Take this information for what it is: a story relayed to me by my local dealer’s heavy truck service director. Perhaps some of you can vet or refute the contents that follows.

I went to see my dealer regarding the factory ‘tornado siren’. I showed him a video I made capturing the sound; IMO my case is way better than what is shown/discussed here: https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...old-start.html. He said he’s not seen nor heard of this issue before so I brought him here so he could read other’s posts.

I also mentioned Rick’s issue and showed him the posts regarding it. After reading some he told me that he had a case of a HPFP failure in which the diagnosis was fuel contamination (water) and warranty was denied. What floored me was what else he told and this is the part I need your help vetting:

This particular customer had a larger Titan tank installed and both my dealer and Ford’s FSEs took a good hard look at this tank. Their claim was that the tank has a depression in the area where the (sending unit?) sits and that the fasteners that keep the area sealed had backed off. Given that the in-tank pressure becomes negative as the fuel cools (true or false?) combined with the fact that this depression holds water, combined with a less than perfect seal, lead them to believe that this was the source of the contamination.

It was stated that when they took the tank down, they found water and lots of it; however, the customer stated he had never seen a WIF indication. Now I need to be really careful here, but I thought I also heard him say that there is some doubt as to the reliability of the WIF sensor.

What do you guys think?

 

BTW if what I have relayed here is absolutely correct, it seems we have two evils here – the Titan tank and Ford’s WIF. I’m not meaning to start a **** storm here, but only trying to get to the bottom of things.

 

I've wondered the same thing but there's one thing in your scenario that we don't have to worry about. The tank is vented so there should never be negative pressure in the tank. The depression on the top can definitely hold water so the seal needs to be done right. Titan highlights the part of the instructions on tigtening the seal correctly. It it's not done right, it would be an easy point of water entry.

 

That was my expectation too; otherwise the tank would be sucked in as we consume fuel. But it does sound like the construction of the tank is such that it could hold water.

Now that you mention it, I think they pressed this guy pretty hard as to who installed the tank; it turned out to be a 'trusted party'. But it seems feasible as an entry point.

I wonder if Rick had a Titan tank and if so, I wonder what the condition of this 'seal' is in his application.

Again, not that it's Titan's fault. I'd really like to find out more about these WIF 'not showing water when they should be' insinuations.

 

Take a look at 5:25 on the video and you can see the difference between the OEM tank and Titan seals. They both use the same thick single O ring seal with a couple of differences. The Titan ring is quite a massive plate that cannot flex whereas the Ford ring is stamped steel. But you can also see the OEM tank has no opportunity to hold water up against the seal where the Titan could seal could potentially be submerged in water. Better torque that thick ring right!

2011 Ford Super Duty Titan Fuel Tank Installation - YouTube

 

Regarding the WIF light/warning, I would think that Ford Techs that post on FTE may have better insight regarding whether or not the WIF has been reliable or not. They see more trucks and have access to the Ford Tech website/Forums where that would be seen and discussed.

 

Rickatic does have the Titan..

I never said it, but I always thought it. You all with the 50 gal Titan have an easy out for ford where they can say that the WIF system is not designed to manage potential water condensation for a fuel tank that size. Personally I don't believe this, but it does seem to be a possible point of contention.

With respect, and humility. I am not criticizing you all. Just giving my opinion.

And I don't buy the water entry theory. Maybe a couple ounces is possible but think about how much water makes it to the top of the fuel tank driving in the rain. I mean really, the underside of the cab floor hardly ever gets wet, just misty at most.

 

Ric, has the Titan tank, but, it was never a point of contention.

 

Seems like I've said this a hundred times...The WIF light can only function correctly if the water is being separated by the DFCM. There are conditions by which water can become emulsified and go right through the DFCM and into the HPFP.

You do NOT have to have a WIF light come on in order to have water make it to the HPFP.

From HERE.

Everyone likes to think that if the WIF light doesn't come on this just can't happen. The truth is that if the WIF light comes on, you have less to worry about because the system can operate correctly! So that's two cases where the HPFP was destroyed with no WIF light...but some users here on FTE have had the WIF light come on and haven't had a HPFP failure. That's because the water in these users' trucks could be removed, and the system was able to work.

 

What is disturbing is the "water in fuel" light. If it is not coming on this is not acceptable. It doesn't matter if it is one ounce or one gallon.....the light should come on for a warning.

--
Gordon

 

I agree with Tom's post 100%. What I will add to that is that people either don't understand how the water separation system works, or they have unrealistic expectations of that system.

The WIF light is only going to illuminate when there is enough water in the water reservoir part of the fuel conditioning module to trigger the light. The purpose of this warning is not to alert you to the presence of water in the fuel but rather to prompt you to drain the separator so that it can continue to do it's job.

Probably one of the simplest solutions to water in the fuel tank is to install a drain at the bottom of the tank to remove any possible water from the tank. Manufactures don't provide such a drain for various reasons. A tank drain could be a convenient way for a vandal to leave you stranded or it could possibly be knocked off the tank much like we have seen the water separator drain broken in the past.

 

Conceivably, couldn't one just while changing their filters plug the bottom of the DFCM into the sensor and fill the bowl up with water without attaching it? you could turn ignition on, but not start the truck. You have to purge the system anyways with the 6 30 second key turns. My only fear is that somehow Ford could see this WIF despite what they told Ric. Maybe someone who's truck is out of warranty could try it? Not sure if that is practical or not. But for those who question whether it works, seems you verify it that way.

 

Would this make a case for using a diesel additive with demulsifying properties?

MA

 

There's nothing to fear here. Remember that the WIF warning is a normal occurrence with a properly functioning system. If the WIF light comes on there is no negative action that's associated with it.

What you're suggesting is like having your warranty voided for a low DEF warning. It's a typical message stating that something requires your attention.

Attached is the document Ford uses to assist techs in fuel system diagnosis and whether or not the failure is covered under warranty. Note that nowhere in this literature is there a mention of the WIF light and how it can affect warranty.

 

Crazy, is that an elephant jumping on a trampoline....Wow!