Diesel Jay

I've seen the video referenced on one site, but the file wasn't produced by anybody. That's cool, in a scary kind of way! What dealer was that at? - Jay

Another one. Hopefully, everything's in place for you techs to kill two birds with one stone. Otherwise, it could be the same truck visiting your bay for two separate recalls. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif - Jay

Looks like the media got wind of it pretty quick, too. Click Here - Jay

Click here for the initial details. Looks like that tailpipe "flamethrower" was not an intended feature. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif - Jay

There are some pretty significant bugs in the Regen strategy that Ford is working on. There will be a reflash coming that addresses those. When? Not entirely sure.... - Jay

If I were a betting man, I'd wager on more than just one "reflash" coming down the pipe. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif - Jay

Wow -- big flame there! Wish it had better detail, but you can definitely tell that something is amiss! Was there any damage to the exhaust, paint, fender or bumper from the flames? - Jay

Quote: I kinda chuckled in disbelief about flames shooting out the tailpipes.. that is until he showed me the pictures he took of it!!! I'd find it hard to believe, too, unless I saw the pics/flames. Any chance he'd email them to you! I know some "folks" who wouldn't mind seeing them! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif - Jay

Quote: I have been talking with Bob Boumann(sp?) from international on this issue... That's surprising, but you couldn't ask for a better guy to help you. Bob Baumann is the "top tech" in Nav's Reliability department. When the tech support folks encounter a tough problem, they go to Bob for help. And the guys in Reliability are all competent, or better-than-average. What's surprising is that Reliability even got involved. They are not typically the group that answers Ford dealer problems directly. Nav has another group for those issues. - Jay

The ECM can pretty much transmit any length of data that it wants. The problem here is that Ford/Nav is trying to be mindful of the SAE's CAN standards, and the aftermarket scanner market. SAE dictates that 8-bit accuracy has sufficient range and resolution for this fault, so the tools expect 8-bit data. The problem is that the engine uses a TON of boost, and they've set the overboost parameter above the range that can be transmitted to the scan tool. Manufacturers are allowed to create their own codes with whatever resolution they want, but that means aftermarket products won't know what to do with the data. Given all the turbo troubles on the 6.0L, I was surprised that Ford/Nav didn't beef up this aspect of their diagnostics.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif I only noted it as an example of one of those cases where a tech is at a permanent disdvantage. An owner might report a fault for which you don't have anyway of testing/verifying because someone at Ford/Nav figured that 8-bits is "sufficient" to transmit all diagnostic data. It isn't, and that makes a tech's already difficult job even harder. - Jay

Jim: The IDS trick to adjust the range only works if only works if IDS is restricting the range that is broadcast from the PCM. However, in this case, IDS isn't the restricting factor. The PCM is restricted to transmitting only 8-bits of information for the PID value. That's equivalent to 2^8, or 1023 steps. To transmit values above 3 bar, or about ~44-45 psi, the PCM would need enough space to transmit the value as a Word or Double Word. So, IDS will never see a PID value above ~44-45 psi, since the PCM can't transmit a value above that. The PCM actually uses 16 or 32-bit info for fault detection, but can't transmit anything bigger than 8-bit. Ingenius, huh? - Jay

Quote: Apparently a lot of these trucks are having A/C problems. The strategy in the ECM won't cycle the compressor on until it's learned ambient temp, and for whatever reason, apparently a few of these trucks haven't learned ambient temperature yet. I guess they're being told to unplug the MAF and run the engine until the CEL comes on. Then, clear the code and plug the MAF back in - supposedly this re-learns ambient temperature and then, viola! A/C works. Are you getting any DTC's? If so, which ones? - Jay

Here's an interesting "gotcha." DTC P0234 is related to an overboost condition. The parameters to set this is pressure above 4050hPA for greater than 5 seconds. 4050hPA is just shy of 59psi. But...the PID on the scan tool only goes up to ~44-45psi. Who thought that one up? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/confused.gif

As of now, the 6.0L will remain in the MY07 E-series. However, Ford is notorious for making last minute changes to the E-series, and the now-defunct Excursion platform. The engine will not meet the '07 emissions standards. It gets somewhat technical & complicated, but fines and/or credits can be used to offset the missed emissions. I'm not sure if Ford or Nav would be responsible, but Ford has recently dispatched an army of lawyers to all their suppliers in an attempt to demand "concessions." - Jay

Jim: In terms of "customer service," you're thinking way ahead! And you're correct to note that there are a lot of "sensitive" folks out there when it comes to their 6.0L's. With that said, I think even you techs would be shocked at how hard the engineers abuse these engines during testing. I've been in a few trucks where they were testing various reflashes or trying to sort out problems/bugs. The engineers have a PC with some software that allows them to control just about every aspect of the PCM calibration. I've seen them switch variable values to make these engines barely run, or alternatively, smoke like trains, and then proceed to power brake, or full throttle launch, or purposesly kill fuel or oil delivery, etc. all in attempts to figure out a problem. I mean, I wouldn't run an old U-Haul rental truck as hard as these engineers push some of these brand new engines. You quickly learn that it's harder to break these things than most people think, and it also tells you how "out-of-whack" some of the programmers/tuners really are if they can, indeed, break these engines. I point this out as just a measure of reassurance. The 6.0L has proven to be somewhat problematic, but it's also tougher than most people think. It just doesn't have the head-room built into it that the 7.3L did, which was grossly overbuilt for use in LD pickup trucks. Regards, Jay

The only real damage to the 6.0L injectors occurs when there's a lack of fuel, not oil. Air in there won't hurt the spool valves. As I'm sure you know, though, air in the HP oil circuit can cause rought running. It can take some time and some aggressive driving to purge it all, but will eventually sort itself out. Regards, Jay

The manifold between the high pressure oil pump and each individual cylinder head [branch tube] can break and cause hard starting. When that happens, too much high pressure oil gets dumped back into the crankcase and the engine won't start because the injectors aren't getting enough oil pressure. As an aside, the Nav hotline guys are generally very good. Most are ex Ford/Nav dealer techs who have been in trenches, and the engineers that are involved are well seasoned. They're a good bunch of "no-BS" guys, the kind you'd go have a beer with after your shift. More of the time, they'll lead you down the correct road with their advice. - Jay

Nav keeps separate warranty data for the VT365 and the 6.0L PSD, so they'll know if there's a specific problem in either application. Actually, the most likely source of the problem is one that's common to both -- EGR mixing. Mixing EGR with normal fresh air is phenomonally/incredibly complex. The only folks who think it might be easy are those who've never had to mess with the variables and equations. Very, very few folks understand it fully, and the 6.0L suffers from some "unoptimized" issues. Given a sticking turbo, it's possible for one cylinder, or another, to see substantially different volumes of EGR vs. fresh air, which can wreak all kinds of havoc. - Jay

DCX will have to make a new MBE engine to fit in a pickup, as the current ones are too tall & heavy. Plus, they'll have to overcome opposition from the German half of the house, which doesn't want to lose European production to the US side of the pond. It's alot cheaper for DCX to mfg'er engines here, but internally, that may cause quite a stink.

Statistically, Nav isn't aware of any cylinders that are having more problems than the others. Nevertheless, I do know that there was zero time spent on "tuning" the intake manifold, and that standing pressure waves can occur. However, the standing waves have been shown to alter individual cylinder flow by only the smallest of percentages, so this is not a major priority. Honestly, I doubt that's the issue at play here.

Nav couldn't even get Pilot Injection [2 injection events] to work reliably at idle, much less at higher RPM's. The physical, moving parts of the G2 HEUI injector are just too hard to control. Some of the aftermarket programmers have re-enabled PI, but I don't know that any have used it above idle speed. That would be playing with some seriously unknown variables.

I asked my contacts the same thing. They noted that if the timing was that far advanced, the CP's would have been astronomical, to the point that you'd start seeing melted aluminum on the pistons. - Jay

I ran this by some folks who analyze these sort of things on a daily basis, and they noted that the pattern here indicates the timing is badly retarded. The injector plumes are too big, as if the piston was too far away from the nozzle while injection was occuring. If things were operating normally, you should see more of the pattern contained within the piston bowl, but in this case, it looks like none of that is occuring. - Jay