The CP4 pump is known problem. The Ford 6.7 and the newer Dmax trucks use it. Ford has not been very forgiving on warranty claims. Any reason to deny the claim has been used. The internet is full of scary stories of guys getting billed from 10-12K to replace the fuel system after a failure. GM on the other hand has replaced the CP4 failures as they should.
-
Thank you for visiting HeavyEquipmentForums.com! Our objective is to provide industry professionals a place to gather to exchange questions, answers and ideas. We welcome you to register using the "Register" icon at the top of the page. We'd appreciate any help you can offer in spreading the word of our new site. The more members that join, the bigger resource for all to enjoy. Thank you!
Daves latest thread!!
- Thread starter dave esterns
- Start date
Just not ignitions.
Don't hang 2 pounds worth of keys on the ignition and you will be just fine.
That didn't help, but GM knew about the problem for 13 years!!!
durallymax
Senior Member
I haven't heard many stories lately. I myself don't get too worried because our fuel is very high quality, but if filling up at filling stations you end up buying more water than you think sometimes.
We have 4 things running CP4 pumps around here now(2 LML's, CR2.0 TDI, MF 8680). Theres a lot of stuff using them, theres not a ton of options for common rail setups. Ford tried Siemens on their 6.4 but that didn't work out so hot for them either. The CP3 supposedly cannot produce the pressures needed anymore. It tops out at 180MPa, CP4 can go to 220MPa IIRC. I'd like to know more about the Scania/Cummins XPI system, they are running the very high pressures as well but use their own setup. Our Fendt uses a Duetz 7.8 motor with a Duetz common rail setup. It uses a low pressure gear driven pump to feed two high pressure pumps driven off the cam than pressurize a common rail like any other CR system, the pumps are the part that are much different.
Never understood this concept. WHy people need to have all of the extra keys on there to begin with I guess just doesn't make a lot of sense to me but thats just me.
Welcome to America, thats the American way and why I don't care for American vehicles or anything really.
Like I always say, nothing new comes out of Detroit, just bean counters. Too many kids in our schools are led to believe Henry Ford was an inventor of the Automobile and/or Assembly line. Henry Ford was a businessman who saw an oppurtunity. Combine the successful innovations of many others into one idea. Mass produced, cheap cars with few options. It was ingenious in its own way (mostly with regards to making money), but thats not what is often taught. Ransom Old's is a man who is very under appreciated IMO. If you look past the surface of auto history he is the man credited with many of the things Ford later used. Olds patented the assembly line, he also introduced things like delivering parts to the work stations, interchangeable parts, and many others that were later used by Ford and others. The one thing Ford did different was put the cars on a moving assembly line. He was the first to do this, but even he gives credit to other industries (mostly the butcher industry) for inspiring him. Old's was the first to really create and mass produced affordable car, but it certainly wasn't as mass produced or as cheap as Ford's Model T. Many historians agree that Olds is really the man who set everything in motion for Detroit, without him and his innovations things would be a lot different. I don't know why so many people think Henry Ford invented the automobile, maybe because generally Americans are considered as "dumb/narrow minded" but enough people at some point in their life do learn about Karl Benz. The more I learn later in my life the more I think our schools history books are a bit slanted. I grew up thinking this was the greatest country in the world that invented everything and made the best stuff. My opinion now is that its the best country at ruining good products due to worrying about money.
The problem that the assembly line created is well known today, quality. When my parents were on a tour of a German factory the tour guide pointed this out to the group. He felt that in America the assembly line strips the worker of any responsibility and turns them into nothing more than a robot whereas in many of the factories over there they still relied on more skilled labor than anything. Over there each person has their station and end task, however they have responsibilities, even things as simple as sweeping their own floor. Many of their product improvements come from the workers on the line. They don't "idiot" proof things as much either, they let peoples brains make decisions and if a persons brain isn't good enough then they don't get the job. Their factories are not plastered with warning signs, PPE is optional and up to you to decide what you need. You can choose to not wear safety glasses if you want but if you get something in your eye its your own fault. Then again if you are the person driving the tractor off the line you don't have to wear a vest, goggles and hardhat. Lawyers are the big difference I guess, they don't have the negligence lawsuits we often deal with. If you put your finger in a 400 ton press and it gets cutoff then natural selection is at work because if that is your machine to operate you should know better and if its not your machine you have no business being near it. Now if the machine fails and hurts you then they do compensate you. It's pretty neat, a lot of the factories supply bikes for riding between stations. IIRC Boeing does this in the US as well.
Another American "success" story often taught alongside Henry Ford is Harvey Firestone. Contrary to popular belief in America, he really didn't invent much of anything. The ballon tire was his most significant patent. Instead he really became successful by simply being friends with Ford. Firestone also was known for finding ways to make tires cheap in order to increase profits (see a trend?). Remember the Firestone 500? Or maybe the Explorer rollover issues? Both cases were due to tread seperation and in both cases Firestone blamed the consumer and was considered uncooperative with NHTSA in their investigations. In both cases it was later discovered that they were hiding the fact they knew about the issue and were accused of trying to cover it up. The issues with the 500 stemmed from Firestones reluctance to adapt Radial tires. BFG was the only American tire company that was not rallying against Radials at the time and it ended up costing them the company and they later sold out to Michelin. Every tire coming to the US on other cars was a Radial, Michelin was obviously the big player from the start but as the others adapted it overseas it put pressure on the US. The automakers didn't want them either because it meant redesigning suspensions for the stiffer ride. Eventually they gave in though but Firestone didn't want to risk profits so they tried making the tires on machines designed for Bias tires. The 500 was their first tire and suffered a lot of tread sepration issues, after steep fines from the NHTSA(the largest at the time) they recalled over 7 million tires. This along with the bad publicity is primarily what crippled them and let to the Bridgestone buyout. Ironically due to the Explorer fiasco Firestone told Ford they would not enter into any new contracts due to trust issues. I find it ironic because Ford essentially was the reason for Firestones early success. They made up shortly after though.
I like my German cars and Michelin tires, maybe I am biased but it seems like the "American Way" is to worry about how big your paycheck will be at the end of the day. That part still baffles me though, they spend all this time reducing costs and making the cars they sell very cheap yet still cannot figure out how to turn a profit. It was a couple years ago but I remember GM's profit that year was around 7-9billion and VW's profit was over 25billion yet the actual volume of sales were much closer than the profit numbers would suggest.
I just don't really care for detroit vehicles I guess. My 2000 Jetta is pretty beat up with 270k but its 10 times tighter than my wifes 06 Mustang is with only 130k on it. I don't think those things were tight on the showroom floor, cheap plastic everywhere and squeeks rattles and creeks like you wouldn't believe. Not to mention the overall low quality feel of it.
Again maybe I am biased, but the more I look into things the more I find Europe(Primarily Germany) or Asia(Mostly Japan) are at the top of their games and often are the ones producing the most saught after products in terms of quality or innovation. More and more of my toolbox is German tools. Compare a Knipex Cobra to a Channellocks and tell me you would by the Channellocks for any reason other than lower price or being made in USA. Enough of the good equipment on our farm is from Europe(Claas, Fendt, Pottinger). Maybe I'm not patriotic enough, but I simply wont buy a product based on COO. It doesn influence my decision though, Germany has earned my trust for certain products as a COO that will not let me down. Japan has also earned that trust with me for certain things. Made in USA is simply a marketing tool in my mind, used to get a premium price for a sub par product.
Anyways how bout them JCB's.
jsinpa
Well-Known Member
Wow...I'm starting to see how some get really sensitive or should I say defensive when it comes to talking about equipment..its just like truck brand discussions..geesh..Dave, if your happy with your JCB, then great! I have realized though, when discussing these things, you can state your opinion, but its all in how you state it. I joined and use this forum because I need some help advice in looking for a newer used machine. I'd love to get a brand new one, but I'm not in them or use them everyday for a living like all of you. So to me, I value opinions and answers from guys like, in no particular order) KSSS, JNB, Grit, TMC31, CM1995, and Durallymax because they have been the most helpful and posted the most responses so far in answering some of my questions. So far, I've learned there is no perfect or the best..they all have their good and bad..and most importantly, dealership support is the number one thing.
popsiclepete
Well-Known Member
Very well said.
JCBiron
Well-Known Member
A JCB Skid may be or not be a lot of things....but the one arm is definitely not a gimmick....As mentioned above, roll-out of new product can sometimes be premature, and have its glitches. JCB is not immune to this, nor is Case (Alpha), BC (Telehandlers), Deere (take your pick)....etc. I will echo KSSS's comment from above. There is doubtfully no "best" machine out there for every single application. I do, however, feel that JCB's new product is as good as any, and the single boom takes a back seat to no one when it comes to durability. Our experience anyway....
JCBiron
Well-Known Member
JCBiron
Well-Known Member
This is true....on the early small platform machines, there was a steel hydraulic line that would vibrate against the underside of the cab and cause a hellacious drone....have the dealer check it out, they should be able to solve the issue simply by putting a little more "bend" in the line. No parts necessary.
OK, done blowing up the thread all at once now....
Last edited:
You guys do realize that 75% of Dave's motivation here is to get your panties in bunch????? He has said several different times that the JCB is not perfect but is the best for him. So clearly he (i think) he understands why someone else would contest the fact that its not the best thing thats ever rolled off Henry Ford's (HE HE HE!) assembly line.......
Dave, Well done!!!!
Dave, Well done!!!!
dave esterns
Senior Member
truth be told, my relationship with the j c b is a love hate relationship (i would say this is almost entirely because of the electric controls [electric controls in general/not just the j c bs]). making the transition from the standard bobcat to the j c b is one of the hardest things i have ever done. it is something i would wish upon no one. there are days when i just want to take those joysticks and break them right off out of frustration because i just simply can't do what i could in the bobcat. some days, particularly if I'm in a hurry, i wonder why i am fighting the system and wish to have the old bobcat back. i think what is the point of all the sweetness of the machine if you can't get nothing done with it!
but then i find an old bobcat and drive it around for a while, and am happy for about a half hour. then i quickly realize how sweet the j c b is and i'm ready to go back to it.
if i was going to go out an earn a living with a machine, and dig a trench around someones house or something, i would take the standard bobcat in a heartbeat. the bottom line is i am quicker, more efficient, and more accurate with manual controls. if my paycheck depended upon it, my priorities would change. on the farm, all i am interested in is increasing the quality of my life. on the farm you work 24-7 so its not like there is a difference between work and leisure. the goal is to combine the 2. the j c b is successful at removing 1000 hours a year of work from my life. i know as long as I'm in the j c b i pretty much got it made in the shade. the key to driving the j c b is that you must be relaxed. as soon as you get worked up a little, you just start to get mad.
it sounds to me like the hay day of diesel is over, why not just get the new mazda 3. same fuel mileage as jetta diesel without the hassle.
Last edited:
durallymax
Senior Member
You must misunderstand why I buy TDI's, never have I stated it has anything to do with fuel economy and there is no more "hassle" in owning one that any other vehicle. I know about certain models potential flaws just like I know about a lot of the Duramax flaws but couldn't tell you what problems an Egoboost has. Just what I am involved with.
I buy TDI's for two reasons, I like German cars, I like the feeling of driving a diesel. Theres something about 330ft-lb(or 236ft-lb stock) coming to life at only 1700RPM and pulling you through all the gears. I hate having to wind the **** out of a gasser to get going. Mazda 3 makes a whopping 150ft-lb at 4000RPM. I like to get where I am going sometime in this decade. If I wanted a gas motor with low torque I'd at least get something like a Jetta SE with the 1.8TSI motor that makes 184ft-lb from 1500-4700rpm. Honestly though if I would be happy with a gas I would buy an Audi. For 2014 they have the TDI in the A6,A7,A8,Q5 and Q7. The A4 will get it next year after the redesign. That's what i'd probably go for, the rest of them are out of my price range being 50k-90k.
EPA estimates for the TDI are notoriously low yet overstated for enough other cars.
Mazda 3 2.0: 30/41mpg
Jetta TDI: 30/42mpg
Fuelly is as good of a report as anything as it is from real people. The Mazda 3 has an average economy of less than 32mpg the past 3 years and less than 28mpg for years prior to that. The Jetta TDI has an average of 38.5mpg the past 3 years and on average 38mpg for the years prior to that when the Mazda 3 was produced. The sample group for the TDI numbers dwarfs those for the Mazda 3.
Am I saying its cheaper to drive a TDI over a Mazda? No, and to me its an odd comparison anyways. With the $0.50 spread thats common between diesel and gas these days it makes it tough to justify any diesel on fuel economy alone.
Fuel costs for 100k assuming $3.50 gas and $4 diesel with 32mpg for Mazda and 38.5mpg for TDI
Mazda 3: $10,940
Jetta TDI: $10,390
Not enough to swing my opinion either way and sure not enough to swing the average persons opinion. The "extra" cost of diesel maintenance really comes down to the fuel filters. Everything else is a wash and there is no DEF on the Jetta's. Fuel filters are the killer, I use MANN filters which is the OEM supplier or at least has been in the past. They cost around $20. In 100k you will change them 7-10 times maybe. So add another $300 into that price above (remember your time is worth something, they take about 10 minutes to swap) and you close the gap even more.
Then you have initial purchase price. The cheapest TDI (Value edition) starts at $21,300. The cheapest Mazda 3 is down in the 16s and so is the cheapest gas Jetta. One thing the TDI's have though is resale, you get every extra penny you paid initially back when you go to sell them. Still can't find 2000 or newer TDI's with manuals and straight bodys for less than 6k in this area, even if they have 250K plus miles. The TDI's will still be running great over 200k. I would guess a Mazda would too being Japanese but there aren't as many on the road to begin with so its hard to draw a conclusion.
In VAG's eyes the hayday is just getting started, Audi want's to offer diesel in everything shortly in the US. They offer the Porsche Cayenne in diesel as well. Their diesel LeMan's race program is pretty impressive and they have won every year since 2006 when they debuted it. Except for 2009 when Peugeot won with their diesel LeMans entry.
Dodge is pushing the Eco Diesel 1500 now as well.
GM has their diesel cruze and is rumored to be bringing the diesel for the new Canyon/Colorado as well.
Apparently somebody is buying them or they wouldn't keep introducing new models. I'm not one of those blinded fanatics that thinks everyone should want to buy diesels, I could care less what others do. I just like driving them because I like the feeling of torque at low RPMs.
Yea that has gotten a few Ram/Cummins fans a little worked up. They get the Italian diesel in their half ton and Nissan gets the Cummins in their half ton, seems wrong on several levels.
dave esterns
Senior Member
by hay day of diesel i mean back in the day when diesel was .50 cheaper than gas, the diesel option cost you 2k extra if that in a new machine, and you actually would get over 20 mpg with it. with my experience with diesel pickups, i get between 7-16 mpg.
in my opinion, i don't think they are actually selling many of these little diesels, i think they are hoping people will buy them, because they don't have many options what with the gov regulations. at the end of the day most people are not willing to pay extra for an engine that does not get you faster acceleration.
I'm aware the old diesel jetta was sweet. reliability is still a concern on the new ones. one of my buddies, a local dealership salesman says whenever they take an audi in on trade it goes directly to the auction; he calls audis 60,000 mile cars. also, if you research vw reliability they have more problems/100 vehicles than most. also, i know 2 people who have a4s one guy with a gti, one with a passat, and they all have had major problems. sure to everyone else none of this info is credible, but to me it is.
if I'm buying german I'm getting a 3 series. too bad they got rid of the 335d with 425 lb ft of torque (but i can see why they did), and too bad they never offered a manual, or x drive for that matter that I'm aware of. although an a3 with a diesel would be more tempting than an a4.
in my opinion, i don't think they are actually selling many of these little diesels, i think they are hoping people will buy them, because they don't have many options what with the gov regulations. at the end of the day most people are not willing to pay extra for an engine that does not get you faster acceleration.
I'm aware the old diesel jetta was sweet. reliability is still a concern on the new ones. one of my buddies, a local dealership salesman says whenever they take an audi in on trade it goes directly to the auction; he calls audis 60,000 mile cars. also, if you research vw reliability they have more problems/100 vehicles than most. also, i know 2 people who have a4s one guy with a gti, one with a passat, and they all have had major problems. sure to everyone else none of this info is credible, but to me it is.
if I'm buying german I'm getting a 3 series. too bad they got rid of the 335d with 425 lb ft of torque (but i can see why they did), and too bad they never offered a manual, or x drive for that matter that I'm aware of. although an a3 with a diesel would be more tempting than an a4.
Nige
Senior Member
An Audi at 60k is just getting nicely broken in. Seems to me with an attitude like that your sales buddy should look for a job with a dealer selling Detroit iron.........I bet the buyers at the auctions love him .........
My Toyota turbo diesel pickup has averaged around 28mpg day-in, day-out in more than 5 years since I got it new (currently has 135k on the clock) and is good for a top speed of around 110+, not bad for something as aerodynamic as the average house brick. That ought to be enough for anyone IMO.
Scrub Puller
Senior Member
Yair . . .
The whole Australian rural/farming/mining industries run on three to four and a half litre diesels in their light vehicles.
Most are four cylinder, some five and then there's Toyota who run a horrible V8 in their overpriced Landcruiser . . . dave esterns quoted 7-16 mpg is laughable and completely unacceptable in a work ute (pickup) . . . in my opinion. As I write dieso is $1.69 litre and rising over Easter at local Caltex.
I have a three litre Mazda 4x4 and (with a tonneau cover on the trayback) seems to get 11-12 kilometres per litre running light and down to eight on towing . . . this vehicle can be positively dangerous on wet bitumen as without judicious use of throttle it will break the rear end loose in second gear from idle . . . a bit disconcerting on slick roundabouts.
I have not checked what it will wind out to but it runs up to 140 kph no worries on overtaking and cruises at just under 2100 rpm at 100 kays . . . as I have said before you do not need a 7.3 to haul your toolbox, ass and lunch pail.
Cheers.
The whole Australian rural/farming/mining industries run on three to four and a half litre diesels in their light vehicles.
Most are four cylinder, some five and then there's Toyota who run a horrible V8 in their overpriced Landcruiser . . . dave esterns quoted 7-16 mpg is laughable and completely unacceptable in a work ute (pickup) . . . in my opinion. As I write dieso is $1.69 litre and rising over Easter at local Caltex.
I have a three litre Mazda 4x4 and (with a tonneau cover on the trayback) seems to get 11-12 kilometres per litre running light and down to eight on towing . . . this vehicle can be positively dangerous on wet bitumen as without judicious use of throttle it will break the rear end loose in second gear from idle . . . a bit disconcerting on slick roundabouts.
I have not checked what it will wind out to but it runs up to 140 kph no worries on overtaking and cruises at just under 2100 rpm at 100 kays . . . as I have said before you do not need a 7.3 to haul your toolbox, ass and lunch pail.
Cheers.
dave esterns
Senior Member
if i could buy a compact half ton pickup with a diesel that got good mileage i would. (then i would drive it as my only vehicle. but at this point i have to own a gas guzzling big pickup, along with a beater car so it doesn't cost $100 to go somewhere.) but that is simply not offered in the us market like it is the rest of the world. I'm not confident all these half ton diesels are going to get good mileage. mahindra tried bringing over a compact pickup, but I don't think they tried too hard and it failed; their price point was too high for one thing.
Scrub Puller
Senior Member
Yair . . . dave esterns. Thanks for comment. Just what small pickups are available in US?
Cheers.
Cheers.