It's deja vu all over again.

Am I the only one that can see that there needs to be a wholesale housecleaning of management and engineering at FoMoCO????????? Ford needed to do it way better than the last time, and it doesn't appear that that's happening now.

While I'm sure this is related to the emissions crap that is forced down our throats, I hope it is as vloney stated, from badly crimped fuel lines, but then the question begs to be asked, who thought one time use fuel lines were a good idea? Have they been used in other vehicles\applications? Did they crimp a million of those to check the machine, since they supposedly put a million miles on test trucks? (Starting to wonder about the truthfulness of those statements and under what conditions they're really tested)

It's almost laughable, but in reality it's sad that anybody can screw up this much and keep their jobs outside of politicians.

 

Don't these motors already have a shutdown feature for low oil pressure? I know every semi truck our comapny buys and medium duty trucks have low oil pressure shutdown to protect the engine...so in reality your engine could already shutdown while you are driving it if you lost oil pressure. Seems to be if exhaust temps in the DPF got to high it would makes sense to shut the engine down before flames started shooting out or before things started to melt.

 

Vince, it apparently is Ford...that says this won't fix it.

"...This software fix will recalibrate the engine's PCM (power control module) so if it senses that temperatures have climbed too high in the DPF it will begin a gradual reduction of fuel and air flow to the engine to help bring the temperatures back down," says Jarvis.

It should be noted that the software patch WILL NOT fix the root cause of any oil or fuel leak in the motor caused by faulty hardware...."

Would you not agree that this flash addresses the symptom and not the disease?

All 6.4 engines will have this re-flash. Those that power down and wind up on the side of the road will obviously have to go back to the dealer. I agree it is necessary to possibly save lives and property...even if it only happens a few times...but, it does not diminish the fact that it is a stop / gap device. It would surprise me...very much... if Ford leaves this programming in place for any great length of time. It inherently creates it's own safety issues. Especially when towing in extreme tow / haul conditions.

How would we suggest to fix it? Well, since we are not privy to the engineering / design specs or the results of the 10-12 million miles of testing...I reckon it would be pretty hard for us to do. Except for the sake of it being a rhetorical question....Why would you even ask?

Regardless, the cat is out of the bag and this story is not going to bode well for Ford. Even if they only finds 5 trucks with this issue. They are not going to be "almost pregnant" with bad PR. It is done. Gonna take a hell of a spin to get over it. Right or wrong. That's the way it will be. Two years from now boards like this will get threads wanting to know if the 6.4 really is still bar-b-queing cows as they stand in the pasture. It is in local news casts for crying out loud. Prominently showing an '08 SD driving thru a pasture and on truck paths in ranch land while they mention how at least one incident reportedly created a pasture fire. Naturally, they did not mention that it was quickly doused.

Keep in mind, this TV news report was in one of the biggest Ford truck markets in the world...currently in the middle of a drought. Next to the price of hay...pasture fires are the most frightening thing a farmer / rancher can read about in this state. Doesn't even include Oklahoma...another huge F-series diesel market...expereincing the same conditions. (BTW: It would only take one...to burn thousands of acres.)

So tell me, how would you suggest Ford fix this? I know, another rhetorical question.

Yes, Ford needs to put in place a process to keep this from happening. Yes, it may wind up only being a few vehicles. Yes, it is better to err on the side of caution. Yes, it could easily be an assembly line error that will also be easily remedied...never to be seen a again. Yes, IMO, they will likely have to undo the flash. Yes, IMO, it will likely take them quite some time to overcome the media assault and buyer perception.

BTW: I haven't seen anything from Ford yet regarding the leaks and how to fix them. Your comment Vince, regarding the fittings, seems like a pretty smart place to start...if that allows fuel to leak into the fire zone.

 

Everybody take a deeeep breath. They havn't said they don't know how to fix it. Just the opposite. They know there are circumstances where additional fuel can go to the DPF -- which can result in the tailpipe flame. They have now put in a safeguard to prevent the flame, and the cause would then be repaired by the dealer.

With all the owners on here we did not hear of this issue.

 

I realize that this is a fomoco product but engine issues (leaking fluids included) would be navistar's problem to fix. In regards to the leaking injector - a leaking injector line is going to leak to the outside of the engine not to the inside.

I have no idea what testing they did with the system but I'm guessing this falls under the worst case scenario category. On the other hand, the problems they had with the 6.0 should be fresh in their minds - they should have thoght to themselves " hey, that PMF is pretty darn hot...hotter than the flash point of any liquid in our engine. Maybe we should simulate a massive turbo failure and dump a bunch of combustable oil into the PMF and see what happens."

 

Yeah, but I'm not buying a Navistar, if I need warranty work, Ford won't let me go to Navistar, I have to go to Ford. It is a Ford issue, if from no other standpoint than they screwed up the testing, again.

 

It could easily be a Job 1 assembly issue. Post-testing. The jury is still out on that...IMO.

 

thats great.

 

The injectors and lines to the injectors are inside (under the valve cover). There has been a few instances of over full oil pans already (holy 6.0 batman!) because of faulty connections at the injectors. The pump lines are external however. The reflash may also adjust the amount of fuel injected during the regen cycle. One of the fires happened at the connection between the two turbo halves (again a manufacturing foul up). The fire out of the tailpipe is too much fuel in it--reflash it to adjust the fuel.

 

What kind of fires are these 3 reported incidents? Were they sustained fires? Or just short blasts?

 

(So tell me, how would you suggest Ford fix this? I know, another rhetorical question. )


You ask how to fix the issue, stop using Navistar for engines and start using Cat or Cummins or Ford can engineer their own diesel engine!! Screw International!

 

:-x22 :-x22

 

As soon as the fuel run out---the fires out.Shut the motor off, the fuel stops, the pressure goes down, the fire's out.

 

The billions of dollars necessary to manufacture a small diesel engine that will fit in a pickup, have enough horsepower, but still meet emissions spec, is enough to keep cat out of the picture (they dont want it). Cummins is elbow deep into daimler (they dont want us). Too many dollars required for engineering your own (dollars are a little tight right now). All thats left is Perkins, John Deere, and Yanmar.

 

something to do with flames and tailpipes sounds pretty cool, if u dont have the motor shutting down thing... you would be drooling when a 6.4 goes flying by with flames shooting out the exhaust the forest fires are just a way to tell the EPA to back off or they will get something theyve had coming for awhile... worse problems