As some of you may know, I’m new to the diesel family after many years of wanting. One of the reasons I’ve desired a diesel for so long is durability and longevity. This impression comes from many friends of yesteryear (80’s and 90’s) who used diesel one tons in their business, hauling equipment from place to place in the state of Florida. I was always impressed as to how long and how many miles these vehicles served before requiring ‘major’ maintenance and on this topic, what I remember them all exclaiming “it’s time to get the injector pump rebuilt”.

With this in mind combined with our recent negative experiences regarding our HPFP’s apparent premature failure, I have to ask: are we all destined to a massive (~$10K) ‘maintenance’ bill in our distant (~150K miles) future?

I only ask because this seems to be the only logical conclusion: as the HPFP wears (even normally) it’s going to release metal into the fuel system and when it’s time is up (and perhaps before) we are not only looking at a fuel pump but also the remainder of the fuel system, which we know is about $10K in price.

Tell me it isn’t so, because if it is, I have a really nice, low miles 6.7 for sale.

Trust me, I’m not bashing, but if I had known I’d be in for this, I never would have bought the truck in the first place as I could easily swing a brand new gasser at 150K for less than the cost of what I assume is ‘normal maintenance’.

 

I would say your guess is as good as anyones. Ford chose to use a pump that is not intended to last on US fuel quality. Bosch even says so themselves. I like my truck, but I have zero confidence in the fuel system, or Ford as a whole after hearing how they treat their customers.

 

I will trade you my 09 5.4 if it will make you feel any better

 

We won't know until thousands of 6.7L Ford's are reaching the 150,000+ mile mark.
I don't know how many engines Ford tested to 250,000 and I imagine we'll never know or know the results.

 

^Well hell yes the *engine* lasted, but was that testing done in an actual vehicle with the fuel system we have or on a test bed that was fed with lab quality diesel from a NASA spec 5 clean tank?

 

Can you tell I'm getting pissed? When this all started I chalked at least some of this up to drama and fear mongering and in my level best ice-water-filled veins, I think I'm asking oina-fide questions.

 

That is what I am chalking it up to.

EDITED

I'm trying to get a list of failures going in the "FACTS" thread. If you know of any, please add to that list.

 

I'm getting all worked up because I just realized that my 'normal' maintenence will perhaps not only include a HPFP but the entire remainder of the fuel system to the tune of 10K. All becuase the engineers (I'm one so I feel I can express my feelings) failed to assemble a system that does not LAY TO WASTE the remainder of a system due to the failure of an upstream component.

 

Herman.......

While this HPFP fiasco has caused me some concern, I'm not buying into all of this "sky is falling" bovine excrement that's being manifested here. Until we start seeing an epidemic of these failures or some solid statistics showing the actual failure rates of these pumps, I'm just not buying into the whole theory of all of them being doomed to failure.

And I'll just go ahead and say it.....I don't give a rat's hairy azz about a bunch of stupid Volkswagen fuel pumps. This is a truck forum and if I wanted to read about VWs, I'd go to a VW forum. Keep the VW garbage in the TDI forums and out of here.

 

 

Just out of curiosity, how abrasive is water at 30000 psi? Doesn't a water jet use high pressure water to cut metal? Even ULSD has some lubriscocity to it. I could see a small amount of high pressure water causing a problem with any sort of high pressure system. A cp3 that was used on the 6.4 was a lower pressure pump then the cp4's. A good water separator pre HPFP would more then likely solve 99% of any water problem. I'd talk to my local dealer and see what they think. If a $50 filter assembly will solve a lot of the water problems I don't see how ford could deny this?

A water separator is normally in the 150 micron range and much higher flow then the stock fuel filter system GPM wise. If they then want to say it put a restriction in the system put a pressure/vac gauge on each side of the filter head. There should be no drop if the GPM is higher then the system is rated.

Evidently the warranty claim isn't going to be paid if there is water so I'd take my chance on voiding a warranty that isn't going to pay for a water in fuel failure anyway. If then an injector fails that would be warranty you'd still be money ahead replacing the bad injector vs all 8 and a hpfp because of water in the system.

 

I am pretty sure those waterjet tables have to have abrasive mixed into the water to do the cutting, it's not just pure H2O. It's like sandblasting but with water instead of air.

Are you sure the 6.4L/Maxxforce 7 had a CP-series pump of any kind? I thought it was a different brand entirely.

 

Interesting that no one has mentioned stepping up the filter changes with all this going on or draining the water separater often.

If I had one of the 6.7's that is exactly what I would do. Filter changes around 7K miles or sooner with bio.

Drain that separator bi weekly.

I do have the 6.4 and it is just as fragile but I do not worry about all this.

 

Powerstroke72 .... while I get the obvious about keeping the VW stuff out of here I have to say the information presented by NinerBikes has been very valuable. There are more similarities than not when you dial in the concepts, pump manufacturer, longer experience trail, and VW responses to the issue. Their analysis of the roller cam and the defect in design and the materials used was great. This could lend a ton of credibility to our cause if in fact there is a cause. I for one am willing to see through the VW haze to gleen as much info as possible ...... even with the fact I could pull 20 VWs down the road and they couldn't pull one SD

Trent32 ..... Don't underestimate the power of water. With my power washer I can and have cut granite or concrete with the right tip and 3000 psi. This is why I'm continually amazed that the fuel rail runs at 27000 psi and doesnt disintegrate.

 

You don't have to subscribe to a 'sky is falling' theory to need to be legitimately worried. Regardless of how well the pump was or was not designed we have plenty of anecdotal evidence on this forum to know that Ford will instantly void your fuel system warranty if there is ANY evidence of water EVER being in the fuel...even a very faint rust-look being present. Based on that I think we all have to agree that even small amounts of water is very harmful to the fuel system. At this point to disagree with that fact is almost silly. The only thing that really appears to be up for debate on this forum, at this point, is whether the standard US ULSD causes accelerated wear to the pump or not and whether Ford should have put one in that could handle it better. However, everyone should agree by now that water kills this fuel system. Period.

Water in the fuel has always been a problem for diesel engines. The problem is that now instead of being a relatively minor annoyance and a relatively inexpensive repair we are now looking at $12k when it happens.

So, I think a better question to ask over 150K miles is not whether the pump will wear out because it has been eating a steady diet of 520SCAR ULSD but : What are my chances of getting a tank of fuel with some emulsified water in it or fuel that never had the lubricity additive put in by the refiner/blender over 150K miles? Unfortunately over 150K miles I think there is a decent chance that will happen...1:20? 1:40? Not good odds when you are talking about a $12k bill.




---Aaron