New Duramax's uses the exact same fuel pump.
I researched all 3 for a good year before buying a 2011 truck and each had their own problems. Proper regular maintenance goes a long way with any diesel and many people push the limits beyond what they should. Not taking up for Ford because I have one but the driver should do their part as well.
Things do happen and it sucks when it does, especially when you happen to have a bad part.
Actually read a post on a duramax forum where a member had his truck die, took it to the dealership and it the fuel pump had failed. Dealer replaced all seals, pump, gaskets and everything was fine again.
Respectfully, I must disagree with you. There have been far too many failures reported that have had nothing to do with poor owner maintenance habits. While the sky is not falling and no one should be selling their Ford 6.7 for fear of HPFP failure, all owners should be running a lubricity additive in their fuel. Using Ford's PM22A product will at least allow an unfortunate owner of a failed 6.7 HPFP to wave the receipts in their face. Unfortunately, the history of the issue tells us it will not matter.
Owners of these trucks should not have to worry about an occasional WIF warning. If you read the owners manual it clearly says to drive the truck until it is safe to drain the DFCM. It does not say to shut the truck down and have it towed to a dealership for a $10,000 repair bill. The latest software update for the 6.7 Ford contains a computer flag that tells Ford that a WIF event has occurred. Good luck with getting the repairs covered under warranty if that happens.
The NHTSA investigation is moving forward. Fords answers to their questions are now public information. An interesting admission by Ford, contained within the answers, shows that the HPFP failure rate in Canadian trucks is much lower than the US failure rate. This can be broken down into percentages of sales per country that are shown in a table within the report. Canadian diesel fuel must conform to higher standards than US fuel. The US standard for lubricity is 520 Scar. The Canadian fuel standard is 460 scar. The lower the number, the better lubricity factor in the fuel. Coincidentally, the 460 scar fuel rating is the minimum standard fuel that Bosch requires for the long term success of the CP4.2 series pumps that both GM and Ford use in their engines. Bosch publications, as late as 9/2009, all state the requirement for 460 scar fuel or better. Pumps exposed to 500 scar fuel can expect a lifespan of 1000 hours. MY HPFP went 1200 hours on US fuel before it self destructed. Is it coincidence that the Canadian fuel is providing significantly fewer HPFP failures?
The saddest part of the story is all about Ford's treatment of the hard working owners of these $50,000 plus trucks who put their faith in Ford and now are bearing the cost of an obvious design shortfall. One has to ask why GM, who is experiencing a slightly higher percentage of CP4 series HPFP failures than Ford, has decided to fix all the failures under warranty? Could it be that they understand the 460 scar fuel issue and are stepping up to the plate to take care of their customers? UYltmately, the cost of these warranty repairs end up at Bosch. Does GM have a better relationship with Bosch which makes their warranty repairs possible? not likely...Ford needs to own up to the growing problem and fix these trucks without making the customer feel like he has done something wrong...
Regards