BrunoWilimek

Just curious, but what part actually fails? Is it the thermal limiter, and if so, why did it fail? Like the tinfoil around the fuse "fix", this begs the question: what is protecting the circuit now if there is a short(or whatever caused the thermal limiter to give up the ghost). Or, is the failure of the thermal limiter unrelated to an actual concern in the solenoid? Also, some of the ones that fail around here make an annoying ratcheting noise that sounds like stripped gears and the rest seem to be seized. I assume these are not repairable by this fix, right? Just agreeing with Grampa Jim and playing devil's advocate.

Yes, that is the correct way to do it. Ford put the cab to frame bolts underneath, just like the 08 Super Duties. Just remember to heat the bolt heads(same as the S.D.'s)due to the use of cage nuts and loctite. The cab removal is actually the easiest of any truck I have done so far. I will post a step by step proceedure and some pics later when I find some extra time(about 3 1/2 hours total including making notes to re/re). Also noted was the flip-up bottom of the shroud that actually locks in the up position to make front cover removal a breeze in chassis.

If the noise does quiet down, what is the fix?

I wish mine had done that when I first started on it. It has the new loaded head on it with no change in the noise level. Of course I stripped the old head od camshaft and followers and hla's without finding anything and I blew compressed air into the block which came out at the left chain tensioner. Jim, the noise is about a 4 on a scale of 1-10. Ten being GET THE HELL OUT OF HERE!!! I could live with it if it was mine, but the customer can't. I am pricing a long block for it now and SM is not sure how we are going to get paid for all of the repair.

I would definitely go with the 6.8. We had a poll on Inford a while back and the gas engine won out bigtime. I don't like to recommend the 6.4 to anyone(although I would love to be able to do so, being a loyal Ford supporter)due to the expense and complexity of the darn thing. Also, the costly routine maintenance as well as the history of repairs way above what should be required for a modern engine. As for the 6.7, I would wait at least a couple of years for other people to be the guinea pigs and find all the weak points on it before committing.

Well, no debris found anywhere, yet, so, the head is coming off. I will keep you posted.

I just removed the left valve cover on an 04 E350(not an ambulance though) and I have a few comments/suggestions to make. First, the length of the studs on the top of the bolts holding the GPM and dipstick tube brackets is waaaaay toooo loooooooooong , especially if the bolts turn out of the head when loosening the nuts. It didn't help me any, but somehow the length of the studs mysteriously shortened after I removed them. I had to use a hole saw to make an access hole for the nut/stud at the bottom of the GPCM bracket after the bolt loosened before the nut. There was no way, even with a flex-head ratchet wrench that I could get them out of there, my hands are just too big, and they are too far in to use a universal socket due to the angle required. Other than that, and using a long extension with a 12 mm universal socket to get some of the bolts out instead of the 12mm flex-head ratchet wrench, that is the proceedure I used. Oh, yeah, I also removed the turbo y-pipe to give me a little more working room. This is not absolutely necessary, but only took a few extra minutes and made a tight spot a little easier to get at.

I have now had extensive experience using the tool on an 09 F150 with a 5.4 3 valve engine and have a few tips/observations to pass on. First, the manual says to remove 6 specific followers with the crankshaft damper spoke at the 12 o'clock position and timing mark at 1 o'clock, making sure to observe the position of the camshaft lobes as per the picture in the manual. However, I found in this position, the lobes did not line up as specified. I found that the crankshaft had to be rotated further counter-clockwise to achieve the proper lobe positioning. This actually is the position that timing chains can be installed, with the keyway at 9 o'clock. Second, when removing the rest of the followers, not only should the cam be on the base circle, but make darn sure the piston is far enough below TDC to avoid valve contact, as this will prevent fully depressing the valve springs. I removed all the spark plugs to allow easier crank rotations and also piston locating. The tool has to have the foot positioned properly on the top of the spring to prevent bending of the foot. I might have to add gussets to the top of the foot to strengthen it later, when the new tool I ordered arrives. I modified our tool by drilling out the top of the knurled knob, tapping it the same as the rest of the knob and inserting a bolt in this hole with a locknut to allow me to gain a little more depression on the valve spring. I hope this helps others using this tool. Another tip for those also removing the timing chains to prevent having to remove all the followers is this: As long as the chain is in the proper position prior to removal, mark the links at the two gears on both chains, as well as the gears/phasers. You can then re-install the components(transfer the marks to the exact spot on the new components if replacing parts with new ones)in their original locations.

Right side. Original oil+filter changed in first attempt to cure noise by another tech at 6000km. I saw the ssm and checked the caps with no debris found. I then replaced phasers with only a little improvement. I have only just finished putting solenoids/valve bodies and tensioners in it and will let you know if that fixes it. Hotline said they have been having problems with these engines at low mileage with "manufacturing debris" in the valve bodies. Note: the noise definitely went away with the solenoids disconnected. Listening to the right bank with my stethoscope, it sounded loudest at the front, but also almost as loud at the rear of the head.

+1.

Tried magnet in cylinder and only came up with small carbon particles, and probably oil residue on cylinder wall. Must have been a red herring. Called hotline and was directed to re-assemble and try to narrow down source of noise. Sounded loudest at front. Also told to disconnect cam solenoids with engine off(locks them in place). Noise gone-told to replace phasers. I will let you know if that fixes it.

Same here. I noticed the foot had been bent which reduced the travel to the point the tool wouldn't work until I straightened it out. I modified ours by drilling through the top of the forcing screw and inserting a 1/2 inch diameter bolt that also gives a little extra travel when it is turned in. The basic problem is the tool is too flimsy for the job. I am going to get a new one ordered, but I think I will modify this one further by welding some re-inforcement ridges along the edge of the feet. I notice they bend way too easily when bending them back to the proper place. Also, when bent, the tool slips off the valve spring very easily.

On further inspection with borescope, looks like debris of some kind on top of #3 piston and possible cylinder wall scoring. I will keep you posted.

Got a truck here with noise at 900 rpm loaded and hot. Oil pressure looks good, over 30 psi hot and 55 psi when making noise. Noise went away after very briefly doing first oil change. Truck has about 7000km on it. Owner tows a large boat, but weight is within rated capacity. Noise worst when towing boat/trailer combo. I am presently modifying the 303-1039 tool as per a previous posting to remove roller followers and inspect valve springs and stems for damage as per hotline. If head removal is required, manual says to remove engine to remove heads. I was wondering if this is the best way to go. Has anyone done this on one of these trucks yet? Would it be easier to do cab-off as I do with the 6.0's and be able to leave the engine in the chassis? Any and all ideas would be appreciated.

To quote the coffee table book, "The IAT1 sensor's primary function is to measure intake air temperature to control the timing and fuel rate when cold starting. The continuous monitoring by the IAT1 sensor limits smoke emissions." "The primary function of the IAT2 sensor is to provide a feedback signal to the PCM indicating manifold air temperature." From my notes from the 6.0 diesel update course,"if the egr valve is leaking, the IAT2 will read higher than normal. IAT2 at 200 degrees when EGR is working properly. IAT2> 300 degrees or above 200degrees is too high." From the 6.0 Diesel Updates course book, "The IAT1 sensor on the 6.0 diesel engine performs the same function as the IAT on the 2003/2003 7.3L engine. The PCM uses the changes in IAT1 voltage to determine the current ambient air temperature. The IAT2 on the 6.0 diesel engine performs the same function as the manifold air temperature(MAT) sensor on the 7.3L engine. The PCM uses the IAT2 signal to measure manifold air temperature to help determine the proper fuel delivery." I hope this helps.

Not the radkitplus, but same principle. Often an A/C system holds a perfect vacuum for 15 minutes or even more, only to spew refrigerant out a relatively large hole after recharging and pressurizing the system. Personally, I feel that using the radkitplus as a leak detector is not what it was designed for and therefore not a valid test method. Pressure testing is much better. Of course, whichever rocket scientist wrote the TSB must know better, right?

That may be true, but the original lens kept its clarity for a lot longer than the shine restorer returned it. I was wondering if the difference was in the brand of treatment or if they were all basically the same and only a short-term solution. If so, I would be more inclined to sell a replacement lamp than a short-term band-aid shine. The customer may be happy when the shine is back, but not so happy if it only lasts a short time.

I have been wearing a bump cap for a few years now. I got sick and tired of hitting my head while working under mostly trucks with lots of hard, sharp edges everywhere, including the hoist arms. I first saw them at a trade show about 12 years or so ago. I wish I had bought one then. I thought I could get one locally, but no-one in the area had them or had ever heard of them. Later, I attempted to contact the company from the trade show, but they were no longer in business. I then went on the internet and attempted to get one from one of the few companies that sold them, but most were in the USA or did not reply to my inquiries. I wanted to get one locally as the cost of shipping from anywhere was more than the price of the hat. I saw many listings for different ones, from inserts for existing ball caps, to actual hard caps that looked like ball caps to ones that looked like hard hats(but not as robust). I finally talked to the local Matco tool dealer and he ordered one for me in the only type available to him, the hard-hat type. Shortly thereafter, Princess Auto came out with a ballcap-type bump cap on sale for half the price I paid for mine. DOH. Anyhow, even though I get called smartass names like Bob the Builder and Walter Safety, I usually wear it when working under trucks.

Sorry for your loss, Larry. Your mother sounds like she was a special person. It is always hard to see someone you love pass away, but at least she is no longer suffering. I have heard of people who took chemo and swore never to do it again(if they survived the first bout of cancer)as the cure was worse than the disease. All our hearts go out to you and your family.

I agree with you 100%, Bruce, especially the part where they claim "slightly better fuel economy, less smoke and 'maybe' a few extra ponies". What B.S. As soon as the engine reaches operating temperature in normal usage, the thermostat is basically almost always fully open, so the few minutes difference in acheiving this full opening is negligible in my eyes, and hardly warrants those frivalous claims that can never be substantiated in the real world.

My only concern is how long the shine lasts. We have used a kit made by Canbuilt here for a few years and initially, it does an amazing job of removing the cloudiness but, after a year or so, the lens looks just as bad as before.

Reminds me of the Windstars of a few years ago without tilt steering. Seems all you needed to make the tilt work was a lever. The mechanism was in all of them, just not the lever. If you wanted factory tilt, it came as part of a package.

Had a cube van come in on the hook one morning. No start. Owner just had major work done at another dealer and drove it home, parked it, then wouldn't start next day. It was winter and we had just had freezing rain, so the van was covered with a thick layer of ice which was slowly melting and pouring down on me at the driver's door. Needless to say, I tried to avoid this area of the van as much as possible, but I pulled codes and found low ICP. The batteries were dead from repeated cranking efforts of the owner in cold weather, so I hooked the charger up. Meanwhile I was able to find out that the other dealer had just replaced the STC fitting for a low ICP concern. I checked PIDS and it did have low ICP, so I air leak tested it and found a leaking dummy plug D-ring. I replaced that and still had low ICP. Meanwhile, truck had sat overnight with battery charger supposedly hooked up, but when I came in the next morning, one of the clamps had popped off(thanks a lot FOMOCO for putting the batteries underneath, on the frame), so I still couldn't crank it for more than a few seconds. I was finally able to get the batteries charged(after another day that the corroded terminals prevented the charger from working). I discovered no base oil pressure and after removing the pan and front cover, the cause was obvious. A piece of the old STC snap ring had been sucked up by the pickup and badly scored the pump and front cover. After replacing the damaged parts(and cursing IH for putting such a large mesh screen on the pickup tube)it started. I always check for base oil pressure at the guage first now, when I am diagnosing a low ICP concern but was glad to not have to pull the engine on that thing.

I wonder if these things are over-boosting? That's what caused a lot of the 6.0 hoses to blow off.

I have one sitting out behind the shop right now in a 1999 F550 cattle truck that needs a drop-in carrier assembly($9000+) due to the spider gears and axle side gears lacking teeth and the inside of the carrier all munched-up. The cost to rebuild it was less than 1/2 that, but we don't have a press that will install the ring gear rivets and used ones are not anywhere to be found in the province(the closest one was in Saskatchewan). I priced a torque multiplier if I had to do the re-assembly, but to get back to the original question, what do you brace the pinion flange with? We have two companion flange tools, one of which should work, but there is no mention of using one in the shop manual(did they actually perform the proceedure?). The tool numbers are: OTC 307-372 and OTC T78P-4851-A, which crosses up to 205-126. Both have a 1/2" square hole in them to use with a Johnson bar. Since I have not actually done the re-assembly, I don't know if my Johnson bar would even be up to the task. It does work on the smaller diffs in the F350's.