porthole
Retired
Can you explain this?
Perhaps you missed the part where I said (here and in other posts) that I do use the Motorcraft branded fuel additive. The bottom line is that I have used diesel and gasoline additives going back to the late 80's when I started boating.
Since having diesel powered trucks I have been fairly consistent with using diesel additives. And, since I can purchase the Motorcraft brand at the same or lesser cost then the aftermarket branded items, I do indeed use PM-22 and 23. Although for some reason and I don't know why, I never needed an anti-gel formula when I had my GMC, while my Ford buddies did. And the ones that did not use an anti-gel always had gel problems in the temp extremes. Oddly enough it seemed to affect Excursions more then SD's.
I also know, as you probably do, that the additive, Motorcraft or any brand, is not needed to maintain warranty.
Same goes for Motorcraft branded oil and fuel filters (which I do use for the same reason I use the PM-22 & 23).
Confidential, maybe when it was sent back and forth at Ford, but once the NHTSA got ahold of it for whatever reason they were looking - and posted on the NHTSA site, it became public domain.
I will reserve comment on the 2nd part of the above statement.
But, one of the reasons I mentioned it was because of the conversations relating to when the WIF indicator actually - indicated. I am not that familiar with the 6.4, only know enough about it to stay away, but I did find it interesting that a "cycle" of events was needed to have the WIF show positive for water. With the distinct possibility that a 10% water contamination could possibly not cause a WIF event.
That conversation is at the bottom of this post.
And of course it raises my curiosity as to if the 6.7 fuel system works the same way. In fact, the Ford types in the NHTSA documents even have that question.
I am still curious though, with water in the fuel being such a catastrophic event for the 6.7, why a better water-fuel separator was not incorporated. In the cases where water caused fuel system damage, the amount of water involved was grossly disproportionate to the cost of repairs. And many of us know that the HPFP failure due to either the poor quality fuel in this country or to water intrusion is a rare event, non the less, one of our own members here was subjected to that very expensive repair.
And his warranty was denied because the "tech" that worked on his truck claimed that he could smell water in the fuel system
When fuel injection became the norm on passenger cars, a simple hydrophobic sock on the pickup tube prevented any water from getting into the fuel system from the tank. If water was in the tank, the engine stopped for lack of fuel, not damage.
You are correct, I failed to follow up on that thread. I had surgery last month and have had my share of good and bad days. It was only a few days ago where I was able to sit back at my desk and use a computer instead to tapping out one character at a time with my non dominate thumb on my phone.
But, I did start putting together my reply to that thread, just forgot to finish it. I will attempt to complete that tomorrow or the next day.
I am not a Ford engineer (or any engineer for that matter). But, I do hold a degree in automotive - diesel technology. And although this is old school, I was certified for complete engine service / overhaul for the Cat 3208 series, Cummins 903/904 series and all of the 2 cycle Detroit series engines.
I did almost 20 years as a Class A tech for a couple of large and small Chrysler corp dealers and was a Mitsubishi and Cummins tech for those diesels in Chrysler applications. In 1994 I was the Chrysler Corp Tech of the year for the New York Zone. And not that it means much, but I did hold the ASE General automotive Cert since 1978 up until 2008 when I just got tired of taking the tests for a field I was no longer active in. So, I do have a smidgen of automotive knowledge.
And - I am not the only one on this forum that has similar experience ..........................
So I would suggest we leave this as an informative thread and leave the snide remarks out.
No matter what the subject is - if one puts out some information there will be those that question it, either because they don't understand, don't think it is correct (whether it is or is not is immaterial to those asking) or just want to know more.
BTW, have you gotten a chance to look up the engineering differences between the 2011 - 2014 F-350 DRW and F-450 pickups (not cab & chassis)?
These are not my comments - just a cut and paste of the Ford guys conversing with reference to the 6.4 pump and injectors.
With the fuel system in the 6.4 being so susceptible to water what is the reasoning behind the WIF light and codestrategy?
When a 7.3L had water it turned the light on right away warning the customer. What was the capacity of the 7.3 and howmuch water did it hold before it started bypassing the water?
See below description of the light/code operation from the PCED:
NOTE: The PCM must detect water in fuel during engine idle at least 6 consecutive times to set DTC P2269and to light the WIF indicator. The PCM monitors the WIF sensor for 30 seconds at idle. Each time the PCMchecks for water in fuel it must detect a change in the vehicle speed before it will check for water in fuel again.
NOTE: In this step the vehicle needs to be driven enough so the PCM can detect a change to the vehicle speed.
Scenario as follows, customer fuels up because they are low on fuel, 5 gallons left, they fuel up with contaminated fuelthat is 10% water and puts 10 gallons in the tank. Water gets in the HFCM and fills it with water to the point it is bypassing because the customer is driving down the road not idleling or cycling the key. The light never comes on becausethere was only one key cycle but by now the truck stalls because the high pressure pump, injectors are wiped out.
EA11-003 0000285Why is the capacity so small in the HFCM? The truck above has a gallon of water in it but it started bypassing with 3.2 ozwith no light that leaves 125 more oz to go through the system with no light.
What about trucks that idle all day at a job site but never get driven or more? One could run water through the system andnever set a light what is the logic behind that?
With such a low capacity by the time the light comes on and sets the code the fuel system is already compromised. I haveover 1000 CQIS reports of p2269 which tells me there are a lot of fuel supply stations that have water in their fuel.
Is the 6.7 going be as susceptible to water as the 6.4?
Are there plans for a better WIF light strategy?
Is the FCM going to have more of a capacity for water/contamination?
