In my case, there was no warning whatsoever of the catastrophe that was about to happen. The truck was running perfectly right up until it died.

Regards

 

I like the direction this has taken, as lubricity has been a primary concern of mine ever since I got my 6.4L truck!

Guys, remember that this is still not brand-new technology. HPCR injection systems have been around for over ten years now, and if you'd like to know how your truck will do after 100,000+ miles I suggest visiting a Duramax or Cummins forum. Even if the Bosch pump isn't identical, the technology is very similar.

Obviously lubricity and fuel contamination are possibly the most important factors when it comes to fuel pump life. Lubricity obviously can't be treated through any sort of filtration and therefore an additive is required to have any kind of assurances of proper lubricity. This is the easy part, and a free one IMHO because the fuel economy increase should pay for the additive. Filtration is a harder one, which is made more complex by the complex nature of these fuel systems.

Not all HPCR systems are alike! For example the system in the 6.7L requires 60-120 PSI for the low-pressure fuel system going into the pump. The last-generation 6.4L requires 3 PSI. Yes, you read that right, three PSI. I'm not an engineer, but my guess is that you do NOT want to affect any modifications that change the factory flow and filtration of the fuel.

Also remember that the factory filtration systems are really pretty good. The primary filter in the DFCM is a 10-micron filter, and the secondary filter on the engine is a 4-micron filter.

A source within Ford tells me that:

 

I'll bet that, at the end of the day, a lack of lubricity as opposed to water will be the cause of most failures. And as you said, the easiest to supplement. A bottle with every fill-up will pay for itself in fuel savings and restore peace of mind.

On the water side, you would think that Ford would support an after market separator. It is in their best interest especially if the owner is willing to absorb the cost. It is a win win where Ford could avoid warranty and customer satisfaction costs and the owner purchases additional reliability. We'll have to find a system that does not affect the required pressures though.

If there is any manufacturer culpability here it would be in the form of delivering a product which requires a high specification of fuel for which the fuel industry isn't ready to reliably provide. This is truly a case study of the risks taken by early adopters.

 

Why should Ford support an Aftermarket water seperator... Because of a design flaw?? The consumer should be out of pocket for something that needs to be done anyway!!!!! Not an option.. If this IS an issue... Ford factory recall... But in my reading.. Too isolated of an incident to warrant Fords involvement.

Shane

 

That would be an expensive option. The pump is expensive, but the installation would be a lot more expensive. Another post said that the pump is burried in the middle of the engine and a lot of stuff would have to be taken out to replace the pump. I know a lot of forum menbers are mechanically inclined, but doubt that even they can replace their own pumps.

If the cost would be under $2,000 I might consider replacing the pump at 50,000 miles or so. By Ford. By then I would hope that the new pump would be a lot better than the old pump.

ken

 

Replace pump at 50,000??????? Not with my 100,000 extendes esp warranty!!!!

Shane

 

That's exactly the issue. Ford has no reason to recall anything because the OEM separator is working as designed and failure rates are apparently within allowable limits. What I'm interested in is supplementing that 1% and making it 0%. It would be nice if Ford could say something like, "No additional water separation is warranted but hey, if you want to... this would work." By going it alone and attempting this without their blessing, I'm pretty confident the warranty goes bye bye and at worst, can actually impede the OEM system. That would not be good either.

There are some limitations to the current technology which does indeed allow water to pass through the separator. Bio-diesel can emulsify the water to allow small enough droplets to pass through. Over time, that amount of water can do damage. So is this a real issue? We've only heard of two HPFP failures so far out of about half a million trucks?

Shane, you're probably right. Not a big enough issue to spend any money on. This discussion is probably just academic.

Lubricity on the other hand... yeah.

 

Doesn't do you any good if Ford says it's bad fuel.

 

I guess I left off the sarcasm=on

 

1. I am now convinced that I should use a fuel additive 100% of the time.

THANK YOU ALL for some good research and explanations. I have been reading all this about Ricks truck and so forth and only now do we have some real discussion that will benefit those who read it.

2. I also have the ESP so my engine is covered up to 200k as long as the diagnosis is not the dreaded "bad fuel"

3. I think it would be wise to contact the major diesel sellers and find out some information on when,where, and how often the diesel fuel is filtered. Some stations have filters in the hose right behind the nozzle.

4. Do any of you out there in cyber space have resources to compose a letter, make a phone call, or whatever would work, and contact ford and maybe BP and make a case for diesel pumps to require in line filters? This could be a big case for a lawyer. No reason to sue or file charges, just a case for getting the right people together and agreeing on something that should be done.

 

I am also convinced that a fuel additive is necessary for the 6.7. I used Diesel Kleen in every single tank on my 6.0, but that was an entirely different fuel delivery system.

For the 6.7, I believe an additive that's a demulsifier is best as that would allow the fuel/water seperator to do it's job. That would allow the owner to drain any accumulated water at each fill-up or once-per-month as needed. The additive should also provide increased fuel lubricity.

 

I wouldn't be so confident that Ford will replace a HPFP under warranty. Its much easier for them to just say "you got bad fuel, not our problem" to get out of footing the bill.

EDIT: Let me rephrase that. It seems like the only cause of failure for the HPFP is either bad fuel, or water contamination. Neither of those are covered under warranty.

 

Great post, as usual.

The Duramax uses a fuel delivery system which seems to be very similar to the 6.7 so it will be interesting to hear about what experiences those owners have with water in the system. I know nothing about the GM fuel/water seperator system and how it compares to the Ford system. That would be interesting information.

 

Well since the begining of the "fiasco" I started using Motocraft Cetane,..I'm Honestly getting 2mpg better. I'd like to say 3MPG better but you guys wouldn't believe me. It feels good knowing you are helping out the engine.

Maybe everything happens for a reason.....I have logged over 300,000 miles in a diesel engine and have never used it. My 2001 7.3 had 198,000 miles on trade in..this was pre ULSD. I bought my 2007 6.0 and only got her to 80,000 without an additave.This was right before the change over..Maybe on that current course it might have been a problem. It just feels right adding it to this 6.7, PLUS my service writer swears by it. Says since this is a New Engine with FORD stick with motorcraft...So there it is. Also at 40z for 25 gallons..It's a no-brainer. Plus my engine sounds better...kinda more like a diesel. Not louder,..just better.

Shane

 

Look what I found....

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sourc...1lRNVrICs4yY0Q


Shane