Recalls, what is it Ford doesn't understand!

[Howdy!!]

Last summer I received a recall notice on our 2000 Focus for hinges in areas of road salt. Door seals were added and whatever. Just bought a new 2005 Focus 2 months ago and now I get the same recall on this one. What is it Ford does not understand that owners don't like having to take a car back for recalls. Especially recalls like this one. Why was this problem not taken care of at the dealer before I bought it. Why are known recall problems not taken care of on the new cars sitting on dealers lots, instead of waiting till someone purchases them and send out a recall in cases like this??

[Ron W.]

Last summer I received a recall notice on our 2000 Focus for hinges in areas of road salt. Door seals were added and whatever. Just bought a new 2005 Focus 2 months ago and now I get the same recall on this one. What is it Ford does not understand that owners don't like having to take a car back for recalls. Especially recalls like this one. Why was this problem not taken care of at the dealer before I bought it. Why are known recall problems not taken care of on the new cars sitting on dealers lots, instead of waiting till someone purchases them and send out a recall in cases like this??

 

Ford added more vehicles to the 05S27 program. The dealer should have taken care of the recall before it was sold, but can't if you bought it before Ford added the other vehicles. The supplement was dated November 7 2005. Ford cannot force the dealer to do the recall before the vehicle is sold, BUT on "S" safety campaigns it states on the paper work. "Federal law requires dealers to complete any outstanding safety recall service before a new vehicle is delivered to the buyer or lesee. Violation of this requirment by a dealer could result in a civil penalty of up to $5,000.00 per vehicle. We try man but sometimes lack of communication between dealership departments happens. No dealer wants to lose that kind of money.

[wyominghotwheels]

That is an awesome reply ron.....great answer.

[FRdesign]

Once Toyota,Well IF toyota becomes the worlds Number 1 automaker,There quality will slowly fall to Below Ford And Gm level.

[RichardJensen]

What's that line from "Badlands" by the Boss?

 

Poor men wanna be rich / Rich men wanna be kings / and a king ain't satisfied / till he's rulin' everything.

 

Toyota's push to be the world's largest automaker has many precedents in many other industries, and in history--unfortunately for Toyota, few of them have happy endings. Napoleon invaded Russia for reasons that are not readily apparent, and Hitler did the same. Toyota's quest to be the world's largest auto maker is a quest driven largely by ego. Since they began their push into emerging markets (which is where a lot of their growth is coming from), they have seen expenses grow faster than revenue, and they took the drastic step two years ago of budgeting no additional money for R&D, in an effort to reduce costs.

 

And their quality has not improved as quckly as the quality of their rivals. For instance, domestic IQ as reported by CU is twice as good as it was five years ago.

 

Regarding the recall: well, that's life. One might point to the scope creep of the Toyota oil sludge problem, the Prius stalling problem or the Honda transmission problem (both of which were initially acknowledged by the manufacturers in only a small percentage of instances).

 

...

Edited November 26, 2005 by RichardJensen

[ufotofu27]

The main problems I have had with my Toyotas has been directly related to AC Delco parts. Alternator on the Corolla, and washer pump on the Camry. My Taurus had a genuine Nippondenso washer pump :D .

[PolarBear]

In all fairness, though, Ford is eventually going to have to take the Toyota approach with their dealers- outstanding customer CSI, both in sales and service, will be the price of keeping the franchise. It's been proven, over and over again, that great service really is a viable business model.

[RichardJensen]

In all fairness, though, Ford is eventually going to have to take the Toyota approach with their dealers- outstanding customer CSI, both in sales and service, will be the price of keeping the franchise. It's been proven, over and over again, that great service really is a viable business model.

http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/press....asp?ID=2005227

 

Notice that the difference between Ford and Toyota represents 24% of the difference between the top and bottom finishers in the ranking (excluding Isuzu).

 

...

[bec5150]

Once Toyota,Well IF toyota becomes the worlds Number 1 automaker,There quality will slowly fall to Below Ford And Gm level.

I respectfully disagree and I will tell you why.

 

The reason Toyota and Honda are where they are is not a product of today, but rather a product of the late 60's to the mid 80s, a time where the "Big 3" made some real junk. This is not an opinion, but rather a direct quote from Lee Iacocca, who was involved with both Ford and, later, Chrysler at the time.

 

No one makes "junk" nowadays. But in the 70's, most of the American cars were trash. The reason was that they simply had no competition, Volkswagen notwithstanding. I remember the A and F bodied GM cars having the leaf springs break in half within a few years after purchase and the dashboard vents having to be held in place by cardboard. My 70 Pontiac had EVERY mechanical part break at one point or another, all before 60,000 miles. Most of the Fords had an automatic trans that would self destruct before 50K miles. Chrysler had mostly solid drivetrains, but everything else fell apart before the third year of ownership. "Turning over" the odometer (100,000 miles) was a rare accomplishment.

 

Then folks started buying the Japanese cars for economy and, admittedly, they were junk too. But like the Koreans in the late 90's, the Japanese of the 70's never gave up. I remember my 1980 Datsun. I put 150K miles on it and nothing ever broke. NOTHING. Even the clock still worked. This was at a time where a clock on an American car ALWAYS quit working within the first year.

 

Now, of course, I think that ultimately Toyota will spread themselves a little thin and the Americans will get better. The challenge is that Toyota and Honda currently make more money on their cars than the domestic companies. It's a challenge, but it's not insurmountable.

 

I also think that Ford is in the best position of all of the manufacturers. Honestly, they are the only domestic that has competitive products in the areas where it counts, the small SUV/crossover and the mid sized cars.

 

I have always said IF, and I mean IF Ford can show me a product that will give me a consistant 150-200K miles of trouble-free performance and give me a decent residual/resale value on the product, then they will have a buyer for life with me. Then they can sell it without massive incentives, make more money, invest more money into development and dealer support, which adds up to more market share, etc.

 

One more thing. You notice that Harley Davidson has shut down most of it's mom and pop dealers to open up bigger, better dealerships. Probably not a bad idea. If Ford finds the dealers to be substandard, I think they should make efforts to stand up dealers that provide a better experience after the sale.

 

Just an opinion...

Edited November 28, 2005 by bec5150

[ebritt]

http://www.jdpower.com/news/releases/press....asp?ID=2005227

 

Notice that the difference between Ford and Toyota represents 24% of the difference between the top and bottom finishers in the ranking (excluding Isuzu).

 

...

 

It dont matter what "JD" says. If the toyota sells more and people "think" its a better car...Ford loses ...period.

[RichardJensen]

It dont matter what "JD" says. If the toyota sells more and people "think" its a better car...Ford loses ...period.

Not that simple. Nothing is.

 

If people are buying Toyotas because they perceive them as having better quality, and are willing to endure appaling sales and service to get that higher quality product, that's fine.

 

But what happens when Toyota quality is no longer perceived as being worth the price premium and the high-pressure sales tactics and snide service department staff?

 

And don't think it won't happen.

 

According to CU, initial defects in American cars have fallen by 50% over the past five years, more or less achieving parity (on an average basis) with Japanese cars. There are caveats to that: of course, not all Japanese or American companies are equal, and numbers from Japan may be skewed downward by increased sales of lower quality Japanese products (Mazda and Nissan). However, the point bears repeating: Japan is steadily losing its quality advantage, as is Toyota. When customers see no reason to endure nasty sales tactics and high prices, they'll go elsewhere. It's an American tradition that Toyota has no control over.

 

...

Edited December 2, 2005 by RichardJensen

[Overdrive]

Richard, you have alot of confidence that Toyota is going to stumble and fall. I've heard this from many Detroit people in the supplier community. Toyota will become #1 and will go from a spartan company focused on it's business to fat and happy campers in their ivory tower et al. Someday...if....when....etc their vehicles will start having problems, their dealers give horrible service etc etc etc

 

Now, I'm not a Toyota or Honda fanboy, but these guys do alot of things right. They are a ferocious competitor and to bank on them stubbing their toes is just not practical.

 

But let's remember one fact. The brand is more powerful than the dealer. Yes, dealers can turn off customers but the customer can find another dealer for their desired brand. Frankly, most auto dealers are focused on doing a good job for their customers. The days of flagrant disregard to consumer attitudes are over. All of the automakers look at CSI indexes with a fisheye and no dealer wants their zone manager harping on them.

 

It's the product and the company that bring the people in. And outstanding dealer with fanatical and overwhelming customer service who carries a yard full of Yugos can not do the traffic that a well established brand can.

 

I don't see Toyota or Honda making any revisions to their business model anytime soon. Ford needs to look at what works for them and consider adopting some of their practices. It isn't like the Japanese didn't adopt many of ours!

[peterhershey]

OH AND WHY THE HELL DOESN'T FORD SUPPLY THE DEALERS WITH ENOUGH PARTS TO REASONABLY HANDLE THEIR CUSTOMERS WHEN THERE IS A LARGE WIDESPREAD RECALL?

[lauraleez]

Toyota and Honda have just as many recalls as Ford does...they just hide them better and they don't make it into the media as much, not at all or in a very small article. Myself, I would rather stick with getting a recall from Ford and getting things fixed, rather than with a car company that hides their problems to keep their perceived quality.

[RichardJensen]

Richard, you have alot of confidence that Toyota is going to stumble and fall.

I agree with what you said about copying the tactics used by Toyota and Honda; however, stifling arrogance (which one encounters most often from Toyota execs) is not something that Ford should copy. Ford needs to radically simplify the total part count; sharing as many components as possible, and carrying over as much componentry from one generation to another as possible (Hondas have had the same basic signal/headlight switch stalk for geez must be 20 years at least now, if not longer).

 

I wholeheartedly support that, that and regular consistent, visible upgrades.

 

However, Toyota is pushing to be number one. In a very real sense they have taken their eye off the ball. Their focus is not on building better cars (they assume they have a lock on that), it's on selling more cars than anyone else.

 

NOTE: This is not an attitude I see at Honda. The new Civic while being tragically styled in the way so many Hondas have been since 2003, is worlds better than the old Civic.

 

Anyway, Toyota wants to be number one, and in order to do so they have pushed themselves (IMO) beyond a certain margin of error in emerging markets. Increase in costs up until very recently have been kept under increases in revenue; however last year in order to keep costs under control, they budgeted not a cent in additional R&D over the year earlier. This was utter foolishness.

 

Moreover, revenue has not grown as fast as unit sales, and on the whole, Toyota's profit per unit has trended downwards.

 

They are desperately in need of keeping American customers happy; yet it is apparent that they are beginning to take these same customers for granted. American customers are financing Toyota's push to be the world's largest car maker.

 

...

[Overdrive]

Their revenue may be trending downward, but their profits -each year- are damn near the market value of General Motors........

[RichardJensen]

Their revenue may be trending downward, but their profits -each year- are damn near the market value of General Motors........

Market cap is malarkey, for the most part.

 

To the extent that it deviates from shareholder equity, it is nothing but bluesky and sailboat fuel.

 

Market cap is no measure of a company's worth.

 

But, more to the point, I am not saying that Toyota is going to collapse Enron style.

 

However consider this:

 

Revenue is increasing, but revenue and profit per unit are decreasing, and this has continued for about 3-4 years non stop.

 

Moreover, in order to control costs, Toyota budgeted NO increase in R&D in a fiercely competitive industry for FY 2005. Their failure to adhere to that unrealistic budget estimate resulted in costs outstripping revenue growth for the first time in years, and I would guess that sky-high energy and materials costs this year will result in revenue growth being outstripped by cost growth again.

 

So this is the picture you've got.

 

Cost growth > Unit growth > Revenue growth > Profit growth.

 

That is not a sustainable model. I don't care if you're Toyota or a street corner hot dog vendor, you CANNOT sustain growth like that.

 

...

[Ron W.]

OH AND WHY THE HELL DOESN'T FORD SUPPLY THE DEALERS WITH ENOUGH PARTS TO REASONABLY HANDLE THEIR CUSTOMERS WHEN THERE IS A LARGE WIDESPREAD RECALL?

 

 

If the fed's mandate a saftey recall the manufacturer has no choice but to announce it even if the repair parts are not yet available. Our concern at the dealership level is not only the availability of parts (we are the one standing in front of the upset customer) but the labor times and the repair itself. Take the 05S28 recall for the cruise control switchs. Ford pays .2 (12 minutes) for that recall. It takes longer than that to pull the truck in create the repair order and submit the claim for reimbursement, now add the repair. .4 for the "original population" that gets the 1L1Z-9F924-AA switch and jumper harness kit.

 

Now the "added population" of vehicles (the .2 units) get an in line fuse holder that looks like some engineer on drugs designed that uses a 2amp fuse. The lable on this "fused jumper harness" states that the fuse is non serviceable and directs the customer to buy at their own expence the 9F924 kit should the jumper fail.

Well first off the fuse CAN be replaced and secondly the problem is the switch diaghram leaking brake fluid and catching fire due to the electricity going to the switch. So the fuse pops the cruise quits working and the customer i'll bet money will replace the fuse (the easy fix) rather than the leaking switch. So is Ford fixing the problem or just putting out a fire? Pun intended.

 

By the way my 97 F150 is one of the "added population" so i'll just buy the 9F924 kit and install it myself.

Edited December 3, 2005 by Ron W.

[ebritt]

Guys ....it's not Toyota or Honda that Ford and GM have to worry about, they need to keep their eyes on Hyundai and YES KIA. All of the korean cars have been quickly coming up in quality and style and they are very hungry. The big warranty and small price are big selling points. Don't laugh 'em off cause they'll get ya.

Hyundai just built a Major Advanced plant in Georgia that's onna put them on the map. Just watch.

[F250]

Standard operating procedure for recall parts availability for most manufacturers.

 

When the massive Toyota truck ball joint recall was announced it was about 45 days before the first ball joints arrived at dealerships to begin scheduling their replacement.

 

But when the current generation 4-Runner was introduced the fuel pressure regulators were recalled and it was illegal to sell any of them until they were replaced. Those parts were available immediately, imagine that.

 

By the way the current Sienna has 6 recalls and counting...

[Bluecon]

If the fed's mandate a saftey recall the manufacturer has no choice but to announce it even if the repair parts are not yet available. Our concern at the dealership level is not only the availability of parts (we are the one standing in front of the upset customer) but the labor times and the repair itself. Take the 05S28 recall for the cruise control switchs. Ford pays .2 (12 minutes) for that recall. It takes longer than that to pull the truck in create the repair order and submit the claim for reimbursement, now add the repair. .4 for the "original population" that gets the 1L1Z-9F924-AA switch and jumper harness kit.

 

Now the "added population" of vehicles (the .2 units) get an in line fuse holder that looks like some engineer on drugs designed that uses a 2amp fuse. The lable on this "fused jumper harness" states that the fuse is non serviceable and directs the customer to buy at their own expence the 9F924 kit should the jumper fail.

Well first off the fuse CAN be replaced and secondly the problem is the switch diaghram leaking brake fluid and catching fire due to the electricity going to the switch. So the fuse pops the cruise quits working and the customer i'll bet money will replace the fuse (the easy fix) rather than the leaking switch. So is Ford fixing the problem or just putting out a fire? Pun intended.

 

By the way my 97 F150 is one of the "added population" so i'll just buy the 9F924 kit and install it myself.

 

My buddys' dad had a 64 Ford. The break sensing switch was on the master cylinder and leaked. This problem was solved by relocating the switch to the brake pedal where it remained for many years.

 

Now some genius in Ford engineering decided to locate the switch back on the master cylinder and the rest is history.

[RichardJensen]

My buddys' dad had a 64 Ford. The break sensing switch was on the master cylinder and leaked. This problem was solved by relocating the switch to the brake pedal where it remained for many years.

 

Now some genius in Ford engineering decided to locate the switch back on the master cylinder and the rest is history.

That switch on the master cylinder is there as a failsafe. Unfortunately, Ford did not engineer it against the possiblity of a fluid leak compromising the electrical components on the switch.

 

Having a failsafe is good, it definitively shuts off the CC when the brake is pressed.

 

However, Ford overlooked (and this was some years ago, so it wasn't due to budget cuts or whatever), Ford simply overlooked the consequences of a short in the switch due to brake fluid leaking through the sensor.

 

...

[kenp77]

That switch on the master cylinder is there as a failsafe. Unfortunately, Ford did not engineer it against the possiblity of a fluid leak compromising the electrical components on the switch.

 

Having a failsafe is good, it definitively shuts off the CC when the brake is pressed.

 

However, Ford overlooked (and this was some years ago, so it wasn't due to budget cuts or whatever), Ford simply overlooked the consequences of a short in the switch due to brake fluid leaking through the sensor.

 

...

Thats right and all for a $2 fuse and you still can't get it fixed si really looking good for the blue oval! I have friends that have been driving around now for months with no cruise control guess you know where they will be going the next time they replace their trucks???????????

Edited December 8, 2005 by kenp77

[Bluecon]

That switch on the master cylinder is there as a failsafe. Unfortunately, Ford did not engineer it against the possiblity of a fluid leak compromising the electrical components on the switch.

 

Having a failsafe is good, it definitively shuts off the CC when the brake is pressed.

 

However, Ford overlooked (and this was some years ago, so it wasn't due to budget cuts or whatever), Ford simply overlooked the consequences of a short in the switch due to brake fluid leaking through the sensor.

 

...

 

Does any other auto manufacturer use this type of switch? Seems like a bad idea considering the high pressure you would need to deal with. I think a switch which would not leak under this pressure would be quite expensive. GM uses a fail safe switch on the pedal.

[RichardJensen]

Does any other auto manufacturer use this type of switch? Seems like a bad idea considering the high pressure you would need to deal with. I think a switch which would not leak under this pressure would be quite expensive. GM uses a fail safe switch on the pedal.

I don't think so, and I don't think the pressure's all that high. The switch is mounted on the reservoir, not on one of the lines. The membrane, when not manufactured to spec (apparently the membrane is supplied by DuPont), can leak. I think Visteon designs and builds the switches, so by the time Ford gets the parts, QC can be quite tricky, especially since I'm assuming it's quite difficult to tell if the membrane meets specs.

 

Anyway, Ford should've designed the switch with an inline fusible link, on the off chance that the switch itself would short out, but that kind of forethought is a rarity in almost any profession you can think of.

 

I don't really fault Ford for neglecting to incorporate the fusible link in the initial design. However, I do wish Ford would've had systems in place to detect and rectify this situation once it became apparent that there was a problem with the design, as well as the materials (in that the design itself is not 'bad', but it is unable to cope well in less than perfect conditions).

 

That's where, IMO, Ford has fallen short. They didn't have systems in place to catch and correct the shortcomings of the design.

 

...