Brad Clayton

Yeah, this unit is pto off the trans. Then on top of all that the brake lines have been updated with line locks and they were in the way of getting to the exhaust manifolds.

Sounds like you got it clocked if you shaved 3.5 hours off the second time around. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/cool.gif I don't open any lines up, so I only have to fill the radiator and check and top off the trans fluid. I think it's worth it to take all the stuff off the rad in chassis so I don't have to fool with a/c or bleed that crazy fuel cooler system. The only thing that slows the process down, that I can see, is accessing the lower rad hose clip.

I had about 8 hours into (working slow as Christmas and reading the manual word for word). As far as the boom goes, I talked to people in the shop and no body had any good ideas for the boom. Our shop is a converted Subaru dealer so the truck barely fits in my bay in the first place, there is a beacon bar that would have had to been removed also. These things kinda started to add up and I could have lifted the cab probably 2 feet as it sits to at least get to the exhaust pipes easier, the real only reason for cab removal in the first place. But I did it with cab on, out of respect for my neighbors, and we have some trucks with box conversions with the shelf that sits right on the cab. This truck only has 4 grand on it and was a good gage as to what to expect in the future. So with that said, how would you guys have moved that boom?

Welcome to the site slim. I used to live in Marietta back in the mid '80s.

Quote: How was it getting the turbo out with the cab on? A total bitch, esp after pulling cabs for less work when not needed on other powertrains. Small hands are a plus, be a great job for Japanese techs. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Got some photos: This is the beast, it's dead in the water and the boom is driven off a pto on the trans. This is the chaffe in the wiring for the high pressure fuel pump control valve. Picture is very blurry, sorry. And here is where it rubbed on the pump creating a dead short. This is the view I was looking at for the better part of the day. An over the engine creeper came in handy, but pulling the cabs is a must for this job if possible.

Quote: the 7.3L IDI was the engine that really gave us problems. I don't know how many I replaced tensioners, shimmed pulleys and adjusted P/S pulleys. The best was removing the bolts from the a/c compressor and tipping it down to get the belt on the pulleys cause they took so much slack out of the system to keep the belt on. Loads of fun back in the day.

Looks like this is probably going to become an updated procedure or part to take care of chafing problem under high pressure fuel pump cover. Got my first broken 6.4l today with a crank no start. Had a gazillion codes stores and had blown fuse 74 in pdb. Hooked up short detector and unplugged jumper harness to pcv and vcv and short went away. Called Ford to confirm what I had read here and they told me about the statement I typed above. Here's the kicker for me, it's my 1st 6.4 and it's a 550 with a boom over the cab. So I am doing the "hard way". I'll snap some photos tomorrow.

My jacket arrived today, nice little suprise when I got home. I must be a small guy, xl fit me perfectly. "I like it alot" Now all I need is a new bike to go with it!

I saw two new engine concepts this weekend in magazines. The first was a "Popular Science" 'zine that had a six stroke engine. The engine prototype was a one lunger that would complete it's usual four strokes but on it's normal 1st stroke now the fifth stroke it would be injected with water that would instantly turn to steam powering the piston down instead of fuel and on the sixth (exhaust stroke) a aux. valve would open allowing the steam to be redirected to a cooling condensor to be reused again. Pretty wild and simple idea. The second was in a "Truck Trend" 'zine. This engine had a variable compression ratio for better runability on E85 (spark knock prevention, ect.). I didn't take time to read the article but the pictures showed the oil pan off and a pretty wild rack gear set up. If you're in a store that has magazines check out the new issue. Not sure if I would want this motor in the lifetime powertrain option if I were producing it though.

alrighty then. Ford has a really good reputation with trouble free wiring, excluding the 6.0L of course. When a wiring concern crops up it's usually due to modifications or a sloppy repair of some sort. I am almost positive the trans has been out of this truck, so I would examine the wiring crossing over the trans crossmember to the mlp switch, seen a lot of them rub thru if not push pinned back into the xmember, 4x4's usually get tangle and ripped completely out. Other than that I would just check closely for modifications, and if nothing comes up you can fuse each branch with a smaller amp fuse to help pinpoint, or up the main fuse by 5 amps.

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/notworthy.gif There shouldn't be a broken down 7.3l anywhere near your training facility.

Haven't seen one of those in a long time Bruce. I actually had to think for a minute, to figure out what you were talking about. Then it all came back to me and I was glad we were in the present day and not the early to mid 90's anymore. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

Yea, I stared at it for a while then gave up on it. I think this truck belongs to an older couple who drags a 5fth wheel all over the country. They have an '07 Edge with the same log going, it must be ok because they haven't complained about it. The only reason I saw this one is because they were in the owner's office for a while raising sand about it. They seem to be pretty anal (but maybe not so accurate) about tracking mileage. Ever see someone top off a tank soooo many times before? They must have to pee every 2 hours. I tell ya, when me and my wife retire, and we decide we want to see the country via traveling motor home style, then I'm buying an 18 wheeler and getting paid while we travel.

Is this truck a stick shift? If so I would check the wiring where it runs near the clutch pedal. They use to be bad about the harness rubbing on the pedal and blowing fuses. That's the only thing that comes to mind from previous repairs.

I know a lot of customers are confused. They should definetly be buying a Focus. But they buy a Super-Duty, thinking it is a passenger car. Of course they can't claim they have the biggest pecker if they buy a Focus.

I bet a lot of dealers would try to find a way to sweep the evidence under the rug and warranty it. They seem to have trouble holding customers accountable. It's been to my experience when a guy does something stupid and everyone knows it, he just wants to pay the bill and get the hell out of there. This is gonna be a big bill though.

Quite a few on my end. But I had been at the same dealer and same small town for 17 years before becoming a yankee. There were a lot of "old timers" when I came into the field, I was most definately glad to know them before they bowed out.

There was a local garage in my area whose tech faced manslaughter charges after rebuilding a trans in a Suburban and not putting the park pawl in correctly. The vehicle rolled into a lake and the occupants drowned. Not sure of the outcome of the case, it was quite some time ago. I think about that incident from time to time when I do a brake job.

Here is a satisfied customer's (sarcasm implied) fuel log that was attached to an R.O. Kinda fuzzy picture. But we didn't send 'em packin' empty handed. Not one to let someone leave with an actual problem, all the basic stuff was checked over. Brakes dragging? check. Any crazy air deflectors in use? check. ULSD being used? check. Tires inflated properly? check. Turbo making rated boost? check. Dif gears 4.88 or lower? check. Towing a 30,000lb camper with questionable rubber? uummmmm. Oh well it seems they should invest in some cetane booster, I'm talkin' 'bout cases of the stuff.

I don't know of anyone in my area who would address a fuel consumption issue, whether it be our current platform or all the way back to an '83 model. Majority of the time it is what it is. If the truck was used for it's intended purpose then mileage would never be an issue just part of the bottom line. If I had the money I would by a '08 in a heartbeat eh.......maybe not the best term, but at any rate, then I would get a Big-Tex goose neck and I would work it til it laid down on me, fix it and keep going til it wouldn't go anymore. And I would pass those fuel bills right to my customers, or swallow it up in my overhead.

Dude, that is the funniest thing I've read to date!!!!!!!! Bear in mind I said work there not own the place.

That or worse, I'm being told that if they don't run ulsd the mileage can be off due to more frequent regens. We have a lot of customers reading message boards and shying away from '08s due to mileages. I'm not sure what they're getting instead though. Had a customer stop in with a whole mileage log, which work out to 8 mgp and over a grand in fuel, it was attached to the R.O. I'll see if I can get it on here for all to see.

My part time job in the ski industry would be looking better everday!

ya been away for a while eh? People posting about sightings of no emmisions on '08s sounds kinda fishy to me, I have yet to see or hear of this. But that doesn't really mean anything as far as my input goes. I have seen some strange things come out of the factorys that were a miss though.