Jim Warman Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 of modifications... So... It's no secret how I feel about "our carbon footprint"... being a old fuck, I lived through shit you young guys will never understand nor appreciate.... Yussuf Islam opined "you're still young - that's your fault" in "Father And Son".... If we refuse to learn from our history, we are doomed to repeat it.... Anyway.... a couple of the guys were chatting about the cost... sorry, that should be the "cost" of EGR delete kits. To really appreciate the ramifications of something like this, one would have to research the tailpipe emissions that result from EGR deletes as well as the other changes that 'usually' accompany these kinds of modifications. One of these techs was aghast at the thought of paying over $400 for an EGR delete... The old guys brain didn't kick into gear until he got home ... While $400 may appear to be quite an expense for a hose or two and a block off plate.... let us look at the "real" cost.... So.. ya want something to keep you from having this bothersome little fuck up called an EGR valve from making your life inconvenient... Has anyone done much research on oxides of nitrogen? Has anyone done much research on tailpipe emissions in general? Some of you guys have children... one day those children will bear grandchildren... I look around and, today, I see some of the most "fragile" people the world has ever produced. I can't say if the youth of yesteryear were more resilient or if we just didn't complain like todays youth.... I can't say if it is a case where-in we are becoming the product of our environment... I can't say if it is a case where we have beaten polio and rubela and all the other "childhood" diseases and now we have new shit to replace them. We have spent decades introducing pollutants into our environment... we accept the skyrocketing costs of our health care (quite grudgingly)... yet we view deleting an important emissions control device as "spending 400 bucks....).... with no regard for the costs that come AFTER the initial "investment".... As amazing as it may sound.... "we" should be the experts at some of this stuff... "we" should research the results of our actions.... Need I say it again? "We" have been placed in a position of public trust.... And the best response we can muster is that "I will install that crap because another guy will install that crap..." (Repeat after me.... "Hey sailor... wanna get lucky?". Look at it this way.... a professional doctor will adhere to correct methods and proven procedures... Quacks are a dime a dozen.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam_Dodson Posted September 23, 2009 Share Posted September 23, 2009 Al Gore's in the house! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Even around all the ramifications the removal of the emissions equipment has (I agree with you on it fucking up the environment, Jim) a lot of these emissions devices actually do play a part in driveability, more than Joe Schlub who's only concern is "Taking that goddam thing off"...now we have all sorts of fucky driveability concerns that weren't there before...and the customer blames FoMoCo or Navistar for this. I have a little card I keep a stash of in my toolbox, reading the following: "Your criticism of this product reveals a very unsound technical background." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted September 24, 2009 Author Share Posted September 24, 2009 Al Gore not-withstanding, Adam... I'm not sure there is a "goody two shoes" aspect to any of this stuff... Aaron... since the advent of the thermactor in 1967.... yes... in 1967. the positive crankcase ventilation system somewhere around the same time and the EGR valve in the early 70s.... the hardware has ALWAYS been cause for concern and driveability issues... ALWAYS... it is the nature of the beast... it is called a "cost of being green" (much like buying a torque wrench is a cost of doing business). Zero pollution is a dream... unattainable... will not happen in our life time... however, we can either do our part to minimize our footprint... or - we can unilaterally declare war on our planet and on our grandchildren (some of you youngsters have no aspersions to grandchildren - let alone children today.... I was like that once. Don't get me wrong.... there is a 67 Coronet with a 383.... a 69 Charger with a 440 and a 69 RoadRunner in the works with an RB stroker (500 inches)... The Coronet got ran 30 minutes this year... the Charger hasn't been run this year at all and the RR is in progress... DUH!!!! A daily driver? Give us a break.... Do we need heavily modded daily drivers? Do we need a bunch of <expletive deleted>s deciding that EPA and other legislation designed to reduce our exposure is "bad"? Are these the same guys that will climb on some bandwagon and loudly proclaim that someone else should be hung out to dry because they "broke the law" or "offended our sensibilities"? Since the inception of these troublesome emissions controls, our air quality has shown inprovements... and now some jerkoff is deciding that my efforts allow him to do those things that I would love to do... but know that they aren't in our best interests? He is, in effect, saying fuck you and your family, Jimmy-boy... I wont limit my polluting to a few hours a year... I am going to shit on you every time I start my daily driver... Now.... when we realize that some of these guys are busy "repairing" todays vehicles, we start to wonder if the fox isn't in charge of the hen-house.... In the early 70s, we would see some old school techs with piles of vacuum harnesses under their bench as they disconnected those things they refused to understand... Can't fix it like a real man? somebody has a delete kit or a programmer or some other way so that we can shoot ourselves squarely in the foot... Some of this crap has to change.... if we don't do it.... who will? One thing you can be sure of.... YOUR grandchildren will HAVE to accept the world we give them... Al Gore? Even he can't remember the last time we had an 80 degree day at the end of September in Slave Lake... But what do I know.... I'm old and haven't seen much in all these years.... If I was a lot younger - I would know everything. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam_Dodson Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 heres one for ya Jim. EGR deletion EGR deletion in the Diesel is considered justified by a wide range of people, including the environmentally conscious. Although deleting the EGR system results in increased Nitric oxide. Hydrocarbon, Particulate, Carbon monoxide and Carbon dioxide are drastically reduced. Further adding to benefits of EGR deletion, is the increase in fuel economy which can be over 25%. Reduced fuel consumption has environmental benefits that extend beyond the vehicle itself. End gas recirculated back into the cylinder adds wear inducing contaminants and increase engine oil acidity. This can result in a poorly, inefficient running engine. The increased level of soot also has negative effects on Diesel particulate filters. This increase in soot creates a whole subset of problems and scenarios that can negatively impact the immediate environment. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted September 24, 2009 Author Share Posted September 24, 2009 OK...... EGR deletion is considered justified by WHO???? Certainly not by those agencies that have done what-ever research that may or may not be required... Some accreditation - some empirical evidence is going to be required... Too many folks are swayed by glossy ads and shiney bolt on contrivances. FWIW... that's "oxides of nitrogen" - this reacts with sunlight, rainfall and various other ground level pollutants... You didn't see the history of this pollutant and it doesn't fit your concept... I cannot blame you for that... but you need to research things a little better... Hydrocarbon emissions... The EGR was never designed to control this... Particulate emissions... the EGR was never designed to address this... Carbon monoxide and dioxide???? No EGR going on here.... Like I said... the emissions controls are part of "A" concern... Scientists and engineers are struggling with this.... and we have the "cure" at hand"? Something that surprises me.... so many dwell so hard on fuel consumption.... while it has been proven time and again that controlling tailpipe emissions has been unfriendly to fuel consumption... the biggest hit I can recall was the reduction in compression ratio, the removal of tetra-ethyl lead and the addition of the catalyst/EGR system back in (in Canada, at least ) 1973... We can squander our petroleum resources in an effort to buy time for a "better" fuel supply.... Why are you willing to squander our air for you short term goals? What most people do not realize is that EGR flow in a gas engine happens at part throttle... there is no EGR flow at WOT. In a diesel, there is little EGR flow at part throttle and more EGR flow happens at WOT. While there are benefits to the vehicle owner when we consider these types of modifications... it is society that we need to consider... unless of course you go to a different planet at quitting time... There is none so blind as he who WILL NOT see.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mchan68 Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 So if you're a true environmentalist, then you will take into effect that every time EPA comes up with some new scheme to save the environment that each manufacturer has to scrap old equipment and buy new. Then companies that manufacture this said emissions equipment have to scrap old equipment and retool to manufacture new parts and programs. Then once it's built, it has to be hauled by emissions producing equipment (that oh by the way doesn't meet new emissions standards and has to be re-equipped with new products to meet spec or scrapped and new trucks have to be purchased be to new standards). All of this new production and retooling requires more training and cost in terms of labor hours, mother earth has to be dug into again to meet demand, then manufacturing plants pour out smog to produce all this new stuff, new plastics are made that aren't biodegradable and will fill landfills for lifetimes to come, (I REALLY CAN GO ON IF YOU'D LIKE) and your worried about freakin NOx?!?!?!?!?!? ARE YOU SERIOUS? You sir may lack proper education or maybe you have failed to see what the bigger picture is. You can offset a little NOx emissions by sending your freshly canned EGR to a recycling plant or cutting back on eating six double cheeseburgers today. You think that you can blame someone who wants to improve the longevity of their vehicle for the ruin of earth. Maybe by driving a vehicle for another 10 years instead of scrapping after it is out of warranty these said people are doing just that. Look at the plank in your own eye before trying to remove a speck from another's eye. Maybe you drink water from plastic bottles that are polluting the earth at a much faster rate than a couple block off plates. Maybe you waste food or drive unnecessarily. Maybe you just need to live and let live and realize that everyone isn't on the same page that your moaning and groaning aren't going to change anything. In fact do you do anything other than complain? Are you involved in an environmental group or do you donate to environmental causes? I thought not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam_Dodson Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 im curious how much NOX is created when a 6.4 goes into one of its scorching regens! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 im curious how much NOX is created when a 6.4 goes into one of its scorching regens! NOx forms during "peak combustion temperatures" which must exceed 2800*F (1500*C). The DPF in our beloved Ford trucks operates at temperatures less than half that at the most. Remember that the engine shuts down when EGT13 breaches what... 1200 or 1400? (don't remember the exact figure - will look it up and correct) As Mr. Jim pointed out EGR is only part of the total emissions control scenario. In 2010 we will see diesel emissions shadowing gasoline engines. SCR which we will see with the 6.7L PSD will further reduce NOx emissions - urea injection - ammonia reacts with the NOx... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneGorniak Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Originally Posted By: Anonymous Poster's Response to another anti-EGR delete thread So if you're a true environmentalist, then you will take into effect that every time EPA comes up with some new scheme to save the environment that each manufacturer has to scrap old equipment and buy new. Then companies that manufacture this said emissions equipment have to scrap old equipment and retool to manufacture new parts and programs. Then once it's built, it has to be hauled by emissions producing equipment (that oh by the way doesn't meet new emissions standards and has to be re-equipped with new products to meet spec or scrapped and new trucks have to be purchased be to new standards). All of this new production and retooling requires more training and cost in terms of labor hours, mother earth has to be dug into again to meet demand, then manufacturing plants pour out smog to produce all this new stuff, new plastics are made that aren't biodegradable and will fill landfills for lifetimes to come, (I REALLY CAN GO ON IF YOU'D LIKE) and your worried about freakin NOx?!?!?!?!?!? ARE YOU SERIOUS? You sir may lack proper education or maybe you have failed to see what the bigger picture is. You can offset a little NOx emissions by sending your freshly canned EGR to a recycling plant or cutting back on eating six double cheeseburgers today. You think that you can blame someone who wants to improve the longevity of their vehicle for the ruin of earth. Maybe by driving a vehicle for another 10 years instead of scrapping after it is out of warranty these said people are doing just that. Look at the plank in your own eye before trying to remove a speck from another's eye. Maybe you drink water from plastic bottles that are polluting the earth at a much faster rate than a couple block off plates. Maybe you waste food or drive unnecessarily. Maybe you just need to live and let live and realize that everyone isn't on the same page that your moaning and groaning aren't going to change anything. In fact do you do anything other than complain? Are you involved in an environmental group or do you donate to environmental causes? I thought not. This is gettin goooood! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted September 24, 2009 Author Share Posted September 24, 2009 Wow.... this is quite the load of horseshit this guy is packing.... let's take a look at only a few of the holes... Originally Posted By: Anonymous Poster's Response to another anti-EGR delete thread So if you're a true environmentalist, then you will take into effect that every time EPA comes up with some new scheme to save the environment that each manufacturer has to scrap old equipment and buy new. Then companies that manufacture this said emissions equipment have to scrap old equipment and retool to manufacture new parts and programs. Of course emissions control devices are the only things any car manufacturer will redesign - no new models... no redesigning existing models... they never introduce new features or new motors, transmissions or what have you. An emissions control device that has been retooled to meet new criteria is pretty small compared to the mountain of changes we witness as models and designs mature... Then once it's built, it has to be hauled by emissions producing equipment (that oh by the way doesn't meet new emissions standards and has to be re-equipped with new products to meet spec or scrapped and new trucks have to be purchased be to new standards). Existing vehicles have to be re-equipped to meet new emissions criteria? WTF is that? Are we going to start installing DPFs on old trucks? All of this new production and retooling requires more training and cost in terms of labor hours, mother earth has to be dug into again to meet demand, then manufacturing plants pour out smog to produce all this new stuff, new plastics are made that aren't biodegradable and will fill landfills for lifetimes to come, (I REALLY CAN GO ON IF YOU'D LIKE) and your worried about freakin NOx?!?!?!?!?!? So... what your saying is that the manufacturing plants would close down if they didn't have redsigned products to produce? If they wwere building "last years" model then mother earth wouldn't be the source of any raw materials? Manufacturers wouldn't seek out new materials to lighten a vehicle or add strength? ARE YOU SERIOUS? I AM serious... and I am not myopic nor do I pretend to know this guys living habits. You sir may lack proper education or maybe you have failed to see what the bigger picture is. You can offset a little NOx emissions by sending your freshly canned EGR to a recycling plant or cutting back on eating six double cheeseburgers today. You think that you can blame someone who wants to improve the longevity of their vehicle for the ruin of earth. Maybe by driving a vehicle for another 10 years instead of scrapping after it is out of warranty these said people are doing just that. Look at the plank in your own eye before trying to remove a speck from another's eye. Maybe you drink water from plastic bottles that are polluting the earth at a much faster rate than a couple block off plates. Maybe you waste food or drive unnecessarily. Maybe you just need to live and let live and realize that everyone isn't on the same page that your moaning and groaning aren't going to change anything. In fact do you do anything other than complain? Are you involved in an environmental group or do you donate to environmental causes? I thought not. So... let's look at some of this stuff logically. How do we pick who should be able to delete an emissions control and who can't? People that live in even numbered houses? People born on a Thursday? Better yet... why don't we just stop building these things with EGR valves and such on them? If defeating an EGR valve or other device is so good for the motor... lets get rid of all these damned devices... I love the smell of ozone in the morning!!! (Apologies to Lt.Col. Bill Kilgore - aka Robert Duvall). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 Jim - I wasn't trying to say that the emissions equipment CAUSES driveability concerns. I will agree with you that some of the stuff from back in the day was pretty rudimentary and crude and didn't work all that well.I was saying that a LOT of work has gone into making these controls work hand in hand with the existing equipment, and as far as I've seen, most of the software that allows their removal merely shuts off the DTC's for the particular device (EGR for example) and doesn't alter anything else to compensate for it.I mean, really, all it takes is to watch the VGTDC and EGRDC pids on the same screen during a road test to show that they work together a lot of the time.I agree with you on the hot rod vs. daily driver. My Malibu? Pfft. Emissions. Yeah. Right. 13.4:1 big inch small block chevy, on 112 LEADED fuel. How much run time does it see a year? Not much. I rev that fucker up in the driveway, and I can SEE the hole in the ozone get bigger...I'ma have to switch that fucker over to methanol...C16 is way too expensive.My Super Duty? Runs at LEAST 40-50 MILES a day, all the emissions machinery is on it. I'm currently getting between 18 - 21 mpg, depending on fuel quality and how heavy traffic is - including regen events. So you can't make me believe that removing the DPF and CAT is the be-all and end-all for fuel mileage. Yes, my truck has tuner on it.24,000 MILES, and this is the tailpipe. (Warning: Tailpipe shot enclosed.)FWIW, I have seen stock trucks with sooty pipes on them.I'd rather pay a little more for fuel (How much more economy is a 8000LB truck gonna get - it weighs 7920LBS without my big ass in it and about 3 gallons of fuel in it) than not be able to breathe. I am interested to see what's coming out of the tailpipe on my truck when it's in regen, but from what I can see in the pipes at this mileage, I would say that the aftertreatment system is doing it's job.I got it smogged about two months back.Z-E-R-O Opacity on the emissions test, which is done at WIDE OPEN THROTTLE. Seems to me it's a fairly clean machine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aaron Posted September 24, 2009 Share Posted September 24, 2009 heres one for ya Jim. EGR deletion EGR deletion in the Diesel is considered justified by a wide range of people, including the environmentally conscious. Although deleting the EGR system results in increased Nitric oxide. Hydrocarbon, Particulate, Carbon monoxide and Carbon dioxide are drastically reduced. Further adding to benefits of EGR deletion, is the increase in fuel economy which can be over 25%. Reduced fuel consumption has environmental benefits that extend beyond the vehicle itself. End gas recirculated back into the cylinder adds wear inducing contaminants and increase engine oil acidity. This can result in a poorly, inefficient running engine. The increased level of soot also has negative effects on Diesel particulate filters. This increase in soot creates a whole subset of problems and scenarios that can negatively impact the immediate environment. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EGR 'Cause Wikipedia, an encyclopedia written by it's users, is a set-in-stone reference for anything, especially something that most people think is "OK". Go on there and find a topic about smoking reefer - I bet there will be some mention in there of it being ok, but at the bottom line - both of these things (smoking dope, and defeating federally mandated emissions control) are AGAINST THE LAW, at the very minimum. Not even getting into the ethical aspect of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 Soot is soot.... that's what the DPF is supposed to catch (I had one this afternoon with soot in the pipe and an Airaid filter). Carbon dioxide is clear.... carbon monoxide is clear... oxides of nitrogen have to react with sunlight to be anything but clear... Sorry, Aaron... the lack of soot in the tailpipe doesn't prove too much other than that the filter is doing it's job. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LARRY BRUDZYNSKI Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Dirty whether it be clear or visible is still dirty. I still polish my boat or coffee table even though they might appear clean. Do you wash your pretty truck even though it looks clean?? Most do.....So why shouldn't the exhaust be allowed to do its job??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastendpowerstroke Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 OK all this talk is good but there is a MUCH bigger problem afoot. http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/40478 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 OK all this talk is good but there is a MUCH bigger problem afoot. http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/40478 A problem with quality hops? Dwaynes tolerance for some mods may change Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaysonfordtech Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 I have to agree with Jim on this one. I may not like some of the laws of the land, and I may not agree with them but we are a society built on following laws. We have collectively decided through our regulators that clean air trumps increase fuel economy and durability. The externalities of the use of fossil fuels must be minimized by the use of emissions devices. The use of EGR does not increase the formation of particulate emissions if it is operating properly. This is false. The release of CO2 is directly related to fuel consumption not EGR flow. The attitude of some people about this is why we should mandate annual inspection and emission test around both of our countries and any other that share a common goal of reducing the tragedy of the commons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneGorniak Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Let's get t his straight! I don't have much of a tolerance for many mods at all. Especially when it comes to chips, programmers and for any mods at all on the 6.4L. However, this is where Jim gets a little defensive. I consider the 6.0L to be one of the BIGGEST PIECE OF SHIT POLLUTING ENGINES to ever be put on the road. I look at how busy we have been over the last seven years straight. I look at the amount of head gaskets repairs, EGR cooler repairs, Engine oil cooler repairs, Injector after injector after injectors repairs we have done over the last seven years, etc. I look at how much black smoke these things belch out every morning I walk out to the lot an fire them up. Some of you may not see the cold mornings like we do up her. I look at ho much white smoke these things belch out when the Head gaskets and EGR coolers are blown. I look at how much oil they ouke out on to the ground when the engine oil cooler explodes and pumps it allout the rad cap. Some might say, what's a couple of gallons of coolant a day being burnt out the tail pipe gonna harm? Well, how about how many hundreds of thousands of these trucks over the last seven years or maybe even millions of them added up burning a couple of gallons of coolant everday added up. How good is that for the environment? How about the millions of these fuckers belching black smoke? How good is that for the environment. Can we fix them? Yes, but only temporarily. They will fail again. Let's compare the Six litre to a nuclear power plant. A nuclear power plant can be very environmentally friendly when it is brand new and everything is working great. UNTILL THAT FUCKER SPRINGS A LEAK! Well a six litre can be clean for 20,000 to 40,000 km's or until shit wears out on and springs a leak from somewhere. An spring a leak they are guaranteed 100% to do. Every time I see a Six litre hooked up to a travel trailer or any trailer for that matter, I see and environmental disaster happening right before my eyes. You just know that fuckers gonna blow something. Jim believes the Six litre has a good crankshaft and bottom end. Well I can tell you that that is not all an engine is made of. The engine is made of everything on it from the bottom end to the twisting heads and stretching head bolts, popping egr coolers, exploding engine oil coolers, sticking turbo's, puking injectors, carboned to the nuts egr valves and etc. These engines were a engineering fuckup right from the get go. The 6.4L on the other hand, really isn't all that bad. It is a clean engine and does a very good job of cleaning up the exhaust wven when shit gives out. Leave the fuckers alone. They are also way to advanced for all of these back yard fucking rednecks to go and just start cutting shit out. I don't promote EGR delete kits on Six litre's. I am actually the one that couldn't believe that a piece of pipe and a couple of gaskets cost $400.00. I think that's crazy. Fix the fucker right and spend that money on studs so the head gaskets don't blow and rupture another EGR cooler or engine oil cooler. Jim will tell you that lack of maintenace on the customer's behalf is what made these engines fail. I will say Bahhhhhh Humbug! The fail for customers that maintain them very well. I haven;t been busy for the last seven years for no reason at all. So in the end, what I find extremely sad is the fact that the failure rate of these engines has lead to the devolopement of piece of shit modifications like we are talking about. I also find it sad that the pollution that these pieces of shit pump out is widely accepted and never criticized either. Can any of you imagine having to pay what these customers pay for retail repair bills? We are all technicians who can repair our own vehicles and I think that that thought sometimes escapes us. Just my . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 . . . . ..................................................................... . . . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneGorniak Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Just one more thing to add: Ford realized and accepted the fact that Navistar really fucked up and created a huge piece of shit. This is what lead to the deterioration of the relationship between Ford and Navistar. This is also what lead to Ford deciding to build their own engine which I am positive about so far. So why can't most of us accept what Ford has accepted? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted September 25, 2009 Author Share Posted September 25, 2009 Let's get t his straight! I don't have much of a tolerance for many mods at all. Especially when it comes to chips, programmers and for any mods at all on the 6.4L. Dwayne... I'm not even going to attempt this one... You are developing selective and are only acknowledging about half of what I'm saying... For some reason you have an intense hatred of the very thing that feeds your family - calm down - you are much too young to do this to yourself... I am interested, though... what is it that Ford has "come to accept"? That hot-rodding the VT365 wasn't such a good idea? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LARRY BRUDZYNSKI Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 Let's get t his straight! I don't have much of a tolerance for many mods at all. Especially when it comes to chips, programmers and for any mods at all on the 6.4L. I am interested, though... what is it that Ford has "come to accept"? That hot-rodding the VT365 wasn't such a good idea? Thanks Jim, I was trying to figure out how to word that. Well Said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DwayneGorniak Posted September 25, 2009 Share Posted September 25, 2009 It's not an intense hatred. It's a simple observation. I'm laughing about the whole topic. I guess things sound more intense than they really are. You still have to look at the fact that the Sick-0 was the direct replacement for the 7.3l. Jim will it was a stop gap engine and I will say no it wasn't. I will say that the 6.4L may have been a stop gap engine if Ford's eyes knowing that they working on their own engine to break away from Navistar. However, I don't believe the 6.4L is a stop gap engine for Navistar. And just so the rest of you know, Jim and I get into conversations ike this on an almost daily basis. But at the end of the day, we will sit down together and have a few beer with eachother. Sometimes even continue the conversation. By the way, Ford accepted the fact that they had to sue Navistar to recover severe warranty costs. And if you listen to Mike Rowe he says that if Ford wants something done right, they have to do it themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbriggs Posted September 26, 2009 Share Posted September 26, 2009 And lets not forget that the 6.0l is responsible for getting a vast number of us diesel techs (in western canada anyways) certified, through the "accelerated" diesel cert programs. Fords way of (reactively) reducing customer wait times i guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.