travlingman]

Huntindog wrote:

NC Hauler wrote:

Garry&Gayle wrote:
There is a thread on the DieselStop forum about documented HPFP failures, been open for quite some time and there are not that many cases that are documented. I would think from this thread that the CP4 pump grenades on a regular basis but that's not the case; since GM and Ford outsells the Ram by several percentages points we are going to hear about more issues with these trucks. When you rely on fuel lubrication for the pump it just becomes necessary to use a quality fuel additive to increase that lubricity along with proper maintenance plus draining your water separator, don't wait for the idiot light to come on. JMO
Got a 2015 Ford F350 Platinum CCDRW 4X4 on order after giving the Ram considerable test driving

Odd, that contradicts what is said about ULSD by the manufacturers of these vehicles....no additives necessary....now understand, that's not "MY" stand, but I've read it about the GM/Chevy Ram trucks in their owners manuals...It's stated that IF ONE chooses to use an additive, THEN there is a recommendation, I believe for GM it's Stanadyne, (sp?)

BUT again, I don't know about Ford, but when I owned Chevy that took ULSD, no where in my owners manual did it recommend using a fuel additive, in fact, in some manuals, it states, "no fuel additives needed"....same with Ram...it's there for the research....again, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with using a fuel additive, BUT I see no where FROM THE MANUFACTURER that it is HIGHLY recommended, if recommended at all for one to use a fuel additive to help with lubricity to help keep the HFPF in great working condition....just saying, IF it was THAT important to the care of the injectors, fuel pump, etc.....to keep from having warranty issues with the fuel system...you would think it would stick out like a sore thumb in the manufacturers owners manual that fuel additives are a MUST......Haven't seen that.

I would think that when BOSCH was doing R&D on their CP4 HPFP, part of the testing would have to take into consideration the lubricity of the USLD fuel and how it would affect the HPFP over a certain length of time, (at least 3/36)....I mean, they HAVE to cover themselves for any possible failures...So one would think that "IF" a fuel additive HAS to be used to maintain the integrity of the CP4 fuel pump....it would have been passed on to the manufacturer of the engine/manufacturer of the vehicle....but I've NEVER seen a "CAUTION", or a "YOU MUST USE", type of information in the owners manual that states you MUST use a fuel additive to maintain the integrity of our (BOSCH) CP4 fuel pump. Should have been thought out in the manufacturing process of the pump itself.

....and the water in the fuel, yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what can happen in that case..if water get's in, then yeah, big issue, but having owned diesels for almost 14 years, I've never had the first water issue to date...I know one can, but it never happened with any Chevy or Dodge/Ram I've owned...

Again, someone show me where it is RECOMMENDED by the truck manufacturer that a fuel additive is a MUST....it HAS to be used.....I'm talking Ford, GM or Ram, and show where it states it's needed to keep the fuel pump lubed properly to help it last longer than the short time frames we've read about failures in...and for as much as it can cost, one would think the information to use fuel additives would be written on a sheet of paper and announced when vehicle is purchased.

I know about all the other research and all the arguments on how ULSD needs an additive and how low the lubricity is, but again...that's "others" discussing the merits of fuel additives...heck, it's what they sell, what do you expect from them? I'm talking about the actual manufacturer/warranter of the vehicle.....what is THEIR take on it...If it was that important, I would think in an owners manual it would be stated to add a fuel additive "X" amount of times a year, a month, a week, at fill ups etc...not seen it...BUT that is extra money which manufacturers would have to pass onto the consumer....sort of like extra cost of DEF, BUT that isn't anywhere near as costly as adding a fuel additive every other tank fill up or more or less often...to me ONE would be too many.

GM frowns on using additives in my manual.

Interesting thing about Ford. They were (still are?) having the dealers make purchasers sign a paper about the use of their additive (PM22 ?) being mandatory. There were some other things such as mandatory draining of the water separator at very frequent intervals.I have seen these papers posted on the net. It seems that follow thru from the dealers was/is inconsistent on this.

Since you have saw this document, and would know where to find it, please post it for others to see. When I bought my Ford, I never signed this document. I have never met any Ford driver who has signed this document you speak of. It does say in owners manual that one should drain the water separator, did in my Chevy manual too. It also says that if you want to use an additive, they suggest you use PM-22A. My Chevy said they suggested Stanadyne. It doesn't say it is mandatory you have to use PM-22A. On this document you speak about, what does it say is the consequences of not doing this?

[NC_Hauler]

Garry&Gayle wrote:
I am referring to the known fact that ULSD is lacking in sufficient lubrication so I feel the use an additive to increase lubrication is a good idea, and as I stated JMO

"so I feel"......and all I'm saying is in the manufacturers owners manual, it doesn't state one HAS to use a fuel additive, nor do they have to..in fact several state NOT to use them...so I feel the manufacturer probably knows more about the truck they manufacture, as well as the engine they put in it than I do....so it's my opinion that the manufacturer knows more about their product than we do at some point.

[Garry_Gayle]

I am referring to the known fact that ULSD is lacking in sufficient lubrication so I feel the use an additive to increase lubrication is a good idea, and as I stated JMO

[Huntindog]

NC Hauler wrote:

Garry&Gayle wrote:
There is a thread on the DieselStop forum about documented HPFP failures, been open for quite some time and there are not that many cases that are documented. I would think from this thread that the CP4 pump grenades on a regular basis but that's not the case; since GM and Ford outsells the Ram by several percentages points we are going to hear about more issues with these trucks. When you rely on fuel lubrication for the pump it just becomes necessary to use a quality fuel additive to increase that lubricity along with proper maintenance plus draining your water separator, don't wait for the idiot light to come on. JMO
Got a 2015 Ford F350 Platinum CCDRW 4X4 on order after giving the Ram considerable test driving

Odd, that contradicts what is said about ULSD by the manufacturers of these vehicles....no additives necessary....now understand, that's not "MY" stand, but I've read it about the GM/Chevy Ram trucks in their owners manuals...It's stated that IF ONE chooses to use an additive, THEN there is a recommendation, I believe for GM it's Stanadyne, (sp?)

BUT again, I don't know about Ford, but when I owned Chevy that took ULSD, no where in my owners manual did it recommend using a fuel additive, in fact, in some manuals, it states, "no fuel additives needed"....same with Ram...it's there for the research....again, I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with using a fuel additive, BUT I see no where FROM THE MANUFACTURER that it is HIGHLY recommended, if recommended at all for one to use a fuel additive to help with lubricity to help keep the HFPF in great working condition....just saying, IF it was THAT important to the care of the injectors, fuel pump, etc.....to keep from having warranty issues with the fuel system...you would think it would stick out like a sore thumb in the manufacturers owners manual that fuel additives are a MUST......Haven't seen that.

I would think that when BOSCH was doing R&D on their CP4 HPFP, part of the testing would have to take into consideration the lubricity of the USLD fuel and how it would affect the HPFP over a certain length of time, (at least 3/36)....I mean, they HAVE to cover themselves for any possible failures...So one would think that "IF" a fuel additive HAS to be used to maintain the integrity of the CP4 fuel pump....it would have been passed on to the manufacturer of the engine/manufacturer of the vehicle....but I've NEVER seen a "CAUTION", or a "YOU MUST USE", type of information in the owners manual that states you MUST use a fuel additive to maintain the integrity of our (BOSCH) CP4 fuel pump. Should have been thought out in the manufacturing process of the pump itself.

....and the water in the fuel, yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know what can happen in that case..if water get's in, then yeah, big issue, but having owned diesels for almost 14 years, I've never had the first water issue to date...I know one can, but it never happened with any Chevy or Dodge/Ram I've owned...

Again, someone show me where it is RECOMMENDED by the truck manufacturer that a fuel additive is a MUST....it HAS to be used.....I'm talking Ford, GM or Ram, and show where it states it's needed to keep the fuel pump lubed properly to help it last longer than the short time frames we've read about failures in...and for as much as it can cost, one would think the information to use fuel additives would be written on a sheet of paper and announced when vehicle is purchased.

I know about all the other research and all the arguments on how ULSD needs an additive and how low the lubricity is, but again...that's "others" discussing the merits of fuel additives...heck, it's what they sell, what do you expect from them? I'm talking about the actual manufacturer/warranter of the vehicle.....what is THEIR take on it...If it was that important, I would think in an owners manual it would be stated to add a fuel additive "X" amount of times a year, a month, a week, at fill ups etc...not seen it...BUT that is extra money which manufacturers would have to pass onto the consumer....sort of like extra cost of DEF, BUT that isn't anywhere near as costly as adding a fuel additive every other tank fill up or more or less often...to me ONE would be too many.

GM frowns on using additives in my manual.

Interesting thing about Ford. They were (still are?) having the dealers make purchasers sign a paper about the use of their additive (PM22 ?) being mandatory. There were some other things such as mandatory draining of the water separator at very frequent intervals.I have seen these papers posted on the net. It seems that follow thru from the dealers was/is inconsistent on this.

[NC_Hauler]

Thanks Ben, even information on there that I spoke of, fuel additives....:)

[BenK]

labren wrote:
Is there someone that could possible explain the difference in the cp3 system that is in a Ram verses the cp4 system that is in a Ford? The high pressure Fuel Pump, is it just a brand difference or an older version? Thanks for any input on this.

For the OP...here are some links from my archives on the topic. Learned
a lot from these threads

This one in particular to one of my Skunk Works at the Labs...we invented
diamond foam from CVD (chemical vapor deposition) diamond and is a
man made 'real diamond'...why DLC isn't really 'diamond', so named 'like diamond'...

NewsW wrote:
Posted: 02/10/12 09:54am

Just received confirmation from an expert in the field that Bosch may have overlooked something in the design and testing of the Bosch CP 4.x pump.

The pump is believed to use a Diamond Like Carbon Coating to lower friction and to withstand the intense pressure / temperature / wear.

While DLC coatings are normally believed to be inert and highly stable in automobile applications, research done in late 2007s suggest that the coating is not as inert / stable as originally believed.

This research was not public until late 2008, well after the design of the CP 4 pump was "frozen" and testing / validation done.

In fact, DLC coatings (tested in the above research) is now known to be reactive with common petroleum based lubricating oil additives.

It is highly likely that chemically similar compounds are found in diesel fuel normally sold in the USA.

Diesel fuel in the USA require considerably more refinery processing and use of additives to bring it "to spec" compared to European Spec Diesel fuel.

It is not just lubricity --- but chemical reactivity with DLC that is the prime suspect now in Bosch CP 4.x pump failures.


Bosch need to roll up their sleeves and get to work with some good science.


At present, we have a hypothesis.... not proven facts.



Side Note:

It is known that certain people will try to "home brew" fixes to the CP4 pump problem by adding lubricity additives (commercially sold or home made) to their diesel fuel. At least a few have publicly said they are doing so.

If this reseach is right... addition of lubricating oil (loaded with EXACTLY the stuff tested) in a vain attempt to improve "lubricity" of North American diesel will ACCELERATE, not RETARD the failure of the DLC coating (if it is similar to the one tested).

The poor jokers who have no background in petroleum chemistry, tribology, DLCs, etc. trying to "home brew" a fix for what is a very high tech, difficult to solve issue....

* This post was edited 02/10/12 10:05am by NewsW *

Note: I'm not a diesel guy, just a gear head, boy racer who loves
anything automotive. Almost went over, but decided the, then new
SMOG rules were going to be too onerous and a few years before they
settle down on what doesn't work to what does work

Here are the hot links for many days of reading up on this topic :B

Highly VOLATILE and opinions flew...but if you read past that...informative
Where NewsW and learned about each other. Smart guy...just too many
didn't like his style...we must have crossed paths many times during
our early careers...but never bumped into each other.


Ford 6.7 debacle just gets crazier


Warning...Warning...More Blue KoolAid needed ASAP


Ford HPFP vs. GM HPFP


More 6.7 Ford HPFP fun


2013 Rams using CP3 HPFP?


Anybody use the Motorcraft Cetane Booster?


2011 Ford Diesel


I think I stumbled upon some specs for the 2013 RAM HDs


Ford 6.0 Superduty


Another CP4 only this one is Canadian


Another case of dreaded 2011 Ford 6.7L HPFP failure?


Beware of Diesel Fuel Additives with DLC coated components


I'll ask again -anyone had any GM HPFP Fuel System Problems


Has YOUR Ford 6.7 Diesel HP Fuel Pump failed?


Ford PSD 6.7L


My Ford 6.0 PSD dead for good!


Ford Canada tells me to pound sand

[Cummins12V98]

NC Hauler wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

steve-n-vicki wrote:
Cummins 8.9 ISL = I Still Leak or In Shop Longer, for the leak

???????????????????

:h...Yeah, I didn't get that either...I know I haven't kept the three Rams I've had to date very long, but I thought our engine was the 6.7 6 banger. (8.9ISL?????),..but never had a leak of any sort anywhere on any of them and I now have almost 27,000 miles on this truck, ( will have had truck 2 years May 9th), and still zero leaks of any kind...

I have to say I was very impressed crawling around under my 11RAM removing airbags, MagHytec trans pan and rear diff cover to get it ready to trade in on my long awaited 15 on order that at 60K the truck is bone dry.

OK back to the debate!

[NC_Hauler]

Cummins12V98 wrote:

steve-n-vicki wrote:
Cummins 8.9 ISL = I Still Leak or In Shop Longer, for the leak

???????????????????

:h...Yeah, I didn't get that either...I know I haven't kept the three Rams I've had to date very long, but I thought our engine was the 6.7 6 banger. (8.9ISL?????),..but never had a leak of any sort anywhere on any of them and I now have almost 27,000 miles on this truck, ( will have had truck 2 years May 9th), and still zero leaks of any kind...