Jim Warman

Now... I'm not a religious man... but I try to live my life "right". I try to be careful with my donations... obviously Crohns and colitis should get the bulk of my generosity... At the same time, I am ever thankful for my good fortune. I always try to remember to add something to the grocery basket to drop in the food bank bin on the way out of the store.... And I often cut deals for those on fixed incomes or otherwise disadvantaged. Could this be a good opportunity to make a donation?

This drops quite neatly into the "shit happens" bin. I've seen spark plugs do this very same thing on gas engines.... Being the jaded old phuque that I am, I find it surprising that anyone would find it surprising... But that's just me.

In retrospect, I am nearly surprised that it took this long for them to visit the concept (or revisit as the case may be). We've had diesel-electrics for a long, long time.... railway locomotives, large earthmoving equipment (shovels, draglines, bucketwheel excavators). Some of the "new" stuff we see is actually old stuff that the available technology just couldn't support. Today, we have either improved technology and/or greater need. This is an exciting time to be involved in this industry.

Do you have a part number or an engineering number that might help? For the actuator - I mean...

Just a word of caution... lately Ford has been asking for some really goofy shit back... gaskets and seals that you might not expect for them to ask back... that kinda stuff. I know a guy that was thinking of becoming a warranty nazi.....

Furbling around the 'net, I stumbled across a few examples of engines using turbo-compound technology. Basically, these engines have a power recovery turbine or "blowdown" turbine fitted to the exhaust. These turbines recover energy that would normally be lost in the blowdown phase of the exhaust stroke (usually that part of the exhaust stroke before valve overlap) - the technology applies to both gas and diesel engines. Currently, Detroit Diesel and Scania both have engines with blowdown turbines connected to the crankshaft. Caterpillar is researching a combined power recovery turbine/turbocharger unit. The recovered power drives a motor/generator and can be used to power additional traction motors. Other manufacturers are also working on this technology. Part of what makes this so interesting is that turbo compound motors were first developed in the years following WW2 (that's 60 year old technology, boys and girls) and used quite extensively in aircraft. Diesel, gas - radial, inline. Many motors benefitted from the additional power made available with this technology. About 20% of enmgine output can be recovered - in the case of the Pratt & Whitney R-4360 (admittedly, that's 4362 cubic inches - not quite 72 liters), recovered power could be as high as 600 HP. Underhood real estate on modern vehicles is at a premium, even so, as we see advances in automotive applications, there is a very real chance that we may see this sort of technology applied to those vehicles we work on - if not in my lifetime, perhaps in yours. What might we see next? An electric crawler tractor? This gets good around 1:40....

I got our VDR back today... it had been set up using B65. B66 reported that the VDR had no recordings on it even though there were three. Here is the reply I received from TIS... "If the VDR was setup with IDS 65 first then yes this is a known concern. The only way to view the VDR recording is with IDS 65 if this is the case. IDS 67 is coming out soon, so you have a couple of options depending on how important the recordings are for you: 1. If you do not care about the current VDR recordings then all you have to do is setup the VDR using IDS 66, this will delete any recording on the VDR but will allow you to upload new recordings. 2. If these recording are of utmost importance then you can send your VDR system to us, we'll extract the recordings for you." As it turns out, Dwayne was still at B65 and I simply uploaded the VDR to his laptop and copied my data over to the IDS I usually use.

I'm sure that, if this stuff worked that one of the lubricating oil majors (no, not Spamsoil or one of the other small time niche marketers) would be all over it to make their oil "better". I like the "tested by ITEC" blurb... So - ITEC tested it and?????? Moly is the only thing that shows up in an oil analysis, so it says. Meaning the rest of the stuff is already in your motor or not deemed worth testing for. In December of 2008, they posted a couple of videos to You Tube... In one video, some wiener says "ITEC no longer makes the 6.0 for Ford". Excuse me? No Fords with a 6.0? Mike Chan would be happy to hear that (along with about a bajillion other techs). And lastly, why is it that all of these snake oil products invariably offer a money back guarantee? Forgetting to mention that you will spend at least as much as you originally paid to get your refund. Ford no longer uses the 6.0? Muck fe.....

The big misconception is that good fuel mileage = less pollution. Sadly, it is those conditions that offer the best fuel consumption numbers that increase the problematic tailpipe emissions. Increasing combustion chamber temps will (when applied to a modern engine) improve the brake specific fuel consumption numbers. Less fuelk consumed for the same or more work performed. Sadly, increasing combustion temps leads to the formation of oxides of nitrogen... This information is freely available on the internet and is (usually) quite a topic of discussion in training classes. One needs to be careful when assigning meanings to terms like "reliability".

Remove and install new oil in the HPOP reservoir? Cool....

So.. I went looking for a new avatar and came across.... <drum roll please> this article... Have fun with it

Mike... I can't say that I'm getting excited about the Fiesta per se.... Look under the skin... Take a close gander at that PowerShift transmission... What will drift compensation and active nibble control do for customer perception - more important - what headaches might it open up for us? Ford is surely going to convert their whole product line to EPAS (it is proven to improve fuel mileage). I'm not a dinosaur... and the only reason I'm not a dinosaur is because I try to keep an eye on what is coming out of the tap.

In another thread, I'd mentioned that Fiesta Production started on May 11 in Mexico. I was 'driven' (pun intended) to check out this new little piss-cutter and Im beginning to be nearly amazed. It isn't getting the 1.6 EcoBoost.... yet, but I can see it in the cars future. As it stands, the car will have twin independantly variable cam timing. Rated at 120 HP, I imagine they can make the torque curve do back flips with cam tining events. The EcoBoost 1.6 is touted as having up to 180 HP. It will have the PowerShift as an option - this is an automatic trans that isn't an automatic trans... if you're interested, the WSM is up for this car... This is the trans that has two clutches mounted to two concentric input shafts. Some of the other nifty (or maybe not so nifty) stuff. It will have EPAS, something that Ford seems to be heading for. Stability control appears to be standard equipment and now the steering system features "active nibble control" as well as "pull/drift compensation". Basically, the car can compensate for crosswind, road crown, misalignment, tire and balance issues... Wow! The EPAS section in the WSM features interactive diagnostics in place of a symptom chart (remember what I said about "dumbing down" the techs role?). Of course it will include all of the mundane electronic toys we are seeing on several models now... and only a matter of time before they imagine some more new ones.

First it was chrome... if your car didn't have a great big glob of chrome hanging off the front, you had squat... Cars of the late 50s had front bumpers that must have weigh a zillion pounds... Then it was fins... had to have a car with fins... and then compacts - Falcons, Chevy 2s, Valiants... compacts became popular with many young families... and it gave Detroit the chance to stick great big motors in tiny little cars until.... the pony car. Mustang hit the market first in the middle of the 64 model year (at a time where you could depend on not seeing a new car before September). And then Boogie Vans became the rage and then something else (Gad, I forget so easily/quickly any more) and then mini vans and then SUVs and eventuially to what we are seeing now... Cars and trucks come and go in fads... when the monster truck with the rattling, smokey diesel is going to fade out is anybodies guess... The high price tags coupled with the fragile nature of most emissions controls (along with the power being generated by direct injection gasoline engines) may signal the demise of the Super Duty mentality. Granted, the popularity of holiday trailers will extend the life of the Super Duty phenomenon... but camp grounds are getting more and more crowded - not to mention much spendier as their popularity increases. Yeah, we can still go wilderness camping but it's only a matter of time before someone destroys a big patch of mother nature with gas powered toys or a poorly chaperoned campfire - and then watch the restricted zones pop up. Who knows what the "next really big thing" will resemble? No idea... but the Super Duty as a work truck will perservere for many years... as a personal vehicle, it's days are numbered, IMHO. Like hemlines, appliance colours, hairstyles, fondu, sushi, cop shows, cowboy shows, space shows - cars and trucks are fads... styles come and styles go and though some diehards hang on as long as they can....... As far as cars are concerned... the next really big thing might be around the next corner. After-thought. On May 11, Ford began production of the Fiesta at the Cuautitlán plant in Mexico.

AFAIK, the pumps we get are 'new'. I would think that we get the pumps the way they are delivered to the assembly line... that guy gets to push the existing line into the pump.... We don't. Ergo, it is cheaper for Ford to ship the pumps with the manufacturer installed fitting in place and have us remove it for free than it is for them to hire someone to remove it for us... Not that I'm being facetious or anything....

To bad there isn't something a little more compelling than anecdotal "evidence"... This guy isn't a scumbag... he is a criminal... And, by letting him get away with this sort of thing, some of his workmates may be complicit... (read that as 'just as guilty' by being accomplicies). Bad men profit when good men remain silent... and Joe Public will just say "All you mechanics are bunch of thieves, anyway". "scuse me... now I gotta go have a hissy-fit.

Are they reusable when you're done?

Got an idea what sizes you need?

I assume we are talking side bearing shims? No master kit that I am aware of... I collect any and all old ones I can and parts stocks at least one of all P/Ns.

for those with a penis extension sitting in the driveway - wheels to complete the look.

Well. it is trying to snow right now (big, heavy, slobbering flakes that melt as soon as they hit) so I have been driven indoors... Not that putting up soffit was something I really want to do today and I am a touch under the weather (we've been passing some head cold thing around at work). This is something I just stumbled across and haven't yet had chance to do any more than skim over it. Interstingly, on page 27 it states that there is no federal requirement for cetane number nor cetane index. CGSB (Canadian General Standards Board) specifies a minimum cetane number of 40. But here is where it gets murky. Ontario has adopted the CGSB standards... but British Columbia used to adhere to the standard but have rescinded the requirement. Quebec also has a requirement fo a minimum cetane number of 40 but, since they don't really consider themselves part of Canada, they have passed an Order in Council (they will only use Canadian shit when they can profit from it). AFAIK, in all other provinces and territories, without a cetane number requirement, nobody is going to bother testing - and I have yet to see ANY diesel pumps advertising a cetane rating (meaning no oversight from any trade commission). There is some anecdotal info in THIS thread. Reading similar threads around the internet has me seeing oil companies put a spin on their product. Our fuel exceeds CN 40 but is "usually" closer to CN50 kinda spin doctoring. I'm reminded of food packages bearing "MAY CONTAIN" warnings... we aren't sure what's in our stuff.. but we think it's better than we think it is...

This probably isn't what you were after, but it's still a pretty good read. I didn't realize that CN and CI we so different. I'm not sure about other areas, but here in northern Alberta, diesel is, to a point, offered as seasonally adjusted fuel. When I managed an Esso Petroleum bulk fuel station back in the mid 80s, we could order P40 fuel beginning in late fall. The reduction in power was the first thing an operator would notice due to the reduced cetane number of the fuel.. but the fuel wouldn't gel or "wax off" in our cold winter temps. FWIW, I think that P40 was actually in that nebulous "almost kerosene" range. From some of the horror stories seen on the monkey house, I'm almost certain that CN isn't given nearly as much importance as octane ratings when it comes to pump islands. Suggestion... for input for your article, you might, perhaps, contact some of the major suppliers (Exxon, Esso Petroleum Canada, etc) directly?

Mine is old enough that it doesn't have any Frenchinese on it (well, I am from the Republic of Alberta). In addition, in order to perform the twice yearly inspections on ambulances, one must have a certificate from the local health authority. On top of that, you can also qualify for a certificate from Alberta Infrastructure... this will come with one or more of several possible endorsements... these might include Out of Province vehicle inspection, Commercial vehicle inspection (subject to trade qualification restrictions) and written of vehicle inspection. Sadly, Alberta is lacking in any direct anti-tampering legislation... and the CMVSS is a quagmire that mere mortals will never understand (all of my best efforts have left me more confused than educated). What is "acceptable" can become a cloudy issue when we mix "morally acceptable" with "legally acceptable". Alberta has more of these issues than you can shake a stick at.

A bigger danger, in my jaundiced old eye would be an independant shop, bereft of adequate manuals, doing something that would require a system reset of re-initialization... and then not doing it. (Or a dealer tech that didn't check the WSM... same difference). There is far too much "stuff" on late model vehicles that we can't hope to remember or consider when we do even some of the simplest labour ops. A far cry from OCS considerations, let us visit something as simple and mundane as installing a wheel on a vehicle... This would be section 204-04 in the WSM. Just for shits and grins compare 09 F350 (pay close attention to step 2 of the removal instructions) with both 09 Focus and with 09 Fusion... Note the obvious differences... Pay attention to both what IS said.... and what ISN'T said. No way in hell can we remember everything we need to know. You're best defence is learning how to navigate the manuals... and use them and OASIS every chance you get. Sorry for the digression.

I can't stifle myself any more... They chose to drive one of these trucks... for that, they get all the baggage that comes with the truck. It isn't about how many dollars we spend in defence of the environment.... It is about the environmental "footprint" we leave in our wake. To suggest that someone driving a gross polluter should have some mystical "cost cap" after which he can just turn into a pig is.... is..... is... phuque!!! I'm at a loss for a word!!! We have rules, regulations, laws and accepted industry standards and practices. If we don't adhere to these, who will? Imagine going to a hospital and meeting this kind of anarchy.