Search results

Ouch - TSB's sound like they were trying to remedy it, through oh so many years. Yikes - at that point is when you really do design a master module that looks for power draws to other modules - and shuts off power to them when they should be shut down or less power. Obviously they do it for...

So being at 50% SOC would sure explain the 15.x V charging level. So after OTA with those above figures of 14.xV and improved mileage - you are using the trailer hitch light?

Doesn't work that way. (lengthy drive has nothing to do with it working) Rarely works isn't a description that allows any troubleshooting or useful suggestions. What doesn't work when it doesn't work - exactly?

You REALLY need to find the posts that show this is not a DCDC issue. This is not a drain issue. This is a purposeful strategy. You could see it too with a scan tool monitoring some PIDs. 12V battery SOC%, and Amps (Battery2 for showing decimal value), and Volts. You have a nice long drive...

I think the described effect is opposite what you are talking about.

The replacement will be a newer more heavy duty model compared to what came on it. Not sure if anyone has had those with enough miles to see how long they take to go bad. Was it spring 25 those started getting used, or summer?

Probably filled up unlevel and got more in tank - closer to the 16.5 possible. Doesn't take much tilt down on passenger side for that effect, it's a wide tank. Explains the non-moving fuel gage for awhile. The DTE is based on a chunk of prior miles running average - you can see as you drive...

Yep - that's the published untrue spec based on math, not usage, they've always put out. I guess make the engine sound better to those that don't know operation but know engine spec's and what sounds good? Do people still look thru quick-compare charts with spec's for that to even be noticed now?

No disrespect - but you've had your head in the game of the intermittent battery drain too long. This particular conversation and thread - if you catch the right posts - is clearly showing there is a charging strategy that has NOTHING to do with a battery drain issue. It's not dismissing that...

Add in the fact that just like a normal tranny with resistance in lower gear may not be enough to maintain speed depending on incline. The need to change from regen that could have been a decent amount and held the desired speed, to ICE air braking because the HVB is full - could result in much...

Oh - I meant can you see it in the OP picture where you saw the passenger one too high? We all better be able to see the one on our own truck. Yours really nailed it though. Good theory. Wanted to see just how good your eyes are.

I could only find the published spec's when I looked couple years ago - which is based on calculation of bore and stroke. Not the fact a valve is open partway on compression meaning no compression. Which I found very strange.

Nope. Resting voltage. ETA: fixed my post.

And if they drug their feet that long for a battery drain issue (obviously difficult to troubleshoot anyway) - I can only plan on them doing nothing about their BMS strategy of discharging a battery when it reaches 92% SOC for AGM or 85% SOC for SLA. Preferring voltages closer to 12.1 than fully...

Since Atkinson compression is so low by design, not sure how any problem with pre-ign could happen that higher octane would solve. ETA: Yes there have been plenty of posts of ones testing 91, especially towing with hybrid. I recall (that's always dangerous) no comments of improvements, or...

Well shoot. 2 threads within the last week, at least - seemed to have this effect. Don't recall their MY - but great to know. This isn't the TSB 23-2209 from 2023 right, something newer? Is it this? https://www.mavericktruckclub.com/forum/threads/tsb-23-2209-hybrid-shudder.35207/post-666994

Good eye! After your comment I could see it too. Now - can you see the driver side mark? If it's on the mark at rest, but passenger isn't - dealership has a bit of movement to fix. I've had both rest a tad high, and rest a tad low before. And unrelated to me moving them for service position...

Interestingly the recall for extended warranty on the 22's, didn't start with the production start date. Sounds like they did use a better one initially, then resorted to what you got. And either found a new one or went back to the prior one. There was a thread on that extended warranty recall...

Get ready for that with many other manufacturers. Constant complaints of newish, or models where same parts are being used in new builds, having parts unavailable for replacements. Pulling teeth to get them to dealers where they are needed. So if you have an expected vehicle you are interested...

And some companies kept that policy going for newer cars that could have made it longer - but went ahead and switched the fleet out. Got a couple of good late 90's cars that way - they easily went 150K, but were sold at 60/70K. Maintenance records and such, just high mileage, and usually a good...