Ford Faces Class Action Lawsuit - Hybrid Engine Fires

[Barksdale123]

The Pintos had to be hit, not just start burning. This is starting to sound like the Pinto case. Ford knew of the problem, they knew the fix. An $11.00 steel plate between the gas tank and the car. The really damning part was the high level V.P. response the engineering departments memory about the fix and the cost. The response read. " Let'em burn".

Sponsored

 

[RedRider]

The Pintos had to be hit, not just start burning. This is starting to sound like the Pinto case. Ford knew of the problem, they knew the fix. An $11.00 steel plate between the gas tank and the car. The really damning part was the high level V.P. response the engineering departments memory about the fix and the cost. The response read. " Let'em burn".

It wasn't a steel plate used to fix the problem. We had a 75 model, and it was actually a great vehicle. They recalled it and wrapped the tank in 1/2 inch of polyethylene to drastically improve the puncture resistance.

 

[r8drskullz]

No house "comes" with smoke detectors. Someone at sometime installed them.

And someone or sometime without even having to worry if or when got sprinklers too.

 

[r8drskullz]

10/23? It’s only September 23

Typo 10/22

 

[Barksdale123]

It wasn't a steel plate used to fix the problem. We had a 75 model, and it was actually a great vehicle. They recalled it and wrapped the tank in 1/2 inch of polyethylene to drastically improve the puncture resistance.

I stand corrected. Yes they were a good concept. Ford's 1600 engine was great and very versatile. If it wasn't for the fire thing I remember considering the wagon.

 

[Dad]

Sorry but I'm confused with your reply to my post. Time for me to move along.

Apologies. Maybe if you had read the entire thread? No judgement. I often pop into the middle of a thread.
Shorter answer . . . nothing to stop homeowners from installing smoke detectors.

 

[Darnon]

Apologies. Maybe if you had read the entire thread? No judgement. I often pop into the middle of a thread.
Shorter answer . . . nothing to stop homeowners from installing smoke detectors.

Nothing to stop you from getting oil analysis to evaluate if you have high wear indicators.

 

[Montana]

Nothing to stop you from getting oil analysis to evaluate if you have high wear indicators.

True... but that's more of a checks and services thing that should be done for any engine rather than a solution to the bigger issue. I'm also willing to bet that even if you send in oil reports regularly, the issue could pop up between changes and who knows, by the time you get that analysis back - kaboom. No start.

I really think this thread is too focused on potential fires, and not actual failures. We've seen enough reports on this forum to know the failures are happening, and by the logic of some - since most people don't report either good or bad to online forums - it's safe to assume that it's happening without MTC getting the "breaking news" too. Plus we see it all the time: Users report having a new Maverick or doing mods etc etc and then going dark never to be heard from again. Not everyone feels the need to report every success/failure. One example there is people that have lifted beyond 2.5". There are multiple threads of people throwing the biggest tires and lifts they can fit and nothing since - even a couple with reports of trading in either for another vehicle or a stock Maverick... gotta be a sign... Probably shifted like crap and obvious CV issues. It's a safe assumption based on calculations of failure rates beyond driveline limits.

So it's safe to estimate we don't know how many actual failures there have been so far. But we do know that it was over 70% of models built in that time frame that have the potential to have this issue, because that's what the numbers show us from production to the amount of recalls issued. I ran those numbers multiple times on multiple threads and guess what happened - it got ignored. Facts hurt peoples feelings. But it's not like I was saying "You will have an issue" - more of a "Yours is in the potential area for this recall, so don't just turn your nose up at it".

The other thing that worries me is how trusting people are of FORD and how them sending out a piece of paper is the peace of mind they are looking for. It's no secret that FORD will do as little as possible to save money. That's not exactly heartwarming to current owners, because all they are doing is hoping they never have an issue.

It's really a question of "Are you willing to risk it?". That's all it is. Most seem fine with it. That's their business. But "not having an issue yet" is not the same as "will never have an issue" or "No issue exists".

 

[icegradner]

Nothing to stop you from getting oil analysis to evaluate if you have high wear indicators.

Unless you know what metal/composite the crankshaft is made of, what good will that do? All new engine have shavings. Now if Ford was doing the testing, they would know.

 

[Darnon]

Unless you know what metal/composite the crankshaft is made of, what good will that do? All new engine have shavings. Now if Ford was doing the testing, they would know.

That should be immaterial; an engine that was prematurely wearing itself to imminent destruction would have much more elevated levels than even break-in wear.

 

[catshreds]

This has nothing to do with "pitting customers against manufacturers." Ford knew about this problem for some time yet chose to do nothing to correct it except their lame drill holes in the undercarriage "fix". Ford has even admitted this did nothing to solve the problem. It was a cheap band-aid. Ford needs to be held accountable for making a faulty product and since they won't accept responsibility on their own, one recourse is to sue. I'm betting if it were your truck that caught fire you'd be singing a different tune.

I hate that someone mentioned the Pinto. I hope that Ford doesn't again wait for 27 people to die before taking action on this issue!

 

[icegradner]

That should be immaterial; an engine that was prematurely wearing itself to imminent destruction would have much more elevated levels than even break-in wear.

Depends on in which way the crankshaft was poorly manufactured I suppose, and where the failure point is. Maybe it just snaps rather than having excessive wear? Leaks told Ford Authority the crankshaft was the issue, but not what it does to cause the failure. At what kind of mileage did the engines with the failures suffer the failure? Way too many questions and no real meaningful answers.

I'm not like some of the others who are worried to the point they want to sell the truck right now. I'll wait to see what Ford does, but given the first response to the issue, I'm not too excited about the next "fix". Will they take off the entire bottom plate and take away the shutters completely as the next step? How much more of what we paid for get taken away before they actually do the right thing and just replace the engines (the ones that need to be!)?

 

[Hoagus]

It would be interesting to see Ford’s analysis of the problem and their calculations around various solutions, but we wouldn’t see them as a result of a class action lawsuit.

 

[Rmalone]

Does anybody know how many Mavericks have caught fire so far? If it is 5 that is one thing if it is 500 that is something different all together.

 

[Mark S.]

Are there any reports of injuries related to this recall? It seems to me if there were Ford would've been required to issue a stop drive along with the recall.

Sponsored