Keith Browning

I know that the reps and FSE's do not want the dealers giving out their telephone numbers or e-mail addresses which I agree with as there is a procedure for these things. Also, once that information gets out it will get abused. With that said, you can call the Ford Customer Relations number at 800-392-3673 and start making a big stink. I am trying to visualize what they did to your truck and why. The CMP sensor is quite easy to access from under the truck.

I thought this was cool. The History of Ford in Louisville on Dipity.

Ah yes! I just did a 6.4L long block and forgot that too!!! Except I couldn't bet the torque converter studs to cooperate as I was installing the block. Slept on it and decided to check if it was there and sure enough, I overlooked it. Fortunately for me I caught it with the engine still dangling from the engine hoist.

Now I feel less stupid or at least I am in good company. You are coming to the same conclusion I am based on similar findings.

Jim that document is similar to a lot of what you will find when "Googling" the subject using different words. There is also a lot of industry lingo and chemistry that I know makes no sense to me, nor should it. To me it seems "logical" that a cetane rating should be guaranteed and posted on the pumps. They do it for gasoline so... ? Bruce, I believe that testing fuel samples taken directly from the pumps and from vehicle tanks is indeed what I am looking for as what ends up in the consumers fuel tanks is the bottom line. I am a little surprised that I cant find any kind of aggregate testing data on a large scale. Mostly what you see published is furnished by the oil companies but again, where the fuel starts out and where it ends is likely a different story I contacted a couple "friends" to see if there is any Ford information on this. I KNOW they do fuel testing and research. From what I am reading and things I have heard over the years I guesstimate the average is going to be from 38-CN to 42-CN but that is simply not good enough. At any rate, if the average still meets 45-CN then I would think that using fuel additives to target 50-CN is still good advice. I also have read in several places that improvements in performance level off around 55-CN. The bottom line: I have heard from more than a handful of people from Ford Motor Company that have stated that the quality of diesel fuel in North America is poor. All I want is a simple explanation or data to support it. I agree that fuel quality is probably the largest factor contributing to performance issues and carbon related concerns but it is not the only answer.

I am doing research for an article and I am having difficulty finding anything resembling a study or report on actual cetane numbers of fuel tested at the pumps or in samples that were analyzed. I have found plenty of documentation that shows that North American fuel has a generally lower cetane rating than that of fuel found in Europe for example. I see claims that North American diesel should be from 45 CN to 55 CN but the minimum requirement is 40 CN. We know there is no accurate in-field test so analyzing must be done by laboratories. My FSE commented once that fuel samples often tested in the upper 30'S which is piss poor. Any ideas on reliable information sources?

It is not okay. I like Bruce's response in that it is not legal to remove emissions devices, or even modify them and it is not up to the vehicle owner NOR is it up to us. If "we" are going to be talking out both sides of our mouths then we deserve to be called on it. When one of us gets caught doing it we ALL look like assholes. If you look at what is going on in the aftermarket and in the various forums on the Internet this is becoming an epidemic. This is one issue where Federal and State lawmakers and law enforcement need to step things up. Well heck, everything is green this and green that when politicians throw politically correct buzz-words around. Looks to me like there are some loopholes that need to be closed. I am beginning to think that diesel engines should be subject to annual emissions inspection just like gasoline powered vehicles are. And for that matter, it is quite possibly time for technicians to be certified to be able to work as well. No certification? No workie on cars and trucks or a steep fine if caught doing so. I think that with that hanging over the heads of some technicians they might think twice before disabling, removing or otherwise modifying emissions devices on ANY vehicle. Apparently holding the vehicle owners liable or even catching them isn't working. Or is that too drastic?

I would have pulled the cab just to screw with everybody!

They self extinguish.

Well shoot, I saw that on an early 6.0L where the injectors filled the crankcase with fuel and the turbo graciously filled the CAC with the cocktail. It is a sickening feeling when you shut the ignition off, remove the key and the engine is still accelerating. All of the pistons had circles on them and they weren't happy faces!

According to "sources" the typewriter noise will go away. This one might be a hard sell...

Well it is a little different when it is your own truck...

I am calling bullshit on this one. I have performed PDI's on about 10 6.7L trucks now and all sounded perfect. Until today. Wait till you hear this sound. Are they kidding? Seriously? Do they think anyone is going to buy a truck making that noise?

I know "rebuilding" would be cheaper but on a 7 year old turbo why wouldn't you recommend replacing the CRH? If there IS something else wrong with the shaft or bearing you will be eating the repeat repair not to mention the reman housing has a 12/12 warranty. Just askin. And I am sure if you dig hard enough you will find a kit... Where's LARRY?

Yep. "They" are also relying on YOUR ability to access resources like Ford's service information. Do they compensate Ford for this access? Are we authorized to use this information for a third party to profit from? It's not like JustAnswer.com is paying for a Motorcraft subscription right? I passed as well.

Yeah but was that because of a software issue or were the subscriptions expired?

Is the VDR the only known issue with version 66? couldn't identify a 2011 Super Duty today and decided to use the update since I hadn't in 23 days... i loaded an update to version 65 and renders my IDS software completely unusable. I brought that laptop home to remove IDS altogether and install 66 clean.

Paddle faster! I hear banjo music!!!

I read that message. It stated that the tanks were filled to specification at the factory. Naturally I assumed that meant full but I am still questioning what that really means.

PDI = Pre-Delivery Inspection

Yes, I said meters. I was playing around with the instrument luster on a 2011 F350 and noticed that there are two engine hour meters. [*]Engine Hours [*]Engine Idle Hours I think this is interesting. Despite the fact that the engine oil life meter/reminder calculates oil integrity accounting for driving and idling there will likely be some debate or in-depth discussion about this in the future. Now we have two hour meters to really screw us up.

We have done a few 2011 PDI's now. I just finished up a delivery going out this morning where the Transportation Mode Deactivation Process did not immediately deactivate. The procedure actually starts the TPMS learn process. This particular truck is a diesel with every electrical do-dad possible. This may have contributed to the delay. I contacted the Hot-Line and by the time I got my response the message disappeared from the cluster. Keep that in mind.

Excellent point as usual Jim. Regardless of whether Ford cut the labor times and dropped the fluid checks from the PDI list it only takes a few short minutes to check everything. There is too much at stake here. Fixing it right the first time includes DOING it right the very first time.