Which of the three available engines was in this Escape. I'm guessing that it had a turbo..
Ford has $2B more in warranty costs than GM
- Thread starter HangFire
- Start date
- Status
Which of the three available engines was in this Escape. I'm guessing that it had a turbo..
with everything being "global" theres not much american in american built vehicles + thats generally the issue, poor globally sourced parts that fail again + again!! seeing some vids how todays cars ate assembled show how little labor $$$ is used as a person loads parts in a computerized machine that costs millions + the machine does most everything. yes auto workers are likely overpaid, least we forget the millions the execs get for doing little!! todays vehicles are more complicated + worse than ever + the mark-up on the 4 dr tanks aka 4wd trucks is crazy!!! the government dont help either with stupid unneeded requirements. buyers want more gadgets than ever before before + few basic-stripper models are available with manual trannys almost gone because many functions cant be programmed with them + of course lazy drivers that use their cell while driving!!! on that note its said tech is available to stop cell function in a moving vehicle a very worthwhile safety that big $$$$ telecommunications will not activate!
How high was the executive team who made that decision? When I read things like this I no longer feel bad for Ford. Anyone with common sense should be able to see easily that this decision would result in an inferior product with increased warranty costs.
Part of the problem in business these days is the potential short-term benefit for a single individual totally outweighs the good of the company and the individual doesn't care. I have first-hand knowledge of two instances, one in retail and the other in insurance, where someone I know made a decision that saved the company a bunch of money on paper year one, they got a big bonus based on the savings, knew they wouldn't be around for year two or three, and by the time the company sees the increased costs they had already moved on. The attitude is kind of like professional sports - you have to make what you can, when you can, because you never know when it's all going to go away. Executives seem to always be moving around as they try and move up the ladder.
What irks me is the DCT transmission didn't have to be a fiasco. The European market got a wet-plate clutch that had been well tested with no issues. They decided on a new designed dry plate clutch that according to engineers wasn't quite ready, but were told ship it out anyway. I drove one as a rental and it drove fine. It needed a little more refinement. Americans whine too much as it drives different than a conventional torque converter automatic.
jagdriver727
Site Donor 2021
1.5L ecoboost, your guess would be correct.
I've never understood the need to put a single or double overhead cam engine in a truck (think 5.0 Coyote) when a good old pushrod V8 can make just as much torque/power in the usable range for a truck while being cheaper and simpler to make and service, not to mention smaller.
Just because something happened before you were born does not make it fake news. History did not begin the day you were born. It happened. Look it up.
My 2017 V6 Canyon with 64,000 miles has been great. The only thing done to it was the ATF switch done under warranty that fixed the torque converter issue.
They're ridiculous to work on, too. My F350 has the 5.4. Overhead cam, tall engine. It also has a HUGE engine bay. Which would be nice to work on an engine, if the engine was in the engine bay. For some reason Ford put the engine under the dash like a van, but with no doghouse. Any work on the engine is much more hard than it needs to be. And if you ever need to do any work on the valve covers, etc, it's just impossible to do. I can't wait for this to spit the #4 or #8 spark plug. Won't be fun trying to heli-coil that. It does need a head gasket; it has the passenger side external oil leak that all the early 5.4s have, but as long as it still has compression and isn't mixing oil and coolant, it's going to leak.
I had to change the radiator hose. Because the modular v8 doesn't actually fit in this truck --- there's a crossmember where the oil filter would be, they have a remote oil cooler set up pretty much inside the crossmember. The spring clips are completely inaccessible. It took me 5 hours to change the lower radiator hose. I"m sure a mechanic could do it quicker. I rented a chevy 1500 and I was amazed at how easy everything is laid out.
I never understood the need for an overhead cam v8.
My Focus was also not easy to work on. I had to have the thermostat changed. That meant pulling the intake manifold, radiator, power steering pump ... just nuts. And if the alternator needed to be changed ... the exhaust manifold has to come off.
Fords just are not easy to work on. My Subaru? Everything is right there!
Last edited:
This is not just the complaint of a few DIY types whining alone in the wilderness.
"Hard to work on" means high warranty costs, as dealers have to fix the inevitable assembly line screwups, occassional bad supplier part, or residue of bad design. Those costs go directly back to Ford (yes the dealer absorbs some of them as the warranty rates are lower than consumer rates). Unless it fails out of warranty, then the consumer is screwed.
Having owned one I can say it was a lot more than that. Leaking seals and excessive temps (and clutch glazing) led to big-time, rattle the whole car clutch shuddering at launch. I had mine for 5 years and went through countless software reflashes and two new clutches. As clutch replacements would be around $1,500 a pop after warranty I dumped it.
It was much, much, much more than “Americans whining too much...” because they lacked the sophistication to appreciate something different.
The attempt to maximize fuel economy numbers with the DCT, regardless of how little the fuel economy might have actually benefitted the consumer if the transmission worked.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2014
- Messages
- 3,001
I’ve worked on Fords, GMs and Chrysler’s. Out of the three Ford gave us the least problems by far, GM was second and Chrysler was easily the worst. However this was 2004-2009.
Ford was the worst to deal with in terms of giving us manufacturer information and training - i used to work for a federal agency fleet - so what the agency did was say to Ford, ok if you don’t want to give us information and factory training then we just won’t buy anymore Ford vehicles, plain and simple. Within two weeks we were in Philadelphia getting factory trained and they opened up their online repair Information to us.
But I’ll tell yeah, we used to do almost nothing to those fords...the Escape, Taurus, 500, F-150, Expedition, Fusion, Explorer. Nothing. And totally abused and misused. Especially the Escapes - those things were loaded up and driven all over the place. Meanwhile the GM’s we’d be doing intakes, check engine lights/engine performance all day, struts, axles, steering racks, intermediate shafts, fuel pumps, ac leaks all day, just everything. And the Chrysler’s?? Oh my lord! Transmissions every 50,000 miles, like clockwork. Fuel rail replacements, O2 sensors until they were coming out of our ears, evap leaks, AC condensers.
So I’m shocked to hear how far Ford has fallen. I will say that the fords always just drove horribly. Reliable at that time? Yes, but an awful driving experience. Suspension always just felt dead. Interiors always looked so plain and boring (years behind). And the vehicles just looked cheap. But they were easily the most reliable manufacturer we had.
Ford was the worst to deal with in terms of giving us manufacturer information and training - i used to work for a federal agency fleet - so what the agency did was say to Ford, ok if you don’t want to give us information and factory training then we just won’t buy anymore Ford vehicles, plain and simple. Within two weeks we were in Philadelphia getting factory trained and they opened up their online repair Information to us.
But I’ll tell yeah, we used to do almost nothing to those fords...the Escape, Taurus, 500, F-150, Expedition, Fusion, Explorer. Nothing. And totally abused and misused. Especially the Escapes - those things were loaded up and driven all over the place. Meanwhile the GM’s we’d be doing intakes, check engine lights/engine performance all day, struts, axles, steering racks, intermediate shafts, fuel pumps, ac leaks all day, just everything. And the Chrysler’s?? Oh my lord! Transmissions every 50,000 miles, like clockwork. Fuel rail replacements, O2 sensors until they were coming out of our ears, evap leaks, AC condensers.
So I’m shocked to hear how far Ford has fallen. I will say that the fords always just drove horribly. Reliable at that time? Yes, but an awful driving experience. Suspension always just felt dead. Interiors always looked so plain and boring (years behind). And the vehicles just looked cheap. But they were easily the most reliable manufacturer we had.
The wet clutch DCT used in Europe was for high-torque diesel applications and consequently was heavier and pricier than Ford wanted (or so I assume). But, considering the financial and reputational damage this fiasco did to Ford, I expect they’d love a do-over.
4WD
$50 site donor 2025
Had the 355 GMC Canyon platform and beat the snot out of it from 2010 to 2018 … no complaints
Now my wife’s 2015 Explorer was another story altogether …
TFI-IV ignition module failures.
Aluminum piston cracking on Taurus transmissions (early 90s?)
Plastic waterpump impeller failures on early Duratec 2.5L V6 engines in the Contour/Mystique
Engine wiring harnesses made with incorrect insulation (was PVC, should have been XLPE), causing the insulation to crack and fall off, 1995-1997 Contour/Mystique
Ford Crown Victoria Lighting Control Modules with poorly-soldered headlight relay, causing headlights to fail (they finally issued a recall for this).
3.5L V6 engines with waterpump designed to require massive labor (several hours) to replace AND which fails by dumping coolant into the engine oil, resulting in engine destruction
(EDIT: Forgot the steel ac accumulators they wrapped in a foam insulator to GUARANTEE that they would corrode and start leaking. Easy fix, rip that wrapper off...I once paid $200 to the local hee-haw Ford dealer to fix this problem and that was all deductibles on the extended warranty I had. $50 deductible, 4 trips. Took them 4 trips to figure out where it was leaking)
and my favorite
1987/1988 Ford Mustang with foglights, using the foglights would cause the thermal breaker in the headlight switch to open because they never increased the wire size to account for the additional current draw of the fog lights. (IT appears that the original design had the foglights powered off the main headlight circuit before it got to the multifunction switch (which selects high and low beams), then someone figured out that regulations don't allow foglights and high beams to be on at the same time, so their "quick fix" was to simply redesign it so that the low-beam circuit powered the foglights. At least that's the only reason I can figure for there being a larger wire gauge going into the headlight switch than coming out of it...engineer forget that the current in a series circuit is the same at any point?)
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Ahhhh, some of those bring back the memories! TFI module failures were reasonably common and some of the aftermarket ones were less reliable than OEM. The heat conduction compound would dry out and the modules would overheat. Using a thermal paste for a CPU (like Arctic Silver) seemed to help significantly, but of course the best solution was a relocation harness like Ford themselves used later on to mount the module to a heatsink away from the engine.
I always wondered, ever since I read that one of the system or CPU manufacturers preferred them, whether phase-change pads would have worked better for the TFI-IV.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Like a Peltier?
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Locked
- Locked
