05 Ford 6.0 Diesel Problem

Help Support CattleToday:

H

Herefordcross

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 17, 2006
Messages
1,583
Reaction score
0
Location
Not where you are
Going down the interstate with trailer in tow. Truck lost power on a steep hill, heard a loud bang!! Prior to that I heard a hissing sound pulled over and all looked well, didn't overheat or any other odd things on the gauges. I had to lock it in 4 low to get the rest of the way home, top speed is 30 mph loaded or empty. Turbo psi gauge shows no pressure!! Turbo blown??? Help me out here, It's under warranty but, I want to know what it is roughly. guy that works on Diesels won't be in until Tuesday, just did service, trans, oil fuel filters. Acts almost like it's not getting fuel but, it runs great in Park which does me no good.
 
It sounds like you blew off an intercooler boot. They can make a heckuva bang. Check all the boots on the charge air side and see if a clamp backed off or a hose burst.

Also pull the airbox hose off the turbo and check for oil inside the turbo. Grab the veins and try to move them up and down, side to side and in and out. If you see oil or have excessive play, your turbo is done.

Rod
 
Intercooler pipes, connectors are good on both sides, fins look clean and are in place, bearings seem good. Thought it might be a fuel problem?? so changed filters, sarted today and it blew white smoke and coal dust everywhere, drained oil to check for water, checked for oil in antifreeze, everything looks good, now it won't even get up enough power to move. It's the only truck I've got too, so I guess I'll borrow my neighbors truck and get it hauled to the Ford Garage tomorrow.
 
Way too new for me to know anything about, but I'll guess it's in the air system somewhere. Something is preventing the engine from getting the boost it needs. Let us know.

cfpinz
 
Towed to dealer this morning, that's how it acted to me. Like it couldn't get enough fuel to boost the turbo, or not enough turbo boost to pull the fuel in. Code came back P0404, (EGR) but, I cannot believe that this joker died over that, they told me that even if they had to tear the engine down I would have it back in two days, if so, I will purchase all of my vehicles from this dealer!! I have never had ANY dealer fix anything that quick, let alone an engine problem.
 
Well Rod took my first guess so I will go with the VGT solenoid but if it is that, I can't explain the pop you heard. I suspect the EGR code has been there a while. The 6 liter is known to throw this code.

I hate to say it but I suspect it sucked something and the turbo ate it. Hense new turbo. Good thing is the 100K warranty. The bad thing is they probably don't have one in stock and the two day promise is out the window.

Keep us posted.
 
Intercooler Blew wide open, funny I missed that during my underhood inspection???!! :lol: :lol: :lol:

The overheating last week was due to it being cracked and then it finally blew apart.
And yes it will be done within the two days, said to be there at 10:00 tomorrow to pick it up. So taking into account when it was towed to them, it falls exactly at two days.
 
Dang, I've only seen a couple intercoolers blow open, and that was on high HP trucks pushing alot of boost. Glad you got it tracked down, and it wasn't anything more serious.

As an aside, for those of you with trucks that are out of warranty and have intercooler issues, do yourselves a favor and take hard looks at alternative intercoolers for your trucks. Whether it be Ford, Dodge or Chevy, the stock and stock style intercoolers are very inefficient. I've seen HP improvements (and resulting MPG gains) on stock trucks with the addition of a higher flowing, higher efficiency intercooler. Even if you only see 1/4 or 1/2 mpg gain, if you put on enough miles, you'll pay for that stainless cooler in fairly short order.

Rod
 
That and he most likely got the updated version and doesn't stick like the original. Wonder if the lower sulphur content in diesel will help with that?
 
flaboy?":18kaeej5 said:
That and he most likely got the updated version and doesn't stick like the original. Wonder if the lower sulphur content in diesel will help with that?
Click to expand...

I dunno. I'm hearing some horror stories about some of the ULSD. The petro companies are having some trouble getting formulations right, and we're beginning to see some injection pump failures. I was recommending to friends/family/old customers to run an additive for the year or so, until all the kinks get worked out.

I had alot of grief with my older tractors around here. PetroCan's new additive acted like ethanol does in gas. It freed up age old deposits in the lines, and plugged up fuel filters like crazy. After three changes in the 1130 and one in the 930, I think everything is settled down now, but I'm using some old Lubetec I had around here, just in case. I guess in the long run, its nice to have those deposits gone, but ghads I hate changing fuel filters.

Rod
 
flaboy?":nd5wgdu4 said:
That and he most likely got the updated version and doesn't stick like the original. Wonder if the lower sulphur content in diesel will help with that?
Click to expand...

I dunno. I'm hearing some horror stories about some of the ULSD. The petro companies are having some trouble getting formulations right, and we're beginning to see some injection pump failures. I was recommending to friends/family/old customers to run an additive for the year or so, until all the kinks get worked out.

I had alot of grief with my older tractors around here. PetroCan's new additive acted like ethanol does in gas. It freed up age old deposits in the lines, and plugged up fuel filters like crazy. After three changes in the 1130 and one in the 930, I think everything is settled down now, but I'm using some old Lubetec I had around here, just in case. I guess in the long run, its nice to have those deposits gone, but ghads I hate changing fuel filters.

Rod
 
flaboy?":1h6jzjwv said:
Rod, do you have off-road diesel up there? It is higher sulphur content down here.
Click to expand...

We do, but its exactly the same as the clear diesel, except it has a dye in it.

I was wondering if your ag fuel down there needed to go through the ULSD process. I hadn't seen anything in the articles I'd read, and was too lazy to look it up. Next time I'm down there, I may pick up a few hundred gallons. Diesel price is outta sight up here again.

I've been meaning to ask you a question: The way I understand it, the suplhur itself isn't really the problem, but rather the process to remove it, removes some of the other lubricants from the fuel. What do you think about this? I've always thought that sulphur was a lubricant itself as well.

Rod
 
DiamondSCattleCo":32d6ogsq said:
flaboy?":32d6ogsq said:
Rod, do you have off-road diesel up there? It is higher sulphur content down here.
Click to expand...

We do, but its exactly the same as the clear diesel, except it has a dye in it.

I was wondering if your ag fuel down there needed to go through the ULSD process. I hadn't seen anything in the articles I'd read, and was too lazy to look it up. Next time I'm down there, I may pick up a few hundred gallons. Diesel price is outta sight up here again.

I've been meaning to ask you a question: The way I understand it, the suplhur itself isn't really the problem, but rather the process to remove it, removes some of the other lubricants from the fuel. What do you think about this? I've always thought that sulphur was a lubricant itself as well.

Rod
Click to expand...


Diesel fuel must meet minimum lubricity requirements to protect components such as fuel injector pumps and fuel injectors against premature wear. Much of today's low-sulfur diesel (LSD) fuel stock has natural lubricity and does not need lubricity improvers. But tougher ultra-low-sulfur (ULSD) requirements, mandated by the U.S. EPA for #1 and #2 diesel fuel, take effect in June 2006. As refiners increase the severity of hydrotreating to cut sulfur content, most of the natural lubricity is removed.

The ASTM D-6079 diesel lubricity specification balances input from engine makers, standards officials, and fuels producers. It says that a "wear scar" no larger that 520 microns in diameter should result from a standardized wear test

Experts estimate that as much as 50 percent of today's LSD pool will need a lubricity improver to meet the 520-micron specification and that up to 75 percent of the diesel pool could require treatment as refiners convert to ULSD production in 2006 and beyond.
 
Rod, I think the main reason behind the lower sulphur content mandates is the fact that the pollution controls are getting gunked up (for lack of a better work) and they stop working therefore rendering them useless. The EGR valves on the 6 liter are failing at a high rate due to the high sulphur content. Most of us have just defeated them as they are allowing junk to accumulate on the intake side.

The government says it reduces nitrous oxide and particulates. I read an article some years ago about these controls and the diesel engine and it was a government paper. It said EGR equipped diesels were a waste of money and would not work with the current diesel.

I tell you it is a conspiracy to justify increased cost by telling us the government made them do it and now we have to pay more. :shock:
 

Similar threads

L
Diesel Goo
Replies
19
Views
697
libertygarden
L
B
Ford 5610
Replies
10
Views
470
Mat Man
M
ClinchValley86
Ford 3.5L Ecoboost
2
Replies
20
Views
1K
ClinchValley86
ClinchValley86
L
IH 1486 brake problem
Replies
1
Views
188
Silver
Silver
O
Kubota M7060 high/low shift lever problem
Replies
2
Views
43
bird dog
B

Latest posts

Top