Keith Browning

You know I was exaggerating right? But still, I have no patience to pump down a hub and since I started using the pump and a jumper hose I rather prefer doing it that way.

Of those of you who have set up their wireless VCM, who has used BOTH ad-hoc and infrastructure connections and which WORKS better as far as the basic use of the tool? Forget about connecting to the Internet, just using the tool and having a solid/reliable connection.

Are you nuts? You will pump for an hour trying to pull a decent vacuum. Then again, some guys are used to that. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/whistle.gif Get a vacuum tee, some bulk vacuum line, then you can tee in a gauge and use the electric vacuum pump on the truck for a source. You can test both sides from the connector at the pulse vacuum solenoid or go directly to each steering knuckle. Clip on a small Vice-Grip and check for leak-down. Do the same with the hub tester too. From there, the really committed tech can plug in the smoke machine... remember to turn the steering lock to lock when testing for a vacuum leak. Those seals can play games with you!

Cool truck. I am sure it is a one of a kind. Did you see the new Lonestar? WOW! What a freakin wicked looking truck!

I noticed you didn't mention performing a Quality Care Inspection. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Does reprogramming a PCM/ECM clear learned values the PCM/ECM has stored for adaptive systems such as idle, fuel and transmission like resetting KAM does?

Ohhh goodie! We love pictures!!!!

Tony that should tell you that we are not all moving in the same direction. I am sure much of this comes from managers watching the numbers and reports and some from the Ford Reps. Ghee, do ya think this is one of the reasons Ford is a third rate auto manufacturer? This truly upsets me because it sends out mixed signals.

I would not doubt that one bit! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/ford.gif = /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/icon_crazy.gif

It's called a fuel pump. There is no stand pipe in the fuel conditioning module. The fuel filter inserts over the fuel pump, which is sealed at the base with an o-ring and the tip has a spring loaded valve and an o-ring which is that I think is the o-ring your customer is asking for. I have heard of this coming apart. I suspect the o-ring stuck in the filter and pulled out with it. If it cant be put back together the only way to remedy this is probably a new fuel pump. (not the assembly, just the pump) The red o-ring is the one at the valve end, the green one seals the filter opening.

Since when is it Ford Motor Company's business what your dealer does to serve your customers? I have never heard of Ford telling us we couldn't address issues we find with vehicles. Don't confuse this with over-repairing or completing unnecessary repairs. Case and point: My dealership is using FORDs Quality Care Report Cards which provides a complete vehicle inspection. Any concerns that come up must be addressed if covered by warranty - especially safety issues. If the needed repairs are customer pay, so what? If you find a ball joint falling out of a truck with 25K on the odometer (like that never happens before 3/36) and you neglect to mention or address it wouldn't that be negligence? Take care of your customers. Your CSI will improve and you dont have to break any warranty policies to do it.

Click Here!

As I understand it ammonia injection is going to be on our 2010 model trucks and the system has already been tested. The main problem is keeping the solution from freezing and I am sure "they" will figure out something by the time it included in production models.

I have been told by two Hot Line engineers that these engines are making oil during normal operation. It is not unusual to see an extra 2 or 3 quarts of oil during a normal oil change interval. I am currently working with my FSE on an unrelated issue and he stated that they make oil too but wasn't sure about how much was "normal." We believe it can be attributed to the regeneration process. I have gotten into the habit of checking oil levels on 6.4's before servicing. Most of them are above the indicator but not all.

Mike I have heard of the Holman name but that is about it. I don't even know where Turnersville is. But this is another shining example of the Internet allowing complete idiots speak out. What I mean is that there are way too many facts about the car itself for anyone involved to be making any kind of accusation or denial.

Interesting, I suppose these are not truck or diesel guys? We got off to a slow start with this recall but now we are running them through with some regularity now. This has been interesting to watch as it is bringing some old customers back to our dealership with an added service or repair order. What's more is that they all get a QCRC (yes, he's going there again) and we have had some good up-sell on a few. Yes, there have been a few there for "just the recall please" and a hand full declining any up-sell work but we have managed to stay busy in part due to this recall. A few that were in just for the recall we don't even bother with putting them on a lift. For crying out loud it's not the end of the World! You grab your part while in the parts department for something else and get on a creeper and get it done while oil is draining out of something else... or waiting for an approval... Whining? Really?

Figured out what that switch is. Its a self test switch for the Bendix ABS system on trucks with air brakes. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/blush.gif It makes sense that if they aren't going to USE the bypass switch they aren't going to put one in. Apparently most of the larger truck manufacturers see a need for a bypass as you probably don't want these things lighting off in terminals, loading docks and places of the like. Ford and GMC apparently have a different opinion.

As we can see by the pics the HFCM has been changed a lot! I have only drained the bowls on a couple but I did not snoop much. Good pics Bruce!

To reduce intake manifold pressure in order to increase EGR flow is how I came to understand it but the 6.4L literature states that the throttle body is used to assist with the exhaust aftertreatment system.

I have had two in the past that had driveability issues due to poor workmanship related to the installation of sensor harness pigtails. One ICP and one EBP - both were due to the fact that the tech performing the recall did not adequately tape the harness or install convolute over the wires. If you suspect an intermittent VREF short try making a recording and look for the playback to "jump" or stop momentarily during auto play. This is the tell-tale sign that there is a VREF short.

I have heard of this from a Hot Line engineer and I believe Cetane mentioned it in passing during our last chat session. Haven't heard one myself.

Sam, I realize that this is a 2008 truck that you are working on but the basic concern is the same as prior Super Duty trucks. We have seen a lot of that cheesy build up in the water collection chambers which reduces the capacity of water it can hold. But removing the manifold and cleaning any contamination out is only a part of the repair. Inspect the WIF sensor for corrosion and sediment that could cause the light to stay on. The WIF sensor is serviceable on 6.0L level HFCM assemblies and I am thinking it might be for a 2008 as well. Please access and review TSB 06-22-12 for details on the procedures. The TSB wont cover a 2008 model truck and the part may not be applicable for a 2008 but it will give the general idea. Warranty will not cover a new manifold under a warranty if the sensor is avaialble... I imagine the same is true for a 2008 but if the sensor is not available then I guess you will need to replace the manifold.

Well, I suppose it wont change any time soon for sure. The best we can do is educate ourselves as best we can and make better diagnosis' and decisions.

You can site examples of failures and that is fine. I have replaced 15 or so FICM's and NONE were modded trucks. Sure, we can debate our theories, site our examples but you know what, neither you or I have any clue whether a tuner or any other device caused any of these failures. Not one shred of documentable proof because and we have no backing from Ford that is either definitive or consistent. Lets cross THAT hurtle first, shall we? Quote: I think the biggest issue is... Did the tuner cause the truck to fail faster and harder? When Ford Motor Company can do more than publish a general warranty statement like the one I quoted above we will have a leg to stand on... and maybe a clue as to what affect these devices actually have on these engines and what specific damage they are KNOWN to cause. Armed with that information then and ONLY then can we make any kind of a legitimate call beyond obvious or physically relative damage. Quote: Remember...Don't shoot the messenger Tony, I am not and I hope that you or anyone else don't think that I am. I respect you guys but I sometimes believe that we (techs in general) have this notion that we are smarter or more knowledgeable then the rest of the parties involved. To be honest I really want to know what research HAS been done to document aftermarket device related failures if any! I guess what really frosts my ass is the smugness of certain owners and retailers that claim these products are perfectly safe and that they are using these vehicles within the limits of how they were designed, marketed and intended to be used. They assume absolutely NO responsibility or liability and project it onto Ford, dealerships and us, the technicians. So when I hear about or read that some of us act in similar fashion it somewhat blurs the line between "us" and "them". Am I wrong? Am I just being an asshole about this? /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/scratchhead.gif