DamageINC

Ok guys, apparently all of the U-haul vehicles are "assembled" by the same team, so the aftermarket rear wiring "should" be similar across the board for the most part. I have a '99 F-350 with a goofy exterior lamkp issue. So.. when you use the RIGHT turn signals, both fron and rear lamps operate normally, except that they flash fast, like there's a burned out bulb. When you use the LEFT turn signal, the front and rear blink normally, and at normal speed. When you turn the headlamp switch on and power up the parking lamp circuit, the right turn signal still acts the same, and the left turn signal sticks "on" when used. It doesn't blink, the left turn signal lights just stay on. I found that pin 4 on the BOO switch is getting 12V with the brake OFF and with the headlamp switch powering up the parking lamp circuit. As a result, when the headlamps are on, the rear lights are always illuminated as if you were on the brake pedal (except if you use the right side trn signal, and then it just flashes fast). Somewhere, the parking lamp circuit is feeding power to the brake light/turn signal circuit, but because this thing is a MESS of aftermarket wires, I'm killing myself trying to trace circuits with no diagram. Also, I am trying to find C210 but can't seem to locate that fucker for the life of me, haha, there's no picture in the FMC diagrams for it's location and just a brief description of where it's at - and I don't see it in that area at all. I have more info but at this time I just want to know if anyone has seen anything like this before I start getting buried in diagram-free diagnosis, lol. Dave

I worked on a 6.0 once with **3** of those bolts missing on the right side cylinder head. Another shop had done head gaskets 40k miles previous to my repairs and there were still no leaks to be seen, hahaha. Dave

You know, the funny thing abou thow the Media jumps on something and feeds on it like vultures.. now Toyota is getting shit on for recalling a half million hybrid vehicles for a brake concern. Doesn't the media know that Ford released the EXACT SAME RECALL 2 weeks ago for their Fusion/Milan hybrid vehicles? WE all know that Ford sold over 300 patents to Toyota YEARS ago for hybrid technology and they have been working in cojnuntcion with each other with regards to hybrid technology. And even 3 or so years ago, Ford bought 90-something patents from Toyota for Hybrid vehicle design as well. But, seeing as bashing Toyota is now the "cool thing to do" they will unfortunately be in the same boat that Ford was in 4 years ago. Toyota builds, and has built, good cars. Just like Ford. It's absurd to me that 2 companies can have the same problem and only 1 gets shit on for it. And the fix is just a simple reprogram, if I remember correctly. How about the ENORMOUS Speed Control Deactivation Switch recall Ford has been screwing with for the last 5 years? Did you all know that Toyota has been using the same switch in their vehicles too? Guess what - no recall from them. But Ford took a beating on that one thanks to the media. Fact is, it doesn't matter what the truth is anymore. People who get paid to deliver "the news" will continue to jabber on about whatever the teleprompter tells them to, and the rest of the public will just swallow the information as The Grail and we can only hope that we don't eventually PERSONALL become the subject of something that the media can make look awful. Dave

It sounds to me like you have a dealership that is somehow getting paid all the labor ops they should be getting paid for, however. I just paid a visit to my old shop, where there is now only 1 diesel tech since I no longer work there. He is very bright, fast, accurate, a hard worker, rarely ever has comebacks, and BUSY all day long. And he struggles to hit 40 hours every week. He writes up good, legt stories, claims labor ops, DOES NOT lie or bullshit, and by the time he's paid, there are hours missing from each and every diesel RO he finishes. The fight to keep our the 126 numbers pretty has absolutely killed the diesel teams in our area. There is so much that I miss about my old dealership but the bullshit that he's dealing with is definitely NOT one of them. They 'bypass' diag, almost entirely, unless it's something really fucked up. He just got paid 20.xx hours for a BRANCH TUBE on a shuttle E-van with auxilary AC lines and heater lines and all sorts of crap. Retarded.

Of course, that logic really only applies to those who still believe that 9/11 was carried out solely by "Al-Qaida Terrorists"... *looks around for flying tomatos* Start thread-hijack flame war in 3....2....1... hahaha Dave

I do the same thing now! Haha.. Dave

Yeah, it was just the pump. I just wanted to be absolutely 100% positive before doing it because this fleet is absolutely unforgiving if there's any misdiagnosis, so being 99% sure still doesn't make me feel better with them, haha. But the difference was instant, I put the new pump in and FRP jumped to 65psi IMMEDIATELY at startup and FP duty cycle (demand) dropped to about 18% at idle, so far so good. They understand that there's still a potential for further contamination without tank replacement but personally I don't believe there will be an issue. Thanks to everyone for the input though! Dave

Yeah, I found a kit here that might let me tap into the feed line and "tee" my gauge into a reading. Truth be told, it just seems like a weak pump, which was my initial hunch 9 seconds into this job, lol. FRP drops down to 28 psi under WOT and around 40-something while cruising, spec is 65 psi. It can generate pressure KOEO but it just seems to lack volume. I'm trying to find duty cycle specs/references just to see if the pump is being commanded more heavily than "normal" to compensate for the lack of pressure. Even at idle, it hovers around 50psi and it's looking for 65, the duty cycle is at 49%. Dave

What's up fellas? I have an 06 E-450 U-haul truck here, with a P0191 in memory and CEL on. It's the "fuel Rail Pressure Sensor" performance code... now I'm well aware of the SSM that mentions to inspect the tank and pump for signs of metal contamination in aft-axle fuel tanks, and that pump and tank replacement may be necessary. In this case, I removed the pump and inspected it thoroughly. There was a magnet in the tank, much like a trans pan magnet, and it is pretty hairy looking, lots of metal shavings and some larger debris (almost looks like welding flash) bits stuck to the magnet. But the tank itself looks spotless, no signs of any severe rust or metal contamination aside from the stuff on the magnet. The desired FRP pressure pid at idle shows 65psi, the actual PID never goes over 50-51psi, which leads me to believe the pump is starting to crap out. There are no driveability issues at this time aside from the CEL being on. I have checked the fuel filter and found no restriction issues at all there.. I'd like to stick a manual gauge on this thing, but I'd have to "make it work" as these vehicles don't have any provisions for a mechanical fuel pressure gauge to be installed. Also, I'm not sure that I'd even have a good reference point because, as far as I know, the FRPS is referenced to manifold vacuum and not atmospheric pressure, and so I don't know how heavily that will affect the mechanical gauge reading VS the PID's pressure reading. We don't have a fuel injector cleaning kit here and so I can't find another way to manually pressurize the fuel rail and monitor PID data to isolate a bad sensor... I've never seen FPRS failure do this before, usually the pid just skyrockets when the sensor fails and the car runs like complete garbage, if at all, and I'm really leaning toward the pump at this point. But I don't want to be wrong here, it's a valuable account to our shop and they don't really give "2nd chances" so I need to be sure that the part I quote will fix this. Any opinions or advice would be much appreciated! Dave

Yeah I thought it had an auxiliary pump and reservoir?? That would make sense, at least, every air-to-water intercooler I've ever seen before had it's own standalone cooling system. They are much more effective than air-to-air intercoolers and are physically smaller than a good air-to-air unit as well. They're also more expensive and a little more complicated to plumb which is why OE manufacturers tend to stray from the design. The REALLY cool ones are found in modern Super Street Outlaw and Drag-Radial class drag cars.. these guys usually run twin turbo small blocks (we're talking like 88mm + size turbos too) making over 2,500hp and they have a small refridgerator sized intercooler taking up the space where the passenger seat used to be. Ridiculous. Dave

You know, I've never set the crank dowel to 6:00... I always make a mental note as I'm starting the job that I "should probably do it" but I always forget to because it's never bitten me in the ass before. Not that I wait until things go wrong for me to decide they're bad.. I just can't see how this is "bad" I guess. I really don't know HOW putting the crank in a different orientaion prior to cylinder head installation is going to make a difference anyway.. the engine's still in time, right? It's not an overhead cam engine where the cam can be out of time and you can smash valves by tossing the head on without making sure there's no room for piston-to-valve clearance. I'm an aboslute nazi about making sure the keyway is at 12:00 whenever I do 4.6 / 5.4 / 6.8 engines because I know the obvious potential for damage. But with the 6.0, it's a pushrod engine, I can't see the damage potential there. Maybe if people gun down the rocker arm plates without making sure the pushrods are seated properly or something, it could bend a pushrod, but I've always tightened everything under the valve covers slowly and evenly by hand and never run into an issue before.. maybe I'm just lucky so far? Dave

HAha yeah I know a few dudes who've made that mistake before! Dave

Yeah, I am extremely finicky about certain parts being installed back where they came from, but after the million 6.0's I've had apart, I've been swapping valve bridges and pushrods like crazy and have never had any problems whatsoever. Not uber-professional sounding but I can't find a reason to call me a bad tech as a result, haha.. Dave

Ouch. I remember the first time I ever rebuilt a mod motor, I was doing head gaskets on an older Expedition. Literally getting ready to fill the fluids and start it up when I found the crank trigger wheel on the bottom of my toolcart. Dave

I had a 99 no-start with the same problem once also, shorted fuel heater taking out the fuse. I still haven't seen another one since then and that was probably 3 years ago. Dave

I had an econoline Ambulance that SEVERELY overheated (coolant temp with my infrared gun was close to 400 degrees F after 20 minutes of cooling down) but the standpipe was ok in the filter housing still.. overheat cause was because of a bad fan clutch. However the vehicle did need heads and head gaskets (and it ended up getting a long-block due to metal transfer on the cylinder walls) as a result of insane warping and it would pressurize the cooling system any time it was running. Simple blips of the throttle wold push cooling system pressures well into the 20s and the poor cap sounded like someone pulling the valve core out of a truck tire. Dave

No, the VMV feed line out of the valve was all crispy and completely deteriorated off the nipple behind the valve cover on the passenger side. Never seen that one go bad before! Usually it is the line you're talking about.. Dave

Nevermind. Found the hugest vacuum leak in history and somehow it was inexplicably inaudible, NOR did the 2 cans of brake cleaner I fired on the engine get anywhere near the leak, apparently. Love it! Thanks anyway guys Dave

Ok fellas, I have a good one here for ya. Got a solid hour into it now and am running out of ideas.. ..96 Taurus/Sable, 3.0 Duratec. Comes in running rough, only code is P0174 (bank 2 lean). Feels almost EXACTLY like the EGR is stuck open a little.. Low RPM/idle is when the concern is around, anything over 1,000 rpm and it runs mint. Looking at the PID data, my LT fuel trims for BOTH banks are pegged at +33, and my shorts are at +25 so it's adding fuel like crazy and still not happy. I don't hear any obvious vacuum leaks and the first thing I do is eliminate the MAF. Boom - idle jumps up and runs smooth for a good 5 minutes with no MAF. A few restarts with no MAF and it seems fine. Order up a new MAF, clear the KAM and install it - same issue as before. Root through my toolbox, find ANOTHER known good MAF and stick it on there. Same problem. Hmm.. Ok, well, my upstream O2 data shows both sensors at a VERY low 25-30 mv. However, when you snap the throttle and bring up the RPM's, the O2's come alive and read normal values. And with the MAF unplugged, they will read anywhere from 200-900mv cycling back and forth like normal. Here's the funny thing - even though the fuel trims show that it's DEAD LEAN and adding fuel like crazy, it runs better when I add even MORE fuel by taking the fuel pressure regulator line off and spraying brake cleaner into the intake through the regulator's vacuum line. O2's light up and read rich almost instantly. I block off the EGR by placing a piece of cardboard between the valve and intake. Problem still there. DPFE voltage (1st thing I checked) is at .81 KOEO and KOER, and it DOES respond to EGR flow. Fuel pressure is about 36-37psi running and the fuel looks like it's good, clean gasoline. TPS voltage is at .9 and reading C/T when idling. This car DID, however, come in with some gnarly noises in the timing cover and they went away, magically, after I added 4 quarts of oil to it. I fear that I may have a base engine timing issue, almost, but my gut tells me that the driveability concern and lack of oil are not related. I hope I'm right, lol... ..Anyone got any thoughts? Dave

Pssshhh, nawwww.. NOthing a little extra octane and careful tuning (wiht a less aggressive timing curve) can't help with! My buddy has a 348 LS1 (stock block 346 bored .020) with 13:1 compression running 10 psi in his Camaro and he's got no issues whatsoever. Tuning is EVERYTHING when boost makes it's way into the equation (The camaro goes 8.60's by the way) Dave

That's what I'jm talkin about! Now throw some boost at it Dave

Lol, really though that's a pretty true statement. Atmospheric pressure is roughly 14.7psi, and engines are really nothing more than complicated air pumps. The more air you can move through the engine, the more power it will make in the end. a 250 CID engine running 14.7psi of BOOST will, in theory make just as much power as a 500 CID engine with identical (but twice as large) architecture - assuming impossible conditions like absolutely equal friction losses and zero parasitic losses from driving the blower/turbo, air temperature increases, equally effecient cylinder head design, so on, yadda yadda.. ...sometimes you actually make MORE than twice the power at 14.7psi if things like intake design and total engine airflow actually are more conducive to pressurized environments, which does happen a lot on more modern multiple valve head designs. Some engines nowadays actually achieve OVER 100% load/volumetric effeciency in complete naturally aspirated form by literally drawing in more air than the cylinders naturally will hold! Dave

Makes ya feel all warm & fuzzy, hehe. Truth be told though, that addage is getting harder and harder to live by anymore. I hate to say it but I'v ebuilt my fair share of quick 4-bangers, the last one was an '06 Mitsu EVO8 that we built a 2.4 "stroker" (more like a hybrid) and that thing put down 617hp to all 4 wheels. The car will run consistent mid 10's all while cranking the AC too. Still not my cup o' tea, but hey.. 10 second street cars are becoming ridiculously common now. Considering that the "glory days" of muscle car era still left most big-inch cars on the road in the 12s, that's really saying something. Hell, I built a JOKE of a 1.9 Escort Station Wagon station wagon that would hold it's own against most of the "big in badasses" from the 60's and early 70's, and it only cost about a grand to do in the end. I personally know of a few 281 cubic inch Fords out here that would smash either of the cars posted in this thread, it really is getting out of hand to a degree. There may be no replacement for displacement, but boost is very quickly becoming the great equalizer and it's only gonna get more interesting Can't tell you how many old school hot rodders are getting annihilated by modern street cars these days, a simple trip to the drag strip is a pretty frightening experience for those who haven't been open minded about what can be done with these smaller engined rides. Dave Dave

Hahaha, well he's not the only contender for a Darwin Award - I know I wouldn't be crawling around under that thing with a camera, lol!! (I kid, I kid) I remember an 01 Expedition one time, customer complained of noise in the front end. Loosest ball joints in history. Raised the truck up and, no joke, the wheels sag and the left front ball joint just pops right out of the socket and the whole knuckle swings out and away from the control arm. A *light* tug on the other wheel seperated the joint on that side too. The great thing is that the guy DIDN'T WANT TO FIX IT. We had to have guys hold the wheels in place so we could lower the truck down & guide the ball-studs back into the sockets as the weight came onto the suspension. He did get it towed out of there (thank God) but it was still retarded. Dave

For what it's worth, I believe you can use the older-style tensioners on these engines and they work just fine. It's common practice on the performance engine builds, at least I know for the built 4-valve engines that recieved the new-style tensioners back in '03 from the factory. Any time someone blows up their Terminator engine, the rebuilds usually have old-style tensioners on them. I am not 100% sure they'll work on the 3-valve engines but the short blocks are almost totally identical so I'd imagine it'd transfer over just fine. Dave