Jump to content

Class Action Lawsuit Against Ford And Navistar

P71_CrownVic

By P71_CrownVic
in Future GM News & Rumors

Recommended Posts

P71_CrownVic Senior Enthusiast

P71_CrownVic

Posted
Posted

Navistar shouldn't even be named. They built an engine to Ford specifications. Ford's at fault.

 

It's interesting that Navistar didn't have NEAR the problems with this engine when used in their applications. Granted...Ford insisted that the engine look good on paper (no matter how poorly it performed), as a result, it had it's numbers pushed to the max, which severely hurt reliability (which is why everyone should be skeptical of the high-strung TwinForce engines).

 

I can tell you that at my work, a Super Dooty needed an engine at 11K miles and one of our E-Series ambulances (E-Series got a LOWER output Diesel) needed an engine at 50K miles.

 

I hope Navistar is correctly found not guilty...

 

Link

cc1999 Enthusiast

cc1999

Posted
Posted

I have a small business fleet of about 40 trucks, and I have to say I disagree.

 

I 100% believe both parties are at fault on this one.

 

Navstar didn't have a gun put to there head to force them to build such a worthless product. They also had to back said product in conjunction with Ford, so if they knew Ford was asking them to build something that would not hold up, they could have, and should have said no. Navstar does not really have the best reputation, when it comes to there other products either. They mainly just have always came into the market with lower price point, then some of the other mfgs, typically at the cost of poor reliability. This is the first time I have seen it at this level though.

 

Having owned 14 6.0s, and still owning 2 of them, and wish I didn't ever own any of them, I would love to see this class action suit go national. All but 2 of the 14 I own or owned, had to have major repairs and many of them had the same repairs done time and time again, including 2 complete engines, and I lolst count of the turbos, and EGRs.

 

Trade values are in toilet, and trucks I had plan to run well over 100K, I have been trying to cut loose before there warranties run out, at a substantial loss compared to the depreciation that I would have had I bought all Duramax trucks.

 

I won't say Navstar and Ford never made a good product, the 7.3s we had, were all really solid trucks. But I will say I am not impressed in any way with there joint products post fed emission regs of 2003&2007(6.0&6.4).

bogeypro Enthusiast

bogeypro

Posted
Posted

i just emailed this to my dad. He has a 2005 F250 King Ranch that has been to the dealer several times for issues. Dealer cannot resolve the issue, he is planning on taking it to a well known diesel mechanic in the area.

ybsane Enthusiast

ybsane

Posted
Posted
i just emailed this to my dad. He has a 2005 F250 King Ranch that has been to the dealer several times for issues. Dealer cannot resolve the issue, he is planning on taking it to a well known diesel mechanic in the area.

 

They can make the 6.0 work by installing upgraded head bolts but why should it even be necessary? Should have been made right in the first place.

 

 

Nope that won't even help, we have a fleet with over 80 and the problems go in a wide range from heads,EGR,cooling,fuel injectors etc. let's see between 3 dealerships in around the Charlotte area we have 22 of them down right now.

 

Rob

P71_CrownVic Senior Enthusiast

P71_CrownVic

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I have a small business fleet of about 40 trucks, and I have to say I disagree.

 

I 100% believe both parties are at fault on this one.

 

Navstar didn't have a gun put to there head to force them to build such a worthless product. They also had to back said product in conjunction with Ford, so if they knew Ford was asking them to build something that would not hold up, they could have, and should have said no. Navstar does not really have the best reputation, when it comes to there other products either. They mainly just have always came into the market with lower price point, then some of the other mfgs, typically at the cost of poor reliability. This is the first time I have seen it at this level though.

 

As I understand it, Navistar did say something...and Ford insisted on unrealistic power numbers...so that the engine would look good on paper.

 

Again, Navistar didn't have NEAR the problems with the 6.0 (AKA VT365). Probably due to the fact that the engine programming is completely different as the Navistar version has about 210-250HP while the Ford has 325HP. A increase of almost 100HP is not a minor thing.

truckofwinandawesome Senior Enthusiast

truckofwinandawesome

Posted
Posted
I have a small business fleet of about 40 trucks, and I have to say I disagree.

 

I 100% believe both parties are at fault on this one.

 

Navstar didn't have a gun put to there head to force them to build such a worthless product. They also had to back said product in conjunction with Ford, so if they knew Ford was asking them to build something that would not hold up, they could have, and should have said no. Navstar does not really have the best reputation, when it comes to there other products either. They mainly just have always came into the market with lower price point, then some of the other mfgs, typically at the cost of poor reliability. This is the first time I have seen it at this level though.

 

As I understand it, Navistar did say something...and Ford insisted on unrealistic power numbers...so that the engine would look good on paper.

 

Again, Navistar didn't have NEAR the problems with the 6.0 (AKA VT365). Probably due to the fact that the engine programming is completely different as the Navistar version has about 210-250HP while the Ford has 325HP. A increase of almost 100HP is not a minor thing.

 

 

don't forget about the Emissions, the Sooper Doody is in a WHOLE OTHER Emissions Class, than their Navistar Counterparts. so its also partly the EPA's/CARB's Fault.

f0st3r Enthusiast

f0st3r

Posted
Posted

My office backs up to a Ford dealership, and in particular their lot for the service dept. and I have noticed for the last 2 years, that lot is ALWAYS full of ambulances which are Ford E-series and other Super Dutys. They clearly out number the other Fords 2:1.

P71_CrownVic Senior Enthusiast

P71_CrownVic

Posted
  • Author
Posted

The 6.0 started in '03 I believe...so 2003-current.

 

One of my bosses has a '08 Sooper Dooty with the 6.4. It has been at the dealer for weeks (as they throw parts at it blindly) to fix the issue he has where the truck will only run at idle speed. The Monkey's at Ford can't figure it out, the Field Service Experts (yes, that is their actual title) can't figure it out and are guessing that it has to be a chaffing wire somewhere.

 

Meanwhile, our new ambulance with the D-MAX is running like a champ and averaging between 11.0 and 11.4 MPG!

 

Seriously people...if you have work to do, buy a GM. If you need a hobby, buy a Ford.

P71_CrownVic Senior Enthusiast

P71_CrownVic

Posted
  • Author
Posted
so who made the Diesels from the mid 90s until 2000? We had alot of problems with those in our 97-1999 F-450s they kept blowing up turbos and screwing up the trannys and had glow plug issues big time.

 

Navistar.

 

But I don't think they made a 450 back then...at least not ones like we have today (a F-350 with the "3" crossed out and a "4" written in...and a higher price tag)

 

By all accounts, the 7.3 was a bulletproof engine. There really isn't anything that can be said bad about it...except that it was killed off for 10+ years of complete POS diesels.

bluArrow Enthusiast

bluArrow

Posted
Posted
The 6.0 started in '03 I believe...so 2003-current
The 6.0L PowerJoke started the third week of December 2002. So there will be 2003 models with the 7.3L and 2003 models with the 6.0L.

 

The 6.0L PowerJoke is fixable. I believe it was "DieselPower" magazine that showed the install of the parts to fix the design flaws of the original motor. If I recall the total cost was $8,000-10,000 parts and labor. :)

 

I sold my last SooperDooty in the Spring of 2009 and I will NEVER have another Ford truck, no exceptions.

P71_CrownVic Senior Enthusiast

P71_CrownVic

Posted
  • Author
Posted
The 6.0 started in '03 I believe...so 2003-current
The 6.0L PowerJoke started the third week of December 2002. So there will be 2003 models with the 7.3L and 2003 models with the 6.0L.

 

The 6.0L PowerJoke is fixable. I believe it was "DieselPower" magazine that showed the install of the parts to fix the design flaws of the original motor. If I recall the total cost was $8,000-10,000 parts and labor. :)

 

I sold my last SooperDooty in the Spring of 2009 and I will NEVER have another Ford truck, no exceptions.

 

 

You are correct...our 2003 ambulance luckily has the 7.3....our 2004 has the 6.0...which was replaced at 50K miles.

 

Our new D-Max ambulance is fantastic though...

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
Our new D-Max ambulance is fantastic though...

Based on the truck chassis or van? I had heard the Ford dropped the chassis cab vans so now you'd be limited to the Super Duty chassis for the Fords which I can't understand as engine issues aside, Ford all but owned the ambulance market for ages it seemed.

 

I will say that one of the area towns has an ambulance based on the truck chassis and it looks killer.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jsdirt
      2010 Avalanche 5.3 not running correctly after engine swap.

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      If everything checks out at the MAF, then the MAF is BAD, new or not.   You don't need a signal generator to troubleshoot this. PCM needs ALL powers and ALL grounds able to light a halogen headlight bulb - if it can light the bulb bright, then the wiring is good enough to run the PCM.   Best thing you can do for yourself is spend some time here: scannerdanner.com - Check out all his YouTube videos on similar issues. If you decide to subscribe it's the best bang-for-buck ratio in the automotive world, hands-down. He's got TONS of free vids on YouTube, too.
    • Tyler Gibbs
      PF63 Oil Filters Going Away?

      By Tyler Gibbs · Posted

      You got that Hengst D110??
    • contrabombarde
      2010 Avalanche 5.3 not running correctly after engine swap.

      By contrabombarde · Posted

      Yes, I used my multimeter to probe all of the wires at the MAF, both with the sensor connected, sensor disconnected, key on engine off, key on engine running, etc etc etc. I probed all of the wires again at the PCM, at the connectors, etc. All voltages are what they should be according to the service manual/wiring diagrams. All grounds are good, less than 20 millivolts from the battery negative under load. Both at the connector of the MAF, at the PCM connector etc.      I know this throws a pretty big wrench into things, but this truck was acting up before the swap. I don't have very much information, if any on what was causing it, but if you cleared all of the dtcs it would do the same thing where it would crank, fire, then die. And it would do the same thing a dozen or so times, and eventually it would start and run, but the difference is that it would run and actually be drivable. Whereas now if you can drive it at all, it goes into reduced power mode almost immediately, and even then it's not running correctly. When you come to a stop at a light it stumbles down to for 500 RPM before catching itself and returning to the smooth idle. And if you go more than about 50% throttle then it immediately goes back to doing the misfire thing.    Like I said, I know that throws a wrench into things, and unfortunately I was not able to pull any data or anything like that before I did this work, so I don't have much to go on.    I'm trying to not fixate on one particular thing as the cause of the problem, but it seems like all avenues are pointing me towards the PCM. Like I said I have tested the wiring extensively (see above), and during cranking the sensor does produce seemingly legitimate values at least according to my multimeter, but as soon as the engine fires those values quickly descend into gibberish. I've tried it with multiple different known working sensors, I have done literally every test I can think of multiple times on the wiring (probing the signals, probing the pins with the sensors unplugged, probing the pins at the PCM, voltage drop, voltage drop under load, continuity, ohms, and double-checking everything against the wiring diagrams/ proper values in the service data.)    Another thing that pushes me towards a possible PCM failure is, I have noticed in troubleshooting a little bit taking a break and coming back, that when I leave the truck to sit for a while and cool off, it starts and runs smoothly when I first start it up. However once it warms up. It starts having problems. For example, when I went out to the truck this morning after it had been sitting overnight, I was actually able to drive it down the block. And then once I got on the throttle a Little bit after going about a thousand ft, it started misfiring again. I pulled it back into the driveway, shut it down, and started it back up. It idled smoothly. As soon as I touched the throttle it did the misfire thing again. From then on as soon as I started it it would misfire. I shut the truck off and went to go get a coffee and do a bit more research. When I came back out I started the truck up and it immediately went into the smooth idle. After a couple of minutes of playing around with it, it would not idle smoothly anymore. Let it sit a couple of hours, rinse and repeat. This makes me think with temperature change something is going wrong inside the PCM. I have the PCM out of the 2007 donor vehicle and I'm thinking of getting a one-day subscription to the ACDelco programming service to try and program that and see if it helps.   Like I said, I'm really trying to not fixate myself on one potential cause, but it seems everything is pointing me towards PCM failure. I would really like to try to confirm that, but unfortunately I don't have an oscilloscope or a signal generator to do the GM service procedure where you feed 5 khz into the signal pin. 
    • Jsdirt
      2010 Avalanche 5.3 not running correctly after engine swap.

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      Ahh, sorry about that - I got some bad info. Newdude is correct. That's what I get for working 13 hours straight ... on my "vacation", lol.   Should've checked the files I had instead of the internet.   Anyway ... this is GREAT news, since this would've been an absolute friggin nightmare to get working.   I don't think the lack of VVT is causing this - you've got another issue. Wiring, I'm betting.   I'm telling you right now, your computer isn't bad. If it worked before the swap, it's working now. You need to do some more (better) diagnostics and figure out exactly what you're missing. Did you test every wire directly at the MAF? Have 5V reference? Ground? If you're reading ZERO g/s, your Hz isn't much use - it's going to be the wrong value anyway. The MAF is not working, and you need to find out WHY.   I got this off the net, so VERIFY first: Pin A: Black (BLK) wire, Circuit 552, serves as the Sensor Return (Ground).  Pin B: Tan (TAN) wire, Circuit 472, carries the Intake Air Temperature (IAT) signal.  Pin C: Yellow (YEL) wire, Circuit 492, is the primary MAF Sensor Signal output to the PCM. Pin D: Pink (PNK) wire, Circuit 339 or 539, provides Ignition 1 Voltage (Power).  Pin E: Tan/Black wire, Circuit 552 or similar, often associated with the Intake Air Temperature ground or signal return.  Global-A list: https://postimg.cc/KKJnQC85    
    • parthery
      GM Hard Folding Tonneau by REV review

      By parthery · Posted

      Correct....the end user can't reach to Realtruck directly like they can if they purchase a Bak, Undercover, etc...  It has to go through a dealer.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...