mchan68

Isn't this transmission similar in principle to the ones used on heavy trucks in the class 8 and higher categories, that use two mechanical solenoids in place of a manual shifter? I believe on the heavy trucks you are still required to manually engage the clutch from stops though, if I recall correctly unlike the Fiesta. Those of you wanting to go WAY back, anyone remember Volkswagen's "automatic stick shift" that was optional in the original Beetles? Jim, I'm sure you're old enough to remember them. I believe this particular transmission featured three fully synchronized forward gears, and employed the use of both a torque converter and a clutch that was vacuum operated. Just wasn't too sure how the clutch was disengaged to select a gear from a stop.

Maybe REV-X perhaps?

YEP. Needs a FICM or FICM "half shell".

Off the hook .... .... and into the shop. That's a little excessive negative camber, don't you think guys? ..... and now to set this bundle of joy up on the hoist, clean off all rusted areas, call the 1-800 Ford Support, order the fuckin' part and do the repair for 1.5 hours. CHA-CHING!!!!!

-3C3Z-9A543-AARM is the high pressure oil pump for an '03 6.0L -3C3Z-9T288-AA is the discharge tube -3C3Z-9G805-AA is the updated cover with the machined groove on the underside to ensure the tube doesn't contact it, with a new IPR valve installed

I just finished one about two weeks ago (2003 F-550) that got a new pump, discharge tube, eight new injectors and a new IPR valve. But this one was pretty severely neglected. The oil filter was apart in three pieces and the oil black. By the time I got it apart to have a look/see, the top inner o-rings of three out of eight were deteriorated. After the repair with fresh new 10W30, life was good, along with a stern reminder to the owner about the importance of regular oil changes on these trucks.

The downpipe connected to the turbo is what prevents the engine from tilting rearward believe it or not. Don't ask me how I know.

I remember the first time getting my hands dirty on a 6.4L, THAT was exactly what one of my ex-coworkers forewarned me heavily about. Ever since then, I always pay particular attention to those plastic heater tubes any time I'm under the hood of one of these pieces of shit on wheels.

Remove the tranny (if you haven't already done so). Clean the suspect area BONE DRY. Add engine oil dye. Start and run the engine in the shop with the tranny removed as long as needed for the leak to reappear. When it does reappear, pinpointing should be easier with the tranny out of the way.

The only thing preventing me from jumping ship at my store is due to the fact that I don't wrench on a lot of diesels. I would guess that for every one diesel I wrench on Jim, Alex and Keith likely wrench on about 200. Therefore, I'll likely never get as good at working on them enough to be able to tolerate having to work on them on a daily basis like most of the members here do. I do all the work on anything to do with engine removal, disassembly etc. as well as the rare gravy retail work that comes my way. About the only jobs I don't do, are automatic trannys, gas engine driveability and alignments. Yet, for the few diesels that I do wrench on, as well as the engine work, it seems that some in my store perceive me to be the "ass kisser" which is bullshit. I don't by any means consider myself to be anywhere close to being the best tech, but I'll at least put a concerted effort into any vehicle (Ford vehicle that is) that crosses my path be it a Focus or an E-Series 6.0L.

I believe the buses that Alex is referring is the one pictured below: I get a good laugh every time I pass one of them on the road, knowing that I will NEVER have the "pleasure" of having to wrench on them.

Alex, please don't tell me this. If what you're saying is true, they're probably going to hang this one onto ME!!!! I already had my 6.4L hooping once. But in all honesty, if I had to R & R another one, it likely wouldn't be nearly as painful as the previous experience. Picking and choosing is rampant at my store too. The only difference being, I don't CHOOSE the work I do. It's pretty pathetic that lately I've been banking pretty close to the "favoured crews'" hours by doing the bullshit work I do, while "they" do it, doing the gravy retail brakes, ball joints, tune-downs and every other wallet flush under the sun. If I had to guess, this would be Formula Ford in Pickering, correct? I'm guessing THAT dealer because they are close to your neck of the woods.

Just curious, but has anyone else ever had a 6.0L with a failed air management test where the EGRVP pattern looked something like this? Replacing the EGR valve repaired it, but this one didn't look dirty nor did the intake passages look like it was carboned up, which is unsual for an E-Series.

The old part number BRS-123 changes up to a completely redesigned seal part number BRS-170 if it matters. Although I have yet to install one of these completely redesigned seals, it does look much beefier than the rubber ones. If for no other reason, it likely will look much better.

The next one I get rolling into my bay, I'll remember to take a few photos and hopefully Keith can put something together.

Give me a call late tonight or tomorrow night.

It's out. Get your IDSs updated to versions 68.08 or 69.01.

If that were me, I would tell them to shove that 5 hours up there asses and fix it themselves!!!

R & R right side cylinder head. Send head out to be checked and machined as needed. Turned out that the upper side of the firing ring on cylinder #1 showed evidence of coolant breaching, as verified by machine shop findings. Buttoned up, and drove home for a night. No problems ever since. First time ever pulling a head on a 5.4L for THAT reason.

Drive it home for a night or two with either a VDR (if you have one) or IDS hooked up until you can duplicate the concern.

I have a late-build 2004 F-450 4x4 that recently had a grocery list of work done (ball joints, rear brakes and axle seals, transmission service and coolant flush etc.) also with a complaint of the engine running rough and stalling. Only DTCs set during that visit were random cylinder contribution codes in memory. After being unable to duplicate the symptom and completing all that work, I let it go. About a month and a half later, the vehicle returns with the same complaint. Again, all I got were random cylinder contribution codes in memory, but different ones this time. After driving the vehicle for an hour being unable to see anything out of whack, again I released the vehicle. When the customer came to pick up the vehicle, he requested a quote to replace the fuel pump. A week later, he brought it back to have it done. Today, when he came to pick the vehicle up is when it started acting up. So, I rush in to grab IDS to look at some stuff. I quickly notice that power balance is all over the place, but NOT misfiring. Upon, loading up my favourite 6.0L PIDs to look at, I quickly notice that IPR duty cycle is at 32% at hot idle with ICP psi at 580 psi as well as ICP desired. I try to "toggle" IPR back down to 24% and the truck quits. ICP volts at KOEO indicates 0.23 volts. I tried wiggle testing the IPR connector as well as the ICP sensor connector while it was running with no change or reaction. I then restart the engine, and ICP desired and ICP psi immediately shoot up to 870 psi with IPR at 32% and the engine running rough. Give it some throttle and let slow back down to idle and now life is good with ICP back at 580 and IPR at 24%. Soooooo........ what do you guys think? ICP or IPR? Vehicle has no trouble starting when the engine is hot at all, so we know it has no high pressure oil leaks.

Okay. After reading through the test steps and the results, and thinking about it a little, this kind of leaves me wondering if servicing the VGT/unison ring assemblies is going to be something we're going to be looking forward to in the future, just like the 6.0L engines. Because when you think about it, pinpoint test step KA16 instructs you to take active command of the VGT end of the turbo and look for an acceptable change in MAP pressure, which is essentially the way we diagnose 6.0L turbo operation with the added effect that we have to command the wastegate to 0% as well as EGR and EGR TP. And based on the fact that the first test yielded an unacceptable change in MAP pressure while the second one passed, leads me to believe the VGT was hanging up during the first test. So, I guess replacing the turbo would be the result of not having a separately serviceable unison ring like we do now on the 6.0L. Would everyone agree with me? However, that turbo on this sucker looks HORRIBLE to access, re & re, unlike a 6.0L.