So we are on our way back home from the work that I did
in Memphis. We stopped into a truck stop and took a short break from the road.
While I was waiting for my wife I took a minute to check out some of the
products on the shelf. The Kendall Liquid Titanium 5W30 bottle caught my eye, so
I looked to see what it said on the back.
API SN, ILSAC GF5. OK, that's
the current standards. Then it had Chrysler MS6395 (T). Now that's excellent,
they specified the exact rating that they met and it is the newest Chrysler
specification. They had the Ford WSS M2930-B. Then they showed "GM 4718M
(obsolete)". I put the GM spec in quotations here because they are open about
the fact that the specification is no longer in effect by listing it as
obsolete. However, the fact that it meets the Chrysler MS6395 "T" actually means
it really does exceed that obsolete GM spec. But at the same time, it did not
say dexos1 anywhere on the bottle. There was nothing on that stores shelf that
had the dexos1 label on the front of the bottle. There were other products that
met the API 5W30 and they weren't even all SN.
If a GM vehicle owner
that requires dexos1 had to add oil, that Kendall was the best choice,
especially since it meets the newest Chrysler spec. But they made it very clear
that it isn't approved for the dexos1 specification. So this morning I checked
and guess what, there is a brand new list for dexos licensed products. (Feb 20th
2013) Kendall does not have one. Now the next time you are out at the store,
compare what you see on the back of their bottle, to what you find on other
products.
http://www.gmdexos.com/licensed
brands/dexos1licensedbrands.html
When consumers, shops, and techs
understand how to choose the correct products for given cars, they will find the
correct products on the store shelves.
BTW, there were no products
suitable for any of the European vehicles on that store's shelf
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Oil Myths
There is so much to talk about when it comes to engine oil. Consumer advocates are constantly trying to tell vehicle owners how to take care of their cars. Along the way some heard that you cannot tell whether its time to change your oil by just looking at it. It didn't take long at all for them to assume that just because oil is dark, it doesn't mean that it needs to be replaced, the problem is they didn't figure for the opposite condition. Just because an oil isn't dark, it doesn't mean that it is safe to continue to run in your engine.
You will see recommendations that advise replace your oil at least once a year if your maintenance reminder system doesn't command a service. Here is a picture of my dipstick with some of the engine oil from my 2007 Mustang GT.
That oil has 4800 miles on it, and was put into the engine November 9th 2011. The car does go into storage each winter. We had the chance to take a trip with it the last week of February 2013, so I knew it needed replaced. That oil was just short of sixteen months and needed to be replaced. This just goes to show, you can't tell if it needs serviced by just looking at it.
That oil has 4800 miles on it, and was put into the engine November 9th 2011. The car does go into storage each winter. We had the chance to take a trip with it the last week of February 2013, so I knew it needed replaced. That oil was just short of sixteen months and needed to be replaced. This just goes to show, you can't tell if it needs serviced by just looking at it.
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Diplomacy isn't my strongsuit
Well this should be interesting. I've been approached by
some members of the dealers association to assist them in getting more training
programs running in the secondary schools again. They also want my input on
exactly what the curriculum should concentrate on. Yea I can do that, but there
is a problem. Why should I do that? A couple of posts ago the NVLD (natural
vapor leak detection) module was mentioned as a likely cause for the hard to
fill fuel tank on the Fiesta. The labor time is .4hrs under warranty. If you
really understand a technicians job, that .4 is to get the repair order from the
service writer, and find the car. Pull it into the shop and connect the scan
tool to retrieve the trouble code and start the diagnostics. The next step is to
check the TSB's and then if one is found as mentioned earlier, follow the steps
as outlined. Now the tech needs to go to the parts department, (wait his/her
turn) and get a new NVLD which they hopefully have in stock, and then replace
the part as described. Now the codes get cleared a quick self test is run to
make sure no problems occurred as a result of doing the repair, check for any
fingerprints/grease marks and park the vehicle back outside. All for a whopping
.4hr.
If you have done this a few times, and you don't actually test anything it's likely that you can come close to that time, (.4hrs) but there is no room for any surprises at any point in the exercise. It's pull the code, and slam the part and run to get the next ticket. That is how "flat rate" works. The tech gets paid by the labor time billed. This same repair if it is customer pay would likely have the diagnostic time alone be .5 to .7 hrs and the labor to replace the NVLD is .7. That's a problem because the kids that we need to attract to the trade today, who are smart enough to work on these "robots in the driveway" are also smart enough to know that isn't a fair pay system. You can't pay someone .4 on one car to replace the NVLD, and then turn around and get paid 1.2 on another and call it "flat". That just doesn't pass the sniff test.
What's worse is it encourages a sloppy routine, in fact it rewards it so long as everything goes perfect while it is ready to duly punish the technicians at the first sign of a flaw for any reason .
I often refer back to the NBC sting operation that Mr Reed of Edmunds was involved in. They "exposed" dealer employee's over selling maintanence items. NBC did a second story on that reporting about how it was just dishonest employee's who were no longer employed at the dealerships that got caught. Their intent at that point was to exonerate the dealers from any wrong doing, and that is a load of bull IMO. If the service manager/dispatcher feeds warranty job after warranty job to a given tech then he/she will end up not producing the number of hours that the dealer demands of them and they would lose their job, even though they may be a talented, hard working technician simply by how the numbers look on a spreadsheet. If that same tech gives into the pressure and starts selling the maintenance items, then their productivity rises without them working as hard and they make more money and their job is secure too because now they are producing $$$$. They manipulate the techs into selling and then abandon them if anyone raises a question about it, and that is what NBC actually exposed.
I can see how this is going to go because when I get in front of that room of dealers, one of the first things that I am going to talk about is what I just wrote right here and then I'm going to ask them a few questions and to make a list for me.
One of the questions will be; Would you want your son/daughter to become a technician in your shop? Yes or No
The next question would be would you want your son or daughter to be a technician in someone else's shop? Yes or No.
The next one will likely have some of them wanting to head for the door.
List the reasons why you would, or would not want your son or daughter working as a technician in your shop.
Now list the reasons you would or would not want them working as a tech in someone else's
Think about this, if they wouldn't want their own kids to become techs, why should anyone else? This has been the problem that has been getting swept under the rug for decades and now it's really come back to haunt them. This is a problem that has grown under their watch, its a measure of how poorly they have managed the service and repair side of the operation.
They have to establish a plan to make the job become one that they would want their kids to have, if their kids would want to chose to. Anything short of that and we aren't going to get anywhere, and that's a consumer issue. Before I can commit to helping attract anyone else's kids to this trade for them, it has to become a trade worth entering. As the title says, diplomacy isn't my strong suit. I'll have all of the ugly details laid right out there and they will have to address them up front with a clear plan or I'll be more inclined to stand in their way instead of trying to help them. Hmmm, looks like I already started doing just that
If you have done this a few times, and you don't actually test anything it's likely that you can come close to that time, (.4hrs) but there is no room for any surprises at any point in the exercise. It's pull the code, and slam the part and run to get the next ticket. That is how "flat rate" works. The tech gets paid by the labor time billed. This same repair if it is customer pay would likely have the diagnostic time alone be .5 to .7 hrs and the labor to replace the NVLD is .7. That's a problem because the kids that we need to attract to the trade today, who are smart enough to work on these "robots in the driveway" are also smart enough to know that isn't a fair pay system. You can't pay someone .4 on one car to replace the NVLD, and then turn around and get paid 1.2 on another and call it "flat". That just doesn't pass the sniff test.
What's worse is it encourages a sloppy routine, in fact it rewards it so long as everything goes perfect while it is ready to duly punish the technicians at the first sign of a flaw for any reason .
I often refer back to the NBC sting operation that Mr Reed of Edmunds was involved in. They "exposed" dealer employee's over selling maintanence items. NBC did a second story on that reporting about how it was just dishonest employee's who were no longer employed at the dealerships that got caught. Their intent at that point was to exonerate the dealers from any wrong doing, and that is a load of bull IMO. If the service manager/dispatcher feeds warranty job after warranty job to a given tech then he/she will end up not producing the number of hours that the dealer demands of them and they would lose their job, even though they may be a talented, hard working technician simply by how the numbers look on a spreadsheet. If that same tech gives into the pressure and starts selling the maintenance items, then their productivity rises without them working as hard and they make more money and their job is secure too because now they are producing $$$$. They manipulate the techs into selling and then abandon them if anyone raises a question about it, and that is what NBC actually exposed.
I can see how this is going to go because when I get in front of that room of dealers, one of the first things that I am going to talk about is what I just wrote right here and then I'm going to ask them a few questions and to make a list for me.
One of the questions will be; Would you want your son/daughter to become a technician in your shop? Yes or No
The next question would be would you want your son or daughter to be a technician in someone else's shop? Yes or No.
The next one will likely have some of them wanting to head for the door.
List the reasons why you would, or would not want your son or daughter working as a technician in your shop.
Now list the reasons you would or would not want them working as a tech in someone else's
Think about this, if they wouldn't want their own kids to become techs, why should anyone else? This has been the problem that has been getting swept under the rug for decades and now it's really come back to haunt them. This is a problem that has grown under their watch, its a measure of how poorly they have managed the service and repair side of the operation.
They have to establish a plan to make the job become one that they would want their kids to have, if their kids would want to chose to. Anything short of that and we aren't going to get anywhere, and that's a consumer issue. Before I can commit to helping attract anyone else's kids to this trade for them, it has to become a trade worth entering. As the title says, diplomacy isn't my strong suit. I'll have all of the ugly details laid right out there and they will have to address them up front with a clear plan or I'll be more inclined to stand in their way instead of trying to help them. Hmmm, looks like I already started doing just that
Thursday, February 7, 2013
You owe me an apology Bill
There were many times as a young technician I was responsible for diagnosing a problem on a vehicle that turned out to be pretty complicated. It often happened that the car developed a problem, but it wasn't real bad so the owner kept driving it. Then another one developed on top of the first, and still the owner kept driving it, and then another, and yet another. Eventually it got so bad the owner had no choice but to try and repair it, or have it repaired. But which problem finally convinced the owner to bring the vehicle in to be fixed? Worse, how can a tech see every problem that the car may have when one (or some) are very obvious and confirmed? That was the case with a Ford Ranger that another shop dropped off to me back in December. They had already removed and replaced the left cylinder head reporting that it was cracked, but they didn't do anything with the right hand head because it had good compression. After performing that repair, the truck ran but had no power and they noted the right hand bank of cylinders weren't firing. They tried all kinds of things to solve the problem, (replaced spark plugs and wires, swapped injectors etc) but eventually ran out of ideas so they brought it to me.
The testing went pretty much in line with a standard routine. I confirmed spark, and fuel injector pulse and compression and like they said the RH bank wasn't firing. Today we test compression with a pressure transducer and the oscilloscope. This gives us a look at every phase of the engines operation.
Here is cylinder number 2 cranking and showing 160 psi of compression. Next its time to look at the cylnder running, and then when the throttle is snapped.
Here is number 2 running with the exhaust stroke
of the cylinder marked with the cursors.
The rounding of the exhaust pocket isn't normal.
Next is TDC at the end of the exhaust stroke and beginning of the intake stroke. Again the rounding of the wave form is a problem.
The next test, snapped throttle tells the whole story, and here it is. The tall peaks are the compression strokes of the cylinder, the shorter ones that ramp up are the exhaust stroke. Note the value shown by the cursor is 37psi. That's how much back pressure is in the exhaust and that's a mechanical issue. The exhaust is restricted.
The shop that sent the truck to us didn't want to go any further with this. Basically if they didn't want to fix it there wasn't much of a reason to go any further. They picked it up and it wasn't until today that I heard back from them and now Bill is trying to tell me that I got the diagnosis wrong. After they punched out the cats, instead of replacing them the truck still ran bad. So they sent it off to another guy who allegedly had it solved in twenty minutes. The claim is that he tried to adjust a screw with the throttle position sensor, and when he did that, the computer then generated a code, so he substituted a computer and the truck ran perfect. Well not perfect but supposedly much better that he was then able to get another computer and now its fine. The part that irritates me about this is no doubt Bill had no idea the level of testing that was done when the truck was with me in December, and he darn sure didn't realize that everything we test gets documented and can be pulled back up exactly as you see here. Did the truck still have a drive- ability issue after the cats were punched out? I'll take his word that it probably did, after all here is the mass air flow sensor waveform from a snap throttle from back in December.
The trained eye will see that either this engine isn't breathing right, or else the sensor can't report the airflow correctly. Don't worry about the drop outs, that was a scope connection issue.
With the exhaust restricted, the MAF sensor cannot be condemned yet, but it couldn't be confirmed to be good either.
So why does Bill owe me an apology? Easy, had I not have had such documentation of the truck's problem back in December, I wouldn't have a leg to stand on today. With a confirmed mechanical issue, there was nothing else for me to do, the engine has to be able to pump air correctly. Even though I was correct, he is trying to tell me that I failed, yet he was the one who didn't want to spend any money to fix this, "because its an old truck and not worth anything. No doubt he has done this same thing to other techs that were in his employ through the years and gotten away with it. That kind of "bullying" demoralizes, and quite often embarrasses the technician, and without the kind of proof that I have here they might even doubt themselves. I know all about that, I've been there in the past. But not this time, you blew it Bill, I can't help it if you haven't been to training and don't know how the system works, which is why your explanation about the throttle position sensor doesn't hold water. And no, I can't make you look at the email that I sent with the capture of the snap throttle which shows the exhaust back pressure. It isn't the 70's anymore Bill, real techs don't have to guess, they test and produce verifiable results.
The testing went pretty much in line with a standard routine. I confirmed spark, and fuel injector pulse and compression and like they said the RH bank wasn't firing. Today we test compression with a pressure transducer and the oscilloscope. This gives us a look at every phase of the engines operation. Here is cylinder number 2 cranking and showing 160 psi of compression. Next its time to look at the cylnder running, and then when the throttle is snapped.
Here is number 2 running with the exhaust stroke of the cylinder marked with the cursors.
The rounding of the exhaust pocket isn't normal.
Next is TDC at the end of the exhaust stroke and beginning of the intake stroke. Again the rounding of the wave form is a problem.
The shop that sent the truck to us didn't want to go any further with this. Basically if they didn't want to fix it there wasn't much of a reason to go any further. They picked it up and it wasn't until today that I heard back from them and now Bill is trying to tell me that I got the diagnosis wrong. After they punched out the cats, instead of replacing them the truck still ran bad. So they sent it off to another guy who allegedly had it solved in twenty minutes. The claim is that he tried to adjust a screw with the throttle position sensor, and when he did that, the computer then generated a code, so he substituted a computer and the truck ran perfect. Well not perfect but supposedly much better that he was then able to get another computer and now its fine. The part that irritates me about this is no doubt Bill had no idea the level of testing that was done when the truck was with me in December, and he darn sure didn't realize that everything we test gets documented and can be pulled back up exactly as you see here. Did the truck still have a drive- ability issue after the cats were punched out? I'll take his word that it probably did, after all here is the mass air flow sensor waveform from a snap throttle from back in December.
With the exhaust restricted, the MAF sensor cannot be condemned yet, but it couldn't be confirmed to be good either.
So why does Bill owe me an apology? Easy, had I not have had such documentation of the truck's problem back in December, I wouldn't have a leg to stand on today. With a confirmed mechanical issue, there was nothing else for me to do, the engine has to be able to pump air correctly. Even though I was correct, he is trying to tell me that I failed, yet he was the one who didn't want to spend any money to fix this, "because its an old truck and not worth anything. No doubt he has done this same thing to other techs that were in his employ through the years and gotten away with it. That kind of "bullying" demoralizes, and quite often embarrasses the technician, and without the kind of proof that I have here they might even doubt themselves. I know all about that, I've been there in the past. But not this time, you blew it Bill, I can't help it if you haven't been to training and don't know how the system works, which is why your explanation about the throttle position sensor doesn't hold water. And no, I can't make you look at the email that I sent with the capture of the snap throttle which shows the exhaust back pressure. It isn't the 70's anymore Bill, real techs don't have to guess, they test and produce verifiable results.
Several days after the missed appointment a lady walks through the front door and reports that she is dropping a car off for us to look at. She introduced herself as only the one who called about having to jump start the car and that someone told her it needs a fuel pump. We wrote it up and I set about working it into the schedule.
When the time came to look at it, wouldn't you know it fired right up. Well that's OK, we deal with intermittent issues all the time. I just need to get my testing set up, perform my baseline checks and then wait for the problem to occur. One of the tests that I run is to measure the fuel pump current with a low amps probe an my digital storage oscilloscope. Here is the waveform from that test.
The pump definitely has a problem, those current humps should be very similar. You can see the two humps right after the cursors, and how much different they are from the rest. That's a bad commutator to brush connection. But, they claimed they need to jump start the car when it acts up. Trying to jump start it won't fix the pumps problem. If it would happen to not want to run, jumping it wouldn't help. So either they have given me false information or there is more than one problem with this car.
I let it run for about a half an hour and there were no other issues noted. It was time to turn it off and let it sit and then try to restart it in hopes that I could catch the no-start. About an hour later the car started and ran for a few seconds and then stalled as the fuel pressure dropped to 10PSI. Here is what the fuel pump current was then.
That's a little over fifteen amps of current and notice there are no humps in the pattern. That's a pump that is frozen and not turning. The car was now a cranks but won't start. I can see if this happened to someone they might have to wait for help to come along, and maybe in the mean time have cranked, and cranked the engine until they ran the battery down. Now when they have been forced to leave the car sit for a while, and they jump it, that gets it to start but the fuel pump running again is not actually related to the jumping of the battery.
The low amps probe is a great tool for testing like this. Had the problem been a bad connection reducing power to the pump, there would have been less current flowing than the first capture above, and there still would have been some humps from the pump turning, although they would have been very slow. These last two captures show a steady line until the relay turned off. Now its just a matter of selling the repair.
To be continued..
When the time came to look at it, wouldn't you know it fired right up. Well that's OK, we deal with intermittent issues all the time. I just need to get my testing set up, perform my baseline checks and then wait for the problem to occur. One of the tests that I run is to measure the fuel pump current with a low amps probe an my digital storage oscilloscope. Here is the waveform from that test.
The pump definitely has a problem, those current humps should be very similar. You can see the two humps right after the cursors, and how much different they are from the rest. That's a bad commutator to brush connection. But, they claimed they need to jump start the car when it acts up. Trying to jump start it won't fix the pumps problem. If it would happen to not want to run, jumping it wouldn't help. So either they have given me false information or there is more than one problem with this car.
I let it run for about a half an hour and there were no other issues noted. It was time to turn it off and let it sit and then try to restart it in hopes that I could catch the no-start. About an hour later the car started and ran for a few seconds and then stalled as the fuel pressure dropped to 10PSI. Here is what the fuel pump current was then.
That's a little over fifteen amps of current and notice there are no humps in the pattern. That's a pump that is frozen and not turning. The car was now a cranks but won't start. I can see if this happened to someone they might have to wait for help to come along, and maybe in the mean time have cranked, and cranked the engine until they ran the battery down. Now when they have been forced to leave the car sit for a while, and they jump it, that gets it to start but the fuel pump running again is not actually related to the jumping of the battery. The low amps probe is a great tool for testing like this. Had the problem been a bad connection reducing power to the pump, there would have been less current flowing than the first capture above, and there still would have been some humps from the pump turning, although they would have been very slow. These last two captures show a steady line until the relay turned off. Now its just a matter of selling the repair.
To be continued..
Wednesday, February 6, 2013
A bad fuel pump?
We got a call a little over a week ago for a telephone quote on a fuel pump replacement. These situations rarely end in our favor because someone will always do the parts replacement cheaper just to get the work. Our approach has been and always will be that we will invest in the training and tools that are required to do everything that our customers may need. In short our cost of doing business is higher than average, and when you factor in that I am the only technician it's astronomical. The result of that is we work tons of hours, and I even have a second career as an instructor to try and make ends meet.
It has worked out in one way because we are the one shop that doesn't have to send things away to the dealership or anywhere else if a module needs programmed, or if the factory scan tool is required to complete a set-up because we have been buying these tools. Trust me when I say it hasn't been easy, we have never had the cash for each purchase. Every time its been another lease to own which amounts to about a used car payment. A coupe of times we had two and three of these payments going out simultaneously while we were at various points in the lease terms.
We have a lot of people search us out for random problems, or check engine lights that just aren't solved by normal routines. As I do this blog you will see this theme get repeated.
The caller told me that the car has a new battery but it has to be jumped to be started, and that someone told her it needs a fuel pump. That doesn't add up. Then she said once she gets it started she can drive it anywhere. Now it really didn't add up and I told her so. Fuel pumps do go bad, but having to jump start the car is a reference to a discharged battery or some loss of system power in part of the circuit that they may be fixing by connecting the cables. The information she was giving me raised doubts as to what the car really needed, then to top if off she didn't know the details that were required to give her a quote to replace the fuel pump. There are several different styles of pumps, the cheapest one is just the pump but it isn't advisable to replace it that way. By design the entire assembly that the pump is inside of, which gets installed into the tank is supposed to be replaced. These also come with the complete harness replacement kit which will prevent a future loss of connection to the pump. All I could do was give her a range from around $450-$650 but at that point I didn't even know if that was going to solve her vehicle's problem. For us to do the work she was going to have to set an appointment and I was going to need to test it and prove what was wrong, then I'd be able to give her an accurate estimate. She set an appointment for that Saturday, but failed to show. To be continued.....
It has worked out in one way because we are the one shop that doesn't have to send things away to the dealership or anywhere else if a module needs programmed, or if the factory scan tool is required to complete a set-up because we have been buying these tools. Trust me when I say it hasn't been easy, we have never had the cash for each purchase. Every time its been another lease to own which amounts to about a used car payment. A coupe of times we had two and three of these payments going out simultaneously while we were at various points in the lease terms.
We have a lot of people search us out for random problems, or check engine lights that just aren't solved by normal routines. As I do this blog you will see this theme get repeated.
The caller told me that the car has a new battery but it has to be jumped to be started, and that someone told her it needs a fuel pump. That doesn't add up. Then she said once she gets it started she can drive it anywhere. Now it really didn't add up and I told her so. Fuel pumps do go bad, but having to jump start the car is a reference to a discharged battery or some loss of system power in part of the circuit that they may be fixing by connecting the cables. The information she was giving me raised doubts as to what the car really needed, then to top if off she didn't know the details that were required to give her a quote to replace the fuel pump. There are several different styles of pumps, the cheapest one is just the pump but it isn't advisable to replace it that way. By design the entire assembly that the pump is inside of, which gets installed into the tank is supposed to be replaced. These also come with the complete harness replacement kit which will prevent a future loss of connection to the pump. All I could do was give her a range from around $450-$650 but at that point I didn't even know if that was going to solve her vehicle's problem. For us to do the work she was going to have to set an appointment and I was going to need to test it and prove what was wrong, then I'd be able to give her an accurate estimate. She set an appointment for that Saturday, but failed to show. To be continued.....
Sunday, February 3, 2013
You would think that trying to help consumers get the right information is what everyone should be all about. Take a look at this thread in Edmunds. Manufacturers proprietary specs for engine oils are normal for today's cars and GM's dexos is really only one example. To see people twist the debate in a way that works to try and raise the suggestion that it isn't necessary to follow GM's reccomendation is wrong.
Start by following the thread from this post for now. http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f258f92/1071#MSG1071
Feel free to take in the entire thread if you have time.
Start by following the thread from this post for now. http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.f258f92/1071#MSG1071
Feel free to take in the entire thread if you have time.
Friday, February 1, 2013
Of Engine oil and YouTube
I was surfing YouTube the other day and I came across a video where a guy was trying to compare synthetic and conventional motor oils.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lshd7WR-a6I
Eric means well with his video, the problem is that he's totally wrong about many of the things that he states. Here is what I wrote to him on his facebook page.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lshd7WR-a6I
Eric means well with his video, the problem is that he's totally wrong about many of the things that he states. Here is what I wrote to him on his facebook page.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)