TomServo92 Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Link Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Just ads more credence to the saying "but it's a Hyundai". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeavyAaron Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Just ads more credence to the saying "but it's a Hyundai". Huh? Are you saying Hyundai's are more recall prone based on a single instance? That's a pretty silly extrapolation, wouldn't you say? What then would you extrapolate from the whole Ford / Firestone rollover mess (which was obviously far more serious) from a few years back? Or do you unneccessarily extrapolate only when it suits your personal biases? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 What then would you extrapolate from the whole Ford / Firestone rollover mess (which was obviously far more serious) from a few years back? A few years back? That's getting close to a decade ago now. I don't think anyone here would argue that Ford's quality then was anything to brag about either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 What then would you extrapolate from the whole Ford / Firestone rollover mess (which was obviously far more serious) from a few years back? Or do you unneccessarily extrapolate only when it suits your personal biases? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 (edited) Huh? Are you saying Hyundai's are more recall prone based on a single instance? That's a pretty silly extrapolation, wouldn't you say? What then would you extrapolate from the whole Ford / Firestone rollover mess (which was obviously far more serious) from a few years back? Or do you unneccessarily extrapolate only when it suits your personal biases? Must agree with Critic, this was a Firestone issue, not Ford. I'll save you the details as I've discussed this too many times, but will agree there was a lack of quality in Ford products around that time, but was not the reason for any roll overs. Edited April 21, 2009 by V8-X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Huh? Are you saying Hyundai's are more recall prone based on a single instance? No, I am saying they are junk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
97svtgoin05gt Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Control arm failure = serious issue. As good as a Toyota, Ford, or GM for $6,000 less. Sure, you don't mind control arms falling off after about 3 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommy8768 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Must agree with Critic, this was a Firestone issue, not Ford. I'll save you the details as I've discussed this too many times, but will agree there was a lack of quality in Ford products around that time, but was not the reason for any roll overs. So who was the dumbass who recommended tire pressures of 26 psi on those Explorers? Was it Firestone? Or a Ford engineer? THATS one of the reasons they rolled over. It was a combination of things that conspired for that debacle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 (edited) So who was the dumbass who recommended tire pressures of 26 psi on those Explorers? Was it Firestone? Or a Ford engineer? THATS one of the reasons they rolled over. It was a combination of things that conspired for that debacle. From my understanding, Ford recommended 26 psi due to customer complaints of a rough ride when the psi was 30 or above. I had a '99 Explorer (how I got my user name as it was a '99 X 5.0L AWD Limited with every bell/whistle) and admit, when the psi was 32 the Explorer road extremely rough, but at 26 it was much smoother. My friends Bravada felt much more likely to tip and roll than the Explorer ever did. But at the time plenty of companies researched this issue and determined with or without Firestone tires, the Explorer was just as likely to roll over as every other SUV of the day, and was even less likely to roll than some SUV's like the Trooper and Montero for just a couple. Also, why were there Tacoma's and S-10 Blazers that rolled with Firestone tires not considered a problem then? Cause Explorers came stock with Firestone where these other vehicles had them installed as aftermarket replacements. But you never hear about this. For example, 20/20 did an episode on this, and determined the roll over was due to driver error and excessive over correction/over steer as to the reason for the roll overs. Remember this was during the SUV craze where many soccer moms and car people were jumping into trucks/SUV's without the knowledge of the different driving characteristics between a car and truck. Now 20/20 took multiple Explorers, put them on a track and blew many a tire while traveling 55+ mph. They attempted this at all four corners to see if there were any differences depending on where the tire that blew was located. Not once did the Explorer try to roll, but it did track to the side of the blown tire. The test driver could not get the truck to even attempt to roll with your basic corrections when driving. Only when the test driver used extremely excessive over correction manuevers would it try to roll. The driver even took his hands off the steering wheel a couple times when the tires blew and again the truck never attempted to roll, simply drifted in the direction of the blown tire. So 20/20's review, like many others, determined that yes the Firestone tires were bad, but the overall design of the Explorer was no more likely to roll than any other SUV of the day and was not the true reason for the roll overs, it was chalked up to driver error. Problem is, too many people remember the events that took place and the media outrage, but never conducted thorough research or follow up. Just like so many people saying Toyota is heads and shoulders better than Ford or the domestics. They take what some media outlets and a few people say and run with it without actually looking into every aspect and determining for themselves what the best vehicle is. Edited April 22, 2009 by V8-X Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 So who was the dumbass who recommended tire pressures of 26 psi on those Explorers? Was it Firestone? Or a Ford engineer? THATS one of the reasons they rolled over. It was a combination of things that conspired for that debacle. No one recommended 26 PSI, I just checked the door sticker on a 2000 Explorer and it says 30 front and rear. Try again! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 No one recommended 26 PSI, I just checked the door sticker on a 2000 Explorer and it says 30 front and rear. Try again! Actually when I owned my Explorer, the dealer did recommend lowering the PSI for a better ride, but coming from an '85 Ranger and '99 Ranger, the ride was of no concern to me. So it's hit or miss on who you speak with I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 No one recommended 26 PSI, I just checked the door sticker on a 2000 Explorer says 30 front and rear. That's like saying the salesman said I could put 50 PSI in the tires when the sidewall says 35 max. Do what you want, but the final word is what the manufacturer states. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 That's like saying the salesman said I could put 50 PSI in the tires when the sidewall says 35 max. Do what you want, but the final word is what the manufacturer states. I'm pretty certain it was a manufacturer-issued TSB that suggested the lower tire pressure. It certainly wasn't a dealer-to-dealer idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 I'm pretty certain it was a manufacturer-issued TSB that suggested the lower tire pressure. It certainly wasn't a dealer-to-dealer idea. UH Nick,, reading the post it said the man talked to the GM who said lower the air-pressure for a better ride. NO TSB said to lower the air-pressure, and The door sticker: IE owners manual will tell you what pressure your to run in it. Now If I tell you, (I'm your friendly, NOT, Salesman) you to lower it to 15 or up it too 60, are you going to go by what I say as an expert and pass that info along to the next owner, or are you going to follow the owners manual? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 UH Nick,, reading the post it said the man talked to the GM who said lower the air-pressure for a better ride. NO TSB said to lower the air-pressure, and The door sticker: IE owners manual will tell you what pressure your to run in it. Now If I tell you, (I'm your friendly, NOT, Salesman) you to lower it to 15 or up it too 60, are you going to go by what I say as an expert and pass that info along to the next owner, or are you going to follow the owners manual? I know what you are TRYING to say, but there were many mentions of FORD, not dealers, recommending 26 psi air pressure on them. If it was a dealer suggestion, I doubt they would all have recommended the same air pressure setting. FORD recommended it, whether through TSB, dealer memo, or whatever. It was ultimately FORD that suggested the lower air pressure. This has been documented in plenty of places. http://www.fordexplorerrollover.com/history/Default.cfm http://www.usatoday.com/money/consumer/autos/mauto771.htm http://www.californiachronicle.com/articles/view/89226 There are plenty of others that cite FORD as recommending 26 psi... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 Yea, I see what your saying now. But I still stand by what I said. the door sticker on my Explorer says 30 Frt./Rear. You have to question some of those links where it says Firestone recommended THE MAXIMUN as was molded onto the sidewall (35) and Dodge saying 41, exceeding the max. That's what the courts are for, to let it play out there, and not in the media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 OH, yea. let me add something else to this, when that recall of Firestone tires occurred, I had about 10K miles on mine, they were 16" and the initial recall was just for 15". Well I went to a Firestone store and Firestone was running a recall of their own. You could get any of the ATX tires exchanged and it cost me $25 per tire. I traded them for Bridgestones. They had 60K tread life for them. Once the recall became full blown, I was reimbursed for what I paid for the trade. The explorer now has 70K on it and still enough tread for possibly another 10-15K miles. This is a benefit to maintaining proper pressure. Gas mileage and tread life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 To my understanding, the lowering of tire pressure for all Explorers, no matter what tire you were running. I had the Generals on the Explorer for a while and the dealer even recommended these be lowered to 26psi, even though they weren't Firestone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 Yea, I see what your saying now. But I still stand by what I said. the door sticker on my Explorer says 30 Frt./Rear. You have to question some of those links where it says Firestone recommended THE MAXIMUN as was molded onto the sidewall (35) and Dodge saying 41, exceeding the max. That's what the courts are for, to let it play out there, and not in the media. What the heck tire only has a 35 psi MAXIMUM inflation rating? They are typically much, much higher than that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Critic Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 What the heck tire only has a 35 psi MAXIMUM inflation rating? They are typically much, much higher than that. I just checked 3 different sets of tires, each saying maximum of 40 PSI and to also follow the door/owners recommendation. I can remember years ago, tires saying 35, but that was when the biggest you could get would also be a 15". My point has always been, NOT to rely on what your told, but what the door/owner manual says, and If it was to be changed by the manufacturer, they would notify you. Even for a used vehicle, they still notify about recalls. Now in the Escape forum, you have the wacko hypermiler who advocates running over 50 and 55 PSI. What do you think you should do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted April 23, 2009 Share Posted April 23, 2009 Now in the Escape forum, you have the wacko hypermiler who advocates running over 50 and 55 PSI. What do you think you should do? I'll let Darwin take care of him. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
156n3rd Posted April 25, 2009 Share Posted April 25, 2009 How many Ford recalls in the last 5 years? Go ahead, pick on all those independents. They will sell you a car down the road sometime, somewhere. Regardless if it is you or a family member. hahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.