Well, my luck just ran out...time for new injectors

[Wayne M.]

If I’m diagnosing a raising oil level, and it’s fuel, m starting with the crossover tubes.

To bring this back to neutral for a moment.
Take my case. 145000 mi, almost 5000 hours and I don’t want to touch it. It runs fantastic, I don’t push it very hard. I just want it to run - as they say- EVERYTIME.
So what’s the best health check one can do to evaluate injectors? Aside from bench testing them, or doing a return flow test?

 

[TCDiesel]

Cross Tubes will Never add fuel to oil. (Only create the fuel)

The 5.9-6.7 has a valley that the bores of the cross tubes cross, this valley is the head return port to the back of the head. Cross tubes are surround by Fuel provided by the return port of Injector, The Valley Pressure is 1-3 PSI that's it, if the cross tube is not matted/seated correctly it will leak in this area, The Injector has a body O-ring to stop the fuel from escaping into the lube in the head, the Injector on the bottom has the copper washer to stop the fuel form leaking into the cylinder, If it leaks into the cylinder it makes white/gray smoke at Idle.

We manufacture our own tools/fittings to check injector return rates in truck.. The shops we do business do use them and they are more friendly then the Miller Tools.

Its a combination of things to evaluate if Injectors are the problem....The Most misleading area is the Balance rates some use to condemn Injectors, We NEVER recommend this because the rates change according to conditions, and their is nothing on the truck that accurately measures the fuel intake precisely.

In Truck balance rates should only be used as Touchtone info.

The most common Injector failure for fuel in Oil is Solenoid O-ring failure. That's what we call it, second cracked body , another rocker rubs a hole into the body.

If its running good and no signs of any problems leave them alone, at fist sign of trouble , call someone who's an expert in HPCR systems..If this person cannot gain your trust move on. grocery buying just sucks up your wallet and you will hate your truck.

 

[sag2]

Cross Tubes will Never add fuel to oil. (Only create the fuel)

The 5.9-6.7 has a valley that the bores of the cross tubes cross, this valley is the head return port to the back of the head. Cross tubes are surround by Fuel provided by the return port of Injector, The Valley Pressure is 1-3 PSI that's it, if the cross tube is not matted/seated correctly it will leak in this area, The Injector has a body O-ring to stop the fuel from escaping into the lube in the head, the Injector on the bottom has the copper washer to stop the fuel form leaking into the cylinder, If it leaks into the cylinder it makes white/gray smoke at Idle.

We manufacture our own tools/fittings to check injector return rates in truck.. The shops we do business do use them and they are more friendly then the Miller Tools.

Its a combination of things to evaluate if Injectors are the problem....The Most misleading area is the Balance rates some use to condemn Injectors, We NEVER recommend this because the rates change according to conditions, and their is nothing on the truck that accurately measures the fuel intake precisely.

In Truck balance rates should only be used as Touchtone info.

The most common Injector failure for fuel in Oil is Solenoid O-ring failure. That's what we call it, second cracked body , another rocker rubs a hole into the body.

If its running good and no signs of any problems leave them alone, at fist sign of trouble , call someone who's an expert in HPCR systems..If this person cannot gain your trust move on. grocery buying just sucks up your wallet and you will hate your truck.

What kind of tool do you make that works as well but easier than the 9012?

 

[TCDiesel]

What kind of tool do you make that works as well but easier than the 9012?

The fittings. We have double Banjo fittings so you can measure the return form the Injectors and the pump with 1 fitting, so you don't have to disconnect anything.

Saga if they bolt this pump to the new 6.7 we will be offering conversion kits Immediately.. Cummins did not learn anything form the Ford / GM, this pump when it fails is a Particle maker, unlike the CP3.

We will be Selling kits / pumps / Injectors Yey thanks Ram......

#ad

 

[Ozymandias]

The Cp3 doesn't make particle into the Rail?
That's a good News! Glad to hear that.

 

[TCDiesel]

Yep, when it self -destructs, the bores don't allow particles to enter the fuel combustion chambers. Unlike the CP4.

 

[TFucili]

That's why I posted about the CP4.2 as soon as I saw it in the video.
Todd, what do you think of the Denso(?) setup GM went to on the latest Duradud?

 

[cerberusiam]

Solenoid o-rings, injector o-rings, cracked\damaged solenoid, CP-3 shaft seal, injector nozzle seat are just some other ways fuel can get into the oil. Stock bodies will crack with the spikes that the fuel system sees, more prevalent on the older trucks, rare but it does happen. It was more of an issue with the add-on pressure boxes of the day.

There is no one criteria that can point to a single bad injector in most cases. Contribution percentages, rpm drop on kill, and return rates all have to be factored in along with some SOP diagnosis. Return rates are not definitive either because the range is not absolute. It is more like: less than or equal to this value is good, this value to this value is acceptable and probably not a problem, over this value there is a problem now guess which of the 6, or combinations thereof are bad. Even if return rates are good at idle that doesn't translate to operation functionality, still could have RP pressure problems, vibrations, mpg variations, etc. Balance rates are more definitive but that takes costly complex machines and interpretation experience to pin point a setup or wear problem. All that taken together, replace the whole set with known good or you could be chasing ghosts BECAUSE there is no definitive definition for a "bad" injector.

Lots of chatter on the forums about the CP-4.2, none of it very good. NOW fuel quality becomes critical as they are more than a bit sensitive to ALL the things addressed by fuel quality: lubricity, cleanliness, water contamination. Extra filters, clean fuel source, and additives now move into mandatory requirements or ti is big $$$. An non-warranty failure on Ford will generate a $12k bill for the fix. Ford sells a retrofit to a CP-3 but retrofitting with their parts voids the engine warranty. ANY slight indication of fuel contamination and warranty is voided.

 

[TCDiesel]

That's why I posted about the CP4.2 as soon as I saw it in the video.
Todd, what do you think of the Denso(?) setup GM went to on the latest Duradud?

The LP5 has its share of Problems also.

Here's My Personal, Professional take on events, This generation of engineers Believe they are More Knowledgeable and knowing than the tried and proven Technogly. Yep I'm all for New things but to deny Pass failures is just Nuts , Yep, we can Make the CP4 better but it requires we get the Pump in like New condition and it still will require 100-250K miles freshening up. Otherwise risk the possible conditions of turning your pump (CP4) into the particle maker it has proven to be.

The CP4 cost to manufacture is about 30-40% less than the CP3, it looks like the New rail is a cast piece, Good, the China current rail (6.7) has proven to be a leaker at times.

 

[TFucili]

The CP4 cost to manufacture is about 30-40% less than the CP3.

Well, that about sums it up right there.

 

[Wayne M.]

Well, that’s pretty much the answers I’d thought I’d get. I guess it’s good to be a specialist and spot pattern failure.
So the best summary seems to be to yank em all when the time is right, and hope to get a good quality set, and relying on the OE replacement may not be the best. Add to that your pump may be contaminating the whole set. Lots to ponder here.
TC, I’ve only had a couple ISB’s apart (a good thing) and I really thought the tubes were open to leakage in the head, thus contaminating the EO, like some other engines.

 

[TCDiesel]

Its common that they do but its impossible for then to leak in the crank case. the O-rings shrink and leak on the plenum but that's extreme rare also.

 

[S.Morris]

For what its worth , based on a fleet(12-15) of 3rd gens, all purchased used but in the best condition we could find....
In my experience using running hours as the guage, not miles, and barring bad fuel/water related issues,(stock filtration) IF you surpass 6000 running hrs , you are running on borrowed time, and should be planning your injector renewal.

 

[Crunch]

In my experience using running hours as the guage, not miles, and barring bad fuel/water related issues,(stock filtration) IF you surpass 6000 running hrs , you are running on borrowed time, and should be planning your injector renewal.

Using engine hours as a schedule for parts maintenance/replacement and mileage for non-engine mechanical parts makes sense to me. Heck, it may even be a better way to schedule oil and filter changes, since hours aren't dependent on travel speed or conditions. I just checked my truck, and the engine has 8,273 hours on the clock. The odometer is just over 344K, and I've put about 1,000 miles on it since the injector replacement in late December. That puts me in the low 40's for MPH, and in the low to mid 500's for hours per year, a good chunk of that being long distance highway driving. On the other hand there has been a fair amount of idling while stopped at destinations, as well.