Powerstroke and Maxxforce 7, WHY? 1

[waross]

The power stroke, specifically the 6.4L and the "Son of Powerstroke" the Maxxforce 7 have a reputation for early failure.
Past 40,000 to 60,000 miles you may be on borrowed time.
The failure progression as service manager explained it to me is
First;
The high pressure pump wears and puts metal particles in the common rail.
Second;
The particles jam the valves open or partly open in the injectors.
Third;
Over-fueling melts pistons, overheats a cylinder, leads to cylinder washing and accelerated cylinder wear or some combination of the above.
If you are lucky, one injector will jam so far open that the common rail cannot build sufficient pressure and the engine will not start.
Replace injectors and fuel pump and drain the fuel tank and flush the fuel lines. Can run to $20,000.
Question #1 Is the original problem a bad pump design, or a bad injector design? Will other manufacturers injectors pass the microscopic metal particles that kill a Powerstroke/Maxxforce?
Question #2 Is there any remedy other than a different make engine?.
(There is rumoured to be a drop in replacement from Cummins. Cost $44,000 CDN, plus labour and taxes.)
From rumour to anecdote;
A mechanic friend told about servicing a fleet of about 500 trucks on a large pipeline project several years ago.
Admittedly the trucks were somewhat abused; Cold weather starts at minus 30, idling for days at a time at minus 30 to avoid starting issues.
Of the 500 trucks about 120 were Powerstrokes.
Out of 120 Powerstrokes about 90 suffered early engine failure. Most failed at or under about 60,000 km or 40,000 miles.
One truck lost the engine the second time on the way back from the dealers to the jobsite.
The class action suits are ramping up.


Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[dgallup]

I'm not aware of very many turbines on the road.

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[miningman]

Not sure if its relevant but despite the 1999-2004 Volkswagons tdi having an overall excellent reputation for reliability , by 2009 injection systems had been redesigned and 2009-2012+ tdi's are now known to have exactly the same problems as the OP.

 

[waross]

Bosch high pressure common rail? Around 25,000 psig? (Give or take 15%)

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[waross]

I wonder if a secondary issues may be the injector design.
Other engines with Bosch high pressure common rails have excellent reliability.
I wonder if the IH injectors are more likely to be jammed open by wear particles than some other injectors.
By the way.
Thanks to everyone who took the time to reply.
Even the somewhat negative responses are valuable food for thought.

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[CWB1]

Generic comments about the care and feeding of a diesel engine are not always accurate when applied to an engine with known issues.

Sure, but you keep pointing to known issues caused by poor maintenance. If you dont drain the fuel-water separator monthly (stateside) or more often (up north) then you start corroding the system, damaging injection pumps, clogging injectors, and causing all manner of issues. None of this is new or unique to the 6.4 btw, nor does the 6.4 have an overly bad reputation. Ford put them in something over 1M trucks which are still commanding a significant premium over gasoline trucks.

JMO but leave the conjecture for the hobbyist forums, they're generally a great place to get bad information. This is a professional engineering forum.

 

[waross]

Anecdotal sure. But I've talked to IH service managers, bus fleet owners, mechanics with experience servicing fleets of 6.4s, and read about the multiple class actions started against IH in regards to these engines.
How many other engines are currently the subject of multiple class action suits in more than one country? Well, IH has one other engine that is the subject of multiple class actions.
Trust your dealer. On the one hand the service rep at the dealer's warned me that these engines were prone to very early failure.
On the other hand, on the way to losing a multi million suit an IH executive testified in court that it was company policy to withhold information about chronic engine problems from customers.
On pipeline fleets with a mix of GM Duramax, Dodge/Cummins and IH 6.4L the only engine failures were the 6.4s. All were regularly serviced in the same shop. The manufacturers maintenance schedules were followed and computer tracked for all trucks.
And in the winter, water is not an issue, any water is frozen solid in the bottom of the tanks.
There may be a reason that Ford stopped using these engines 8 years ago.
I am using diesel fuel conditioner with claimed lubricant and will be changing the oil at less than 1/2 of the recommended interval.
Are there any after market replacements for the problem components?
These engines also have an emissions compliance issue.
I have been told that one reason that IH discontinued this engine was that the engine didn't meet standards and their emissions credits had run out.
Can anyone verify that?

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[PackardV8]

9quote0JMO but leave the conjecture for the hobbyist forums, they're generally a great place to get bad information. This is a professional engineering forum.(/quote)

For true!

jack vines

 

[LionelHutz]

If it's that scary to you, then sell it while it's still running and worth decent money and buy something else you trust instead.

For the fuel. If it scares you that much then install a much better aftermarket fuel filter and water separator system to provide better protection for the injector system. Keeping water and contaminants out of the high pressure system is essential to the survival of pretty much any modern diesel. Also, only run top tier fuel from a high volume station.

The 6.4l injects fuel on the exhaust stroke of the engine. Your claims of it injecting directly into the exhaust are wrong. It does mean you need to change the oil frequently enough to limit the fuel contamination in the oil. This makes me wonder how much research you have really done on this engine.

The regen cycle does kill economy and it also puts a lot of heat into the engine and cooling system meaning you have to do extra cooling system maintenance as well. You could remove the emissions parts and run a programmer to eliminate the regen cycle which is illegal but does stop any problems caused by that system. Don't get caught without it.

 

[dgallup]

Someone who shall remain unnamed bought a diesel pickup with one of these engines as a test vehicle to develop aftermarket parts for the emission control system. He didn't do his due diligence and said vehicle had already had the complete system removed. Replacing all that equipment and reprogramming it is quite an expensive task. Oops.

----------------------------------------

The Help for this program was created in Windows Help format, which depends on a feature that isn't included in this version of Windows.

 

[waross]

If it's that scary to you, then sell it while it's still running and worth decent money and buy something else you trust instead.

That's a good idea but the economics are not quite that simple. I am seriously considering doing an engine swap and trying to sell the 6.4 while it is still running well.
The older 6.4s injected extra fuel into the cylinders during the exhaust stroke. Newer models inject into the exhaust manifold. That has avoided some oil dilution problems.
I am aware of possible water in the fuel issues. However there have been too many mixed fleets running the same fuel and maintained by the same shops where only the Power Strokes have failed to blame water in the fuel as a root cause.
Duramax and Cummins both use similar high common rail pressures. Some shops cut open the fuel filters at every oil change to check for metal particles circulating in the fuel. If if metal particles are detected in time, a new high pressure pump and a complete flushing the fuel lines often avoids an impending failure.


Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[TugboatEng]

I don't understand your problem. You like the truck so much that you won't sell it, it hasn't let you down, and you want to repair it despite it not being broken?

 

[waross]

Many of these engines run for a couple of hundred thousand miles. Many fail at around 50,000 miles. What can I do to get into the hundreds of thousands of miles group. That is the point.
For example, many years ago, American Motors had a problem with the casting that held the pressure relief valve and the oil filter. If the suspension bottomed out in off road driving, the front axle would contact the casting. It generally wouldn't break but it would dimple it and jam the pressure relief plunger. I got stuck on a cold day in a camp north of Fort Mac. The engine would start but the valve wouldn't release the excess lube oil pressure and the filter gasket would blow out.
I finally got it running and then found out that there was an after market replacement casting that would not make contact with the axle during severe driving.
I was wondering if anyone had come up with after market parts or additives to extend the life of these engines.
I was aware that two fellows that I know had lost three engines between them. Now I find out that the engines were 6.4s.
Thanks for all the comments.
I will be watching for water in the fuel. But that is not the only problem with these engines.

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[TugboatEng]

Don't baby it. You have got to run these engines hard to keep them clean.

 

[Compositepro]

Bulletproof Diesel specializes in making aftermarket fixes for known engine weak points.

 

[waross]

The overwhelming driving is highway driving pulling a three horse trailer with living quarters. That's an old steel trailer, not one of the newer lightweight aluminum trailers. The gross combined weight is close to 20,000 lbs. Mostly on cruise control, hour after hour across the prairies at 65 MPH. Not that hard on the engine but a lot harder than an unloaded pickup.
Thanks for the tip Compositepro.

Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter

 

[LionelHutz]

The older 6.4s injected extra fuel into the cylinders during the exhaust stroke. Newer models inject into the exhaust manifold. That has avoided some oil dilution problems.

When??? The Ford 6.4l version ran for 3 model years from 2008 to 2010 in the same basic configuration.

Basing any opinion on the life of work trucks in the oil and gas fields is rather silly. Too many people driving work trucks abuse the shit out them.

 

[waross]

The Power-Stroke was built By International/Navistar. Navistar called it the Maxxforce 7 and continued using it for a number of years. My engine is a 2013 Maxxforce 7, almost identical to the Ford 6.4L. Many of the failed school buses were post 2010 international chassis.
Your comment about driving the shift of work trucks is valid. The trucks in question were used in pipeline construction which may be even more abusive than other oilfield uses.
On the other hand, take a look at the school bus forums. A lot of school bus fleets have had a lot of problems with these engines.
I'm waiting for the good news/bad news.
The bad news is that with the present mileage, the engine may fail soon.
The good news is that if it doesn't fail soon, it may well run for a long time.
For now, I'll use a lubricating fuel conditioner and change the oil and filters every spring. We put about 4000 or 5000 miles on the rig every summer and will seldom use it in the cold weather.
On the one hand there is no doubt that this is an engine that is prone to issues.
On the other hand I am starting to realize that the issues may not be as bad as I had been led to believe.
Thank you for your contributions everyone.


Bill
--------------------
"Why not the best?"
Jimmy Carter