Keith Browning

Brad, they can have them if they need them if they ask. I did leave the Navistar FSM with all of them so I am sure, no, I am positive a few of them are already in the hands of Ford engineering where they should be. THESE photos were intended to be used by the manufacturers. Rich, The thought to check for voltage drop came too late for testing but it would have been interesting. Bruce, there sure is a great deal of satisfaction when one of these nightmares solved. What is better is spending three days with this guy from Navistar. I learned a lot about reading data and interpreting it. Much of it would not have seen for a long time because of the few driveability issues the 6.4L is having. Aside from that Carl is a great guy and a pleasure to have around.

Mike, I think you need to edit that second link - its the same video as the first. I also went to the 6X6.com Web Site which is interesting. Check out the gallery. They have even made a double dually 2008 F550.

James around the time this video surfaced I got my hands in it from one of our fellow members. Believe it or not I don't remember who but we did try to find out where it originated. Long story short we failed and I guess they wanted to remain anonymous or try to but "Ford" does know where it came from but I have never heard anything more of it. Since the Internet is a great source of mis-information and a perfect vehicle for rumors to spread, I wrote an article on this and placed the video in it where you cab read my write-up and view the video. http://www.forddoctorsdts.com/articles/article-07-01.php I don't know how this never happened before production began with all of the testing that was done. I am sure that if Ford and International had caught it this never would have happened on a production vehicle. I do remember that the issue was addressed and swiftly corrected with the recall that Ford issued. The video is genuine as Jim stated and I have never heard anything about the guys who filmed it being reprimanded though I am very sure Ford was extremely interested in investigating it when they discovered it.

I think it would be very interesting so feel free to regale us with your project. I would even encourage a presentation of the project when you are through with it and present it here on the DTS... if you are up for it. This is interesting reading for many people and a CAT in a light duty Ford? Sheeoot! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/surprise.gif I just hope you can pull it off!

David Wynn. Great guy who makes the effort to help get things done. He should be your FSE too.

Two things come to my mind. Total engine hours is the first as trucks with excessive idle times tend to load up catalytic converters and I have seen them clog to the point where you cant clear them out with hard driving. I believe we can extend this thinking to include the DPF. Second, if this truck DID have a programmer on it the DPF may be ash loaded meaning its capacity is nearing the end its service life. You might also want to consider separating the CAT and the DPF and take a look at the substrate to see if any clogging or heat damage has occurred.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/surprise.gif

The saga continues. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/banghead.gif None of this has made any sense. The Navistar FSM thought it over and re-investigated the fuse box and VBAT circuit and stumbled upon the root cause. Apparently something damaged the fuse pin in the battery junction box. This truck is new, I never touched it and our fleet department didn't touch it either therefore this likely happened sometime during the production process either in vehicle assembly or from the part supplier. We had looked at this before and did not catch the pushed in pin that was also damaged. The final result was reduced amperage capacity due to a poor connection at fuse F74... Make note of the uneven and spread terminal. We have all seen this before but this kind of damage usually causes easy to recognize and detectable symptoms. A look at the rear of the pin gives you a good idea of how we can have continuity but lack the capacity to handle adequate amperage. No different than a damaged wire with only a strand or two completing the circuit or corroded connections. I repaired the terminal and the fuse block, reassembled the vehicle and road tested the truck until we were satisfied that this one was solved and repaired. If you look at the schematic, this fuse supplies battery voltage to the MAF, EGR valve, VGT actuator and the cooling van along with the fuel control solenoids, pressure and volume. These are connected in series using several splices. The fuel control solenoids are probably the last in line to get their power. Apparently, not quite enough for the VCV to function correctly. Here is the odd part that made diagnosis difficult, no codes for the other components on this circuit and all circuit tests passed. Perhaps this is another example to support the concept of load testing circuits, but if you powered a headlamp bulb with this circuit it probably still would have been nice and bright. Do you think this might have shown up with a voltage drop test with the engine running? Quote: Voltage dropFrom Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Voltage drop is the reduction in voltage in an electrical circuit between the source and load. In electrical wiring national and local electrical codes may set guidelines for maximum voltage drop allowed in a circuit, to ensure reasonable efficiency of distribution and proper operation of electrical equipment (the maximum permitted voltage drop varies from one country to another)[1]. Voltage drop may be neglected when the impedance of the interconnecting conductors is small relative to the other components of the circuit. For example, an electric space heater may very well have a resistance of ten ohms, and the wires which supply it may have a resistance of 0.2 ohms, about 2% of the total circuit resistance. This means that 2% of the supplied voltage is actually being lost by the wire itself. Excessive voltage drop will result in unsatisfactory operation of electrical equipment, and represents energy wasted in the wiring system. Voltage drop can also cause damage to electrical motors. In electronic design and power transmission, various techniques are used to compensate for the effect of voltage drop on long circuits or where voltage levels must be accurately maintained. The simplest way to reduce voltage drop is to increase the diameter of the cable between the source and the load which lowers the overall resistance. I have a lot of thoughts about this experience - another topic to come.

Any vehicle with an electric fuel pump must have an inertia fuel cut off switch. Now, as far as the 6.oL goes, we all know that these things can run with a dead fuel pump and sometimes pretty good! We had a stock Excursion once that actually ran but did not accelerate at all. I diagnosed a defective inertia switch. If the PCM is now supposed to shut the engine off if it detects a primary fuel circuit that might be a good thing, but I have seen trucks recently that had bad fuel pumps or faulty fuel pump relays that were still running... driven to the dealer in fact and the code for the secondary fuel pump circuit was in the PCM.

Aron, thanks for posting those pictures that are obviously from the same incident. After looking at them it looks like the occupants of the truck survived. Me and the Navi guy got that sick feeling looking at the video because in the video you only see one angle and I swear it looked like the truck cab was totally pancaked.

I thought twice about posting this. The more I think of it the more I feel for the people...

Aaron, before confirming this with a Navistar Field Service Manager today I was confident that the 6.0L PSD does in fact have a strategy that attempts to reduce Turbocharger speed by opening the EGR valve. I am now certain. I would be willing to send them my thoughts but I would first like to read the article or column that was written containing your letter. Was this in print or on-line as well? I cannot find it on-line.

Rich, all good points of interest and we have been honing in on fuel control. We have ruled out any mechanical concerns for the most part. No combustion leaks, no fuel leaks and fuel quality is good. For those of you following this I am now working with a really good guy from Navistar and my FSE keeps in the loop good guy as well. I have had to call on him now three times with some REALLY screwed up vehicles and he now refers to me as his Angel of Death. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif Anyhow, after a lot of looking at PIDS we noticed that FRP does not hold steady, the graph kinda surges up and down. We can hear fuel screeching through the orifice in the filter housing(?) and one of the valves on the pump making a similar noise when idle and performance gets wacky. Power balance is a little wavy but no one cylinder is standing out and this is also true with fuel trims. This tells us that whatever is causing the concern is not any one cylinder or bank. Back to FRP which sometimes dips below FRP Desired. In looking at PIDS he determined that fuel volume was the likely cause. It was decided to look at the wiring, specifically the Volume Control Valve. We made a jumper with salvaged wire terminals and removed the pins from the harness at the PCM and the fuel solenoid jumper harness connector. Now the truck starts quickly and runs perfectly, ran it for at least two hours and two road tests. Then we cut open the harness and removed the questionable circuit and inspected it, load tested it and found nothing wrong with it. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/frown.gif We even checked the fit of the pins in the hard-shells and slid them on the mating pins to see if there was a poor connection. Nope. For shits and giggles we reinstalled it. Truck runs perfectly with the original wiring reinstalled. Now we are all perplexed. There is talk of the slight possibility of RF interference as the wire was positioned in the loom. My idea but I know little. It was not ruled as impossible though. Obviously we cant return it to its original placement so this is just a theory. RF interference is not a known issue at all from what I gather from conversations. We are deep into unknown territory. A new harness is going in regardless at this point. If the truck continues to run perfectly then we have obviously fixed it but have no solid diagnosis or cause other than to say "it was the harness."

It has been a long time since I have had to mess with one of those coolers and I never saw anything funky. This is a photo Bruce posted. Is this similar to what you have? Perhaps Mr. Bruce can re-elaborate on this picture as I don't know the original topic...

Well here it is Dale... Quote: 1237 - 2008 F250-550 6.4L DIESEL RADIATOR REPLACEMENT VENTURI TEE INSTALLATION SOME 2008 F-SUPER DUTY 250-550 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A 6.4L DIESEL ENGINE MAY REQUIRE A RADIATOR REPLACEMENT. AFTER FOLLOWING WORKSHOP MANUAL (WSM), 303-03 AND THE RADIATOR HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS THE CAUSE OF THE COOLANT LEAK AND IS TO BE REPLACED, IT IS NECESSARY TO ALSO INSTALL THE RADIATOR/VENTURI TEE SERVICE KIT 8C3Z-8B379-B. USE THE INSTRUCTION SHEET PROVIDED WITH THE KIT FOR PROPER INSTALLATION OF THE KIT.

I know I have a screen shot or recording showing this in action but if you need to see this for yourself, bring in a 6.0L equipped truck and get it to operating temperature. Hook up IDS and start your session, open data logger. It's time to play. 1- Select these PIDS; EP, EGRDC, EGRVP, MGP, RPM & VGTDC 2- Select the following PIDS and command each as listed: Raise RPM to 1200 Command VGTDC to 85% (You should hear it spool up) Command EGRDC to 0% Note and record EP, MGP and EGRVP. Open the EGR valve by commanding it open to 45% Note and record EP, MGP and EGRVP. What did the data show? How did the turbo sound when the EGR valve opened? You should have heard the turbo and the engine "go quiet." Notice that with RPM and VGTDC at steady state, when the EGR valve opens, EP will drop causing the turbo to slow down resulting in a decrease in MGP. If you could demonstrate this to someone who disputes this...

This is a PCM strategy that I have seen in action and have recordings of... I think. Around 26 PSI of sustained boost or higher, if the PCM cannot reduce boost with the VGT actuator the EGR will be opened to bleed off some of the exhaust and slow down the turbo. I don't think I have seen this documented either but I recall a conversation with the hot-line where this was confirmed but there may also be other things happening as well. Whether this is a part of the PCM strategy or not, it does work. With the problems we have with sticking turbochargers I am surprised this is not better known and documented. ... that is, unless I am totally wrong.

I managed to compress the 4.5L Coffee Table Book into a 154 Mb zip file. I added it to the Coffee Table Book article/page along with a compressed file that includes all 8 parts of the 6.4L book.

Wow! That engine looks very clean and moving the exhaust ports to the other side and directly into the turbo in the engine valley really does eliminate a lot of that God awful piping we currently have to deal with. Imagine if the new Scorpion diesel implements this design... ooooooh! I'm getting chills thinkin about it!!! Wishful thinking. I know. Down boy! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/rotz.gif

Lemme ask this: What did you do before the most recent asinine TSB was issued? Jim, from the years of interacting with you on the Internet I can tell that you know what you are doing, can properly diagnose these engines and are also mindful of not performing un-necessary repairs. You know how to fix trucks, you know how to "fix customers" and now you have to learn to fix the manufacturer. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif You could be torquing the heads while the prior-approval is printing out. The problem is there are going to be some trucks that are so screwed up that you are going to have no choice but to follow the procedure. Maybe. Which probably brings us right back to your question. Okay, I'll stick my neck out. When I get one of these I do as much pre-disassembly diagnostics as I can to get as good of an indication of that I am dealing with. The tear down process provides us with the opportunity to bench test the EGR cooler as well as the oil cooler for a restriction. Remember to gently warm the cooler with a hand held torch because some only leak when hot. More than once I have seen bad coolers pass a bench test because they are cold! Perhaps an article on that is warranted because if you don't do it right you can fool yourself and flunk a good cooler. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif Post repair verification includes another hard road test and another data recording of EOT and ECT PIDS. I have yet to replace all three (head gaskets, oil cooler or EGR cooler) in one repair and not a singe repeat repair.

Ironically that picture came from one of "those people" at the Diesel Stop. Personally I think that anyone who goes that far has issues /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/icon_crazy.gif like maybe the owner needs a reflash. He was nice enough to let me take the photo... yes, I asked.

Steve you are not off base here but this topic confirms to me that there is a large showing of anti-dealer sentiment that continues to grow and many of us are getting tired of it. Yeah, we know that there are the good and bad techs, dealers and independents. Bottom line it's uncalled for. If a "consumer" has a bad experience I don't blame him for feeling the way he does but derogatory comments directed at us in general are as I just stated, uncalled for. For the most part I do not see many of us retaliating in m any of the public forums. On occasion we might play around with a guy or allow ourselves to strike back at personal attacks. What you don't see is us using terms degrading and insulting people... for whatever reason. I try to stay neutral in these things and I will say it is VERY hard to do that and continue to give advice. It is the rest of the people you come across that genuinely appreciate your help that makes me stick around a forum. They don't have to agree with me, or even thank me but at least they know enough to be respectful and not toss insults at people they don't know. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/2cents.gif

Thank you for correcting me... Why both? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/shrug.gif I thought the inductive heating was to replace the post buzz strategy. I suppose both can't hurt.

I wonder what the parameters are for setting code P0A80. Does the battery monitor or test it's capacity or is this something that engineering decided should pop-up at a certain mileage, time or charging cycles?