Jim Warman

One reader has offered the idea that different rims and tires can exacerbate the condition. While I agree in part with the thought process, I would hope that the factory efforts would have a large "margin of error" built in as a "safety factor". In the early 80s, Escorts and similar cars had a very real concern with the mufflers freezing off - in the early 2000s, we saw a resurgence with the Focus. Ford had, as a cost cutting measure, reduced engineering staff through attrition and early retirement. The "new" engineers didn't spec a weep hole in the mufflers. I'm told that some Fiestas lack weep holes in the muffler... The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Unless I have done the labour op before, I check the WSM. New stuff is happening all the time - some of it we get a sneak preview with NMTs and other web based efforts. For an eye opener, read section 204-04 of the 2011 F350 shop manual "WHEELS AND TIRES/REMOVAL AND INSTALLATION". This is only the tip of the iceberg. FWIW, I can look my customer in the eye and state unequivocally that his vehicle was repaired in accordance with recommended factory procedure. CYA just seems important in todays "climate". There is a not so old saw that goes "IF THE SOLUTION APPEARS SIMPLE, IT IS OBVIOUS THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM". That's a bit of an overstatement, but I still think it bears relevance. Back in the '80s, I opined that the tech of the future wasn't going to possess much innate knowledge ( the point gap 0.017" will give about 32 degrees of dwell on a V8 kind of knowledge) about what he was working on... rather he would know where to quickly find the information he needed to fulfill his task. It would be like dropping the fuel tank only to discover an access panel under the back seat.... Granted, one traditionally expects a crankshaft keyway, but we have seen the automobile evolve from what was - to what"is". All of Fords "old technology" motors - the FE, the 335, the Y block, the Cleveland, 351M/400, even the venerable Flathead V8.... These all had headbolts that threaded into the block deck. Modern Ford engines have head bolts threading into the main bearing web area. Food for thought... no matter how simple or mundane a task might appear, the few minutes spent checking OASIS or the WSM might save you hours of anguish. FWIW, I've been doing this shit for over 40 years.... I still haven't seen all the surprises they have for me.

A 2004 E450 handibus used to haul seniors and disabled people around the area. It was a no start hot that I cannot reproduce. I have to do "something" because the thought of 16 victims being stranded isn't acceptable. I will change the "usual suspects" and hope for the best. Incidentally.... against my best advice, the operator of this bus has the auxillary idle control module set for 1860 rpm and will leave the bus run on the remote start. I can only wonder how the turbo feels about "instant shutdown". Two 6.4s that have a 30~40 rpm surge when idled up to about 950. Hotline says this is "normal". VCV surges with the rpm - if I take control of PCV and run it up one notch, vcv stabilizes as does the idle. Fuel pressure increases dramatically. A 2006 "Armadildo".. oops, Amarillo (did you know that amarillo is Spanish for "yellow"). The truck has a lift kit and the (loose) dropped pitman arm has been beating the hell out of the sector shaft for "I don't know how long". The initial road test was nearly enough to alter my laundry schedule. A 2004 Exploder that an apprentice programmed a spare key for. Some minor (not sure what) thing went wrong after the deed and the customer blamed the apprentice. The concern was easily and quickly addressed. A week later it is back with no power windows working, several broken wires in the left A pillar convolute and a 6 to 8 hour estimate for the repair. The customer is adamant that the problem happened after the key enabling - no shit Sherlock. Explain the problem clearly and concisely without apology. You are, essentially, a doctor telling a patient he has cancer. There is no way to be kind, but neither should we go out of our way to be brutal. And that's only the top layer....

What we, as techs, desparately need to remember is that people aren't "stupid". They may lack some skills that others possess - logical reasoning being one, inability to understand mechanical or electronic process - not to mention some of the things that "machine people" have trouble grasping. Sidebar... I don't know about you - I am a "machine people". I understand machines - I can deal with machines much better than I can deal with people. I will never be a diplomat, I will never be a psychologist..... Matt... whoever change the battery on your customers car deserves a hard one upside the ear. It's called customer service.... we should endeavour to return the vehicle in a condition at least similar to when we got it. As for you not being the tech that did the work, get used to being guilty by association. Until we ALL start acting like the professionals we claim we are... the good will be painted with the same brush as the bad. One of the near constant things we see is the TPMS light. And I will state that many techs can't tell the difference between a flashing TPMS light and a TPMS light that is on solid. For a light that is on solid, the customer has "checked" his or her tire pressures as best they know how or as far as their laziness will allow them. No tires look flat, ergo the pressures must be "good". Talk to a few IT guys (better yet, look over the shoulder of some IDS users) and find out about computer "error messages". Few, if any, bother to actually read them, and fewer can figure out how to respond to them. Consumers are being spoon fed... and every time they make something more foolproof, they simply come up with better fools. If a customer has a concern, a couple of minutes spent explaining a condition in laymens terms will earn you an admirer for life. Treating a customer with disdain will have him thinking I will be the same as you. This trade is broken... it is up to us to fix it.

Oh.. wait.... Aaron... is it the assembly line workers that are getting the chop job.... or every worker?

I'm pretty sure that the world knows how I feel about trade onions. I'm a 61 year old grade 8 drop out... and I can assure you that I am not trapped in a dead end situation. Trade unions are a thinly disguised communist endeavour. Your value isn't based on how good you are or how smart you are or talent or any other above average asset... your value is based on how long you've been doing what you do... be it under-achieving, wasting oxygen or just plain pretending you are more than what you are. I see the new owners as "onion busters". Personally, I have no problem with that. Trade onions are fuelling pacific rim sweat shops and we don't want to get back into that thread. At the same time, I see current employees taking exception to the new, downsized compensation package. It ain't gonna be pretty but it might reveal how some of these people think. What would I do? I've seen non-onion workers denied a job because they were non-onion and preferred to remain such. "Pay us money and you can work". Phuque yoo I don't know what I would do in a situation such as that because I wouldn't allow myself to be trapped in that situation. These people have allowed themselves to be members of the proletariat.... "descamisados" if you will.... and must now pay the piper. This really sucks for you if your job moves south.... "I am the master of my fate: I am the captain of my soul" William Ernest Hensley

Caution!!! Memory thing happening. Until now, our winter has been curious... shirtsleeve weather (for those of us conditioned to the climate). Little snow to speak of... the farmers will have something to whimper about. The temps that hovered around 0C have now plunged to a more normal -30C and may be, in some areas, colder yet. And now we are having a rash of P208E DTCs in memory. The code suggests that the DEF injector is stuck closed. I think it is important to pay attention to how the PCM infers a stuck closed injector. I imagine that the eventual fix will be software related.

I can only suggest swapping injector positions as a diagnostic step... OTOH, with a printout indicating tepidline is basically washing their hands of the concern, you should be able to squelch any future claims of "ineffective repair".

Wow! I sure hope grumpyjim doesn't see this thread. As a sidebar... he doesn't have a problem with "toys" - Lord knows he is involved with a whole fleet of toys. These toys include a 2006 Viper with less than 3000 kms - a very "dirty" 440RB that has been run less than 4 hours per year for several years. But he does have a problem with daily drivers that should be emissions compliant. My grandson has just celebrated his second Xmas and his first birthday. We are only borrowing this planet from him and the people that share his generation. As professional automotive repair technicians, we are duty bound to avoid cavalier attitudes to emissions regulations. The public is relying on us to be honest and truthful in our actions. If we are to look at the requirements and regulations and then contravene those same conditions, we are telling the public that we are unreliable, unbelievable and without remorse. Little wonder that people view us as thieves and charlatans. If we aren't about to act in a responsible manner, how can we expect others to act accordingly... and this includes politicians, the military emergency services, media.... I do apologize for preaching... but if this trade is ever going to be taken seriously, we desparately need to act like we should be taken seriously.

The installation pictured has a harmonic under certain load/rpm conditions. There is an audible "buzz" in the right front. The steering wheel vibrates, the floor vibrates... phuque - the TRUCK vibrates. And, yes, the intake duct is pushing hard on the PCM connector. Now... you can be relatively sure that it will be the truck that is called a POS and NOT the V-MAC pieces. In our case, I can only return the truck to stock condition (what it might take to "turn back the clock" is up for conjecture) only to find out that the problem lies in an ill fitting, poorly considered accessory that would be better replaced by a portable, gas powered air compressor

Wow... in retrospect, I'm not really sure where that diatribe welled up from... and I sincerely apologize if I managed to offend anyone... But the fact remains that we (me included) routinely take advantage of people in nations that aren't as developed as ours. It is so far removed from us that is easy for us to either forget that it's there or pretend that it's not. Automakers are investing heavily in China - a country where civil rights are about non-existant - a country nearly famous for counterfeiting brand name goods (not to mention VCMs). The ongoing push towards a global economy will, hopefully, someday remedy this disparaty and allow all of us to work together for the common good. Have a safe and happy holiday....

Who amongst us is in favour of slave labour? How about paying poverty level wages for long hours just so you can avoid starving to death? How about misusing/abusing child labour? "I got this part for next to nothing!". It may or may not be a "counterfeit" part (which is a whole 'nother subject). A cheap part may have some dubious parentage.... could it be a stolen part being "fenced"? Could it be a substandard part made in a Pacific Rim or other third world labour camp? Have we forgotten the Kathie Gifford scandal? Can we turn a blind eye if we are profitting from the misery of others? "I got this cheap and some little slant eyed bastuhd in the pacific rim should be happy he has a bowl of rice". We are all created equal... apparently some of us are a little more equal than others.

Doesn't it instill absolute confidence to see Microsoft logos festooned about new Ford products?

OK... I stopped by and passed a comment - I think I showed a remarkable amount of restraint. The "fie on Ford" part... "death wobble" has been around since the move to coil spring front ends on the 4X4s. They've had us fucking around with bandaids since.... 07-10-10 should be required reading. I guess nearly 7 years isn't quite enough time to fix this concern on the production line (and I'm not going to mention these new fangled CVH ESOF hubs).

Like some others, I have found that trucks that come with the feature enabled (I believe these would be California emissions trucks) cannot be turned off while others (what I would consider Federal emissions trucks) can fly either way - though here in the GWN we are busy connecting SEIC rather than programming things to shut off.

Have you tried pressing the blue tick?

Well, we had one in the other day..... Kenny got this pic of a 6.7 sporting a V-Mac compressor. The air cleaner is turned 90 degrees and the lid is "altered". The washer bottle is behind the front bumper. The right side battery is moved to below the drivers door... It was in to reprogram tire size and because the washer hose was pinched during the relocation process. I'm sure there are many more "interesting" alterations that we have yet to notice.

The bestestest ones aren't hard to find.....

Something I see far too often is somebody trying to run a crankcase pressure test on a motor with an obvious misfire. As long as that cylinder(s) aren't contributing (sorry for the mixed metaphor), the CCP might be more than acceptable. Obviously, a misfire should be addressed to some degree of certainty ( a mechanical compression test and/or a cylinder leak test can offer some food for thought ) before we condemn the engine. At the same time, a cylinder that doesn't contribute to engine power/smoothness is likely a cylinder that isn't (but probably would) contribute to excess crankcase pressure if it only could.. DUH!! I think we are on the same page and I hope I my post didn't infer that a crankcase pressure test would, by itself, offer a solution. This test is simply one test of many that will help a tech deduce the internal condition of a motor BY TAKING THE SUM TOTAL OF THE RESULTS into consideration. Like doctors, we should add the results of test A to the results of test B to the results of test C ad infinitum to achieve a logical determination of our next step. I wouldn't add an asterisk to the CCP test.... but I would take the test results in context with other observations. The minute you add that asterisk, you are tempting someone to overlook a simple, quick, unintrusive test that has the possiblity of shedding some light on the concern. Once you have even as much as removed a valve cover, the test becomes harder to perform. Something else to consider.... while the crankcase pressure spec has been a moving target in the case of the 7.3 (in all honesty, I have considered using the 6.0 orofice and the 6.0 spec in a comparison trial but haven't had the time or opportunity), we are left with the thought that "what makes 6" acceptable and 7" unacceptable"..... indeed, when we are given any spec we need to consider why one particular number can = less is good/more is bad. And we need to take that into context regarding what we are working on. In an age when engine electronics can readily identify a non-contributing cylinder, the compression gauge has become more a means of verifying relative compression results rather than a first step diagnostic aid (and isn't that what most of our test procedures are?). If my compression is even, where do I go next? I've already done a crankcase pressure test because it is quick, easy and unintrusive and the results of it AND the compression test will go hand in hand.

Ermmmm, I can remember back when a person who is significant in my life was having "hot flAshes"... that was....... interesting.

I wouldn't hang my hat on "should have a skip to it" when determining compression characteristics. Compression that is low across the board could leave you with a smooth running motor. Additionally, watching for blowby at the oil filler is going to be inconclusive, IMHO. A properly done crankcase pressure test (with the correct size orofice) is going to give a better indication of ring seal - dont forget to block off the crankcase vent.

I removed and reloaded 76 and all is well. I can press on and upgrade the rest of them now.

I have one IDS up to 76 and it is registered.... when I try to update to 76.02A, it tells me that 76.02A must be installed over IDS 76. TIS hotline was down this AM

Any body else getting a a funky message when trying to install 76.02A?

Several different brands of rebuilt alternators contain a warning "THIS IS NOT A BATTERY CHARGER" and some of these manufacturers will not honour their warranty if they suspect that a unit has been installed and allowed to charge a dead battery.