| Pages:
1
..
3
4
5
6 |
Bob and Susan
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8813
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Mulege BCS on the BAY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Full Time Residents
|
|
i had a WARNING yesterday...
it said "you MUST change your oil IMMEDIATLY!!!"
of course i did
this was the fix...no joke
turn the ignition switch on
do not start
push the accelerator three times within 10 seconds
turn the ignition switch off
the warning disappears
i wonder if the next fix will be a "chineese fire drill"???
|
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
On another Mexican discussion board, I read a quote from someone who stated that
".....according to the Pemex website ULSD is supposed to be released in Chihuahua, Nuevo Leon and Jalisco in late 2008 rest of Mexico in 2009."
This is a quote from the other discussion board, not the Pemex site. I looked on the Pemex site and could not find this reference.
|
|
|
DuramaxLMM
Newbie
Posts: 8
Registered: 8-4-2007
Member Is Offline
|
|
Did you have some oil with the low ash CJ4 specification with you? If not, you really should try to get some from the USA asap and do another oil
change. Rotella T is now shipping in CJ4.
Based on my research, it appears that using the correct oil is MUCH more important than the fuel because every engine burns small amounts of oil and
the pre-CJ4 oil produces too much ash. It will prematurely fill the DPF with ash.
The projection based on using low ash oil (CJ4) is that the DPF will on average need to be cleaned of ash deposits after 100,000+ miles but using the
wrong oil will definitely dramatically shorten this range. (This ash accumulation is a different issue to the soot, which is regularly burned off
during the regeneration cycles and is created by the burning of fuel.)
How many miles did you have on the truck when it demanded that you change the oil?
|
|
|
DuramaxLMM
Newbie
Posts: 8
Registered: 8-4-2007
Member Is Offline
|
|
There's lots of information earlier in this thread about the availablity of ulsd in some parts of Mexico.
|
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
I know.........and this quote refutes that.
|
|
|
Bob and Susan
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8813
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Mulege BCS on the BAY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Full Time Residents
|
|
oil change warning at 6050 miles
changed the oil at 2500 miles
will change it next week too
|
|
|
DuramaxLMM
Newbie
Posts: 8
Registered: 8-4-2007
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hmmm ... That's not many miles between oil change warnings. 6000-2500 = 3500. Most of the new automatic oil change systems are allowing at least
7-8,000 between changes. I wonder if the fuel is having an impact on the service life of the oil. I'd better carry an extra supply when I eneter
Mexico in December, just in case.
|
|
|
DuramaxLMM
Newbie
Posts: 8
Registered: 8-4-2007
Member Is Offline
|
|
Thank You Don. We'll be watching with interest for the first results.
|
|
|
Roasty
Junior Nomad
Posts: 68
Registered: 7-29-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Don Jorge, I have 14 gallons of Baja cactus diesel (purchased last Tuesday) in a metal auxiliary tank, sitting in my driveway in San Diego.
If you want to U2U me I can see about getting a sample to you.
|
|
|
paulb87
Newbie
Posts: 19
Registered: 12-28-2007
Member Is Offline
|
|
Ultra Low Sulfur and New Dodge Diesel
I have a new 2007.5 dodge with the new cummins 6.7 power machine, 6spd auto 4X4. It has the dpf and I heard all the spoooky stories from folks on the
net. I called Cummins and they told me (off the record) that the new 6.7 will burn all diesel. They did say that it MAY clog the dpf in some instances
such as low speed, short trips etc. I was in Baja Feb-Mar of this year from Ensenad to Cabo and back without a problem. We tow a 30ft 5th wheel and at
highway speeds under load it just burns all the crap right outta there. I have the MDS Dashwak which shows when the engine is regenning etc and it
regened as it does up in Canada. Check out the complete story on the BS about using ULSD diesel in newer diesels at RVNET.com
The use of ULSD is mandated by the EPA law/ratings to simply lower and reduce emmisions. It has nothing to do with the engines performance or dpf.
We are heading back Nov1 st....over 1000 miles on Pemex and running like a top.
Met some GM owners with newer diesels and they reported no problem at all.
Gringo from Canada...Hola Amigos
2007.5 Dodge Ram 6.7 Cummins Power
|
|
|
Bob and Susan
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8813
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Mulege BCS on the BAY
Member Is Offline
Mood: Full Time Residents
|
|
that's correct...
we are just not doing the "greenest" thing possible
|
|
|
Russ
Elite Nomad
Posts: 6742
Registered: 7-4-2004
Location: Punta Chivato
Member Is Offline
|
|
paulb87 I couldn't find the article you mentioned at RVNET.com. can you post the address?
|
|
|
Teddy
Newbie
Posts: 5
Registered: 10-3-2008
Member Is Offline
|
|
Stop worrying - there's absolutely NO problem using your 2007.5 or later engine in Mexico. However, do keep in mind the warranty rules if you decide
to do so.
HERE IS THE THREAD YOU MUST READ at rv.net
http://www.rv.net/forum/index.cfm/fuseaction/thread/tid/2153...
The discussion covers all of the technical explanation, not just hearsay.
|
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
I read that entire discussion on RVnet and your characterization of their being "absolutely NO problem using your 2007.5 or later engine in Mexico" is
incorrect. Ed White clearly states that there could be deterioration of components approaching 40k miles of use. And he admits that warranty
compliance could be an issue. Those are TWO potential problems.
He challenges anyone to find someone who has driven 40k miles exclusively on Mexican diesel and can document a problem. I would venture to say that
there are very few, if any, owners of 2007.5 diesel vehicles WHO HAVE PUT 40K CONTINUOUS MILES USING MEXICAN DIESEL.
|
|
|
Teddy
Newbie
Posts: 5
Registered: 10-3-2008
Member Is Offline
|
|
That was an interesting post Hook, because I happen to be Ed White, who made the lengthy science-based postings on RV.NET. I just happen to use a
different name on this forum.
Here are my comments on the points you raised:
"Ed White clearly states that there could be deterioration of components approaching 40k miles of use. And he admits that warranty compliance could be
an issue. Those are TWO potential problems."
It is correct that EPA and auto manufacturer testing of the emissions equipment measured gradual deterioration in performance of those systems after
40,000 miles of continuous use of fuels with higher than 150ppm of sulfur. However, the same testing showed that using higher sulfur fuels, for less
than 40,000 miles, did NO PERMANENT DAMAGE. The emissions system components, that is the DPF (Diesel Particulate Filter) and the DOC (Diesel Oxygen
Catalyst) recovered completely when put back on ultra low sulfur fuel for at least a couple of regeneration cycles (3 or 4 tankfuls).
"He challenges anyone to find someone who has driven 40k miles exclusively on Mexican diesel and can document a problem. I would venture to say that
there are very few, if any, owners of 2007.5 diesel vehicles WHO HAVE PUT 40K CONTINUOUS MILES USING MEXICAN DIESEL".
Absolutely true - it is extremely unlikely that a Snowbird heading into Mexico for the winter is going to travel more than 40,000 miles before
returning to the USA and resuming the use of ultra low sulfur fuel. That is exactly my point. It is safe to go there as a Snowbird, which is the
group who are worried about the fuel.
I do, however, know of one owner of a Dodge, who lives near Todos Santos, who probably has more than 40,000 miles on the truck by now, and he has
still not reported any problem. Not surprising, because the deterioration in the DPF does not really create exhaust backup until at least 70,000
miles.
The bottom line, as you know by reading the entire postings at RV.net, is that a significant number of owners of 2007.5 and later trucks have already
had them in Mexico without any fuel related issues. The risk to be considered, is that there is NO warranty service in Mexico, so any problem which
caused the truck to be undriveable would require the owner to tow it or ship it back to the USA.
[Edited on 10-3-2008 by Teddy]
[Edited on 10-3-2008 by Teddy]
|
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
So, you're saying that it fixes itself IF you go back to ULSD fuel? What if you dont? then, 70000 is the life expectancy of the exhaust components
listed?
Can you address the concerns of those who worry that , should they return to the US for warranty work, the dealer could void their warranty. That's a
bigger concern for snowbirds than the accepted lack of warranty service in Mexico.
|
|
|
paulb87
Newbie
Posts: 19
Registered: 12-28-2007
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hi Ted...Paul here from N Van....kinda thought that was you
Thanks for providing the link to dieselstop.com so people can be informed about the EPA myths. The new diesel engine under load or highway
applications burns the fuel efficiently and there is very little SOOT as a result. It is the SOOT that builds up in the DPF's that kill these things,
particularily in bumper to bumper traffic, continuous long idling periods and short city runs. Thats why dealerships will often take out a newer truck
for a 45 minute highway drive to regen the DPF. Simply to blow out all the crap from extended city driving. I know the diesel tech at the local Dodge
dealership and he is completely aware of the amount of BS about using anything but ULSD. Bottom line is that if you are in low soot producing
environment, ie hauling or highway speeds, you're not going to plug the filter. EPA regulates emissions not performance folks!
Have a good trip and leave me some of that PEMEX diesel!
Gringo from Canada...Hola Amigos
2007.5 Dodge Ram 6.7 Cummins Power
|
|
|
Teddy
Newbie
Posts: 5
Registered: 10-3-2008
Member Is Offline
|
|
Yes, the EPA testing in the years prior to the introduction of the emissions systems showed that returning to the use of ultra low sulfur fuel, which
is no more than 15ppm, BEFORE reaching 40,000 continuous miles of high sulfur fuel use, does no permanent damage to the emissions components. The
deposited and trapped sulfur compounds in the DPF and DOC are flushed out during regeneration cycles on ultra low sulfur fuel. It is only after
40,000 miles of continuous use of higher sulfur fuels that the sulfur compounds become permanently embedded.
During a conversation I had with an Engineer from the Duramax plant a year ago, he told me that during GM's testing they were unable to create a
"sulfur poisoning condition". I do not know how many miles they ran the higher sulfur fuel because he wouldn't tell me, but you can bet that all of
the automakers have run extensive field tests to see if they can create problems which could be traced back to using high sulfur fuels. I've never
found any documentation suggesting that such a problem has been found.
As for the expected life of the exhaust components if you don't resume ultra low sulfur fuel use before 40,000 miles, I can't answer that question
accurately because I have never been able to find any research papers on the subject.
However, we do know that automakers expect that the DPF will need special cleaning by a dealership at or around 100,000 - 120,000 miles. This is
because even when using ONLY ultra low sulfur fuel, the ash buildup in the DPF gradually plugs it up. All of the automakers have prepared for this
service requirement - a special machine is needed at the dealership to either blow or wash out the ash. That's why the DPF is made of stainless steel
with stainless bolts - it WILL have to be routinely removed and cleaned from time to time.
Clearly, if sulfur compounds are allowed to permanently attach to the filter pores, they can not be removed, and the filter will plug sometime before
its expected routine cleaning interval of 100,000 to 120,000 miles. And therein lies the reason why the Big 3 don't want to provide a warranty if you
use high sulfur fuels. They could be stuck with replacing a plugged DPF, which is worth a few thousand dollars, before your Federally mandated
emissions warranty expires. The fuel will not hurt the engine - it only hurts the emissions equipment if used continuously for more than 40,000
miles.
As for whether the warranty could be voided when an owner returns to the USA, please note that I am not providing this information in order to counsel
people to break the law or ignore their warranty conditions. My interest is solely in sharing science based information to counter all the inuendo
and incorrect perceptions which are floating around.
That having been said, if a truck is towed into a dealership in the USA with an engine problem, say, there would be no reason for the dealership to
suspect incorrect fuel use. However, if they did test the fuel in the tank, and only found ultra low sulfur fuel, I would be surprised if they could
deny warranty on the basis of the fuel.
All of this comes back again to my challenge, which is posted on numerous travel and truck related websites. Find me a single owner who has ever had
a problem with either the engine or emissions system which can be traced to using Mexican fuel. In almost 18 months not a single person has come
forward. In fact, failure or plugging of the DPF is so rare that it isn't even a topic of discussion on the diesel forums. I've never heard of a
case myself. The emissions system components seem to be very reliable indeed.
One final piece of evidence which suggests that the use of high sulfur fuel from time to time is NOT harmful. In the USA it is still possible to find
both ulsd and lsd fuels at places like Flying J. However, the filler hole to your tank allows you to place the nozzle from EITHER pump in that hole.
Cast your mind back to when catalytic convertors appeared on cars - the filler hole was made smaller to PREVENT leaded fuel from being put in the
tank. Surely, if lsd was a problem for either the engine or the emissions systems, the filler hole on our trucks would have been changed in shape or
size to only take an ulsd pump nozzle.
|
|
|
paulb87
Newbie
Posts: 19
Registered: 12-28-2007
Member Is Offline
|
|
Hook,
In response to :
Can you address the concerns of those who worry that , should they return to the US for warranty work, the dealer could void their warranty.
US and Canadian Consumer Law is pretty much alike on warranty related issues. The company must PROVE that the causation of damage was directly
associated with, in this case, Mexican diesel.
If in doubt, tow your truck to the nearest US diesel station, fill it with good old ULSD, and then call your warranty folks!
Gringo from Canada...Hola Amigos
2007.5 Dodge Ram 6.7 Cummins Power
|
|
|
Hook
Elite Nomad
Posts: 9010
Registered: 3-13-2004
Location: Sonora
Member Is Offline
Mood: Inquisitive
|
|
Sorry, Ted, I wont be able to help you on a test case.
I'm a happy driver of a 7.3 liter engine. My engine absolutely loves the high sulphur diesel. Also, well out of warranty.
Thank you for your opinions.
Any thoughts on the decreased lubricity of the ULSD?
[Edited on 10-3-2008 by Hook]
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
..
3
4
5
6 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
