The Ford Guys Turned off Pilot Injection

[rbattelle]

Check out this thread from the Diesel Stop:



Reflashes



They turned off their pilot injection! I find this interesting. It's almost as though the Ford engineers are at a loss for ideas to fix the 6. 0, so they figured they'd try turning off pilot injection and see what happens.

 

[KBennett]

Noise? What about engine life?

Most guys are complaining about the engine noise which would really tick me off if I purchased a quiet diesel only to have it taken away because of poor engineering/testing.



I thought that pilot injection increased the life of the motor as well? From what I have read the combustion occurs more slowly and without a big spike the engine components last longer and you don't get as much soot in the oil. The Cummins seems to last forever anyway. But the Ford PS?

 

[DF5152]

they all compare the sound to the old cummins

 

[TCDiesel]

polit injection

ALL vehicles have some defects,But this is the first I EVER HEARD to turn off a Major function of the motor. I WOULD NOT ALLOW THIS IF IT WAS MY TRUCK.

I also though that warranties were for fix and/or replace,NOT TURN OFF WHEN CONFINENT.

 

[RonWeiss]

I agree... . what if the main reason I purchased the 6. 0 was because of it's quiet running. And I was willing to pay 45/50K for it to boot.



I hate lawyers, but I'd be signing one up if they did a re-flash to cure some other issue and now I find my engine sounds like a 7. 3L



I get sick reading the posts at the Diesel Stop...



Ron W.

 

[gsbrockman]

What a POWER*JOKE !

 

[Got HO?]

Ford problems..........

I wonder what the implications are for Ford re. the EPA on this. I understand that one of the benefits of pilot injection was a cleaner burn, not to mention the howls from Ford owners about poor mileage, no power etc etc etc.

If Ford is changing programming to this degree, aren't they in effect "de-certifying" this engine so that it no longer meets the smog standards it was built to meet?

I think some attorney that smells this one will have a great time with Ford, especially if those owners are savvy enough to team up on it. Can you say "Class action?":-{}

 

[TCDiesel]

polit injection

Ford remove a major part of the 6. 0 operation,probably for their benefit,It show how low a manufacture will go, instead of standing behind its products at lease for the warranty period,Its JUST DOWN RIGHT WRONG.....

 

[Steve M]

Yep, yer truck's ready. We turned the noise up and the power down to cover up the problem. That's whatcha wanted ain't it Buddy!

 

[dieselpilot1969]

Holy bat crap will wonders never cease!

 

[boonsur]

Who would've thought..... if you want quiet, you have to buy a Cummins

 

[rbattelle]

Check this one out too, although it's rather long.



The old bait and switch courtesy Ford Motor Company

 

[lmills]

I think some of the reason behind them removing the pilot injection might have been to free up space in the ECM. I remember reading somewhere that the ECM was not up to the task of controlling everything. Supposedly it was undersized and that is why they were having problems with so much of the electronics. By removing bits and pieces of the progamming they are probably taking a load off of the ECM.



That problem sorta scares me when I read the article that Joe D wrote about the new 325/600 cummins. He wrote that the new engine electronics will take almost twice as much to run the motor as the current common rail. They are relying more on the computer to handle different injections and even the boost levels are being handled by an electronic wastegate. Most likely Cummnins is well ahead of this and we won't have the issues the Ford guys are having by overtasking the ECM. At least I would hope.

 

[rbattelle]

Originally posted by lmills

I think some of the reason behind them removing the pilot injection might have been to free up space in the ECM. I remember reading somewhere that the ECM was not up to the task of controlling everything. Supposedly it was undersized and that is why they were having problems with so much of the electronics. By removing bits and pieces of the progamming they are probably taking a load off of the ECM.



That problem sorta scares me when I read the article that Joe D wrote about the new 325/600 cummins. He wrote that the new engine electronics will take almost twice as much to run the motor as the current common rail. They are relying more on the computer to handle different injections and even the boost levels are being handled by an electronic wastegate. Most likely Cummnins is well ahead of this and we won't have the issues the Ford guys are having by overtasking the ECM. At least I would hope.

That's a very interesting way to look at it... one I had not considered. Where I come from, we like to say "computing power is cheap", so go ahead and make the computer do everything. But if you're building a truck engine I suppose you're not putting a top-of-the-line Pentium 4 in it. (Good thing, too! Imagine if our ECM had an Intel processor and ran Microsoft software? Brings a whole new meaning to the term "crash". )

 

[lmills]

Yeah, I can just imagine how many times I would have to shut off and restart my motor.

 

[Johnstra]

Hey, hey... come on now guys - I know I'm risking major flames by owning up to this - but I'm a Microsoft engineer. Before you trash Windows too much, keep in mind, you probably *would* have to 'reboot' your car several times a day if it were possible install thousands of 3rd party software drivers and applications on it. I'm not defending crappy code, and there's plenty of it in Windows, but if you consider how difficult it is to guarantee that the operating system will stand up to the abuse that thousands and thousands of devices (printers, scanners, cameras, etc. ) and programs (some very good and some very very bad), you'll have to admit that it's a pretty difficult thing to do. Think about fueling in your truck. You can install a box that will give you more go, but have to be prepared to replace some stock parts because you're likely to step outside the expected operating parameters. It's the same in the operating system world. Somebody writes some software that does some really nifty things, but they do it in such a way that they are operating outside the expectations of the operating system - very difficult to accommodate.



Btw, I'm not saying you shouldn't complain loudly when Windows doesn't perform the way it should... Microsoft is happy to accept your payment for the product, so it's your right to expect it behave correctly. I'm just pointing out that a whole bunch of the code running on your Windows system is not written by Microsoft and very often it's that non-Microsoft code that's causing problems.



Ok, I'll get of my soap-box now

 

[lmills]

Maybe you better stay up on that soap box. Windows is like the 6. 0's some are OK, some are just flat out junk.

 

[BillGotthelf]

Crashes? What about the "blue screen of death"?

 

[jrobinson2]

:-laf

Too funny, Today I was talking to a customer with a 6. 0 and he says every so often it just loses power and quits pulling (this may be what the 6. 0 guys call the "dead pedal problem"?) he said to "fix it" he has to pull over, shut of the engine and restart it, then it runs fine for a while. :-laf Sounds a lot like rebooting to me:-laf The blue smokescreen of death is what happens when the crankcase fills with diesel:-laf

Jared

 

[Johnstra]

Ah yes, the famous BSOD (blue screen of death)... Two things to note about a BSOD:



1) This is Windows protecting your system. I know it's a PITA, but when something has occurred that is really bad. The BSOD is a controlled system abort. Your data is protected and you can configure the system to save the entire machine state so the reason for the crash/BSOD can be determined. If it didn't happen it's far more likely your disk could become corrupted or you machine could become permanently disabled.



2) The vast majority of BSODs are caused by 3rd party drivers installed to operate attached devices (drivers for scanners, CD burning software, and video drivers lead the pack in terms of cause of system failures).



I work with a group of engineers that are trying to solve one facet of this problem by coming up with a way for folks to write drivers that cannot cause a system to crash, hang, or BSOD. It's a hard problem, but we're making good progress. Have any of you ever installed a piece of hardware have the little screen come up that says, "this is not a signed driver... ". If you look at the documentation that comes with some of these devices, they actually say, "ignore this screen and continue with your installation. " There's not much we can do about this.



I'm going to stop replying to this thread now since my comments have nothing at all to do with 3rd gen or any other gen of Cummins engine/transmission. If someone wants to start another thread in an appropriate forum I'm happy to contribute.



-john