FORD cruise control recall

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

Hi, the problem is the criuse control "de-activation switch" [mounted on the master cylinder] that develops an internal leak, short, then fire. The first recall was to replace this switch and wire connector. [the original problem]The second recall was to replace the connector with one with an inline fuse. This is to protect the vehicle in the case that the switch leaks, causes high resistance, and then blows the fuse, thus preventing fire.
If you have fear of this happening to you, the best and easiest thing to do is to unplug the de-activation switch on the master cylinder. I personally, for the life of me, don't understand why Ford has to have power to this at all times; You only need power to this when in use.
And finally, as a Ford dealer employee, I / we have no information on what the third recall will entail. My guess is that Ford will fix the remaining vehicles with a fused connector / pigtail.

[2airishuman]

Originally Posted by 2cowpokes

Read all the details in our post #42 on the previous thread about the defective cruise-control switch recall

which is exactly why yet another thread on this issue wasn't needed.

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...all-17027.html

this string of posts should just be tacked on to the thread stef started last summer....

that would be the most useful thing for those that NEED to know about the recall details.

cheers
2air'

[Jim Clark]

Originally Posted by Stefrobrts

Using the cruise control doesn't cause the fire. As I understand it there is a pressure switch on the master cylinder that turns off the cruise control when the brakes are pressed. Stepping on the brakes increases the fluid pressure against a thin diaphragm in the switch. If that diaphragm ruptures, brake fluid will contact the electrical connection in the switch, causing a short, which causes the fire. The wiring in the switch is 'hot' all the time, even when the ignition is off. That is why it can happen even while the car is parked (and it has happened to cars parked in the garage, causing damage to the garage and house as well).

Happened to my neighbor, he was luck and caught it before it burned down the warehouse the truck was parked in. Totaled the truck, he now has a brand new Toyota in his driveway. I have two fires waiting to happen parked in my driveway.

[tpi]

Originally Posted by ROBERTSUNRUS

Hi, the problem is the criuse control "de-activation switch" [mounted on the master cylinder] that develops an internal leak, short, then fire. The first recall was to replace this switch and wire connector. [the original problem]The second recall was to replace the connector with one with an inline fuse. This is to protect the vehicle in the case that the switch leaks, causes high resistance, and then blows the fuse, thus preventing fire.
If you have fear of this happening to you, the best and easiest thing to do is to unplug the de-activation switch on the master cylinder. I personally, for the life of me, don't understand why Ford has to have power to this at all times; You only need power to this when in use.
And finally, as a Ford dealer employee, I / we have no information on what the third recall will entail. My guess is that Ford will fix the remaining vehicles with a fused connector / pigtail.

What value fuse do you think appropriate? Something which will accept the normal loads of the circuit but will blow before it will get too hot. 2 amp?

[clancy_boy]

Originally Posted by 2airishuman

which is exactly why yet another thread on this issue wasn't needed.

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...all-17027.html

this string of posts should just be tacked on to the thread stef started last summer....

that would be the most useful thing for those that NEED to know about the recall details.

cheers
2air'

OMG The thread police caught me. This was a new turn of recalls that Ford finally admitted was and still is a big issue with these vehicles. I felt it was important enough to warrent it's own thread. If the MODS feel it should be combined then have at it. Just wanted to keep those interested up to date on the latest developments.

Now - back on topic. I went out to look at mine - 2002 F250 - that according to all the published data is not in the recall lists, and it is the same exact model sensor on the recall vehicles. It is now disconnected and awaiting a look by the dealer.

[clancy_boy]

Ford recalling millions of vehicles because of faulty switches - CNN.com


New BAD news.....

[Silvertwinkie]

Here was the story that I read a while back (that CNN now posted recently) about the man that lost his wife where he claimed the truck started the fire:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/08/15/ford.recall/index.html

[smily]

Originally Posted by Silvertwinkie

Though I'm not a Ford fan, I sure hope this doens't put them over the edge. Things are bad all around the domestic camps nowadays, but Ford, unlike GM and Diamler/Chrysler feels the pain easier than the other two, though that is not saying all that much.

You wonder how much red ink one company can endure?

As much red ink as we will buy for them. Ford Mfg has been a loser for a loooong time. The saving grace for Ford is their financing, Ford Motor Credit Corp is the breadwinner.
Having been involved in a lawsuit with Ford, professional witnesses and public information stock figures, demonstrates that Ford MFG is losing money everyday in a huge way. But FMMC is making 2.2 million dollars EVERY day.

I think my opinion of Ford is also public information on this thread. No fires in my driveway EVER!

[Silvertwinkie]

Wonder if it gets bad enough, if you and I will bail them out (via the feds) like the feds did Chrysler......

My Ford feelings are well documented here on the forum as well, but as much as I like to rib my fellow Ford owners, a loss of Ford to the sands of time could have a fair to moderate impact on our overall economy and thousands of jobs here that we can't afford to loose..... let alone forcing me to find a new target to replace my Ford jokes.

[Stefrobrts]

Originally Posted by smily

Ford MFG is losing money everyday in a huge way. But FMMC is making 2.2 million dollars EVERY day.

Do you think that's just fancy footwork in the bookkeeping dept? Because the car company gives away so many incentives just to get the car off the lot, but the credit dept wouldn't exist without the fords to finance, right? Makes my head spin. Of course, then there's the question, if FMMC is making 2.2 Mil a day, how much if FMC losing every day?

I'm sick of ford and their antics. For my next tow vehicle, I think I'll be looking for something japanese. They're mostly built in America now anyway.

[ROBERTSUNRUS]

Hi, while you're haveing a good time bashing Ford, think about the future. After Ford is gone, next will be G.M. and, as far as I'm concerned, Chrysler is already dying a slow death. Soon to follow will be Honda, Toyota, and Nissan. Won't that be, just lovely, when your great grandkids are buying their Chineese cars from Mattel? And you know there won't be any problems or recalls on any of these fine automobiles.
Remember the good ole days when we had the big four G.M., Ford, Chrysler, and AMC? And remember, think twice, whatever you wish for: Might come true.

[Stefrobrts]

Well, I'd be glad to stick with them, but they need to give me a reason. Otherwise I'm tired of watching my Fords fall apart at 100k miles while friend's toyotas are still plugging along strong at 200k! Throw in such poor quality control as refusing to do the right thing while people's cars are in danger of bursting into flames even while standing still, and I don't really have a sense of loyalty to them anymore! That's their own fault. People don't go buy Hondas because they're cheap, they do it because they have better quality, and everyone knows it.

China has a long way to go before they start nudging their way into the market (if that crash test video I saw for the Chery is any indication)!

[RedSHED]

I get strongly annoyed when I think about what must be going on in Dearborn, Auburn Hills, or Warren.

We bought a used Saab 9-3 this summer to replace the minivan. It's built on GM's Epsilon chassis. Other models sharing this chassis include the Chevy Malibu, Pontiac g6, and the Saturn Aura.

Surprisingly, all three are priced within the same ballpark (more of a Yankee stadium than little league park admittedly) Only one of these gets a "recommended" by IIHS (crash test). It's the Swede, naturally.
We have kids. That is an important thing. Obviously the chassis can be made stronger than Chev or Pontiac choose to, but they choose not to.
Somewhere, there's a string of epithets too strong for my own good hurtling through space just waiting to attach themselves to the suit who decided to de-safe the Epsilon for the domestic market. Save a few pennies, but lose a number of sales.
And don't let's talk about fuel economy. I've seen 42 on the 9-3 (drive 55, turn the air off, be really really smooth), and 33 on the interstates often enough to believe it isn't a fluke.
/rant. It's late, and that isn't really on topic, but I feel better now. Thanks.

I have a sinking feeling that the beancounters at Ford took the same business classes. VW has stayed in business because they (mgt) care about what they make. Even when their quality drops, you still get the sense that they want to make something great.

[2airishuman]

since this thread is no longer about the recall which is better covered here...

http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...all-17027.html

here is a question...

any one like texas instruments?

good image, good products, american company? nice growth/success story?

right?

ultimately ford is responsible for the defective speed modules but didn't make them.

texas instruments designed and fabricated these ford speed control switches...

ford has been using basically the same switch for 40 years or so.

made by t.i. for more than 20 years.

ford asked t.i. to make the diaphram quieter during operation, not cheaper, quieter.

that lead to softer/thinner polymers in a film membrane.

that leaks under vacuum (that no one knew occurred inside the brake system) and here we are.

t.i. has provided these switches for more than 20,000,000 vehicles...

that's right 20 million, and only 16 mil are ford products.

4-5 million of the exact part is out there on NON fords....

they have/will fail too.

as i recall about 550 reports of fire, 250 caused by OTHER things, leaving 300 'possibly' related to the switch...

60 or so confirmed as relating to the speed control switch...

that's 60 our of 16-20 million or about 3 per million confirmed switch fires.

texas instruments made these 21$ modules, but last year sold off/away the t.i. division responsible...

which now operates as sensatrol? controls and switches?

cheers
2air'

[Silvertwinkie]

Originally Posted by Stefrobrts

People don't go buy Hondas because they're cheap, they do it because they have better quality, and everyone knows it.

We'll I've gotta say something about this. My wife has had 2 Accords and 1 Civic in the past 7 years. Both Accords were made in Ohio, the same state that builds our Airstreams (and we all know the QC issues coming out of Jackson Center). I can honestly say that both Accords have been no better but worse than all 3 of my Chevys. The Civic she had for a brief time was made in Japan, nearly flawless. Only reason she traded was because it was stick and she was having knee issues, making shifting difficult.

So, one can extrapolate this info in many ways, but my take is that if it's built here, it's possible to be the same level of quality, fit and finish that the domestics, built domestically find (after all, they are pulling from the same workforce). Our 3 Hondas seem to support this observation. Just Honda? Maybe, but Hondas have been sliding for years now IMHO. Buddy here at work also has a 2000 Accord, near 100k, it is totally falling apart underneath him. Check engine lights every other day, ABS issues regularly, entire exhaust system south of the back seat fell off piece by piece, dashboard died, got whole speedo assembly replaced, etc.....

Could is simply be a perception issue that Fords, Chevys, etc are inferior to other car companies? Looking at the issue further, Toyota, Nissan, Honda, and other non Asian or domestic vehicles have had far more recalls than ever before. Cause they are made here in some cases?

Bottom line is that Joe hit it right on the head, Ford didn't build these switches, but they own the problem. Makes you think of the old sayin' if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Between this recall, which Ford appears to be the main user of this switch and the tire recall, I sure hope they're fortunes turn around. I do recall when AMC was bought by Chrysler making only 3 domestics. It would be bad to see just 2 or 1, or worse yet, none.

[clancy_boy]

The bottom line is that FORD is the responsible party for the monitoring of their completed product and the service life of this switch not the sub-contractor (whoever that may be). You cannot pass the buck for an issue like this - I realize that TI is no small Mom&Pop organization making some small widget but they delivered a component first designed by FORD to FORD's specifications and FORD is responsible for the design and its use in the final product.

FORD tracks failures in their vehicles, monitored by government agencies and private insurance companies - FORD keeps all the statistics on vehicle failures and the reasons behind them. They new of this issue well before anyone else and the release of this information was on their time line. It has been years since the first reported fire and subsequent investigation pointed at the switch. They just now are getting around to a full recall.

This is back to my previous statement that it is because of the bean counting mentality in major commercial enterprises here and abroad (look at Chine now) that a little risk is worth the sacrifice of some level of quality, but in this case it has cost lives.

Hummmmm - seems this thread is still about the Ford recall.....

[Minnie's Mate]

We had two Fords affected by the first cruise control recall. They were recalled BEFORE Ford had the fuse harness to fix the problem but Ford wanted the cruise control disconnected before there were any more fires. I don't know if Ford's motivation was to limit their liability, arguably the probable reason, or if they wanted to keep people out of harms way, but they didn't want to wait for the harnesses to be built before they recalled them.

Anyway, when I took my wife's in (first letter received) I thought the cruise would be fixed, the service writer told me that it would be disconnected and when the fuse harness was available I would be notified and it would be installed. I told him that we had an upcoming trip in which I really wanted to use the cruise, he told me as long as the Expedition would be parked outside, he could show me how to reconnect it for the trip and I could disconnect it when we returned before parking it in the garage again. (He actually did the disconnect without sending it to the service bay.)

This was how we treated the first recall and had cruise control for trips and had protection from fires when the SUV was parked in the garage. A couple of months later my F-150 was recalled for the same reason and I took it in and had the cruise disconnected. It took about six months for the harnesses to come in and be replaced. I didn't use the cruise on my truck as it was my daily driver only. My wife's Expedition only required cruise control when we took road trips about once every three months and all other trips were local so this was an effective solution for us.

I would recommend anyone have their cruise disconnected and have the service writer or service technician show them how to reconnect it if the wiring harness isn't available when you take it in. This way you can temporarily reconnect it if you think you will need the cruise before the harness comes in.

Parts availability may be the reason for the delay in the recall as much as anything else. If Ford took too much of a hit for the first recall without the harnesses being ready when customers took their vehicles in for the correction, you can bet the fuse harnesses have to be manufactured by the millions and be ready to install before a mass recall can be issued . This supply issue may have been outside of Ford's control.

[Silvertwinkie]

You do understand that from what I've read, the fire could happen anytime power is supplied to the switch. Though I understand that when your in the car it's noticable, but who wants to have a fire while towing a few tons behind them? I'd be inclined to simply leave it deactivated until the proper fix is in place.

[Jim & Susan]

This whole thing about who's brand is better is a lot like who's baseball team is better. I have 5 Fords with about 700K miles on them. I experienced the first major failure this spring when my 1997 F150 blew an engine at 150k miles. OK, it should have made at least 200k, but ya know what, I put a new engine in it (I did the work). Why? Because it’s a great truck. I bought it new and have done all of the maintenance on it. There was nothing wrong with the truck except a blown engine. Number 2 child is driving that truck at college (and has for the past 2 years). And hopefully, it’ll pass to number three 3 in a couple of years. What else do you want from an automobile? Oh yeah, my Windstar Minivan has 186k miles on it. It’s 10 years old. I’d say that’s a pretty good track record, wouldn’t you?

Jim

[davidz71]

Brand loyalty will always play a part in this. I've owned Chevy trucks for years and have been pleased although my '77 K5 Blazer started rusting out in all those areas we know they do. My wife's '95 Astro still plugs away at 196,000 miles without burning oil although we did burn up one in-tank fuel pump and later it started stumbling or wouldn't start. I traced it to a fuse relay junction where the fuel pump takes it's 12 v. power source. The wire was too small therefore too much resistance and the plastic junction box had started to melt causing the metal parts to not make tight contact. I replaced the junction box with one out of a '96 Astro and guess what? The wire running back to the fuel pump was considerably larger! No recall, no word at all. As soon as I saw this on the wrecked '96, I stripped a foot out of the wiring harness and wired it in to the smaller existing wire. No problems since I did this. My '01 2500hd is undergoing a rear differential pinion seal replacement if I would get off this computer. Part is under the truck and I am getting ready to drop the driveshaft. Only problem I have had with the truck was a plastic vane in the AC vent which kept falling out and a tailgate cable breaking which dropped the tailgate to the ground on a sharp right hand turn (covered by insurance). This would not have happened if I had not had the bed sprayed with LineX which caused a bind and the tailgate did not close properly. The vent was replaced under warranty and I replaced the cables with steel straps.

I guess what I am trying to say is that all vehicles will have some problems and we can all hope that they are simple fixes. Chevy should have left the steel straps in place rather than listen to some bean counting idiot who recommended the steel cable replacement. They didn't expect the design flaws like water leaking down the cable where it started rusting then cables started breaking. Ford should have left well enough alone with the cruise control improvement but they didn't expect the fires. In either case, if I lost cargo or got hurt loading an ATV then I would be mad at Chevrolet. If my Ford burned to the ground then I'd be mad enough at Ford. I'm sure that State Farm would have covered it and then sued Ford for the rest. Ford should be taking it out on TI in my opinion. STUFF HAPPENS but I sure don't want it to happen to me!