Hello all,


Today I asked myself just how bad is the stock Racor? Numbers have been thrown around this site to no end. There are even fuel quality reports complied at this site. I have not put together a comprehensive comparison of the O.E.M. VS. Nictane just a basic comparrison, using one set of data. I have studied the charts and graphs provide on the NICKTANE website and this is what I have gatherd. Nick pulled diesel # 2 directly from his fuel tank on his truck, after the stock Racor and after the stock Racor plus Cat.filter. Nick then sent these 3 samples to an independent testing facility. The results showed that Diesel fuel from Nicks tank ( or service station) contained 10,139 particles of 2MIC dirt. 4296 particles of 5MIC dirt. 619 particles of 15MIC dirt. After running the same fuel trough the stock Racor the results were as follows. 602 2MIC, 121 5MIC, 11 15MIC . After running the same fuel through the NICKTANE set up and then through the factory Racor the results were as follows. 100 2MIC, 33 5MIC, 5 15MIC. These results can then be converted into reductions measured in percentages. The factory Racor reduced 2 MIC particles by 94.06%, 5MIC particles by 97.18% and 15 MIC particles by 98.22%. The Nicktane setup reduced particles as follows. 2MIC particles by 99.01%, 5MIC particles by 99.23% and 15MIC particles by 99.19%. The charts provided by NICKTANE shows 2 things, First , Nicktane set up is very,very good at reducing particles. Second the factory Racor does reduce particles SUBSTANTIALLY! Not as good as the Nicktane set up of course. I just want to point out that our factory filter according to graphs provided by Nick prove our factory filter is working quite well! I do not understand how this data shows me that my factory filter is unworthy? My interperatation of the graphs could be incorrect. I am open to discussion.Edited by: Bronco

First I think you need to be clear that it is a CAT filter used in the Nictane kit. CAT has done substantial testing and quality control to arrive at it's "absolute" numbers. CAT has a factory that makes it's own filters. The OEM uses "Nominal" numbers which render it only about 50% effective in the 2 micron range I think was the outcome of the lab test.


George Morrison has explained this about 10 times and I will search around here and there and see if I can find George's explanation of all the numbers. It has to do with ISO standards.

I am just going off of the info. provide in the graphs on the Nicktane site. If you read closely I compliment the Cat filter and list it's ratings at over 99%. My point is that the Racor filter is also a good filter. Not as good as the CAt., obviously. That does not mean the Racor filter is no good. It has been mentioned that Racor had to build a filter to GM specs. I do not think a top notch company like Parker/Racor would produce junk for any one or any body. I am not telling any viewer of this post not to buy a Nicktane filter. Additional filtration is a good thing. I am only stating that the factory filter is doing an adequate job. Do you really think GM knows just how much dirt to let pass to get to 100K mark and then Kaboom? They would have to know how much dirt is in every single filling station and exactly how much fuel is passing through you system. Think about it!

If any of you ever has trouble sleeping, do a search with the word fuel. Oh boy! I have just spent several hours reading past post and researching links,tables and graphs. I am amazed as to how much time and energy has went into. discussing this topic. To the guys that have been around a while; DO you ever wonder when the fuel questions will quit appearing? Before there is a big flame out about my topic, let me explain myself a little further. First of all I had never done any fuel research prior to tonight. Secondly my only info. had come from the last 2 weeks of topics such as adaptor,pre racor ect.ect. All this talk left me with a vision of my stock Racor just letting gobs and gobs of dirt passing into my engine. It was almost like there was not even a filter in the system. So I started looking around a bit. The first place I came to was NICKTANE. I noticed the test results Nick had performed by an independent lab. It shows very clearly that the stock Racor is filtering out quite a bit of dirt. THAT IS ALL IT SHOWS. I was so exited to learn that I did indeed have atleast some type of filter in my system that I made this topic NICKTANE Compared to O.E.M. Is the O.E.M. perfect? NO! A lot of this might have to with the the fact it is mounted above the tank or the fact that it is a suction side filter? My only real point is as follows. The truck did come with a Racor. Good filter. Could of been something that came across the ocean instead. Heated head,water in fuel indicator and petcok valve, pretty convienent if you ask me. There are always going to be improvements you can make to your truck but to say the stock filter is a mandatory improvement like my 4 blown shocks or my bald steeltechs at 17k would just not be a fair statement. Especially considering almost all test results show some common trends. First, there is just not many big particles in our fuel. That shows the 30 Mic filters at the distributors are working. Second, all filters let some dirt pass through. So it is not really a question of how small can I filter down to but more of a question of how much dirt can I stop. If you always get lucky and buy clean fuel you will be light years ahead of the guy who gets just one bad load of fuel, no matter what your filter system is! Fuel injectors are always going to malfuntion and engines are always going to blow. It is all in the roll of the dice.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cool.gifEdited by: Bronco

I wrote the following post on another website a ways back. Did a cut-n-paste to here. It was a post in response to someone who had called the Racor help line and was told our OEM filter is 2 micron. It might help your understanding of the situation with respect to our supposed "2micron OEM" filter. Make sure you read the document at the link.


*********************************************


I talked to the Racor tech line and was told that the factory filter on our trucks is 2 micron.

And the next question that should be asked immediately is "What is the efficiency of the filter at 2 micron". It is maybe 60 - 70%. Just stating that it it a 2 micron filter is meaningless, without mentioning the efficiency of the filter in the same statement. Racor should know better. A number of people have called Racor over the months and been told the same thing. Its a 2 micron filter. Ask Kennedy if the 2 micron OEM is the same as his 2 micron Baldwin!

Reference this document (which has been floating around for a while on this site) for some additional info:

http://www.baldwinfilter.com/engineer/95_11.html

I hope the above helps.

Personally, I would like to have a little margin below the 15/13/10 ISO level. There is some test evidence that suggests for each ISO level drop, the injector wear due to particles in the fuel is reduced by 25% or more.


************************************************


By the way, this whole fuel filter issue has been hashed about now for over a year and a half. It is not something new.


Later,


Alan



Edited by: OC_DMAX

The key to filtration, AND how these guys rate filters is MULTIPASS. They do not simply pass a fluid through a filter media, a single time and then test.





I can say without a doubt that every sample that I have drawn was run as a single pass, immediately (within 2 miles) after filling the tank and driving. This is the worst case scenario for the given batch of source fuel.





I will tell you there is no way that the OE filter is much more than 60%-70% efficient single pass. If you look to the spreadsheets by OCdmax or JBplock you will see that those who have tested the OE filter's performance will concur...

I believe Racor claims 88% at 2m

Some more food for thought....


How do we know that the pre/post aftermarket filters are doing the trick, by this I mean preventing injector failure. We have no idea...the trucks that have these extra fitlers could be the same trucks that drive on the stock fuel fitler for 60,000miles without a single problem. We will have no way of knowing.....as stated above it is just one big crap shoot.


But instead we are running around saying the sky is falling, spending all this money on extra filters and really have no prof this the correct fix or even if it is working.

Do some basic research on the SAE website with respect to High Pressure Fuel Injection systems. There are several papers written that document tests that test fuel injection system life versus fuel contamination levels. I have done the research and it convinced me that additional filtration was necessary beyond what the OEM offers.

I guess GM knows about these papers from SAE that document tests also.

Regarding the question: "How do we know that the pre/post aftermarket filters are doing the trick, by this I mean preventing injector failure. We have no idea...the trucks that have these extra fitlers could be the same trucks that drive on the stock fuel fitler for 60,000 miles without a single problem. We will have no way of knowing.....as stated above it is just one big crap shoot."
Your comments rather fall under the heading that everytime we take off in an airplane it will be a crap-shoot whether we get off the ground because there really is no proof that this flying deal and Bernouli's experiments are not strings and mirrors.
These diesel fuel issues have been discussed at great length and extensive studies by CAT (which you obviously have not read) have confirmed that diesel fuel cleanliness is directly related and propotional to servo valve/piston pump life. It is graphable.. Period..
The "Crap shoot" comes from NOT doing anything in the form of dirt prevention. If one is fortunate enough to have pristine fuel available at the pump, going into their Duramax, then, yes, there is a remote possibility that one could experience good fuel injector life; however, if the diesel fuel is highly contaminated (which 98% of all diesel fuel is, then it is a certainty that pump/injector life is going to be severely shortened. And that is a fact confirmed by extensive, documented, study. It IS a known that ISO 21/19/17 dirt levels will cut the life of piston pumps and injectors in half vs. 20/18/16 ISO for a 6,000 psi system. Ours are 20,000 psi systems..
Please do more research on the literal volumes of discussion that have taken place on this site, along with incredible amount of time and effort that has taken place on this subject before a declaration of "the sky is falling"....
George Morrison
Edited by: Georgecls

I guess GM knows about these papers from SAE that document tests also


I am certain the engineers have read the same papers too. However, the accountants that work for these companies have other goals in mind and typically don't even know what SAE stands for. So we end up with a compromise between cost and performance. Something that probably will make the warranty period with minimal repair (if clean fuel is used like George mentions above).


Example, It has been stated that there are 150,000 DMAX engines produced per year. For conversation, lets say the cost of a second fuel filter and integration into vehicle is $300. Do the math. Thats $45 million per year saved by eliminating the second filter assembly. If your the accountant, then you are all http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Big Smile.gif's





Later,


AlanEdited by: OC_DMAX

Mr. George Morrison:


Take it easy there killer.....with the personal insults!


I am not saying we do not need filters for our fuel system! And yes studies have been done on the importance of fuel filturation. I am not saying they have not been! And yes Bernoulli's principle proven. It is not a crap shoot if you will lift off the ground....but everything that is making the airplane fly is!!!!! Coming from a Airline Pilot who has had two engine shut downs and a few hydraulic/electrical failures in flight. THINGS FAIL AND THERE IS NOTHING WE CAN DO ABOUT IT! We can help by trying to PREVENT it from happening but there is no guaranty it will work. If you have 20 fuel filters on your truck you still can have a injector failure.


So George, take a step back and not be so quick to insult! Edited by: NoWake200

Oh, and one more thing. I am waiting for my Nicktane Filter to show up in the Brown Truck any day now.


Have a nice day.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif

My entire point is The factory filter is attempting to filter. It is a good filter. Racor builds good products. I bet if it was used with a lift pump it would perform even better due to complete fill vs suction side. I never said you can not make a better filter. As a matter of fact there are sevaral filter available that can filter way past any of the standard type filters we all discuss here on this site, just go look around outside of this little world. I am just sick and tired of GM and Dmax getting a rap of being incompotent. This is just not true. They have done an okay job at providing filtration. Parker is a top notch organization. I have used parker pnumatics in other applications and they are second to none. If you are really after a 500K Dmax then you need to stay awy from high horsepower tunes,lift kits, you also need to add space age air/oil/fuel filtration. You can do all of this to the tune of 1500.00 dollars. Lets be real here and stop the hype and paranoid behavior. It is getting old. And to think all of this, just to sell some additive and extra filters!

Bronco, I agree with you. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif

Regarding your statement that 'we are running around saying the sky is falling" is indeed a personal insult to all of us who have done a great deal of work in this area.. I do not know what you construed as a personal insult to you other than the suggestion to do a bit of homework that would confirm, very clearly, that a higher level of filtration efficiency above our current OEM 50%/60% efficency is real.
Apparently you did not understand the impact of your writings... And if I offended you in any way, I certainly apologize; however, your post appeared to be very much lacking in the amount of work that has been accomplished in the area of fuel filtration and the positive affects derived...
I am in the process of reducing my usual 25 cups of coffee down to 1.5, so a bit edgy from caffein withdrawel.. :-)
And yes, I too have my ATP, 10,000+ hours TT, and have lost more than one engine, hydraulic system, so I know what you speak..
George Morrison

And to think all of this, just to sell some additive and extra filters!








Truth be told, I could walk away from the filters/additive, and life would be SO much simpler. Just send everyone to Racor or some other joint, but truth be told, I BELIEVE that we need to do something about it, and if it takes my providing means to this end to get it done then so be it.





Still scratch my head and wonder if it is worth the headaches most days...

NoWake200,

Basically there have been enough tests and studies that PROVE added filtration in high pressure hydraulic/fuel systems increase component life significantly.

If an injector fails due to a mechanical issue not related to foreign object damage (FOD) than yes, we can't show that an added filter increased injector life.

There is more to this than dirt in fuel but the filters reduce that variable (dirt) considerably.

Lets say you never incur a mechanical injector failure not related to dirty fuel... in that case you still have the increased wear associated with a poorly designed filter system. Why not remove that variable for a few hundred bucks on a $40,000 rig?

BTW: I built my own setup and don't promote anybody's. They all seem to be good setups. Edited by: hoot

George, I too got alittle emotional and sorry for that.


By no means I am saying that all the hard work was for nothing or meaningless. The sky is falling was in no means a insult to you and anyone on the field. There are alot more owners on this site with problems...that is how they came to the site. It kind of sets up a tone of panic...ie "the sky is falling". There are also owners without the problems are driving around and unaware for the post/pre aftermarket fitlers and fuel additives. Sometimes "ignorance is bliss"(not a insult).


We do need filtration...and better filtration than what we get from GM.


In the same breath with all of us adding the aftermarket fitlers we might be in turn helping out GM and not helping out the other owners who are not aware of the filtering issues.


And like I said we can have 20 fitlers all over our truck and still have a injector failer. Sometime it is just out of our hands.


Do you still fly? I hope you do not fly for AA...it might not have been the coffee but more like my Avtar that set you off.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Hug.gifEdited by: NoWake200

And to think all of this, just to sell some additive and extra filters!


Like Hoot, I sell neither nor do I promote one over the other. That was the purpose behind maintaining a database of test results on the various fuel filters. To let everyone know that all the supplemental filters were basically doing the intended job. They could make their own mind up what to do.

Just for clarity and for those who have not been around more than 6 months to a year, George Morrison is the filter Guru and the most trusted real expert this and any other board is very lucky to have around as a resource (have you seen his spectron microscopic picture of a failed injector tip?). There is absolutely no doubt that the OEM filter is lacking in performance. This is even more obvious as GM is making finally making changes and even going to an optional secondary (or is it primary) filter setup.


Nobody is forcing anyone to do anything to thier truck. We are all just looking for something better to solve an identified and proven "weak link" in the fuel system. If you don't want to believe it, that's your perogative, but don't defend the OEM until you have seen all the evidence that has been professionally and legitimately presented for review.


The ISO wear data by itself should be enough to cause concerns.


I still have to find all that data and post a link. There is so much stuff out there, it takes time to find it. But I will find it shortly.


Best Regards,

OK I have it all condensed and ready to go, just waiting for permission to post it here....just in case it's an issue.


Reverting soon.

Here it is as history evolved
Here’s where it all started: 09/16/02 George Morrison


<LI class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in">Particle Count is an actual counting of the various size spectrums that cause the most wear in our fuel systems. This wear spectrum has been determined by Southwest Reserach to be in the 5 to 10 micron range, which is exactly the size which fits in the small space betwen the high pressure fuel piston walls, and is like a sand blaster to injection nozzles.
I am planning to run a "before and after" fuel analysis on a Duramax to find out exactly what our effective filter rate is for our trucks.
George Morrison, STLE CLS</LI>



<LI class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in">10/25/02 George Morrison</LI>
Processed the diesel fuel source and "after the filter" today and the results were not good. The "after the filter" results showed double the amount of abrasive particulates compared with the pump fuel that went into the truck's tank! We either had a defective fuel filter or possibly a mis-seated filter. The fuel filter had a little over 8,000 miles on it and the fuel the truck has used is among the cleanest there is. A new fuel filter was installed this afternoon. The old filter was examined carefully and there were no readily apparent imperfections discernable.
The Duramax will be driven for the weekend and then re-sampled early next week. We will post the results here for all to see..
Continued.......
George Morrison, STLE CLS


<LI class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in">10/26/02 George Morrison</LI>
Regarding the "0" rings. The internal '0' ring specifically; however, the removed fuel filter '0' ring looked fine. All of the 0 rings were closely examined and did not reveal any cuts, roll-over or reason for by-pass.
Fuel filters are constructed by human beings (except for the CAT fuel/oil filters which are totally robotically manufactured and incredibly flawless) and can have an occasional mis-build and I mentioned previously, if there is a hole or poor glue, the fuel will find its way through.
We will just have to wait until the end of next week for another analysis result.


<LI class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt; mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; tab-stops: list .5in">10/26/02 George Morrison</LI>
Regard

Good work, Chevysrus, thanks for making all the effort to collect and post that information!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif I've been following all this for over two years, too, and it's good to bring some "history" to the discussion for those new to the issue!

There is so much stuff on this issue it's hard to select what is interesting to others. I know there is another message out there that goes into deeper explantion of the OEM ISO test results and explains the 18/16/14 ISO results in greater detail, but I have not found that one yet.


Also there is a lot of testing using the secondary filters and the ISO results after the CAT or MEGA or others and the OEM showing very low ISO numbers confirming the effectiveness of the secondary filtering. All the seondary filtering to date has been very effective in lowering the ISO numbers well below the minimum levels.


I guess we will get to all that next.


Anyway, thanks and enjoyed getting this stuff back in the "light of day"

I'm not trying to sell anyone's filter either but the pre-OEM CAT filter on the Nictane mount that I've run for over 6,000 miles has never missed a single beat, and that's w/o any lift pump. Even in the sub-zero temps and snow back East, we haven't heard one complaint about either the placement of the freezing/gelling of diesel in the Nictane/CAT set-up.

Current diesel fuel is unfiltered below 30 microns when it leaves the refinery. The diesel fuel continues to pick up contaminants with each transfer, each step of the way until it is finally deposited in its final underground cesspool before delivery to our Durmax engines.

That scares me in itself.Edited by: hoot

I was waiting for someone to notice that! About says it all, however in the CAT study, the slime and bacteria were not the cause of injector &amp; Pump failures, it was the 7-10 micron particles that get by the fuel filters. The slime and stuff only caused clogged filters and shut downs.


I wish I could find and post that electron microscopic picture of the injector tip that looked like a walk on the moon with all the craters from the collision of the dirt particles at 25,000 psi.


OK I have to get some work done today, so leave this with you guys to ponder.


Regards,

The UPS Gal dropped my new Nictane setup off at 11:00 this morning and by 2:00 this afternoon it was bringing new life to my fuel system. Maybe it is just a PLACEBO effect, but my truck sure seems to run smoother!!!!!!!!!


Thanks NICK!!

If you are contemplating adding an additional fuel filter, check out the group buy forum section.

Wow, my computer screen is glowing red! I prefaced my entire comparison by stating I only used the data from the NICKTANE sight. I did a percentage conversion on the amount of particles reduced by the stock filter and also by the Cat. I stated the fact that the cat did an extremly good job at reducing particles. I also stated that ACCORDING TO THE GRAPHS PROVIDED BY NICK HIMSELF that the stock filter removed quite a few particles. Would somebody please acknowlege the fact that the stock filter does remove quite a few particles? To be more specific, the fuel in Nicks tank contained 4296 particles in the 5mic range. After passing it through the stock filter the particle count was reduced to 121 particles in the 5MIC range. This is a reduction of 97.18%. After passing this same fuel through the cat filter the particle count was reduced even further to an amount of 33 particles in the 5MIC range. This is a reduction of 99.23%. My entire point is that according to the dat on the NICKTANE site the stock filter is indeed cleaning the fuel. I am not trying to argue the fact that dirty fuel is not harmful to our engines. Lets look at things in some alternative ways? Would you run your truck with out the stock filter? NO! That proves that it does have some value! The CAT filter lets some particles through to your motor. Whats to say that 33 particles is any less destructive than 121 particles? And finally have you ever seen a water laser? There are cutting devices that will cut through solid steele only using water! If you put anything under enough pressure it will become abrasive. It is just simple phsyics. I am all for extra filtering. Not only will it help injectors but it will also reduce wear on all moving componets inside your engine. I think we need to consider that injector replacement is just part of owning a high pressure fuel system. The LLY has atleast relocted the injectors for easy acsess. I would like to start an adult discussion on the best methods of minimizing the side efects of injector failure. For example Which oil provides the best lubricant when mixed with diesel fuel? Is driving your truck after an injector failure a no-no? How do you interact with the dealer to assure a correct and timely repair? Is the possibility of replacing your injectors before they go bad an alternative? If the number of injector failures gets to high will we start a class action lawsuit? These are just some of the questions that need to be answered. Edited by: Bronco

My results did not show a very good efficiency. Adequate with clean base fuel, but as a whole, not great:





http://www.kennedydiesel.com/detail.cfm?ID=241

John,


I have viewed your results. I interpret your graph the same as I interpret Nicks. It shows the factory filter removing a sustantial amount of particles. Not so much in the 2 MIC range but quite a bit in the 5MIC range and almost all in the 15MIC range. According to the letter in HEAVY DUTY TRUCKING it is the 5-10um range specifically the 7um particle that is destructive. The stock OEM is reducing particles in this range substantialy! Unless I need to be taught how to read a graph?

I am a long way from being an expert on this subject, but it would appear that there should be universal agreement that we are driving trucks that list in the $40K range, and that whether the OEM filter is only a moderately efficient door stop or reasonibly efficient door stop that the addition of pre or post OEM filtration is a good idea. The warrenty issues are a PITA, and frankly I will likely put in the Racor factory solution because I lack the stones to endure a prolonged fight with GM, but I would like to install either Baldwin or CAT filtration. I think the addition of George's past comments clarify that we are using fuel with mandated filtering that was adequate for low pressure injectors, and as time has passed, and pressure has increased, bulk filtering standards, and regulations have not kept up.

Let's see, how did that old adage I learned in school go again.....


"Good, Better, Best, never let it rest until the Good is Better and the Better is Best" LOL (yes it was Catholic School LOL)


Lets say the OEM is good and secondary filters like CAT / MEGA/ Standyne (sp) or even add on Rancor are Better, but we don't know what is actually Best yet! Can we all live with that??


In my mind a real "absolute" 2 Micron OEM type filter is probably Best and what we need. Even if it has to be changed every 5K!


If nothing else, we are "hoping" based on statistical data, that those trucks with the secondary filters will go longer without injector problems than those trucks that are not running secondary filters. There are a lot of variables with that assumption such as pump fuel cleanliness.


Also it is important to distinguish the types of injector failures. The secondary filtering and dirty fuel related injector failures have to do with worn out injectors from pitting or cratering (sandblast effect). The filtering is not going to help any injectors that fail due to leaking cups, leaking fittings or maybe quality control issues leading to defective injectors.


What we are addressing with the secondary filtering is a likely pump and injector wear out issue due to abrasive particles in the fuel that are getting by the OEM filter. This has been documented and exist in other systems. Our DMAX situation may not have gone on long enough to determine exactly what the impact of dirty fuel is on these injectors. I don't know if any of the injector failures to date are related to worn out injectors or pumps.


It could all be just design or quality control issues. But having said that, the abrasive damage is real and on going to the point of eventual failure. We are trying to delay or eliminate that wear out process by providing cleaner fuel. Spending $5K for new injectors at 100K miles or spending $5K at 250K miles is still $5K, but once at 250K and again at 500K is a lot more acceptable (maybe) than doing it every 100K assuming one would hang in there with it in that situation.


(Hopefully this cost will come down in time)


So if we can all agree the ISO cleanliness of the fuel, post OEM is well above the minimum levels established and the only way to get down below the minimum is with secondary filtering until something better comes along, all we are accomplishing is delaying the wear our factor on the fuel system. It does nothing other than that and has no benefit on other causes of injector failure suck as broken, leaking etc.


Sticking injectors might be caused by dirt or a malfunction of the injector. GM takes back the old injectors and I assume they are doing failure analysis, but not reporting the findings. Wish we knew how many failures were due to design/malfunction or dirt.


So that's it for me based on the findings to dateEdited by: Chevysrus

I would have to say that is an impressive study. But you have to understand my "Chicken Little" remark was not directed to the study(ies). I was simply going by the post of owners....may injectors went, mine also, and so did mine posts. Then following that I got this filter, but your filter is this so I went with this filter.....oh is it pre....no good mine is post. I hope you get my point. Kind of self induced panic.





Chevysrus,


Those are some very good points you bring up. I wanted the ask the same question about the failures.....do we know if it was caused by dirt or mechanical failure.


In the study George talked about GM making a secondary fitler for this problem. That was in 2002, what happened? Should GM have released this filter by now?


I fully understand our concerns in wanting the best for our trucks, if we did not this great site would not be here for us to be a part of. But really what we should be doing is talking about how much we love our truck...what we did to it(radio up grade, custom paint, and ext) but instead we are adding filtershttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif. We have owners taking on the MAJOR BURDEN of running there own tests on there own money.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif This is truely some great work, but really for what? So we can have our truck last? Should this not be GM's concern, GM's time, and most important GM's MONEY.


I really hope these studies are being presented to the higher ups at GM. In reality they should be the ones lossing sleep over this, not us.Edited by: NoWake200

NOwake200---I think the study GM was doing in 2002 about a primary second filter is just now being offered as we are learning with the Racor kit being sold as an option "coming to a parts department near you soon"


Like any car or truck once the manufacturers put it in the hands of the consumer, it takes on a new life. Enthusiest are always making 'improvements" either in the cosmetic looks of the vehicle or performance mods or with add on aftermarket enhancers of all sorts.


In our case the DMAX was a relatively new vehicle with climbing sales, but not that many DMAX's on the roads at that time. There was not enough "potential market sales" for an aftermarket supplier to step up to the plate. In the beginning (from the DMAX Bible) everything had to come from the dealer, you couldn't find anything for these trucks outside the parts counter and sometimes even they did not have the stuff. Someone reminded all of us that the original fuel filter cost over $100 bucks from the dealer in the early days. Now we have good (same) filters for less than $20 bucks, the allison spin on can be had now for $8 bucks much less than the dealers $30 price.


So thanks to those who cared enough to take the samples, study the issues by exchanging information and to GeorgeCLS, we were finally able to get to a point where we were comfortable adding the second filter.


I don't know what GM is doing about the problem or when it will get to the "unacceptable" level for them to act. If they are doing injector failure analysis (they gotta be doing this don't they) they will eventually come to a conclusion as it is costing them money to fix these problems. If the conclusion is faulty manufacturing, then they will make changes, if it's fuel related then they have to consider getting a better filter (they may be halfway there already with the Rancor kit as primary add on filter).


Some have expressed belief that GM only wants the injectors to last through the warranty period so they don't have to cover them. If true they are being short sighted and stupid as once this becomes the trend they can kiss sales goodbye (unless the price to fix comes way, way down) and even then it's the hassle factor.


I would hope that GM is aware of these studies and I think they are given the contact they have with these boards (they read everything, just like Homeland Security).


They built a fantastic truck, far superior in my opinion, it would be foolish to let it die for lack of an effective filter or a quality injector. The filter makes up less than .000367346 of the total cost of the truck ($49,000 sticker : $18 filter). The injectors at $236 each from GM direct (has to be less to GM) is only .004816326 of the total cost of the truck (does not include labor, since if the part was high quality there would be no labor).


I really hate to say this because it should be unnecessary and expected, but if GM wanted to charge me $300 more for the truck, but certify the filter at 2 microns and injectors warrantied like a battery for 250K (maybe I pay a little something as the miles rack up similar to adjusting a battery that fails in year 2,3,4 or 5) then I could probably live with that. This should already be in place, it's what we were expecting anyway.


The motto is Quality Assurance.........where is it?


OK getting back down off my soap box. LOL

One more thing, if I may.....


In those instances where injectors have failed and been replaced, could DMAXALLITECH or 1FATCAT, or Patrick and any other techs tell us what they think caused that injector to fail and what they looked like. Realize you don't have the equipment to actually test the injector, but from appearances did they look worn, pitted or chunks missing or did they just fall apart in your hand and have broken missing parts or maybe burnt from an electrical connection etc.


Not looking to get anyone in trouble here, just trying to get better clues on what's going on with those that have failed and been replaced. Is it mechanical or fuel/dirt induced failures?


Hoot, your injectors were recently out sitting on a workbench, did you get a chance to look at the tips up close and what did you see if anything?


I feel like I am suddenly now on a Mission From God! LOL ha ha hahttp://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Approve.gifEdited by: Chevysrus

One more thing, if I may.....


In those instances where injectors have failed and been replaced, could DMAXALLITECH or 1FATCAT, or Patrick and any other techs tell us what they think caused that injector to fail and what they looked like.


That's a very good question, and that data is being held pretty close to the vest by GM. Just a guess on some of the discussions that I've read, but there appear to be at least two major failure modes: internal and body. There were copper sealing cups going on the 2001s. Then there appear to be more than a couple of body-leakage and maybe even cracked bodies due to clamping or manufacturing. And there's apparently a large group of failures in the "mystery zone" that appear to mostly be tip/nozzle/pin/pintle. My hunch is that you have a manufacturing/installation problem or your injector goes bad from wear/contamination. Since my 2001 seems to have bypassed the former, I'm hoping my Megafilter will help prevent the latter!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Ermm.gif

It can be assured that the #1 cause of premature injector failure is dirt. Unfortunately, with the new ultra fine injectors, visual inspection will not reveal cause, so techicians are likely not going to be able to discern the root cause.. However, if one has a scanning electron microscope handy, this is the most probable view; severe erosion from particulates.
George

..http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/uploads/Failed_Injector_Nozzle_web.jpgEdited by: Georgecls

Thats the first time I noticed the micron scale at the lower right hand side. That poor injector has some large particle hits and the erosion had to go somewhere down stream!


Any info on that injector? Miles on injector? Miles on fuel filter? Fuel additives?

THANK YOU George, I looked and looked for that picture yesterday and did not find it.


Can you say "better filtering please"

The injector had 95,000 miles on it at failure. No additives...
OEM filter only...
George

I presume the center large hole is teh main injector port right? So what does the new injector look like under the microscope??





Patrick

The center large hole is one of a number of injector ports on the injector. It is a very sophisticated design which actually directs the diesel fuel sprays in a manner to effect the most efficient burn; the design includes compensating for areas of turbulence from both incoming, outgoing gasses, etc.

Without a before and after it's hard to determine what to make of the picture. The larger outer surface looks to have a ground surface. Electron microscope images tend to make things look scrappy when in reality the surface finish might be very high.

Yes, I would have to agree, hoot. Unless a person has experience looking at scanning electron microscope images, there really is no basis upon which to judge. Ever see an electron micrograph of, say, a red blood cell? Yikes.


I think I do better with the concept of particles of different sizes in our fuel and our desire to filter them out. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Confused.gif


JimEdited by: 2fast2

It looks like we are looking at the moon.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif


Sorry just trying to put some comic relief out there.


I do not mean to be Mr. Negitve...but I would hardly call our truck superior. If they were superior we would not be having these conversations. True it is a very nice truck, it has great options, but this injector issue to me is major flaw...far from being a superior truck. With the sticker prices of the Duramax trucks it should be. Sorry if I ofended anyone again, just my opinion.


Reading the post from Campfire-Rick...with a pre CAT fitler, now one of his injectors needs to be replaced at 14,000. So, now what does this mean? Why did this happen? Rick sounds like a guy just like myself who takes care of his truck. Going back to my post earlier....failer will happen but you have to agree this is alittle nuts...don't ya think?

Just wait till the first owner of an LLY screams bloody murder with an injector failure. It will happen, with or without secondary filtering, however design improvements should make the incidence less frequent.

No wake 200, Jez I said "in my opinion" and easy for me to say, I have an early '01 and so far it has been perfect, no real problems at all, not even the steering rattle, hope I can say this in another 50K-100K LOL So for me anyway, my truck is "superior" to anything else out there at the time I bought it. The Dodges all had serious tranny problems and the Fords were, well let's just let it go and say they were too loud for me. LOL If the DMAX had been as loud as the Dodges and Fords I would not have bought it, I would have bought a gasser. I have a lot of odd hours and don't care to wake all the neighbors at 0300 when I leave.



Now it's a little different, Dodges got quiet, but did not solve the tranny issues and the Fords are still loud I think, don't know for sure, try not to pay any attention to them. LOL Heard there were a lot of problems with them more serious than what we are seeing so far in the DMAX.


I still have faith in my truck and until it does something like others have suffered and let's me down, I still believe it's one hell of a truck.


As stated in other posts, there are probably a couple of issues going on with the injectors, the only one we are sure of is dirt sucks big time and can/will cause problems, hence the secondary filter. If there is a manufacturing quality control issue or something mechanical making them fail, then a filter is not going to solve that problem. We don't know what the exact issue is with the injectors other than dirty fuel and hopefully we have solved that issue. Once we find out what else is going wrong with the injectors we can hopefully get a fix for it as well.


Percentage wise it could just be a random thing, but seems like a lot of random things going on lately.


We are all in this together and we will get to the bottom of this stuff.

Even when I bought my 03 it was superior. The Ford had just been released and the Dodge almost. The old Fords and DODGES were just to darn loud. I do care about my neighbors and try not to be the obnoxious one. Ford and Dodges now are no more noisy than a DMAX. They also offer 5 speed transmissions. It is becoming a very close call once again. I am holding out untill I see what Toyota and Nissan do. My Chevy is just fine for atleast 3 or 4 more years. There will be nothing better across the board untill then.

The word 'superior' is just a very strong word when it comes to cars and trucks.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif


In my little head of mine when using superior to discribe a automobile this is what come to me.http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clown.gif The Mercedes Benze is superior to the GM/FORD/DODGE, now the Bentley(I can not even spell it never mind afford it) is superior to the Mercedes. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Clap.gif


The trucks out there are all with 5%(arbitrary number) of each other when it comes to quality. They all have good points along with some bad ones. http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/Cry.gif Sadly there are bad points with all of them.


But in the long run all that matters is that we are happy.


It is all good!http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/smileys/HiHi.gif

No wake,


Superior is a relative term. I have said all along that the big 3 are in bed together. They all own stock in one anotheres corporations. They all benifit when one does well in the sells department. We as consumers get mad at our truck and go buy a DODGE. They do not care just as long as we buy a new truck. Think about it! We as consumers would have to quit buying new trucks regardless of who makes them to see any real quality and technology implemented. The big 3 trucks are all identical to each other in relation to quality and performance. Some people just like a certain area of there truck to be a little stronger whele excepting a trade off in another area of there truck. It is to bad I could not build a super truck!

...I am holding out untill I see what Toyota and Nissan do.. .


I am somewhat addicted to Land Cruisers, I have 4 of them. 69, 79, and two 84s. Toyota has really pissed me off with what they do NOT offer in the American market. They have been building diesel Cruisers and trucks for many many years. They used to be available in Canada, but not any more. You can get them just about any place except North America. They don't have an engine like the D-Max, they are either 4 or 6 cylinder but the turbo 6 is a pretty nice piece of engineering. They have had 1-ton diesel trucks out there for something like 40 years. Sure hope they bring them over here!