Another EPA fine, this time to edge

DieselD · January 23, 2013

Aaron, do you still have pics of those airplane puller 6.4L trucks?

not a airplane puller truck but along the same lines...This is another truck that never sees the road, actually I dont think it even had plates on it.

Bruce Amacker · January 23, 2013

I remember a particular 6.4 from a mining outfit in NM that had a broom handled rammed up the DPF. Long story short after talking with several people at the mine I found out they purposely hog out the DPF because they plug up in a day and can never perform a regen cycle. What they didnt realize is the amount of fuel that accumulated from the vehicle attempting to perform regens which ended up killing the engines.

If the DPF was gutted, why would there be excessive fuel built up from trying to do regens? No DPF pressure, no regens.

Posted Image

Alex Bruene · January 23, 2013

I'm thinking back a few years to an incident at The Monkey House (back to when 6.4s were brand new). One of their users gutted his DPF-it was fine at first, but then went into a constant regeneration.

Bruce Amacker · January 23, 2013

Must have been a fluke in the software?

Posted Image

Aaron · January 23, 2013

We used to punch out the DPF's on the trucks at Diavik, because the way the calibration was and the way the mine site was wouldn't allow the trucks to regenerate (speed limit and limited usable roads). They would eventually go into regeneration and stay there, raw fuel would blow out the tailpipe. Every so often, clear codes and do a DPF reset and it would stay out of regeneration for awhile. I suspect if the calibration had allowed the trucks to regenerate at idle in park, they MIGHT still have the filters on them. Everything up there idled 24/7 and the filters would plug up FAST.

Again, this is an off road site, although some of the trucks had plates on them because they got delivered (driven) from Kingland to the mine via the winter road, and not by freight. Usually in manual 2 to keep the RPM up so you'd have heat, back when Ford said "don't block the grille with anything." Although, most of the validation stickers were expired.

It doesn't see a pressure drop, so it won't realize the DPF is getting clean(er), is my thought. Now the calibration forces a regen every 667mi.

Mike - I was actually looking for those pictures the other day, and even looked in the thread.

This is the best I can come up with, which I had posted in the original thread:

Note the particulate matter coming out of the tailpipe.

lmorris · January 23, 2013

Originally Posted By: DieselD

I remember a particular 6.4 from a mining outfit in NM that had a broom handled rammed up the DPF. Long story short after talking with several people at the mine I found out they purposely hog out the DPF because they plug up in a day and can never perform a regen cycle. What they didnt realize is the amount of fuel that accumulated from the vehicle attempting to perform regens which ended up killing the engines.

If the DPF was gutted, why would there be excessive fuel built up from trying to do regens? No DPF pressure, no regens.

It makes no sense but it does happen. We have had trucks in with DPF deletes for reflashes that require us to put it back to stock, then put the tune back in after. I forgot to turn off the regen on one and it went into regen after 5 minutes of driving.

Cetane · January 24, 2013

What everyone is describing is exactly the way it was intended to operate. Part of the reason is to protect the engine in the case of a DPFP sensor failure. The system knows the backpressure when the DPF is clean. If the pressure is significantly lower than that base value the supervisor assumes there is an issue with the sensor and goes into regen in order to keep the filter from filling up. It is assumed the operator would notice the MIL and get it fixed. Admittedly not the best control strategy but for the majority it works ok. In any case there are changes coming soon to the supervisor and hardware thanks to new gov't requirements.

EEPOD sells a manual regen tool that your fleet customers can purchase. OCR can be enabled on 2011 trucks with the base cluster and any 2012+ truck but I am not sure if you guys have the ability to do so.

http://www.eepod.com/page3.html

cbriggs · January 24, 2013

I say all these a/m companies, possibly with help from the manufacturers, start up a registry system. If you want to purchase an off road product for your vehicle, you should have to provide your vin and proof of ownership/ registration, or whatever. This information would then be relayed to the manufacturer of said vehicle and the registering province/state. This would make it nearly impossible to register or have warranty repairs done to a vehicle that had been fitted with off road only components. Any software, tuners or like would have to be vin locked before purchase, to prevent them from being purchased with a fake or write off vin.

The only fault with this idea is, they would sell a shit pile less of this stuff, so they would likely not be on board with it. Maybe the epa needs to make it manditory for them? Maybe it would force them to work on some emissions compliant adds? Who knows.

I do think the end user needs to be held mostly responsible for having off road only components installed on thier on road vehicle. Plead ignorance all they want, its kindergarten grade english.

lmorris · January 24, 2013

Even if the governments manage to mandate VIN locking tuners, or out right banned all tuner companies from selling emissions altering programmers, people will still find a way to tune them and get it out to the public. Other than making the vehicle owner accountable, repair facilities would have to start refusing to repair them. Any idiot can plug in a tuner, but very few of them can fix major issues. Manufacturers need to be more diligent with warranty refusal, but that only works as good as the repairing dealerships co-operation. It may be a slow and long battle, but these fines may be the start.

Keith Browning · January 24, 2013

Manufacturers need to be more diligent with warranty refusal, but that only works as good as the repairing dealerships co-operation.

Oh it requires FORD to be cooperative as well! I had in the past reported a vehicles with a tuners, BLATANT neglect or abuse and Ford said "go ahead and repair it" so I gave up dealing with Ford on this. We have as a dealer denied repairing vehicles under warranty that WE determined were not eligible.

Alex Bruene · January 24, 2013

repair facilities would have to start refusing to repair them.

That's what we do.

But, when other dealer techs are taking this attitude... From INFORD

"*** as far as the DPF VS. Delete conversation. I agree the enviroment is important and should always be a concern but when customers come in with cash and ask for deletes and chips I'm not about to turn down the work. It's kind of a love hate relationship in that sense "

lmorris · January 24, 2013

Originally Posted By: lmorris

repair facilities would have to start refusing to repair them.

That's what we do.

But, when other dealer techs are taking this attitude... From INFORD

"*** as far as the DPF VS. Delete conversation. I agree the enviroment is important and should always be a concern but when customers come in with cash and ask for deletes and chips I'm not about to turn down the work. It's kind of a love hate relationship in that sense "

Crap..I hope that wasn't one of my posts... Posted Image ... ....