In the words of Dennis Miller...I don't want to get off on a rant here but....does it strike anyone else that this is WAY too much to ask an average truck owner to put up with regarding the EGR, EGR cooler/Oil cooler, Turbo and FICM problems with the 6.0?

Do Dodge and Chevy owners have to put up with this kind of systemic defect? Without this forum, I would not have been able to diagnose and tell the mechanic what to do regarding my truck. I would have been at the mercy of a mechanic that may or may not have ever figured out what was truly wrong and most importantly, fixed it once and for all.

I'm sure it was the EPA but whose bonehead idea was it to recirculate diesel exhaust back into the motor and burn it again? Rube Goldberg himself couldn't come up with such a bad idea. It doesn't take a diesel engineer to realize smoke containes particles of carbon and that trying to burn that a SECOND time is bound to cause problems. Oh wait..I forgot that first we have to cool the dirty air before we can try to burn it again...

I'd like to meet the genius that designed this system...

 

I read somewhere the the 6.0 was designed in Europe with Diesel Fuel from Europe. When the US went to ULSD the 6.0 design was not able to deal with it.

I posted this in a thread on the Cetane in Diesel Fuel.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...ml#post8997535

 

Actually that statement is a bit backwards. Europe is leaps and bounds ahead of the US in diesel technology. Also, the diesel fuel in Europe has been much cleaner then the fuel in the US for years. The change to ULSD in the US was a step in the right direction to achieving the cleanliness of the fuel in Europe. One a the reasons pass car diesels have been held back so much in the US is because of the poor fuel quality.

 

Harley, I feel your pain. I have an '04 turbo diesel. It seems like every year (for the past 4 years) I go thru similar problems that you are experiencing. I'm letting a friend of mine take care of my truck while I'm away on a contract job in Connecticut. He called me last night and told me my truck was up to it's old bad tricks.

Here's a post on my truck that I wrote in July '09. It could apply today.

The dealer now says it was all due to a dirty EGR valve? Looking back at all my egr cooler, turbo, and wiring harness problems, shouldn't they have had the common sense to check & replace the EGR valve? Now, the truck is past the 5 year warranty limit. I have only 54K miles on the truck. They stuck me with another big bill, $754, to fix something that should have been taken care of during warranty. Do I have any recourse on this matter? Can I sue the dealer for incompetence? I'm so mad I can spit blood. The last 4 times I have tried to tow my rig---during a 2 year period---long distances, I have had to have it towed back once and limped back home 3 times. That's not a good endorsement for Ford Motor Company.
I really don't know what to do. I don't trust the truck anymore. I don't think my local dealer gives a crap about it.


I guess we're all screwed? What's sad is that I have just 58K miles on the truck. Pretty pathetic.
<!-- / message -->

 

Not that I am a big fan of the EGR system, but I do believe it can be (and in MANY 6.0L diesel engines is ...) reliable. It does take a fair amount of attention and it is very adviseable to install and monitor a number of gauges.

I do not have any real plans to delete my EGR system and I am not afraid of imminent failure. I am fairly sure that I am in the minority (along w/ Tex and a few others), but I do believe the EGR system is reliable when the proper parts and maintenance come together.

I do monitor the fuel system and the ECTvsEOT temperatures. I also am diligent with the coolant maintenance. I really do not want to debate the question "Why should we have to watch things so closely?". I also do not want to come across as being a "know it all", but there are many, many examples of trucks with high mileage and no EGR system related problems. This tells me it really isn't a design issue ...... it is more of an issue with the reliability of individual components (and the quality control in making them) and in maintenance practices.

I will admit that there are quite a few trucks that have more problems than they should and that there are shops that do not provide the best service. It is these reasons that cause me to be so active on the forum in an effort to give folks the tools they need to have a better chance of avoiding the situation of being a "victim".

 

Thanks for your input on this. Maybe it's the Ford dealer that I've been taking my truck for repairs. They could be clueless. All I know is....its back to the shop and more costly 'fixes'.

 

Ford & International obviously allowed the 6.0 out of the test lab a couple years early. There were over 500 'running changes' in the first year. At least a dozen of those were pretty major (injectors etc.)
My truck is an 05 and there were major changes to it over an 04.
They seemed to level out after 05 so perhaps we are going to get lucky.
I have never understood why Ford doesn't stand behind the issues that are so obvious.
Even to do 50/50 cost sharing to upgrade would same them so many long term customers.
These trucks are not for the faint of heart and those like me who paid 1/3 of a what a new truck costs we mostly turn our own wrenches so sites like this are savings us time and $$$.
Keep postings lads!

 

Actually, the EPA forced them to do it.

The emissions standards were originally set to take effect in 1/1/2004.

EPA wanted to take the Engine Manufacturers Association members (Navistar, Caterpiller, Detroit, Cummins, et al) to court for a LOOOOONG and ugly court battle over supposed "emissions control defeat devices" that the EMA had been building since the 1994 emissions rules.

The EMA settled in the now infamous Consent Decree that EPA rammed down their throats (to avoid the costs of court), that moved the 2004 phase-in date up to October, 2002.

This deprivation of 16 months (nearly a year and a half) of development time was damaging to EVERYONE's 2004 engines. EVERYONE had problems with the EGR systems, especially when you consider that the last 2 years of development is when you work out most of the problems. EPA forced the customer into the beta-testing role.

When all the dust settled, it is my FIRM belief that the industry spent more on warranty claims than they would have spent on the original litigation. Everyone except Caterpillar, that is; they said "ok. we'll pay the fines on the nonconformal engines while we work out the bugs". My understanding is that their warranty payouts were substantially smaller (although the ACERT engines were still fairly buggy).

- blaine

 

Dodge did that to a degree as well. They used what credits they had accumulated and paid the leftover fines to push down the release of the ones with the EGR system. Rather that helped them or not, that I don't know, I don't pay much attention to the Dodge end of things other then the fact that they used some credits and paid some fines.

 

And to take it even further, Caterpillar is no longer supplying stationary power plants in California because of the EPA. They just pulled out of the market. Said it wasn't worth the trouble and cost.

 

What year did Cummings start putting EGR systems on their engines? Did the 24 valve common rail have an EGR system?

 

Caterpillar's primary market is off-highway construction equipment and mining equipment.

When they pulled out of the on-highway engine market, they dropped less than 10% of their gross business receipts. No great loss, and at a substantial savings.

CA's idiotic rules mean that Cat is just the first to drop the market. I'm sure others will follow. I suspect that many of their stationary engines were rebranded from other manufacturers.

In a way, it could serve them in any case, given that there are some interesting technologies in development at the current time that could be substantial game changers once they are brought to market. The problem with the rules is that they require long-term committment to a given technology (with little to no recourse to changing mid-stream), and the stuff in the pipeline at the moment promises to make current technology not only obsolete, but WAAAAY obsolete.

-blaine

 

Is there any way to sue the dealer or Ford for all the troubles I've experienced with my truck? (see my posts) I'm having it towed back in....again.......today. Isn't there a 'lemon' law? Then again, I guess I'm just screwed. It's hard to keep my BP down.

 

Most of the time, people have signed an arbitration agreement that they agree to go to arbitration first before they pursue other matters. If you don't know any of the arbiters in your area(I'm sure your Ford dealerships do), then you might have some "problems".

As to lemon law, that varies state by state. Some have a few of the same elements, but it's the minor stuff that can get you.

 

Yeah, what the hell. Damned 6.0's. Why should I have to deal with 195,000 trouble-free miles? When my EGR valve clogged at 160k why the hell did I have to spend $4 on gaskets, a used tooth brush,a nd a bottle of carb cleaner to get it functioning properly again? Why hte hell is that the only real problem these engines have.

Why the hell does the duramax not have any problems other than the egr, glow plugs, injectors, worse fuel mileage, they don't have real mirrors, and numerous electrical problems. I wish i had gone with a ford so i wouldn't have to deal with just that little egr issue, because all those issues are so much easier to deal with!

duramax can lick my *****. I'll keep my 6.0 thank you.