I'm not sure if this information was already linked, but I found it interesting and informative: Filtration + Separation - Fuel filtration: Protecting the diesel engine

Proper filtration and water separation seem to be an issue due to ULSD, high system psi, and tight tolerances. There is some interesting info on emulsion and bio-diesel in the article. Water emulsion seems to be a significant issue with the 6.7 fuel delivery system.

 

Y'all have been hoodwinked by social engineers stating that the problem is US grade diesel fuel being contaminated.... There are tons of cars and trucks that run just fine on this fuel without the Injector pump /fuel pump grenading the whole fuel system with shrapnel, machining swarf, and complete fuel system replacements...

In my opinion, the problem is in the design of the Bosch pump, both the CP 4.2 2 piston model used in Ford, Audi Q7 and Vw touaregs with their 3.0 V6 and the Bosch single piston CP 4.1 HPFP's.

It's, in my opinion, a flawed design... VW and Audi have been working with it for 4 years now, and had failures with this pump design since near day 1 when a Popular mechanics writer had his 2009 test car jetta tdi pump fail early on in 2008.

I will share with you some eye opening links from tdiclub.com on this disaster of a pump, what NHTSA is doing about it with an investigation, how it has turned into an engineering defect investigation also, and will provide you with 160 cases submitted by VW to NHSTA, which is probably only the tip of the iceberg, in terms of all the failures versus the ones reported to NHSTA. It is again a $7000 to $10,000 fix, lots of denial by VW /
bosch to warranty it, finger pointing (falsely) at fuel, or misfueling or contaminated fuel.

This is the Bosch / German way.... deny, deny, deny, and be arrogant as hell with getting anything covered under warranty... Ze Germans don't make mistakes!

NHTSA Update on CR HPFP failure investigation - TDIClub Forums

scored hpfp pistons and rollers from a bosch CP 4.1 from a 2.0 TDI

CR engine HPFP analysis - TDIClub Forums

a solution made by Delphi, the DFP6, patented with a square shoe follower that keeps the roller aligned with the cam lobes at all times, not a round bore like the Bosch.



Delphi patented this follower, the square one in 2008 or 2009, when they knew Bosch had a design problem on their hands that allowed the Bosch roller bearing to rotate laterally in the bore, getting the roller 90 degrees out of alignment with the cam surface it is supposed to roll on, and instead grinding the cam and roller.

A failed bosch roller from a CP 4.1.



do a search on Google on Delphi DFP6, read up on it, read the May 2010 announcement, see how they took a direct shot at the design failures of others that allow the piston to rotate in the bore, when it needs to stay in alignment with the cam, with no means to keep it in alignment.

The Delphi DFP 6 High Pressure Fuel Pump Thread. - TDIClub Forums

I felt that with 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 Jetta's in TDI persuasion, all with this Bosch CP 4.1 HPFP having failures documented, 4 years worth of using the same crap pump, and the same failures, early in the life of the cars... that a new thread needed to be started showing the potential way with this Delphi HPFP . So I started a new thread.... and I suggest you all ask Delphi when Ford will contract with them to build a better HPFP for your 6.7, because Bosch will leave you stranded, time and again.

Please, all of you, dig around on the TDI club, under MK V, Mk VI platforms.... read, educate yourself, because this is what is coming down the pike for you too, with these trashy designed Bosch pumps. Use the Search Feature, the info is out there.

VW MKVI-A6 Golf family including Jetta SportWagen (~ 2010+) - TDIClub Forums

VW MKVI-A6 Jetta Sedan (~ 2011+) - TDIClub Forums

This is, again, in my opinion, a design problem, not a fuel problem. If it was a fuel problem, all kinds of diesel vehicles would be dying on the roads, but they are not, just the ones with Bosch CP 4.2 pumps, and CP 4.1 pumps... the ford 6.7, the Audi Q7 with the 3.0 TDI and the VW Touareg with the 3.0 TDI, and 170,000 VW TDI North American models from 2009 to current 2012, all of them have experienced HPFP failures to date.

here is a sampling of cases submitted to NHTSA, read every one of them, look at the timeline for repair, and look at how stubborn Bosch is with getting the new pump to the dealership for an install... 10 days is good, 14 more the norm, and they always try to blame the fuel, and or get the customer on the hook for the failure.

This is a real eye opener, read it!

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/do...003-45604P.pdf

The Bosch CP 4.X series of pumps are a family of pumps, with the same inherent design flaw, such that a law firm in Texas has a class action lawsuit against VW/ Bosch for it, you can find it at the end of the NHSTA pdf above on pages 316 to 333.

Seriously, these pumps experience huge amounts of failures in the summer time, late summer, and also into the fall, on VW TDIS. Folks can stick their heads in the sand and buy Ford Product, and get stuck with the failure, trailering their 5th wheel on vacation, or they can open their eyes, complain to Ford Engineers, and to people in Ford that can do something about this pump... No pump should be able to fail and do $10,000 worth of repair damage to a whole fuel system, that is a defective design, and a money maker for Bosch with constant recurring costs. It will also turn the residual value of these time bomb 6.7 PS diesels into nothing in short order on the used car market.

Just as there is no way I would buy a Bosch CP 4.1 or 4.2 HPFP equipped VW, with what I know now, 4 years worth of data, there is no way I would purchase a Ford 6.7 PS diesel with the same Bosch CP 4.2 pump. It fails on Audi Q7's, on VW Touaregs, and it fails on Fords, too. Boycott the product, vote with your hard earned dollars and take your business elsewhere until Ford opts out of it's contract with Bosch on this junk pump design.

The problem is not the fuel, that's social engineering BS and finger pointing... it's with the Bosch design, and they, once again, are in deny, deny, deny mode. Don't get sucked into it or get yourself in the position to get pinched, there are better options out there.

I realize there is a lot of reading here in the links... and it will take time for all of you to get up to speed, but if you do dig around on TDI club, you will become and expert and have an education on HPFP's and diesels, because the VW folks went down this road 4 years before you guys with your trucks, and it's still not resolved by Bosch, by VW, or by NHTSA either, although they did start an engineering defect investigation.

Please, if your truck fails, file a complaint with NHTSA and get it on the record... this is a safety issue if your motor dies on a very busy interstate and you being in a work truck with a heavy load, need to get over to the shoulder with a dead vehicle, and limited vision if trailering a big 5th wheel.

 

Welcome to FTE, NinerBikes!

You offer lots of good information there, but I would argue that it's not a perfect comparison between a Touareg and SD trucks. One of the first things in your thread "CR engine HPFP analysis" is how the Delphi system is customized to the specific application. I know the same is also true of the Bosch system, as the pumps for the Duramax and the 6.7 Powerstroke have minor differences in them.

I can't speak to the reliability of TDI engines, you clearly know more about that than I do, but neither the D-max or 6.7 PSD have experienced widespread HPFP failures to date. Both have had failed pumps, but it does not appear to be anything approaching a common problem. Do you have anything that suggests otherwise?

 

Time.... time is on my side, that these Bosch pumps will fail... I state this because many TDI owners are couriers, that log far more miles a year than most Ford truck owners, some up to 50k miles a year. Fuel is no longer cheap, but a cheap car that gets 45 to 50 mpg can acquire historical data much faster than a truck getting 15-20 mpg. I have seen these Bosch pumps fail with additives for lubrication added, and without lubrication added. Optimax, biodiesel, what ever... they fail, and the common cause of fail is a steel piston run in an aluminum bore, which is about as brilliant a design and use of material as when chevy decided a silica lined aluminum bore with aluminum pistons in a 1970's Vega with a 9 to 1 compression ratio was a good idea... it failed miserably, many inside 100k miles.

Please, go in to the NHTSA log pdf here, and study up on each case, log by log, and you will see where these Bosch pumps are going. Study pictures on TDI club about how the piston rotates in the bore, dragging the cam roller off alignment with the cam surface. This isn't a cam follower in a head with oil lubricating it, it's more like a roller cam, where you want to keep the roller pinned, or with bearings, in alignment with the cam.... it is a design flaw, and Delphi engineers saw it as instantly as I did, and came up with a solution and patented it. Bosch needs to man up and pay for the patent rights.

http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/do...003-45604P.pdf

Inside an HPFP - TDIClub Forums

Canadian HPFP failure !! - TDIClub Forums

If you were to read the full report from NHTSA, you would see that Bosch has done 3 redesigns on this pump to make it supposedly more "robust". Well, guess what, the pumps in 2012 TDIs, the Bosch CP 4.1's with the latest version revision from November 2010, are still having failures. If you redesign something 3 times and it still fails with alarming regularity, then there is something flawed in the basic design. Bosch has a money maker on their hands, and they know it, with tons of recurring costs with a HPFP as a wear and tear item, every 100k miles or less. I will not own anything with a Bosch CP 4.X pump it it, ever... poor enough design that Delphi fixed it and patented it, and nabbed Bosch by the short hairs... and Bosch won't pay royalties for the design change, and they will be hard pressed to design around the patent without the pump costing a hell of a lot more money.

too many mechanics throw new parts at the problem, instead of solving for the problem part. It's a money maker!

Forget, for a moment, about the power plant, displacement, or brand of motor... the fuel pump is what we are after here, and commonality of design, family of HPFPs or brand. Diesels run, as long as you can get air and fuel to them.... the failure is in getting the fuel to them, the HPFP...

I know I won't make many happy here, but when you start chipping and tuning these things, you are asking waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more of that HPFP at ressures sky high, than it was ever designed for, and flow values from the pump also. Germans design very little margin of extra safety into their products. One looks at chipping and nozzling tdis shows, that shortly after doing so, the clutch fails, or the dual mass flywheel fails... it's always somethign on down the line that needs re engineering and beefing up, heavier pressure plate, whatever... that is just the way Germans engineer things.

Claiming it's fuel problems is a smoke screen... Bosch worked with CARB when ULSD came out in California back in 2000 in select markets, SF ande LA. Bosch knows US lubricity standards are 520 micron wear scar for the reciprocity test, but they built a pump that they want 460 micron fuel for... well guess what, you have to bring a product to market with suitability for the fuel it runs on locally. No if, no ands, no buts. Bosch can say all they want about fuel, but they still need to design a pump that runs on the fuel available in the local market. Everything else is smoke screens, social engineering, finger pointing , and pure BS, their product wont run in North America. Canadians are having HPFP failures too.

 

NinerBikes ..... thanks for the wealth of infomation. I did see some of VW issues while researching the Bosch Pump. To the point that some States stopped selling the Deisel version until the issues were resolved.

I am not an Engineer and cant speak to the design adequately to lend any value. To that point I can neither agree or not with your points. I do beleive there is a serious issue and am not sure why it is appearing in much larger numbers in the VW community versus the SD market. One would think the larger engines hauling 20K lbs + would put a full load strain load on the pump but again who am I to say. Perhaps the smaller engines rev higher or perhaps it is just a numbers game - more VW TDI's on the road.

I think when we are talking about fuel problems it becomes a bit of a catch all term. I for one totally support the issue that the pump is not spec'd to run on US, and barely on Canadian, diesel fuel with current Wear Scar ratings. Maybe I'm just old school but I was always taught when you dont have the right lube you build friction and that builds heat. Neither of which are good for moving parts. That being said; purely speaking there is not a fuel problem perse. It is the matching of a specific piece of equipment to a task where this equation falls down ..... IMHO.

 

So can anyone offer a good explanation how this "faulty" design that's been used for years on the Duramax and Cummins engines hasn't been failing en masse?

 

Probably because that was before USLD was introduced.

 

Its been about 5 years now...still no mass failures.

 

You have provided some very useful information and as time allows I will take the time to review all of it thoroughly. I will take issue with you on the above quote. How can you say that a car that uses 1/4 the volume of fuel per hour/mile of the V8 6.7 engine will "acquire historical data much faster"? It seems that the same pump feeding a 6.7 will pump 3 to 4 times as much fuel in the same amount of miles that it would on a 2.0 engine powering a 2700 lb car. This would mean that most recent HPFP failure that we are aware of on a 6.7 at roughly 35,000 miles would most likely have pumped more gallons of fuel than a Jetta with over 100,000 miles on it. The demand on the pump at any given time is much greater on a large displacement, low economy engine than on a low displacement, high economy engine.

That little fact aside, according to Bosch's own data on fuel lubricity and expected life cycle of a CP4.2, 1000 hrs at the assumed lubricity level of available fuel in the US is pretty close to where they expect a pump to fail. 35,000 miles equates pretty closely to 1,000 hrs unless the truck does a lot of highway travel and very little local travel. Now I'm not saying that this is acceptable, but it appears to be in line with published data from the manufacturer.

At the same time we have a member here with over 90,000 miles his 6.7 and the bomb is still ticking. There just doesn't seem to be any consistency with time of failure or even frequency of failure on the 6.7 engine yet. Could it be that the VW failures are more prevalent because the pump is too large for the small engine and the fuel moves through it at too slow of a rate to supply adequate lubrication? Does the VW have a fuel cooler? There has to be more variables involved than what has been presented to us.

If pump failure does become the norm on these trucks and Ford takes the path they have already on the one incident that we know about here, it is going to be a long road for them. The only reason many previous owners of Ford diesel failures have continued to purchase Ford trucks is because they were treated fairly in the warranty process in the past. Numerous failures with denied warranty claims will not be easily forgiven. On the other hand, if this is indeed a widespread Bosch problem, maybe the shear number of owners involved will facilitate class action and bring justice to all the VW owners that have apparently been wronged over this failure.

 

I suspect that VW sees more failures in fewer miles because their engine tends to operate at a higher RPM.It could also be that the average pressure is higher in the VW because of fewer cylinders and less displacement.

 

Hmmm ..... could be on something there. At higher rpm and a smaller engine they should be processing less fuel. Less fuel of inadequate lubricity but the pump is turning faster. Possibility.

I was also thinkg ..... what reason would the major pump manufacturers have to issue a common position document if there was no reason to. Something must have initiated it.

Tom you pose a solid question ..... Why not more failures? A hard one to answer highlighting the randomness of the issue. Quite likely there are more contributors afoot that are as yet not known. With the fuel lubricity being so close to spec or below maybe a contributing event is needed to push the pump over the edge ..... i.e. a smattering of water enters the arena. I do tend to agree with you that it is not likely a hard defect in design.

 

Ok, one more comment and I will cease for the night.

I must say that I have never been taken so deep into a topic on FTE before. I have had calls with Shell Canada and am awaiting callbacks from Ford and Bosch. I have read for hours on the WWW on this topic. Am I imagining it or are most of the FTE Gurus and Supertechs not weighing in on this one. Am I missing something?

By the way I mean no disrespect to those that have weighed in that fit the above categories. I have the utmost respect for the knowledge on this forum. Just wondering out loud.

 

You ask questions that I too have asked myself. I think in the end you find out that it is not you and I that are missing something, but rather some of the threads that are missing something.........details. Cheezit posted in another thread that he has replaced one pump and that truck had a fuel tank half full of water. He also mentioned that the WIF code had been stored in the KAM.

Now I am going to offer up what will be a very unpopular opinion, but it has been a mantra of mine for many years. There are 3 sides to every story. The vehicle owner's side, Ford's side and ultimately the truth which probably lies somewhere in between the first two. Many details we will never know, yet a lot of people have drawn some pretty harsh conclusions based on what little that we know.

The first dealer reported rust in the fuel system. Did the second dealer and/or the FSE find no evidence of rust? I would think if it was proven that there was no rust anywhere in the fuel system that would be enough to bring into question the validity of the first dealer's warranty flag. Sorry guys but I'm not ready to jump ship over one documented failure. If I had bought a parachute instead of a truck my concern level may be a little higher over one failure.

 

MAN..You guys are WAY to smart for me....I turn the Key and it starts.



SHane

 

A 2.0L TDI redlines at 5000 rpm... power falls off at 4300 rpm, and folks recommend you shift at 2500 rpm cold, 3000 rpm when warmed up. Also, it is common on TDI club, becuase the cars are only 22 to $27 k, that you break the motor in by seating the rings by "driving it like you stole it" to seat the rings properly. This has persisted since 2000, long before HPFP's were on TDI's or HPFP's being more critical for break in than cylinder bores and rings. It's an outdated procedure, but the crowd at TDI club is young, the car is affordable.

E =MV squared.... you double the RPM's, you quadruple the load laterally on that piston and roller in the HPFP bore.... it aggravates the wear... everything happens with more RPM's in a TDI.... it is a high rpm diesel motor design, it really needs 52 cetane to get good mpg on the highway while cruising.

A 6.7 redlines at what 3300 rpm, maybe 3500? There's your sign.