NHTSA Update on CR HPFP failure investigation

That is what the 2% to 20% bio is for. Brings it down to the low 300's as stated. As I said most stations here have bio added. Even 1% added to pump fuel brings it down to the low 300's, which may not even be reported as being in the fuel.

TDIwise said:

FYI
http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/cs/jaxrs/download/doc/UCM430237/INRL-EA11003-54326P.pdf
f. Volkswagen notes that the fuel analysis obtained from this study was directly caused by
this inquiry. Beginning with the NHTSA meeting in May 2011, in which initial fuel analysis
results were presented, Volkswagen has provided updated fuel analysis results in each
of its subsequent responses, dated December 16, 2011 and March 30, 2012.
827 diesel fuel samples have been acquired throughout the continental U.S.
In respect to viscosity, 203 samples were out of ASTM specification (below 1.9 cSt), 186
of those were below the HPFP’s nominal threshold of 1.5 cSt. Here the HPFP may not
have been properly lubricated.
59 samples were detected with lower lubricity (greater HFRR/WSD value) than required.
22 of them exceeded the HPFP’s nominal tolerance of 570µm and may have caused
increased wear.
4 samples were found to contain increased amounts of water more than 1.5 % / 1.8% /
2.5 % and one sample exceeding 10% of water, which was not detected in the fuel
station and random vehicle surveys. Viscosity and lubricity are within specification, but
water could cause rust and corrosion in the HPFP and damage the pump.
79 samples contained more than 5% biodiesel, 20 of those exceeded 10%. Biodiesel
itself does not damage the HPFP, however, collapsed/deteriorated/aged biodiesel can
cause deposits inside the HPFP and clog filters, interrupting the lubrication and leading
to failure.
252 samples showed a flashpoint below ASTM specification, but this has no direct
impact to the HPFP’s durability and may just be seen as an indicator for possible
gasoline content.

Click to expand...

From the same document:

"Volkswagen performed the aforementioned activities to evaluate the ‘typical’ quality of diesel
fuel generally available in the US market, as well as to provide insight into HPFP
replacements. The surveys conclude that ASTM specification ULSD fuel is generally
reflected in the US fuel supply."

Sorry You Misunderstood!

GTIDan said:

It would appear to me that VW/Audi owns the diesel market. No one else has even tried to take the crown.

Did you read the comparison test in Motor Trend I think? They compared the VW Jetta TDI and Hybrid models against the Cruze, and Prius. The conclusion? TDI wins again. Works for me. We've been hearing about the Mazda and the rest of those beer cans from Japan for the past couple of years............where are they? Come on down and join the party and lets see whose still around five years from now.

It's been a long time since the NHTSA has looked at the HPFP issue and so far nothing. I'm betting they dismiss it as a waste of time within the next six to twelve months. As Shakespeare once said: Much Ado about nothing.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I meant to be more clear. I believe a GASOLINE powered skyactive can take a TDI to the cleaners! If you look at CO2 emissions, the new Mazda 6 has the same highway CO2 profile as the Passat TDI, which is VW's most economical highway cruiser. I'm not even talking about the DIESEL 6!

Lightflyer1 said:

From the same document:
"Volkswagen performed the aforementioned activities to evaluate the ‘typical’ quality of diesel
fuel generally available in the US market, as well as to provide insight into HPFP
replacements. The surveys conclude that ASTM specification ULSD fuel is generally
reflected in the US fuel supply."

Click to expand...

"generally" is a non quantifiable term. The data results show lots of fuel samples that would shorten the life of the HPFP.

Lots of statistics being quoted and created on this page, and lots of opinions about what VW should do about the HPFP problem, but not many facts. The only "fact" that I can glean from all the postings is that VW has made repairs on their dime for failures.

VW has not identified the cause of the problem. VW has not indicated how long they will continue to make repairs. VW has not said they have fixed the problem. I am waiting for answers to these three questions.

Pulled from the XL charts. 97.3% were in ASTM spec for lubricity 81% were at 460 or lower. There is a lot more lubricity out there than mandated by the ASTM spec. for US fuel.

Lightflyer1 said:

That is what the 2% to 20% bio is for. Brings it down to the low 300's as stated. As I said most stations here have bio added...

Click to expand...

Just to be clear- TxLED does not mandate any biodiesel content. Whether or not it is TxLED, if there is 1% or more biodiesel then the lubricity will be fine.

Lightflyer1 said:

...Even 1% added to pump fuel brings it down to the low 300's, which may not even be reported as being in the fuel.

Click to expand...

ASTM 975 allows up to 5% biodiesel content in D2 with no specific labeling, but here in TX any fuel with biodiesel content must be labeled.

Lightflyer1 said:

Pulled from the XL charts. 97.3% were in ASTM spec for lubricity 81% were at 460 or lower. There is a lot more lubricity out there than mandated by the ASTM spec. for US fuel.

Click to expand...

How do you know additives weren't used on those vehicles sampled?

Lightflyer1 said:

Pulled from the XL charts. 97.3% were in ASTM spec for lubricity 81% were at 460 or lower. There is a lot more lubricity out there than mandated by the ASTM spec. for US fuel.

Click to expand...

Which XL charts are you looking at?
When I go here: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/cs/documentList.xhtml?docId=EA11003&docType=INV
and pull the VW excel spreedsheet of fuel samples titled: INRD-EA11003-54337P.xlsx
I get 7.1% of the samples exceed 520um wear scar. 24.5% (almost 1 in 4) samples fall below 1.9 cSt on viscosity.

I don't. How do you know they were used? It isn't logical though to "assume" that all of them used additives from personal use. You wouldn't necessarily be able to tell who or when they were added any way. I am sure some additives were used. Now whether the terminal added them or the station or the owner did will be impossible to determine. I think the numbers do show that our fuel isn't necessarily as bad as some purport it to be, and in some cases actually quite good. Seems like winterized fuel could possibly account for some lowered viscosity issues as well as grade 1-D has lower viscosity and is used for winterization purposes. The chart has no dates or locations tied to the entries.

TDIwise said:

Which XL charts are you looking at?
When I go here: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/acms/cs/documentList.xhtml?docId=EA11003&docType=INV
and pull the VW excel spreedsheet of fuel samples titled: INRD-EA11003-54337P.xlsx
I get 7.1% of the samples exceed 520um wear scar. 24.5% (almost 1 in 4) samples fall below 1.9 cSt on viscosity.

Click to expand...

I messed up and used the 570 that VW quoted instead of the 520 astm spec. You are correct. Winterized fuel may account for lowered viscosity.

OK. Thought perhaps there was some new data I hadn't looked at yet.

Lightflyer1 said:

I don't. How do you know they were used? It isn't logical though to "assume" that all of them used additives from personal use. You wouldn't necessarily be able to tell who or when they were added any way. I am sure some additives were used. Now whether the terminal added them or the station or the owner did will be impossible to determine. I think the numbers do show that our fuel isn't necessarily as bad as some purport it to be, and in some cases actually quite good. Seems like winterized fuel could possibly account for some lowered viscosity issues as well as grade 1-D has lower viscosity and is used for winterization purposes. The chart has no dates or locations tied to the entries.

Click to expand...

I don't know if the samples had lubricity additive and wasn't making the assumption they had, but my point is that since these samples are out of control you don't know if they are representative of actual fuel that came out of the retail pump. Therefore conclusions drawn from that data should not enable you to make a blanket statement that the fuel in the US is better than ASTM spec.

TDI2000Zim said:

I understand your pain, particularly because at 2 ~ 5% yearly failure rate from our HPFP, that is 100% certainty that we will have an HPFP catastrophic failure by the time you reach 150,000 miles (I know most TDi owners keep their cars up to that number of miles, if not more), not a heartwarming thought at $6,000 ~ $10,000 per fix.
The interesting thing is that GM, of all North American car makers the only one to introduce a TDi car, spurned our Bosch CP4.1 and adopted an older design Bosch CP1H. I guess they learned a lesson from counting all our VW HPFP failures since 2009.
Now, if they could only produce an Impala TDi, I would give up my Passat in a heartbeat.

Click to expand...

I was using fuel from 2 stations one Shell and one a Sunoco both were hi volume stations. I was averaging
Over 70000 miles a year. Vw tried to say it was a fuel problem,I told them don't even go there.
If there was gas in fuel it would have only been a minut amount. I did make a fueling mistake once but it was after my TDI was broke, I put 3 gallons of diesel in my Avalon. That caused no problems. If a minut amount of gas in the TDI can cause pump to fail that is still a design problem, same as blaming low lubriocity in the diesel fuel. THIS is a design flaw because the know what our diesel fuel spec in US is.

tditom said:

I don't know if the samples had lubricity additive and wasn't making the assumption they had, but my point is that since these samples are out of control you don't know if they are representative of actual fuel that came out of the retail pump. Therefore conclusions drawn from that data should not enable you to make a blanket statement that the fuel in the US is better than ASTM spec.

Click to expand...

But here is some news to be received with cautious optimism:
http://forums.tdiclub.com/showthread.php?t=402041

I was pretty surprised how good the fuel is overall.

About what I expected; I never did believe US fuel was as bad as everyone wants to make it seem. Yes; some places could do better, but for the most part it looks pretty good.

BRUSSELS BELGIAN said:

I'm sorry, I meant to be more clear. I believe a GASOLINE powered skyactive can take a TDI to the cleaners! If you look at CO2 emissions, the new Mazda 6 has the same highway CO2 profile as the Passat TDI, which is VW's most economical highway cruiser. I'm not even talking about the DIESEL 6!

Click to expand...

What's your point? The TDI meets or exceeds all environmental standards world wide...is a blast to drive and gets great mileage.

You like Mazda..........buy one I once owned an RX7 87my. It spent almost three months at Mazda's California headquarters while they tried to fix why the car would just stall. I was on my third rotary motor at the time and only 50 thousand miles more or less.....can't remember exactly. When I turned the car back in on the lease with just under 60 thousand miles the car was total junk. The morning I left to turn it it in I had to have AAA come out and start it (I left it running at Mazda when I left) The sunroof windscreen was broken. The radio ant would not go up or down. The radio was not working nor the passenger's window. The driver's mirror was broken, etc. Mazda? You can have um..........

You work for Mazda? Just asking )

DubFamily said:

About what I expected; I never did believe US fuel was as bad as everyone wants to make it seem. Yes; some places could do better, but for the most part it looks pretty good.

Click to expand...

Curious response given all the additive testing you've performed yourself

Ha!!!!

DogParkGuy said:

Lots of statistics being quoted and created on this page, and lots of opinions about what VW should do about the HPFP problem, but not many facts. The only "fact" that I can glean from all the postings is that VW has made repairs on their dime for failures.

VW has not identified the cause of the problem. VW has not indicated how long they will continue to make repairs. VW has not said they have fixed the problem. I am waiting for answers to these three questions.

Click to expand...

They clearly stated the lack of quality in the first productions had to be addressed. Also the coatings inside the pump needed to be corrected.

It would be nice if they gave us a more technical explanation of the changes and the expected outcome for the changes.

03_01_TDI said:

They clearly stated the lack of quality in the first productions had to be addressed. Also the coatings inside the pump needed to be corrected.

It would be nice if they gave us a more technical explanation of the changes and the expected outcome for the changes.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction. I have never seen any quotes or communications from VWOA on the HPFP issue. Can you provide a link or copy?

Cruze Rocks

RdPrry said:

I was using fuel from 2 stations one Shell and one a Sunoco both were hi volume stations. I was averaging
Over 70000 miles a year. Vw tried to say it was a fuel problem,I told them don't even go there.
If there was gas in fuel it would have only been a minut amount. I did make a fueling mistake once but it was after my TDI was broke, I put 3 gallons of diesel in my Avalon. That caused no problems. If a minut amount of gas in the TDI can cause pump to fail that is still a design problem, same as blaming low lubriocity in the diesel fuel. THIS is a design flaw because the know what our diesel fuel spec in US is.

Click to expand...

Since I have been accused of working for Mazda for stating FACTS, I might as well be accused of MOONLIGHTING for Chevy. Thanks for your information on GM's decision to use an older design fuel pump. A Cruze diesel would look good in my driveway, right next to a gas skyactive Mazda...

Ok I would be glad to take the other 2 POS cars off your hands really cheap! That way you wouldn't have so much JUNK IN YOU DRIVEWAY!

reading all post about hpfp problems i had many diesels in my life also reading all Europeans forums where cr 2.0 diesel is installed in vw ,skoda,seat,and is no complaints on hpfp failures most owners with high km's complaining about dpf problems ...my 2011 jetta tdi is us vehicle with now 125000 km from October in Canada i am the 2-nd owner fueling on shell v power and for now all is good....

My 2010 Jetta TDI is at the dealer - again. It seems the HPFP went out - AGAIN. The first time it went out was July 2011. VW did the work under warranty. This time it looks like it's gonna be on me. I was driving down the interstate with the cruise control on 72 and suddenly, the engine quit. Luckily, I was close to a rest area and coasted into it. The car wouldn't start back. I will be re-opening my NHTSA complaint from 2011. The Jetta currently has 149,779 miles and I had 448.5 miles on the current tank of fuel. Also, this isn't the first or only diesel I own. I also have a 2003 Chevy Duramax with over 352,000 miles on the original engine and fuel pump. It irritates me that VW won't cover the HPFP. Anyone have any suggestions on how I can get VW to cover this ? Or at least the majority of the cost ?



UPDATE (9 December): Sorry for not responding to questions or updating my post sooner. When the HPFP went out for the second time, I was furious. I contacted Star Motor of WV and told them what happened. I had my TDI delivered to them on 22 November. I didn't contact them but waited for them to contact me. While I waited, I analyzed my finances to determine how I would pay for the repairs. On 6 December, Star Motor contacted me and told the TDI was fixed and I could pick it up anytime. They also said VWOA paid for the repairs and I owe nothing. Thank you Star Motor. The first time the HPFP went out was July 2011 when the TDI had 36,250'ish miles. I fought with VWOA to pay for that repair. VWOA didn't want to but the Regional Representative (Brian) agreed to have VWOA pay for the repair. I received a call from VWOA stating basically, even though they said no to paying, they will support their Rep and cover the repairs. This time, I didn't contact VWOA but they paid for the repair anyway. So, the first HPFP lasted 36,250 miles and the second HPFP lasted roughly 113,549 miles. IMO the HPFP should not have failed at all. It is not a typical wear item and shouldn't need to be replaced. I do not run a fuel filtration system or use fuel additives but maybe I should. I'll research those items later in the other areas of this forum. However, I will probably trade the vehicle. I still owe on it but I think it's best to trade it while it's still running and before the HPFP goes out for a third time.

Glad VW picked up the repair without any hassle.

tditom said:

I don't know if the samples had lubricity additive and wasn't making the assumption they had, but my point is that since these samples are out of control you don't know if they are representative of actual fuel that came out of the retail pump. Therefore conclusions drawn from that data should not enable you to make a blanket statement that the fuel in the US is better than ASTM spec.

Click to expand...

The argument that a more strict European standard makes European fuel better is not supported either.

It seems that few if any have posted any data on actual European fuel field results, or fuel pump failure rates for that matter.

Tin Man said:

The argument that a more strict European standard makes European fuel better is not supported either.
It seems that few if any have posted any data on actual European fuel field results, or fuel pump failure rates for that matter.

Click to expand...

What qualities would make one fuel better than another, in your opinion?

tditom said:

What qualities would make one fuel better than another, in your opinion?

Click to expand...

Data to support such a claim.

Tin Man said:

The argument that a more strict European standard makes European fuel better is not supported either.
It seems that few if any have posted any data on actual European fuel field results, or fuel pump failure rates for that matter.

Click to expand...

According to the link in this post, European diesel has a much lower scar rating than North America's.