Putting things into perspective that you read on these boards where the tendency is to only discuss problems is important. That being said I definitely can get influenced by some of the negativity regarding the 6.0L motor be it explicit or not. I know I bought the coolant filter primarily because of what I read here and personal observation of silt/sand in my degas bottle. I had gotten wrapped around the quality control issue in that other manufacture's are able to produce a block with little or no residual casing sand left in the block. Kind of stupid on my part, it is there and needs (I think) to be dealt with. I think the most common problem resulting (correct me if I am wrong)seems to be oil cooler plugging and subsequent EGR cooler failure. My experience base with diesels comes from prior ownership of a Chevy 6.2L and since I am a submariner by trade, Navy diesel generators. In order to prevent "wet stacking" in the latter our procedures require that the engine be operated at something like 70 or 80% of rated load for a given amount of time prior to shutdown and that time is based on the time spent running unloaded. It seems the 6.4L has addressed the EGR valve issue by raising the operating torque of the actuating motor (by a factor of 5 if I remember right).

That is great what do I do with my 6.0L? It would be nice to have an interval that would make sense to pull the valve and clean/inspect or recommend an operating routine that would prevent valve sticking/binding on the exhaust side and on the EGR cooler note if it is truly a cause/effect of oil cooler plugging/EGR cooler failure then at a minimum require cooling system flushing at a sooner interval that 105,000 miles(I think that is what the book says).

I could be completely off base here but I would almost feel better with that kind of support from Ford than the 5yr/100K powertrain warranty.

John

Maybe I am just lucky... and maybe I just take care of my truck, but after 133,000 miles, my 6.0L motor runs just fine and has never had a problem with the EGR valve or cooler.

Now, I change my coolant eveny 50,000 miles (1/2 the service the interval in the book) and I have used a Dieselsite.com coolant filter since 50,000 miles.

I also use Power Service fuel additive in evey tank and use it at double the dosage rate on the bottle (32oz per 44 gallon fill-up). I have an Excusion, so my fuel tank is a whopping 44 gallons!!! I called Power Service a couple of years back and they stated that double-dosing is good and yields improvement... but more than double does not yield any greater results.

I figure that the Power Service in double dosing makes for a cleaner burn and the higher cetane level makes for slighly more "burn"... which in therory and in my opinion, makes for a cleaner EGR valve!!!

I have never pulled my EGR valve and do not plan to unless I have an issue or my truck shows a "check engine" light.

The 6.0L was the first motor with an EGR valve and it was the "testing ground" for all future models due to the EPA required mandates. Just think, owners of the 6.4L motor also have to worry about their particulate filter... and that is an expensive fix when it clogs up after 150,000 or so miles!!!!

FYI.....There is a developing (issue?) going on in mexico. They have a plant that does compressed iron manufacturing. All of the big three are contemplating getting their engine blocks there.

Yeah I do not think it is luck. I think early on you nailed a good routine and stuck with it. I think I have a pretty good handle on what I need to do to keep my truck on the road and out of the service bay but I am still guessing. Getting my arms around "excessive idling" is really what I was driving at with my post. Having a routine that was supported by test data would be really great. I know that the 6.0L was rushed to market hence the problems. The 6.4 underwent lots of testing and I think there is some valuable stuff there that could not only benefit me the customer but Ford the company. The attitude was to just raise the torque on the operating motor so they could tell the customer "do whatever you want with the truck". I read a post by Blacksnapon(Vince?) where he used the phrase "root cause" in reference to the EGR valve/cooler problems where somebody's idea of fixing the problem was to just remove the valve. Coking or wet stacking is not good for any diesel but with ours it would seem to me that it produces this daisy chain of events.

That would suck to move that production to Mexico. We need to keep the jobs right here. Does anybody else think that the UAW is more of a problem than a solution? Tell me about skilled labor. Are techs UAW members? Seems to me they are exponentially more skilled than the guy who puts them together. What regulates their pay and benefits? Sorry. Could not resist that one....

JR

Every issue that the 6.0 has in my opinion is directly related to fuel quality. Injectors, egr valves, turbo, gaskets. Its not a big stretch to blame all of it on fuel. While there isn't any union techs around here, other places might have them.

There may be a lot of truth to that I know a guy up here that was making his own biodiesel to ASTM specs and he would from time to time test regular diesel out of the pump and routinely get cetane numbers less than 40. Now I did not personally observe this nor could I produce the test results so take it for what it's worth. He stated that numbers like 32-33 were pretty common.

blacksnapon said:

Every issue that the 6.0 has in my opinion is directly related to fuel quality. Injectors, egr valves, turbo, gaskets. Its not a big stretch to blame all of it on fuel. While there isn't any union techs around here, other places might have them.

Click to expand...

IMO FMC and the other manufactures corporate line blaming the problems on fuel quality is a lame excuse to shift blame from a piss poor design. Diesel fuel has been diesel fuel for a very long time. The problem with the 6.0 and other "clean" diesel engines is that the engineers & manufactures tried to use the cheapest method possible without much thought in how it will effect the system. They adapted a gasoline engine solution to a diesel engine, unfortunately gasoline and diesel engines operate under different parameters. EGR systems on gasoline motors work because they lower the combustion temperature, which prevents premature combusiton and actually improves fuel economy and efficiency. However, when an EGR system is installed on a diesel engine, the lowering of the combustion temperatures severly reduces the efficiency of a diesel engine, plus increase the presence of the compounds that produce wet stacking & similar problems, not to mention adding a few new components and more ash inside the engine & engine oil. Couple this with reduced compression ratios (this causes lower combustion temps as well) which lowers the engines efficiency further. Add to this mix variable turbos that have alot of moving parts and you just set the engine up for alot of maintenance and problems all related to the EGR system and reduction of combustion temperatures. EGR systems and diesel engines do not mix.

IMO anytime a diesel engine is designed to run on only a special pristine fuel you are going to have problems. Pristine fuel may work in the lab but in the real world it is just a dream.

The current diesel engine design is a knee jerk reaction to simple minded government mandates. The new diesel engines get much worse fuel mileage than there predicessors and todays ULSD has less btu's so you use more fuel to go the same distance. For example the current 6.4 gets 3-4 mpg less than the 7.3, while the 6.0 gets 1-2 mpg less than the 7.3. This is all directly related to the lowering of the compression ratio and adding the EGR system to diesel engines. Add the new lower btu ULSD fuel to the mix and do to government medaling and poor design (read cheap) the new diesel engines need more oil than the old ones, this does not reduce our dependence on oil.

Why then are the major areas that have issues with the 6.0 and the 6.4, coastal states, and states around the canadian border? (Source: FMC hotline) Oh, in case you're wondering, Wisconsin has the greatest percentage of 6.0 warranty repairs, and is notorious for the worst quality fuel (Again, FMC hotline engineers)

suprdtydvr said:

That would suck to move that production to Mexico. We need to keep the jobs right here.

Click to expand...

This has been happening for several years. Many are currently screaming that the foreign automakers are taking over the US, but in reality the domestic manufactures have been moving manufacturing out of the US for years do to high labor costs & the UAW strangle hold. FMC has been investing heavily in plants in Mexico since before the 6.4 and are going to produce the new diesel engines that replace the 6.4 in Mexico among several other engines. On the other hand the foreign auto manufactures are building more plants in the US, and kicking the Big 3 butt while there at it. Toyota for example is currently building two new plants in Mississippi.

suprdtydvr said:

Does anybody else think that the UAW is more of a problem than a solution? Tell me about skilled labor. Are techs UAW members? Seems to me they are exponentially more skilled than the guy who puts them together. What regulates their pay and benefits? Sorry. Could not resist that one....JR

Click to expand...

IMO the UAW us the largest contributing factor to the Big 3 demise, followed closely by lethargic management practices. Yes IMO the service techs are much more skilled and knowledgeable than the person on the assembly line that sticks a part on as the vehicle moves buy. Hell you can train robots & chimps to do this. On the other hand a sevice tech must possess great mechanical & reasoning skills along with a thorough understanding of how all the components work, to properly diagnose and repair the vehicle.

blacksnapon said:

Why then are the major areas that have issues with the 6.0 and the 6.4, coastal states, and states around the canadian border? (Source: FMC hotline) Oh, in case you're wondering, Wisconsin has the greatest percentage of 6.0 warranty repairs, and is notorious for the worst quality fuel (Again, FMC hotline engineers)

Click to expand...

Here is the problem, FMC is trying to blame a piss poor design on fuel quality. Yes fuel quality is going to effect an EGR equipped diesel motor, just like feeding a diabetic fudge/sugar, because the diesel motor has been so poorly backward engineered it no longer runs efficiently. Today's diesel motors run much lower combustion temperatures than pre-EGR motors, which reduces efficiency. Diesel engines like high compression and high combustion temperatures, unfortunately todays EGR equipped diesel engines run at low combustion temps producing an abundance of compounds that you would get in a non EGR diesel engine only if you idled the engine for extended periods of time.

The narrow minded idea put forth by the government, engineers and manufactures that pristine fuel could be produced and available all over the country is a joke. It works well on paper but not in reality. To many environmental factors influence fuel quality, notice that the main engine problem areas (according to FMC) have high moisture and/or cold temps, which effect both fuel quality and engine performance. The engineers & manufactures need to design an engine that will run on any #2 diesel, unfortunately this takes time & money, two things they do not like to invest, not to mention the bone headed time lines set by the government, all do to a few global warming lunatics. We now have diesel engines designed by enviromentalists, government bureaucrats and bean counters that do not function properly in the real world.

suprdtydvr said:

There may be a lot of truth to that I know a guy up here that was making his own biodiesel to ASTM specs and he would from time to time test regular diesel out of the pump and routinely get cetane numbers less than 40. Now I did not personally observe this nor could I produce the test results so take it for what it's worth. He stated that numbers like 32-33 were pretty common.

Click to expand...

Colder areas of the country tend to have lower cetane fuel do to the addition of components to reduce the gel point.

Biodiesel is an interesting argument as well. If they can successfully & profitably make it from algae instead of crops grown in the ground, then it may become more common. Biodiesel does have some draw backs, it produces more NOx and is less efficient than petro diesel. Biodiesel produces 10% more NOx than petro diesel and reducing NOx emissions is one of the main reasons current diesel engines have EGR systems and lower compression ratios. Also Biodiesel has less btu's than petro diesel.

#2 LSD = 147,000 btu
#2 ULSD = 130,000 btu (11.6% less energy than LSD)
B20 = 127,000 btu (13.6% less energy than LSD)
B100 = 118,000 btu (19.7% less energy than LSD)

Gasoline = 114,000-120,000 btu depending on grade (EPA says 114,000 for unleaded regular)
E100 = 76,000 btu
E85 = 82,000 btu

Here is an article with some good background....

http://www.centronenergycorp.com/whitepapers/articles/3/3.php

suprdtydvr said:

Here is an article with some good background....

http://www.centronenergycorp.com/whitepapers/articles/3/3.php

Click to expand...

Though and older article, you just gotta love these statments:
"Finally, say engine manufacturers, EGR valves and related equipment will not require routine maintenance. Nor will EGR, they say, significantly affect mpg or engine service life."

"Because EGR reduces peak cylinder temperatures, it increases condensation of water and acids in the engine, and may increase oil sooting. Therefore, a new, API CI-4 oil standard has been established specifically for EGR diesels and must be used in them."

This is not working as they planned, go figure. Do to the reduced cylinder temperatures, lower compression ratios, and EGR system as a whole, fuel mileage is down 3-4 mpg, The CI-4 oil has been replaced with CJ-4 to help with all the contaminents now in the engine, and the EGR systems are Not maintenance or trouble free. To top it off, they have added DPF units to all new vehicles and will soon be adding urea injection.

Yeah I guess that was my point to begin with is that this thing(EGR system) at least in some respects is not working as advertized and should be looked at for some kind of maintenance interval. I would not even go so far to dog International/FMC on "lousy design". I am sure if it were up to them it would not be there to begin with. What I would really like to find out is how much of an evironmental concern particulates are. It has to be some kind of carbon chain right? Is somebody going to tell me I can't light a fire in my fireplace soon for "environmental concerns". Those things tend to be heavier and settle out somewhere NOx can be dealt with by timing adjustment. Truth be told I have precisely the engine I want and I think over time they will be sought(maybe not to the extent of the anointed 7.3L) after because they don't have all the crap on them.

suprdtydvr said:

Yeah I guess that was my point to begin with is that this thing(EGR system) at least in some respects is not working as advertized and should be looked at for some kind of maintenance interval. I would not even go so far to dog International/FMC on "lousy design". I am sure if it were up to them it would not be there to begin with. What I would really like to find out is how much of an evironmental concern particulates are. It has to be some kind of carbon chain right? Is somebody going to tell me I can't light a fire in my fireplace soon for "environmental concerns". Those things tend to be heavier and settle out somewhere NOx can be dealt with by timing adjustment. Truth be told I have precisely the engine I want and I think over time they will be sought(maybe not to the extent of the anointed 7.3L) after because they don't have all the crap on them.

Click to expand...

Actually out here in the West, Some AZ towns (Phoenix is one) and other areas have restrictions on fireplaces during certain time of the year and pollution levels. You burn your wood burning fireplace on non-burn days and you will be fined heavily. Most people have switched to gas fireplace because of this.

EGR systems are a piss poor design on any diesel and there are other ways to lower NOx, CAT uses after treatment to do it. I blame all the engineers & bean counters that went the path of EGR system on a diesel.

As far as maintenance and Vince or one of the other techs can add more detail. From what i have seen & heard, cleaning the EGR valve returns mixed results. Sometimes after cleaning the valve will not work at all and must be replaced. Per FMC all EGR valves must be tested for proper operation after each cleaning and if the fail the test they must be replaced. FTW he EGR valves on the 6.4 are supposed to be more robust than the ones on the 6.0, time will tell. Also at least the EGR Coolers on the 6.4 are external, but the systems still look like a Rube Goldberg design and after thought.

The 6.4 has the additional DOC (Diesel Oxidation Catalyst). Its sole purpose is to dry out the exhaust before it enters into the egr coolers and the egr valve.