You originally posted in the 2009-2014 section.

These are NOT 'programming errors in the App'. Mode $06 diagnostic reports are requests for the PCM to produce asynchronous (instantaneous) reports on various stored results of OBDII monitor routines, or take instant readings of various components as seen through the PCM's A-to-D convertor. IE: Like shimming under your truck with your trusty Volt/Ohm meter. You wouldn't crawl out from under there with a Zero reading exclaiming "Damn VOM has a bug in it".

MID$06 TID:$83 = HO2S22 sensor Lean to Rich Response Rate

Your instant reading for it says your Bank2 O2 sensor is switching at zero millivolts per millisecond. TILT! (Also programmed into your PCM are Minimum and Maximums for such test. And the instant reading is outside those limits).


Now on the other hand, MID:$32 TID:$82 ---- has 'Incorrect Minimum / Maximum values programmed into your PCM - NOT the App.

See the note at bottom of Page 70 of 160 in The Motorcraft OBDII Theory of Operation Manual for your truck @
http://www.fordservicecontent.com/fo...t/OBDSM704.pdf

Quote:
Note: OBD monitor ID $32, Test ID $82 (upstream hose test) may erroneously show a failing test result when no P1405 DTC is present. This is cause by in incorrect max limit in the software. The incorrect max limit will show a negative value (approx -32 kPa). The correct max limit will show a positive value (approx. +32 kPa). Early production vehicles may exhibit this issue until the software is corrected by a production running change or service fix.

It appears yours with a 'Current' reading of 0.086kPa is actually OK.

So what would you recommend I do to correct this error?
and would this cause the drastic drop in fuel economy

"Programming errors" was probably a poor choice of words. However, the data that was presented is not indicative of any failure that corresponded to the stated symptoms.

And, if I crawl out from under my truck with my meter that just read zero volts when I expected something else, the very first thing I'm going to do before trusting that reading is to go and verify the performance of my meter using a different source of known parameters. I did my fair share of electronics test equipment calibration back in the old days... ;)

Interesting that Ford published that bit about the wrong limits programmed in at the factory for the EGR tests, hadn't run across that one before.

As for the " MID$06 TID:$83 = HO2S22 sensor Lean to Rich Response Rate", value, it could have been due to a testing error, like cold downstream O2 sensors or the engine wasn't running. Again, won't help with the diagnosis of the drivability issues reported. With no cats installed, we'd expect the downstream sensors to slew at pretty much the same rate as the upstream sensors once all the sensors are warmed up and the PCM switches to closed loop operation.

A Sensor 2 error shouldn't significantly affect the way it runs, those are just catalyst monitor sensors.

Wow. You have a way of asking the tough questions. On the first matter, like @projectSHO89 originally said, they may neither be an actual 'fault' - just not a fault in test equipment. Mode $06 test results are an extremly valuable tool. But it, as with DTC codes - is almost NEVER a silver bullet fix instruction. One must take into account all parameters and conditions surrounding the readings and weigh those against what they might should be under those conditions. As @project said, on startup (cold cats aren't working anyhow, so) downstream O2 switching readings "MIGHT" have little relevance. But he also noted the slew rate between upstream and downstream would be expected to be the pretty much the same with cats deleted.

THIS is actually a fault confirmed by your Reading: TID:$82 (Lean to Rich Resp time) is Zero millivolts per millisecond. And for TID:$83 (Rich to Lean Resp time) is ALSO Zero millivolts per millisecond.

The PCM increases / decreases fuel injector pulse width several times a second. As it does, it expects to see upstream sensors represent the rich-2-lean / lean-2-rich change. That is IF the CAT is doing anything --- there should be a delay in what the downstream O2 registers. In your case ----- Mode $06 indicates that is NOT happening. The delay is ZERO going from rich to lean and lean to rich. Could that be cats gone. Probably (or engine is KOEO, or initial startup, or cat midbed temp is below operating temp). Only testor knows those things.

The fix for that is probably to put cats back on.

The EGR probably is not a problem - at this moment anyway.

As to gas mileage - insufficient info is available. And it is going to be HARD to make informed judgments about many readings (including EGR tube flow, etc) with cats removed. I'd be using Torque Pro to monitor fuel trims, MAF readings, front O2 readings --- but if something is out of whack, it could lead right back to something in PCM being forced to default settings with cats omitted. There are a number of flags (FMEM - failure mode effects management) that can be tripped that effect power / fuel-air ratio etc. You can actually check with Torque Pro to see if any of those flags are set.

forgive me I am trying to learn the technical side but I must admit I am a lamin
the statement "THIS is actually a fault confirmed by your Reading: TID:$82 (Lean to Rich Resp time) is Zero millivolts per millisecond. And for TID:$83 (Rich to Lean Resp time) is ALSO Zero millivolts per millisecond.

are you saying that the fault is being caused because the cats have been removed and I used spark plug non fowlers on the back so they are getting Identical readings?

Or is that in reference to the possibility that the )2 past the cat could be defective?
Also Please help me understand this when A cat is defiantly blocked it can cause you to have decreased HP and fewer MPG because of the clog, So if you remove the clog wouldn't that cause the increase back to oem or a little better because no back pressure?
to my mind it makes no sense to have 16mpg blocked and 13-15 open.

No apologies necessary. Getting a handle on all that goes on in that smart onboard computer (PCM) can be a challenge for the BEST. Can be hard to get our minds wrapped around - without having benefit of a flow chart of what programmer intended.

By design, your O2 sensors switch (or conduct current to ground) upon sensing presence of oxygen - supposedly calibrated to switch 'on' wnen air/fuel ratio is above 14.7 to 1 ratio (lean), and 'off' when below 14.7:1 (rich) air fuel mixture. When 'on' voltage should read .1 volts, when 'off' .9 volts. Center point is considered to be .45 volts. When voltage 'crosses' .45 volts, the PCM considers that a switch from lean to rich - or visa versa. When the 'upstream' O2 switches, the PCM measures the amount of time it takes the 'downstream' O2 to switch (or thus to register the change). The CAT's function is to capture and store oxygen. Thus, there should be a delay between seeing a switch (.45v crossing) in the upstream, and downstream O2. This time measurement between front/rear O2 switches gives the PCM an indication of how much oxygen the CAT is capable of storing, or how efficiently it is burning off (consuming) unburned hydrocarbons. //The latter is what makes the CATs so hot//.

In your 'Test Results' - there was ZERO milliseconds between upstream O2 sensor switching, and downstream O2 sensor voltage switching (following suit). This tells the PCM the Catalyst is NOT storing oxygen AT ALL. How true. There is no catalyst there.

The PCM keeps track of a count of number of switches in front O2 and rear O2. Comparing the "RATIO" between those controls generation of P0420 and P0430 DTCs. The switch ratio during Catalyst Monitor periods (under certain driving condition - generally light cruise) must be between certain window to keep from tripping catalyst efficiency codes.

I note _with interest_ that your switch rate (when Test Results were requested) was 0.18 on Bank1. Nearly low limit. And 0.16 on Bank2 (nearer low limit). Maybe the spark plug fowlers - but still VERY close to both P0420 and P0430. But I would bet with cats in place it would be more like .5 to .75 Ratio.

My guess is your O2 sensors are working OK. You can very successfully monitor them with a graph gauge in Torque Pro.

There are so many parameters the PCM can (and does) adjust that your fuel mileage drop is elussive to spot. Ignition Timing, Fuel Trims, EGR and on and on. But you can't just assume that relieving exhaust back pressure will increase mileage. This may (I don't know this) even be upsetting the amount of EGR commanded. That could adversely effect MPG.

I do know that if you lose EGR flow, your mileage will decrease noticeably.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lOx...ew?usp=sharing

sorry for the delay in response I am still getting errors and have no idea what to do now

This is not an "I told you so" site, so I won't do that.

But I would remind you that @projectSHO89 suggested those Mode 06 errors were 'nothing burgers', and post 21 by somebody called F150Torqued noted that the Mode 06 Test ID $82 had to do with O2 sensor response time from lean to rich. You STILL have MID$06 TID:$83 = HO2S22 sensor Lean to Rich Response Rate. At least this time the response rate is 0.1mv/ms. Last time it was 0. But both are outside the minimum spec programmed into your PCM for that test. ///Which is the voltage per millisecond change for downstream O2 sensors switching from High (.7v) to Low (.1v) ///

I would say your O2 sensors have become 'Lazy' and need to be replaced. But as suggested in a prior post, PUT THE CATS BACK ON, then go from there.


As for the other error (Monitor ID $32, Test Id $82), refer to the NOTE at bottom of post number 17.

Let us know when you have done something that might change the situation.