well its true that when you replace an 03 injector you are replacing some of the fuel switching capabiity that for the 02s is contained in the VP44. So in that sense I guess you're right that replacing a set of 03 injectors replaces more wearable things (the fuel switching gates, valves or whatever they're called in the injector). so yea, I see your point there. On the other hand, though, you're replacing something that doesn't need replacing -- like changing oil too often.<br><br>In other words, there is some value in prolonging any maintenance investment into the pump (time value of money) and replacing 03 injectors doesn't allow you to leverage the comparable portion of what you change out. When you replace injectors on an '02 you keep extracting value out of the fuel switching pieces of the engine (the VP44), because you don't replace it. When you replace 03 injectors, you throw away the unused life of the fuel switching components. <br><br>The reliability problems with the VP44 haven't been reliably traced to bombs, have they? or is that not true? In spite of DC claims to the contrary, I thought that manufacuring process controls were responsible and that folks were replacing their VP44s for that reason. That is, the warranty denials were so far based on &quot;evidence of tampering&quot; and things like that, rather than any robust investigation showing that the fueling box actually caused the pump to fail. But I could be wrong about that.<br><br>I'm aware that &quot;hooking up the pump wire&quot; has been associated with pump failure (something about increased plunger excursion into a non-worn region). But that aside, I thought the VP44 itself would be pretty reliable and not really a factor. Unless you count lift pump induced VP44 failures.