Cetane

Also, there are some good close ups of some of the engine components at http://www.insidesuperduty.com

I wouldnt be too suprised if they were changing the bowl again it has been done a bunch of times before. That being said it is a lot of work to recalibrate everything when you do that. With a month to go I hope thats not true. I havent heard we are having trouble with the '07 emission standard, so I would think if that is true it only applies to internationals truck division. As for the Cummins and D-Max, I dont believe that at all. From what I understand meeting the '07 standards was the reason the Cummins was punched out to 6.7 and the D-Max has been extensively redone. EDIT: I just read the press release on the '08 GM offerings on cheersandgears.com. Here is the D-Max paragraph verbatim. "A cleaner, more powerful Duramax 6.6L turbo-diesel engine is available. It continues to lead the segment in power and torque, with power ratings increased to 365 horsepower (272 kW) and 660 lb.-ft. of torque (895 Nm). Upgrades to the engine and a new diesel particulate filter system help provide a 90-percent reduction in particulate matter and a 50-percent reduction in NOx (compared with current standards), meeting a new federal government mandate. All diesel manufacturers are required to meet the new emissions standard, starting in calendar year 2007."

For those of you who havent already seen it, here is the first uncovered picture of an '08 that I have seen on the net. By the way it is a F450. http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/531049-08-super-duty.html

I didnt mean it like that at all. They may only intend on taking 3 or 4 of them and are just going to pick the best ones from the lot. Not all of the trucks are diesel and I dont think any of them are optioned same so I think they will take them all but you never know.

There are seven trucks being built for the fair. Hopefully all seven will make the trip. I am curious to hear what "y'all" think. In the past have spectators been allowed to get close or is it similar to an auto show where they are on a rotating turntable?

Dont bother with the ultrasonic. We have one and after 4 hours there was no change. There was no change after the parts washer or hot tank.The exterior sure looked nice though. The bulk of the deposits are in the "mouth" so maybe just a good scraping will be good enough. I had heard people sealing off the ports and filling the intake with a chemical like simple green&water and a couple hundred BB's. Letting it soak in with an occasional shaking to loosen up the deposits. I wasnt sure if that or something similar was working for you guys. Thanks

Does any one have any tips or tricks to cleaning out the carbon from the intake manifold. I have used a wire brush to remove as much as possible but there is still lots remaining. Acetone works wonders but it would take tons of it to clean this manifold. Thanks!

Basically the DPF is just a filter/trap that holds particulates. When the PCM detects the filter is plugged, it starts the regen process(this can be accomplished a couple different ways). Assuming the regen process does a good job there is another issue - ash. Ash doesnt burn away like the soot does so it eventually plugs up the DPF requiring a more through cleaning. This is why you are hearing the rumors of possible oven purchases. I dont know if the rumor is true or not. That would probably be a good question for your FSE/zone reps.

I have to agree with Diesel Jay as long as the engine has been running fairly well before the teardown. I have disassembled a lot of diesels lately, from 6 cylinders through the newest ITEC and they all had some sort of "star" pattern on the piston. Most of these had gone through pretty substantial testing in either chassis or dyno development. I have to say most werent production fueling or timing but none of them were being torn down because of piston failure. That being said there is a "science" to reading the pattern kind of like reading a spark plug. I dont think you could immediately say a star pattern indicates a tuner but if you were experienced enough you may be able to tell the difference between normal fueling/timing and a engine that has been subjected to modified values.

We have a winner on pickuptruck.com!!!!!!!!

I wonder how these photos get out to the public?? That was an old concept, its somewhat close to the end result though. I have a completely unmasked front 3/4 view that I use as wallpaper at work. It would be nice to show it but I like having a job.

I cant speak about the 6.0's differences, it was before my time. I could repeat things I have heard but I havent worked on enough of both varieties to be able to say for sure. I am not sure why this "delay" is making such big news lately. Everyone knew this was going to be a January intro for quite some time now. Some base engine things have changed in the past couple months but I think the majority of the problems is with the emissions systems not the engine itself. I dont know of any base engine failures in quite some time. That being said meeting emissions is still proving difficult and its only getting harder.

Job 1 for the '08s is the first week in January although KTP has been building prototypes for a while now. Hopefully service engineering comes up with a good program for you guys, its going to be fun!

Once you get a look under the hood I think everyone will be happy. I dont know how the service guys worked out the cab removal process for the production version but the most of the prototypes came off in a very similar way to the pre '08's.

The aftermarket will probably have fun with it....

I have a some questions. Is there something like a desired setpoint for both MAP, and EGBP? I am curious how it was following the requested values. Are those values for MAP and EGBP typical for a full throttle launch? I wonder if there is some drivetrain protection active. Those values seem very low. What is the definition of EGRDC? I am assuming it is the commanded EGR percentage. Since run three doesnt have one, did it trip a limp home or MIL?

I would guess if the PCM doesnt go into some kind of limp home strategy that the boost will be similar(edited... hey its late). As for the the EGR valve being pushed open shouldnt it be the other way around? There have been problems with the EGR being stuck closed when the backpressure is too high on "other" engines, since the 6.0 is a dual poppet you shouldnt be able to generate enough backpressure to hold it closed.

Well, I had this big long explanation typed out then we lost power and my whole explanation went black. Since it is so late I will just hit on a couple things. I think there is a misconception about the relationship between boost pressure, EGR and backpressure. Backpressure is kind of like a measurement of how much work the turbo is doing. If you raise the VGT percentage both MAP and backpressure should go up until you get out of the efficiency range of the turbo then the MAP will go down but backpressure will continue to rise. EGR is simply a release of some of this backpressure and should almost always be at a higher pressure than the intake. I am not sure in what other instance you would see the EGBP go up and boost go down. In your example if the EGR is disconnected and PCM does compensate you should see the VGT percentage go up(closing????) to the max value at which point the turbo would likely be out of its efficiency range. This would account for the lower MAP and the higher EGBP, the higher cylinder temps, as well as the lack of power. At this point the turbo would actually be acting as a kind of exhaust brake. If you had the truck in front of you I would expect to see the VGT percentage as high as possible with the MAP lower than expected and the EGBP way too high. As for the MAF stuff, I am not sure how it works for this engine but it definitely is a major player in the EGR determination in other engines. Again if this is based on other diesel engines and may not be the way the 6.0 is designed but it sure sounds like it. If you have a specific scenario I would be happy to try it tomorrow and let you know the results since I know this may not be too clear.

My knowledge on the 6.0 strategy isnt very deep but doesnt the MAF also help determine the actual EGR flow? Say the engine needs "X" amount of air at a given power level and rpm. If is is flowing some amount less than "X" wouldnt this allow the PCM to infer the difference as the EGR flow. I am guessing that is what allowed the deletion of the EGBP sensor. Based on that I think the reason for the performance issues is that the PCM sees more airflow though the MAF and thinks the EGR valve is not flowing enough. This causes the valve to open more than it should making more smoke and HC emissions possibly even leading to misfire. Just a thought, again I dont know a lot about the differences between the 6.0 and other Ford engines but it sounds good to me /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif .

For those who havent seen it already someone has leaked a powerpoint file containing info on the upcoming diesel. It is located on thedieselstop.com under the general diesel tab. Who knows what is true and what isnt but its the first piece of info I have seen on the net that looks real.......

I forgot all about this thread, I should have updated it quite awhile ago. After putting a few miles on the engine it did start acting up on the cylinder that got the new parts. It was replaced with a new unit and everything is fine now. Good advice about the copper washers, if they are available....

I dont know when this program started or ended but apparently it was the last cal in its base sequence, meaning either something major changed and required a new cal or they just started over for a new model year. I wish I had some info on what changes were in the program but I have never been able to find something that lists the changes for older models. By the way the part number was 4U7A-BFH.

The only thing I know about FSM7 is that it was supposed to be a calibration release during that fury of updates in the earlier days of the 6.0. I dont know if it was actually released to the public or not. You could try entering it into the WDS manually and see what comes up. I am guessing that it was replaced just as quickly as the release before it was. As for the boost tables, you guys drive those old ones alot more than I do, someone else could probably speak more intellegently on how the boost changed with each update. Overall I think this guy was led to believe this one calibration "FSM7" was something Ford came up with for all model year 6.0's to cure the symptoms he was experiencing but in reality it was just one of the many cal releases.

Well, it appears based on that descripition that my experience is very different from the way 6.0L handles EGR. Sounds like everybody should take your posting on this topic as more factually based than mine. The MAF basics should be the same but I wasnt even aware the MAF had been deleted so it doesnt matter much. I should probably stay off the 6.0L part of this forum.

I kind of regret posting anything on this topic. I probably should have held off on any definitive answer. My experience is based on ford diesel but not the 6.0L. The more I think about it, the way the 6.0 handles EGR may be a lot different than the way I am used to dealing with it. Based on the way FordDoc described it I think it is similar but if what I say doesnt make sense I would appreciate the correction. I have been doing some MAF contamination studies in the recent past but the MAF sensor as the line techs are used to seeing it does some different things in the config I use. I need to go back to the 6.0L PCED before I throw anymore opinions out there on this topic.