Cetane Posted January 12, 2007 Share Posted January 12, 2007 I am not sure if anyone has brought this up but there is an interesting article in the chicago tribune today. It may have future implications.......... http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-0701120110jan12,0,394060.story?coll=chi-business-hed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 Interesting. Does anyone know HOW heated this really is? This is not the first time Ford and International have had it out over engines. It would be sad if the two eventually split after so much time but there are many people that think that a CAT engine in a Ford Super Duty would be the pinnacle of all truckdome! Wait a minute. Get a grip, let's not do anything like ruin a good thing! I think a break-up would hurt both companies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cetane Posted January 13, 2007 Author Share Posted January 13, 2007 This is a pretty well kept secret even within Ford. I doubt anyone will talk about it at this point. Its hard to say what the final outcome will be but there is a lot more to the story than this article outlines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamageINC Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 I'm pretty unsure what to think o fthe whole situation, except that I'm not too comfy with the idea of havin ga 6.4 around for 1 or 2 model years and then learning that the Ford/Navistar thing is done. Then it's something brand-spankin' new all over again with whatever other company they decide to deal with. But... that's just speculation too. I do know that although Navistar is a relatively large company, they're still just a dog turd in the lawn of what is Ford Motor Company. As "dire" as the media likes making Ford out to be, the reality of it is that they are still one of the largest and most successful companies on the face of the planet. Navistar could use Ford's business much more than Ford needs theirs, when you consider that 70% of Ford's Super-Duty sales have a diesel in them. IF something does actually cause a split between the two, Ford will NEED to find someone else. Quickly, too. They're already using Cat engines in the 650/750's so I suppose it's possible to see a Cat motor in the Light-duty trucks. And I guarantee that would cause a retarded amount of *good* attention in Ford's direction seeing as virtually everyone on the face of the earth knows about Caterpillar. Nothing I can do but sit back and watch.. if things go south quick enough, that 6.4 class I'm taking in 2 weeks will be about as useful as a box of Trojans in the hands of the Pope. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m-mathus Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 it was only a matter of time.....first the techs now the suppliers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted January 13, 2007 Share Posted January 13, 2007 I had started a topic back when I had been at CAT for emissions certification that the Instructor mentioned that CAT engines will be in smaller vehicles than the F650/F750 trucks. His comments ended with that one sentence. I am not sure which forum it was but there was mention that Ford did put together a mock-up of a Super Duty with a C-7 in it. Don't know if that is true or not... that engine just seems like it is just a little too heavy or big. With all that has gone on in the last few years and the money that has been lost, one can't help but think that investing the money into developing their own new diesel engine might have been wiser choice for Ford in the long run. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/shrug.gif Maybe not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordTechCA Posted January 20, 2007 Share Posted January 20, 2007 is the rumor i hear true about Ford has more problems then navistar with the 6.0L? the warranty costs wouldnt be so high if Ford would just let us fix them instead of all the bandaids we have been tossing at the 6.0L since its been out. how many times have we done the same repair or close to the same repair because of some fast money saving TSB that was issued that only delayed fixing it right the first time. Ford screwed up with this engine and dont have the guts to admit its their failure and not navistars. why did Ford have to spec the 6.0L with more HP and rev higher then what international did within their own vehicles? all i can say is i hope this goes bad for Ford because i still believe in international engines. the 7.3L was a great engine and the 6.0L could of been if Ford had left it alone and ran it the way international built it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Warman Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Ford couldn't leave the 6.0 alone.... how many 230 HP engines does anyone think would sell when competing in the light truck diesel world? The 6.0 hasn't been without it's problems, especially early on in the adventure. At the same time, I still firmly believe that these are very good engines with decent electronics and decent after treatments. And I can say this simply because of the sheer number of happy owners we have in our area... These engines have fallen victim to owners that have never had a diesel before and have a misbegotten belief that some of the stuff they read on "other forums" is good to do. Still others have fallen victim to techs that have surpassed their technical abilities or can't stand the thought of not making buckets of gain time on flat rate. For the largest part, I think that Ford has stepped up to the plate quite well when it comes to addressing most concerns. As Kieth so eloquently put in another forum, this engine will "separate the men from the boys".... We will either see "interactive diagnostics" or we will see the good diesel techs become a commodity... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cetane Posted January 21, 2007 Author Share Posted January 21, 2007 Well, I had a long response typed out for this thread but I decided not to post it. Frankly, sometimes you guys' posts are down right insulting. You have no idea the work it takes to "fix" the problems that the 6.0L had. Those "bandaids" were the best engineering could do to on short notice to meet conditions that did not occur during durability testing. These fixes didnt just have to fix problem they also have to work with the existing framework. Emissions, driveability, durability and safety with every model combination has to tested to make sure it still meets the requirements you suggest we just threw out there. It is pretty naive to think Ford saved any money by issuing multiple TSB's on the same issue. The fact is until the permanent fix could be throughly tested, stop gap fixes had to be issued to keep the trucks on the road. Is Ford without blame, absolutely not, but there is much more to this situation than you will ever know. The fact is ITEC is trying weasel out of things agreed to in the contract. This is due to a variety of factors. Some of the reasons will become clear in the future, some not. I never understood why people assume the process to fix a problem is as simple as a new part, cal or procedure. The fact is the problems that surfaced took time to fix correctly and that is why you are seeing vastly improved trucks today than in '03. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamageINC Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Took the thoughts right out of my skull. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 You have no idea the work it takes to "fix" the problems that the 6.0L had. Those "bandaids" were the best engineering could do to on short notice to meet conditions that did not occur during durability testing. These fixes didn't just have to fix problem they also have to work with the existing framework. Emissions, driveability, durability and safety with every model combination has to tested to make sure it still meets the requirements you suggest we just threw out there. It is pretty naive to think Ford saved any money by issuing multiple TSB's on the same issue. The fact is until the permanent fix could be throughly tested, stop gap fixes had to be issued to keep the trucks on the road. Is Ford without blame, absolutely not, but there is much more to this situation than you will ever know. Unfortunately, there are many opinions, mostly based on personal experiences, anger/frustration and ignorance. We know why owners are unhappy and the Internet provides them an easy to access pulpit from witch to express anger and display ignorance. As for technicians, dealers and Ford employed professionals almost the same can be said but the sad thing is, there is no excuse for it because WE are in this together. At the heart of it, I cite education and communication the biggest failure of all. From the beginning of the 6.0L launch most if not all of us in the field were untrained and without adequate support for what was about to happen. Trapped between the manufacturer and the consumer WE were left without answers and we took a beating both financially and from our customers who only wanted straight answers and for their trucks to be right. We all will continue to feel the pain from that for some time to come. I believe the above statement to be 100% truthful and the product shows it. Most importantly, I for one, have a lot of experience, training and now, backing from the manufacturer in a technical sense concerning the 6.0L that I consider outstanding. However, almost daily I am put in a position to educate and inform a customer or fellow technician and present things in a generally positive manner and diffuse a bad situation before it arises; it is very difficult to do that standing next to a truck with it's cab in the air. I for one have felt insulted and belittled every time I had no answer for a pissed off customer... every time I log onto the many web forums I frequent... can't explain why a truck was towed in for the third time in 6-months... Websites like FRT, TDS, FTE, SDD, TDG and so on are full of ignorance and anger. Try posting anything about this topic on the FMC Dealer Message Boards and see how quickly the post gets pulled and you get banned! At least here, someone like yourself can make a post like you did and at least in my opinion, it means something and I thank you for posting it. One of the hardest things a person has to to is look at themselves and determine what role they are going to play and how well they are going to play that role. You can sit around and continue to whine, gripe and project the blame onto someone else - or - you can pick yourself up, educate yourself and make the effort to succeed. With the resources and lessons learned behind us, we now have no excuse for failure other than not trying. Cetane, I don't think I can say anything to help you not feel insulted by some of our posts but our fellow members are free to speak their minds and I certainly encourage that. You are in a position to help us understand things and shed light on what is going on despite being limited as to what you can share. For what it's worth, you are not alone and are in very good company! I don't know what your position in all of this actually is, but, if you are personally involved in the product improvement, my hat is off to ya. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/thumbup.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cetane Posted January 21, 2007 Author Share Posted January 21, 2007 I certainly did not mean to discourage people from expressing their opinions or experiences. I just wish that sometimes people would sit back, look at the big picture and comtemplate their posts before submitting. Maybe I am in a unique position because I have been on the line and now see things from the inside. To be honest I dont think anything I said should be much of a surprise. Maybe that is a mistake on my part. I certainly dont want to portray an image of engineering up here on a "high-horse" that just leaves techs hanging out to dry. There is a myriad of reasons why things played out the way they did and it would be irresponsible of me to print them on the internet. I will not continue to argue the faults of the 6.0L, we all know them and I cannot defend my position well without revealing things I am not willing to divulge. Along those lines and in keeping with the subject of this thread, the article referenced does not paint a clear picture of reasons behind the lawsuit. As always politics plays a big part and it is a part you will likely never hear about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordTechCA Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Ford couldn't leave the 6.0 alone.... how many 230 HP engines does anyone think would sell when competing in the light truck diesel world? The 6.0 hasn't been without it's problems, especially early on in the adventure. At the same time, I still firmly believe that these are very good engines with decent electronics and decent after treatments. And I can say this simply because of the sheer number of happy owners we have in our area... These engines have fallen victim to owners that have never had a diesel before and have a misbegotten belief that some of the stuff they read on "other forums" is good to do. Still others have fallen victim to techs that have surpassed their technical abilities or can't stand the thought of not making buckets of gain time on flat rate. For the largest part, I think that Ford has stepped up to the plate quite well when it comes to addressing most concerns. As Kieth so eloquently put in another forum, this engine will "separate the men from the boys".... We will either see "interactive diagnostics" or we will see the good diesel techs become a commodity... how many? well thats something we will never know but they sold a ton of 7.3L's that were very reliable at the hp number. i was told when the 6.0L first came out they were wound up about as much as they can handle without the customers taking a perfectly running truck and modifying it. we all know the 7.3L can take more power without issue yet Ford didnt leave the customer any room for error on the 6.0L. is it Ford's fault, the customers fault or internationals fault in the design? the real question is how many 6.0L customers that had 7.3L's before will be lost due to the 6.0L and not willing to give the 6.4L a chance. your other point of the wrong people owning a diesel. i totally agree with that and have been telling my service manager thats one of the biggest issues we have. some of the issues we see at our dealer would not be an issue if the vehicle was used the way it was ment to be used. as for the techs being a problem, yes flat rate is probably a big cause for alot of these trucks not getting fixed the way they should be. i know i wouldnt work on them if i had to work flat rate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordTechCA Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Well, I had a long response typed out for this thread but I decided not to post it. Frankly, sometimes you guys' posts are down right insulting. You have no idea the work it takes to "fix" the problems that the 6.0L had. Those "bandaids" were the best engineering could do to on short notice to meet conditions that did not occur during durability testing. These fixes didnt just have to fix problem they also have to work with the existing framework. Emissions, driveability, durability and safety with every model combination has to tested to make sure it still meets the requirements you suggest we just threw out there. It is pretty naive to think Ford saved any money by issuing multiple TSB's on the same issue. The fact is until the permanent fix could be throughly tested, stop gap fixes had to be issued to keep the trucks on the road. Is Ford without blame, absolutely not, but there is much more to this situation than you will ever know. The fact is ITEC is trying weasel out of things agreed to in the contract. This is due to a variety of factors. Some of the reasons will become clear in the future, some not. I never understood why people assume the process to fix a problem is as simple as a new part, cal or procedure. The fact is the problems that surfaced took time to fix correctly and that is why you are seeing vastly improved trucks today than in '03. ok sorry maybe the use of bandaid wasnt the right term to use. i know coming up for fixes isnt easy. its frustrating in the shop though when just as we are getting a handle on reparing the 6.0L and keeping the customer happy Ford comes and tells us we can no longer do what we have been doing or a new calibration is released that is susposed to fix something to only cause issues somewhere else, i think thats why i used the term bandaid. using turbos as an example, yes we replaced alot of them since 2003 and fixed alot of vehicles, then we get the turbo clean TSB that only caused more come backs til it was made clear what to look for in the cleaning process to determine a good turbo that could be cleaned or one that needed to be replaced. we are made to look like iddiots in the customers eyes even though we are doing what Ford tells us we can do. the 03 engine i think ran the best and the least amount of problems 2-3 calibrations ago. over 50% of the customers that have gotten the latest FICM calibration arent happy with the 30 buzz after shut down. again sorry to offend you Cetane Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 I certainly did not mean to discourage people from expressing their opinions or experiences. No. You didn't. This is exactly the kind of discussion and ideas that should have been exchanged from the beginning. You have to remember, many of the technicians and service personnel for that matter, are still quite clueless. That is why I am floored that we already have training and product materials available to us before the trucks have arrived at the dealers. I know someone here has already had classroom instruction and I am going this week. Pinch me! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif But I think we are all holding our breath with this new engine and God forbid, if there be any problems, opening up the lines of communication will be essential for minimizing their effect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktmlew Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 My biggest !@#!?$! with the 6.0L is the wiring harness design. What were they thinking and who did the buy the connectors from ACME? You remember ACME from the Roadrunner cartoons? Great quality! /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/poke.gif /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/hitthefan.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cetane Posted January 22, 2007 Author Share Posted January 22, 2007 First off, I want to apologize for coming on a little strong with my first post. It was a rough week on the development front and we are losing people(luckily not me) which makes the job even tougher. It has been a while since I have had to lay a wrench on these trucks especially one that has a irate customer behind it. I should have taken my own advice and looked at the big picture. I acknowledge that the service procedures have not been as linear as they probably should have been but that was partly because of the reasons I listed earlier. Unfortunately this makes you guys look bad. Just as unfortunate, I think you will see similar things happen with regards to the new aftertreatment system on the 6.4L. We have put so much work in to this new engine that it is hard to imagine any problems will surface but, as I am sure you all know, it is impossible to be everything to everybody. Hopefully some of the variables that are out of our control will be lessened but some how I doubt it. On a seperate note, what became of the chat room suggestion? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Quote: On a seperate note, what became of the chat room suggestion? Just waiting for a few more votes for a day and time to trickle in. I'll post something this week so we can test it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordTechCA Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Quote: On a seperate note, what became of the chat room suggestion? Just waiting for a few more votes for a day and time to trickle in. I'll post something this week so we can test it out. now will this chat room be open 24/7 or just in the evenings? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Browning Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 now will this chat room be open 24/7 or just in the evenings? Actually, the chat room(s) are always available. Look up. The link is in the menu next to the PhotoPost link /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/wink.gif The chat client is actually a Flash script that requires no set up on the user's part. Just click the link, wait for it to load and log on with your screen name that appears next to your posts. No password is required. The "Poll" is just to get an idea of a preferred time to suggest a chat session to try it out and see how it well it works but you can use it any time! I would have no objections to anyone posting a time or setting up a chat for what ever topic... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.