The Ford Guys Turned off Pilot Injection

[TBrennan]

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.

The difference with Dodge is a big one, they leave the engine control to the experts, Cummins. The Dodge PC just interfaces to it and doesn't take direct control.

 

[lmills]

Originally posted by TBrennan

The difference with Dodge is a big one, they leave the engine control to the experts, Cummins. The Dodge PC just interfaces to it and doesn't take direct control.

I here ya! That's what I have been saying all along. Ford needs to back out and let IH design the programming for the PSD. They have been running the 6. 0 in their trucks for a couple years and have not had any of the issues Ford is having. I think we are safe as long as D/C doesn't start messing with our engine programming.

 

[rbattelle]

Johnstra-



Having done some programming myself over the years, I can sympathize with the problem of writing code that many people will use... sometimes it's amazing the things end-users will come up with that you never thought of and will crash your software bad.



I sympathize, but at the same time I love picking on Microsoft products... it's just so easy!

 

[jlasich]

I feel the same as far as the ECM goes. Let the engine experts control the engine/transmission and the pickup experts do whatever they do. I will be ordering a Cummins 600 this week and am not nervous one bit. Cummins knows what they're doing and with Ford so screwed up right now, you can bet DCX and Cummins want everything to be perfect.

 

[crabjoe]

Originally posted by 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

I think his problem the VVT. I hear they get stuck sometimes and the way to get them working properly is to shut down and restart. I understand there is a fix (Reflash).



BTW, about Windows... With Windows 2000, I rarely get teh BSOD. Infact, I can't remember the last time I got it. Because of this, I talked my friend into upgrading last week. Now he has run into 2 problems. Windows 2000 shuts the power down too soon causing the write cache to not be written. This had caused his system hive to get corrupted, so he had to reinstall. BTW, he does have a Promise ATA card. After he pulled the ATA card and reinstall, his system now reboot itself when he tries to print to a USB connected HP Printer. This is a major PITA. It makes no sense to me why MS would put out a fix for the write cache problem on Win 98 and not on Win2K or why Windows reboots when using a MS approved print driver. I think the next set for him might be to go Linux.

 

[lmills]

I am not worried too much about cummins with the new ecm requirements. I am sure they are ready for the 325/600 motor. I am wondering what type of new hurdles the aftermarket companies are going to have to go through to make new boxes to work with the more complex ecm

 

[CATCRACKER]

you know it wasnt long ago that all you had to do on these engines was turn some bolts and look at what we are talking about now!

 

[HoleshotHolset]

crabjoe: "I think his problem the VVT. I hear they get stuck sometimes and the way to get them working properly is to shut down and restart. I understand there is a fix (Reflash). "



My VW with a variable geometry turbo does the same thing... If you are on the highway... say at 60mph and romp on it... the boost goes to the "5:30" position on the 30psi boost gauge (35psi ??)... . it will stay there for about 15 seconds or so... then come back down to 20-25psi. If you keep your foot into it for long enough the VNT blades get stuck in WFO position. Eventually you run out of highway and have to let off...



The problem is when you want to get back into it again... . the VNT blades are still at WFO position. So it ain't gonna be building jack squat for boost... . Since we're dealing with electronic engines that are hell bent on reducing smoke... . the ECM realizes that it can't control the VNT mechanism... . AND it also realizes that there isn't enough manifold pressure to burn the fuel... . The end result is that the ECM cuts the fuel way back and you're left with an engine missing both of its cajones... .



The 'fix' for this on the VW is just like the F*rds. Shut her down... and start her back up. I'm not sure if the ECM realizes an overboost situation and goes into this mode... or if the VNT blades really are stuck and won't come back to normal unless you shut her down for a few seconds... .



As for 'electronic' tuning VS. 'mechanical' tuning... I have done both... and still prefer messing with my mechanical pumped 12-valve... . I get to use my hands/wrenches a lot more, instead of a soldering iron and electrical components... .



Matt

 

[jrobinson2]

HoleshotHolset

He actually said to me "it sounds like the turbo just quits working" so that may be his problem.

Jared

 

[HoleshotHolset]

Does he have a boost gauge?



Mine goes from 30++ psi to 10psi and shoots out a HUGE cloud of smoke all at the same time... .



I've done this about 3 or 4 times and shutting it down for 10 seconds fixed it every time.



I'm beginning to think that my next turbo will not be a VNT... despite all the benefits. There's so much to love about traditional internal/externally wastegated turbo setups... . and with all the newer ball-bearing turbos... . darn near VNT-like spool is possible.



Matt

 

[jrobinson2]

No boost gauge, he did say it does it mostly when he's towing his gooseneck with the backhoe loaded. He also recently had a problem that caused the engine to lose a bunch of oil, he thought they said it was the "high pressure pump"? He hates the truck and is going to trade it for a Duramax at around 50K miles, it has 35K now in less than a year and has been back to the dealer several times.

Jared

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

"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. "



YUP - and I fondly remember the days when most failures on vehicles were purely mechanical - a fuel pump fails, is easily spoted, and a quick trip to Pep Boys put ya back on the road again with the help of a screwdriver and a couple of wrenches...



NOW, we are faced with the spectre of being shut down by an obscure 5 cent Taiwan-made resistor buried deep inside some engine control module where we don't have a PRAYER of finding it!



I commonly see 50 year old diesel tractors still in regular operation in rural fields - sometimes kept in operation with baling wire and duct tape - but STILL operating - how many 50 year old solid-state TVs and similar electromics stuff is still in regular daily operation? Where will our latest crop of computer controlled vehicles be in 20-40 years? Some of us DO keep stuff that long, but will the electronic replacement components still be available - or will the whole vehicle hafta be junked because of that failed 5 cent resistor?



Computers and electronics are nice - and *I* am up to my ears in the stuff - but the time is long past when the common individual (OR most shop techs!) had the smarts to really be able to accurately trouble-shoot and repair his own electronically controlled appliances or vehicles - we just keep digging our own graves deeper and deeper - it's GREAT when it works, and pure hell when it DON'T!

 

[Got HO?]

Gary,

You make some good points. BUT, I remember the days of 10k mile plugs, points & condensor replacements, tires that wore out in 15k miles, complete chassis lubes every 5k etc etc. Granted, it was easier to get moving again after a breakdown in the boonies, but remember what a PITA it was to keep your vehicle on the road. Seems like I always had something to do on the weekend, not because I wanted to, but because I had to. Electronics have made cars more reliable IMO. When they do screw up they are a pain, but overall cars & trucks have become more reliable. Case in point, I own 2 1985 BMW 535i's, one has 236k miles, the other has 285k miles. Neither has ever had to be towed, haven't replaced any control units or non service parts except for rpm sensors on both (Plug connectors had come apart from age & heat). They've been pretty darn good so far (Touch wood)

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

OH, I'm all for better tires and spark plugs too - and they HAVE improved much on their own, independent of vehicle computer control - just as lubricant improvements allow longer mileage between changes. Sure, accompanying engine control systems contribute as well - but at what price over the long haul for the average user?



How about having to swap out a complete $900 integrated module simply because the included alternator voltage regulator - a former $12 separate item - has failed? Or a failed control board on a VP-44 that then requires the complete unit to be replaced at well over $1000, when the board alone could probably be had for $100?



IF we must submit to ever increasing use and reliance upon computer systems, how about at least making them more "consumer friendly" by making their troubleshooting easier and replacements less costly? Why must we accept the requirement to pay over $1000 to replace a complete system board, when all that has really failed, is a 10 cent component?



Maybe more "modularism", and less "integration", so specific failed sections can be identified and replaced, rather than a much larger and expensive assembly?



We don't wanna poke TOO much "fun" at the Ford guys - WE may be next!

 

[HoleshotHolset]

You need the electronics to be able to deal with emissions. Plain evidence that we can all relate to is the progression from VE-44 - P-7100 - VP-44 - and now the 3-stage pilot injection - common rail fuel system...



It all comes down to meeting the budget, making the sales quota and keeping Uncle Sam happy. There are lots of compromises in between that the consumer... and everyone else in the chain... has to deal with.



Matt

 

[rbattelle]

Originally posted by Gary - KJ6Q

Maybe more "modularism", and less "integration", so specific failed sections can be identified and replaced, rather than a much larger and expensive assembly?

I whole-heartedly agree.