I'll bet bet my Fluke is as accurate if not more than anything a dealer has. I do check it from time to time against a Tektronics O-scope though. Is it lab quality? No, but it is close enough for what I need.
I've seen the same results several times, which is why I offered to share the data. It never hurts to have another pair of eyes, maybe someone will "fix" a FICM and offer there data?
What would you like to know TMT? Short of sending you my "fixed" FICM, and no I can't, I don't know what else to say? Could you maybe ask some of your testing manager contacts for there input?
As many know, rarely IF EVER will an OEM admit anything negative relating to a product. In fact, if one asks a dealer about the FICM failure issues, the canned answer will be; "we're not aware of any significant failures?"
I'll keep digging until I find the answer if I have to test ever last component on the board.
Until then, the Hot FICM with Eric's flash is one of the best upgrades availble for about $600.00
Ahhh your getting all testy on me now.
You didn't state if you were using a Fluke (what grade) or a WalMart analog guage. And honestly, not knowing where the charging circuit was at the time, as an automotive vehicle test R&D manager, I can only do an OK, but... When you state 13.2 vdc on the input, that seems a little low compared to my vehicle when checking with AE. BTW, AE doesn't agree with my own Fluke.
Flukes are generally pretty good, but we did see variances as I had to have all my instrumentation in the shop go through ISO calibration checks. Voltmeters were not high on the list of needing compliance however.
Nor did you state that getting over 50 vdc was a repeated result from multiple repairs.
Manaufacturers won't admit to the public of a problem except by recall. Even with published TSBs there is a line of people at the door stating, "I didn't think I had a problem, but now that you mentioned it".
I'm not trying to put YOU
on the spot. Everything 'we the public' change on a vehicle has risk/benefits. In my job I would have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars testing what is being done here. When you accept aftermarket changes, you become the R&D test case because no aftermarket supplier can afford to do that type of reliability testing.
In my (past) line of work, this type of debate up through head butting on a project is (was) healthy. It sorts out a lot of the poor techniques and misdirections of "I didn't think about that" so we can complete a project in an efficient and through manner.
It ain't this
But I am a curmudgeon