We live in an area where this is a good mix of Ford, Chevy, and Dodge HD trucks. There are about the same amount in the shop on any given week. So far there are hundreds of thousands of 6.7's on the road and very few engine issues. I think the track record so far speaks for the quality of the engine without any added lubricity agents at the tank. Adding the Ford additive may make sense but is it really necessary? Don't know but will find out. Our Ford extended warranty does cover the fuel pump per the Dealer here. Be curious as to what yours is telling you?
All our farm/ranch fuel comes from Cenex where they are very aware of the lubricity needs for the new equipment and old as well. We haven't had any issues with any of the disel engines since going to ULS fuel. The local Cenex fuel is bio fuel in that they used enough to make the lubricity targets. On the road we always stick with name brand fueling stations just to be sure. Going to a discount store to get you Diesel filled up is taking quite risk. If you have been to a termnial you will see the fuel comes into one large tank. The difference when the tanker comes to get a load is the additives. This goes for diesel and unleaded alike. I personally don't think Ford has mislead anyone. Re read the document, it don't say you have to add anything. I wasnt ask to sign anything for the waranty, they just included the page as a hand out.
Your local fuel suppliers very well could be producing fuel with sufficient lubricity. The biodiesel blends do have a better scar rating. But...the first thing out of the first dealers mouth when they went down the no warranty road was "did you run any biodiesel?". Ford's own 6.7 development engineer has posted his concerns about biodiesel. His musings can be found in the 6.7 Tech folder at Ford Truck Enthusiasts.
If only using "name brand fueling stations just to be sure" was a viable preventative measure against bad fuel/poor lubricity fuel, I would have never had my HPFP failure. I do not ever look for "cheap fuel". I am well aware of terminal activity. I delivered fuel for several years.
The document we have been discussing clearly has signature lines on it for both the purchase and the dealership. It is supposed to be presented for signature after it has been reviewed at the PDI. The document was introduced nearly a year after the first 6.7 Ford's hit the dealerships. This was not coincidental. It is a deliberate move by Ford to make warranty denial easier for them. BTDT. Of course they do not mandate the additive. Like a demand for using only Ford/Motorcraft filters and lubricants, the Moss-Magnuson act would require Ford to provide the PM22A additive at no cost.
I am well aware of how many 6.7 trucks Ford has sold. For over a year, I mixed the Ford Kool-Aid and fed it to all who would listen. The engine has been quite solid to date. The issue I have is simple. Proper maintenance, on Ford's schedule and always performed at an Authorized FOMOCO Dealer did not provide an acceptable service life for my HPFP and injection system. My failed HPFP has been inspected by 3 automotive engineers. One is a HPFI systems specialist for Detroit Diesel. The unanimous decision is "it broke due to the substandard diesel fuel available in the USA. Low lubricity is the likely cause. No water damage is noticed". The DD engineer said he has seen hundreds of Bosch HPFP's with similar failures.
To not be a bit concerned about the reliability of the Bosch CP4.2 HPFP currently being used by Ford is a bit like whistling past the cemetery. The experts have spoken. The diesel fuel in the USA is of poor quality. Until that changes, running a Cetane Booster/Lubricity enhancer just makes sense...call it relatively cheap insurance...especially since the Ford warranty is a joke
Regards
