LARRY BRUDZYNSKI

Jim You and the wife have a extended invite whenever you feel the need to come south...... We enjoy fresh vegggies whenever we feel the need....

Baby food on a string???? Gotta have fresh......

Brad, That was a awesome pic!!!! One question though....Did that come from Rex's truck? We all know how he felt about Ford trucks after he beat/killed the one he stole from his customer.....

Just from experience with these.....Landscaping truck....Excessive idling.....What do we see???? Runs to cold, excess soot and carbon build up in the Turbo, Intake, and EGR valve....Stuck/Sticking Unison ring. Bad jewjew.....Take a look.... On edit.... 2 best things I can recommend.... 1) Drive it hard and with a load. 2) Refer to number 1 Diesels are meant to be worked not driven like a family truckster minivan......

Aaron, Shhhhhh. Quiet Rabbit, Were hunting here.... By the way hows the truck running?????

I don't know...Kinda looks like one of Jim's Hemi's.....

So it is engaging and dis-engaging? At what temp? Is it intermittent?

I know this has become a world market but when I see service replacement parts coming from China that just pisses me off.....Why brag about be "American made" when it really isn't?????

Your checking this off of the laptop? Or have you gotten a true reading from the T-Stat housing? What is the fan clutch doing while this is happening? Fully engaged?????? Do you have a laser temp probe?

Just ordered and recieved a 9d930 UV harness. Was quite disturbed upon opening the box, didn't even look at the part number tag before opening. Upon opening the box came across the tag wrapped around the harness. Looking at it came across the term in bold, "MADE IN CHINA" I then grabbed the box and also has in bold text "MADE IN THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA". It also states packaged in the USA in smaller print. I know we have been on this topic before but this is bad...... I don't know where FOMOCO is going but come on this is on a F-series truck.....WTF!!!!!! We ordered this to finish the custom harness to be able to check the 6.4 injectors on our test stand. But this is really disturbing.... Does Ford not see what anyone can see, when ordering their product?????

How many miles/km's on this truck?

SOOOOO!!!!! Let me get this straight(not that I don't know the answer already) Let's flush the intake with some fluid we don't know what's in it and blow all this crap thru the intake and into the engine........Where does it go and what does it do to the engine???????? THIS IS NOT A LATE 60's-early 70s engine we could use some water to blow off the excess carbon build up...... This engine eats its own shit and NEEDS to run hard with a load to clean itself out....... If it needs help to clean itself. It needs our help.....NOT THE TUNEUP IN A CAN......

Mike, I don't have to look any further.... 1) Turbo sale 2) Dusted engine 3) Customer says Ford sucks.... Am I close????

Aaron, those don't just break. Who was under the hood before you???? Chances are someone slipped and either grabbed the harness or stepped on it before you got to it..... By the way glad to hear your still up and going

I think the main concern here is...... And you may quote me on this...... " A fair job for a fair price " We all do a job that is worth our time and efforts and should be paid for it. If we all deal with FOMOCO and the A/M warranty companies, why should we be regulated by them and lose our ASSES. I might not compare to you guys on this but... I'm expected to give away my turbos,injectors,pumps,blades and clutches.....I DON'T THINK SO ALEX.........I'm here to make my bosses money and keep my nice comfortable job........I had the owner come out and ask me why I got a certain amount for a custom fan blade. I responded with the regular answer and he went away.....Fair price for a fair job.....Experience pays and the customer always calls back and thanks you......MY 2

Thing that kills me is take it back BUT put it back to stock before you do........WTF.........Performance mods are performance mods......It only makes it harder for us to diag any problem if there is one.......If we don't know whats really happening, how can we help to fix it???????If we can't see what the truck is doing when it happens, how can we help the customer? Whether mod'ed or not????? If it is pony up to it and ask for the help you need, Warranty or not, It doen't matter we have to fix them, don't we??????

Sorry I had one of those busier than shit periods.....Aaron, you have a place to stay if shit happens and you need to stay somewhere. My home is yours.... As long as you take your turn picking up dog poop I don't mind No really....Mine is yours...... Get well soon BUD.......

Poney up some cash from Cat on the manuals...Thay ain't cheap....I would suggest getting the owner to pay you for them if he plans on keeping them.

Should be 2-3 sensors in the t-stat housing. Start at the fan clutch and back trace the air line to the control valve/solenoid, follow the wires there back to the sensor/switch in the t-stat housing. The wire from that sensor should go back to the ecm. The other 2 sensors should be a alarmstat and the other the coolant temp sensor. These should both go back to the ecm as well. You need to isolate which is which. The fan clutch is easy you can jump the sensor and should here a click from the solenoid control valve. The other ones shouldn't be to difficult. If it has a alarmstat on it you can jump that and should set off the temp. alarm inside the cab. That would leave the temp sensor for the gauge. Take a closer look it shouldn't be to bad.

I believe the temp sensor for the gauge runs thru the ecm. Are you having any other issues with this truck? Fan clutch engagement? Overheating? Silly question but did you check the gauge? Bypass the sensor? Chafing? Etc,Etc......

I would hope that the Manufacturers would be contacting the EPA to investigate these companies. I found this search for the EPA guidelines for removal or tampering of emission control devices. It made for some interesting reading.... EPA420-B-00-003 May 2000 EPA Motor Vehicle Aftermarket Retrofit Device Evaluation Program Potential Tampering Liability Associated with Fuel Economy Retrofit Devices The federal tampering prohibition is contained in section 203(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act (Act), 42 U.S.C. 7522(a)(3). Section 203(a)(3)(A) of the Act prohibits any person from removing or rendering inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in any motor vehicle in compliance with regulations under Title II of the Act (i.e., regulations requiring certification that vehicles meet federal emissions standards). The maximum civil penalty for a violation of this section by a manufacturer or dealer is $25,000; for any other person, $2,500. Section 203(a)(3)( of the Act prohibits any person from manufacturing or selling, or offering to sell, or installing, any part or component intended for use with, or as part of, any motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine where a principal effect of the part or component is to bypass, defeat, or render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine, and where the person knows or should know that such part or component is being offered for sale or is being installed for such use. The maximum civil penalty for a violation of this section is $2,500. Installing any device, system or part(s) which affect the fuel delivery rate or the combustion process would be expected to affect elements of design of the emissions control system. Accordingly, any change from the original certified configuration of a vehicle such as adding a system or parts that affect the fuel delivery rate or the combustion process, or the manufacture, sale of, or installation of, aftermarket parts or systems which are not equivalent to the original equipment could be considered violations of section 203(a)(3) of the Act. However, EPA has established an enforcement policy, Mobile Source Enforcement Memorandum No. 1A (Memorandum 1A), to provide guidance to the public to reduce the uncertainty regarding potential liability under section 203(a)(3) of the Act for using or selling aftermarket parts or systems, or making adjustments or alterations to parts or system parameters. Basically, Memorandum 1A states that EPA will not consider any modification to a certified emissions control configuration to be a violation of the tampering prohibition if there is a reasonable basis for knowing that emissions are not adversely affected. In many cases, durability aging and emissions testing according to the FTP would be necessary to make this determination. There are two different methods for establishing a reasonable basis for knowing that emissions are not adversely affected by the installation of a retrofit device: 1) the installer knows of, or the 12 manufacturer of the device represents in writing, that FTP emission tests have been performed as prescribed in 40 CFR 86 showing that the device does not cause similar vehicles to fail to meet applicable emission standards for their useful life; or 2) a federal, state or local environmental control agency expressly represents that a reasonable basis exists. Such an agency determination is limited to the geographic area over which that agency has jurisdiction. Some states, such as California, have additional requirements. If the results of EPA emission testing of a retrofit device show that any of the regulated emissions increase (even though other regulated emissions may have decreased), EPA will publish a Federal Register Notice (Notice) explaining the legal implications of those findings on persons engaged in the business of servicing, repairing, selling, leasing, or trading motor vehicles, fleet operators, new car dealers and individuals. The Notice will alert the regulated parties that the installation of such a device by them may be deemed to be a violation of section 203(a)(3) of the Act. EPA does not have a mandatory, formal program to evaluate and make determinations of compliance of aftermarket parts with Memorandum 1A. Although EPA has informally evaluated compliance information in the past, because of current budget cuts and resource constraints we are not routinely reviewing information showing compliance with Memorandum 1A .While compliance with Memorandum 1A is required, submission of the information to us is not required unless we request the information to verify compliance. We emphasize, however, that our lack of review of the information does not relieve any one from responsibility to comply with Memorandum 1A or liability for violations of section 203(a)(3) and Memorandum 1A. The results of an FTP test are valid only for similar vehicles. Therefore, the test fleet should be diverse and large enough to provide an adequate data base from which conclusions can be drawn with reasonable confidence. When appropriate, however, analyses based upon engineering judgment can be used to determine the applicability of FTP test results to other vehicles and the devices’ effect on the durability of the emission control systems. The EPA’s NVFEL does not make decisions as to whether the installation of a particular retrofit device constitutes tampering with the emission control system of a vehicle. Questions regarding tampering or requests for copies of Memorandum 1A are handled by Steve Albrink in Washington, DC, at 202-564-8997. Miscellaneous Evaluations conducted in the EPA test program are for the purpose of demonstrating the effectiveness of developed devices and are not to be construed as development testing. All development work must precede EPA evaluation. The applicant will not be permitted to make adjustments to the test vehicle or to the device except to repair malfunctions. Such repairs will be permitted at the discretion of the EPA test engineer. 13 EPA engineering staff will prepare a draft report on the evaluation of the device for applicant review to ensure accuracy of the information describing the device. The developer should transmit comments to EPA promptly. Final test reports are distributed upon request to technical personnel in federal and state governments, private industry, universities and are also available to the general public from the NVFEL Library at: U.S. EPA NVFEL Library 2000 Traverwood Drive Ann Arbor, MI 48105 (734) 214-4311 Applicants may cite final EPA reports (but not draft reports) to indicate the exhaust emission and fuel economy levels attained with the device, but the developer may not claim that the EPA report constitutes approval, certification, endorsement or registration. Cases of misrepresentation of EPA evaluation reports will be referred to the Department of Justice and/or the Federal Trade Commission, as appropriate

Gotcha!!!! Will do!!!!

Most of the guy's here start the Urea process usually with Alcohol.....Wonder what that percentage would be????

The sheets have the guide on the back of them. I still have yet to try them. It's been crazy busy here. I haven't had time to go to the can let alone anything else.

Primarily the condition of the fuel, coolant, oil and other conditions of the fuel. I sent 3 of the sheets to each of you 3. I have about a dozen freebies left. Aaron I am sending yours with the driver from Bogar......