Ford Quality "Back on Track"

[cappa]

From Focus Fanatics:

 

A fellow user has had both his exterior fit issues fixed and his MFT has been applied with the new update which will be released to the public in July/August.

 

 

My car was taken back to the Michigan Assembly plant on Wednesday because the exterior fit and finish looked terrible. The doors were misaligned and the sheet metal didn't fit right. Luckily, the dealership I bought the car from is both huge and very close to the plant, not Jack Demmer close though. Tonight I'll post pictures the difference in the sheet metal before and after.

 

However, something that I think is more important, because it affects more people also occured. The factory updated my MFT/Sync! When I went to pick the car up, a factory rep and the service manager gave me a walk through of the exterior fixes, as well as an explanation of the MFT/Sync update. My car received the July/August update that is coming out to fix the slow response times, random reboots, and screen freezes. So far life has been so much better. I no longer hate my car. I no longer worry that my wife will call me on I-94 in Detroit with a frozen Nav. I have not really noticed changes in the background or look of MFT, just the usability. Both the touch screen and voice commands are smoother and less frustrating. Hopefully July will mark the end of all these problems that everyone has experienced. Let me know if any of you have any questions.

[suv_guy_19]

While we're at it, does anyone have any idea what the shaking at idel might be? There's been a suggestion that it could be a faulty alternator.

[aneekr]

all transmission are designed with metric rating in mind.

Correct. Society of Automotive Engineers standards specify SI units (kW, N-m, etc.).

[aneekr]

While we're at it, does anyone have any idea what the shaking at idel might be? There's been a suggestion that it could be a faulty alternator.

That's a definite possibility. Does the tachometer needle on your F-150 fluctuate significantly when the truck is at idle?

[akirby]

Correct. Society of Automotive Engineers standards specify SI units (kW, N-m, etc.).

 

I'll ask my buddy if he was mistaken but he clearly said it was lb/ft.

 

I would assume a Ford senior transmission engineer would know the difference.

[suv_guy_19]

That's a definite possibility. Does the tachometer needle on your F-150 fluctuate significantly when the truck is at idle?

 

When the truck shakes, the RPM gauge gets sucked right down to about 500.

[kenp77]

I'll ask my buddy if he was mistaken but he clearly said it was lb/ft.

 

I would assume a Ford senior transmission engineer would know the difference.

I wouldn't look how they designed the heads on the 04-07 5.4 3V!!

[F250]

I'll take the word of a longtime Ford Transmission Engineer over Wikipedia or any other non Ford Transmission Engineer.

 

I posted the results of a quick search and gave the source. Something you can verify.

 

You just gave hear-say.

 

So by your logic the 4R75E 4-speed automatic in my '06 F-150 is rated to handle 750 lb-ft of torque. Outstanding! That's double what the 5.4L made and 130 lb-ft more than even the 6.0L PowerStroke diesel belted out in the 06 SuperDuty.

[fordmantpw]

I posted the results of a quick search and gave the source. Something you can verify.

 

You just gave hear-say.

 

So by your logic the 4R75E 4-speed automatic in my '06 F-150 is rated to handle 750 lb-ft of torque. Outstanding! That's double what the 5.4L made and 130 lb-ft more than even the 6.0L PowerStroke diesel belted out in the 06 SuperDuty.

 

So by your logic, the 4R75 is rated to handle 553 ft-lbs. Outstanding! That's 50% more than the 5.4L and about equal to the 6.0L PS!

 

Bottom line, the rating has to be more than what the engine is rated at for several reasons. Is it double? Is it 50% more? I always thought it was double to account for torque multiplication and I thought the number represented ft-lbs. It doesn't really matter...do we need to argue about something so trivial? Can't we all just get along?

[akirby]

I posted the results of a quick search and gave the source. Something you can verify.

 

You just gave hear-say.

 

So by your logic the 4R75E 4-speed automatic in my '06 F-150 is rated to handle 750 lb-ft of torque. Outstanding! That's double what the 5.4L made and 130 lb-ft more than even the 6.0L PowerStroke diesel belted out in the 06 SuperDuty.

 

That's not hear-say. It's EXPERT testimony. All you posted was a Wiki article that anybody could have written with no verification. So unless you have some official Ford documentation my source is still more reliable.

 

As for a 4R75 handling 750 lb/ft - read the two responses below - especially the bolded part that you didn't bother to read before.

 

Bottom line, the rating has to be more than what the engine is rated at for several reasons. Is it double? Is it 50% more? I always thought it was double to account for torque multiplication and I thought the number represented ft-lbs. It doesn't really matter...do we need to argue about something so trivial? Can't we all just get along?

 

Well that's a given - the 6F50 was developed to handle higher torque (as was the 6F55). In Ford parlance the last 2 numbers denote the max torque capability at the tranny input shaft AFTER the torque converter. The TC can almost double torque at very low RPM so it's not just the engine output - you have to account for almost twice that.

[F250]

That's not hear-say. It's EXPERT testimony. All you posted was a Wiki article that anybody could have written with no verification. So unless you have some official Ford documentation my source is still more reliable.

 

As for a 4R75 handling 750 lb/ft - read the two responses below - especially the bolded part that you didn't bother to read before.

 

Expert testimony? Perhaps, but it wasn't from you so it is hearsay by definition.

So go to Wiki and correct the article if you can link a Ford Motor Company offical source.

 

It really isn't worth arguing over, it may be an internal Ford designation as to the design limit of a transmission type. For example all 2011 F150s have the 6R80 automatic regardless of engine yet they are all different internally beyond just gear ratios. The 6R80 behind the standard 3.7-v6 has internal differences which would reduce its torque capacity yet it still carries the same designation.

 

My link to Ford

 

A familiar transmission – with several improvements – will manage the power produced by the all-new engine lineup of the 2011 Ford F-150. The diverse group of engines, which ranges from a 3.7-liter V6 with advanced valvetrain timing to a 6.2-liter V8, will be mated to the 6R80 six-speed automatic transmission.

 

“The F-150 has a diverse set of customers, so we don’t take a one-size-fits-all approach when matching the transmission to the engine,” said Bryant Grytzelius, 6R80 transmission engineering manager. “With the 3.7-liter engine, for example, that particular transmission has fewer clutch plates compared with the other engines. Everything is sized accordingly for optimum driveability, performance and fuel economy.”

[YT90SC]

The last digits are the input torque in FT/LBS on the input shaft after the torque convertor when it was first designed. It then carries that designation until it is redesigned/redesignated/replaced. The conventional 6R's and 6F's are all in the same families, but they are different from each other. For example, the 6R60's case is smaller than the 6R80 which is smaller than the 6R140. There are differences in the 6R35/50/55 other than clutch friction count. Friction count does not change the designation of the transmission. Reduction in weight of rotating mass of any type helps reduce parasitic loss in the drivetrain, thus increasing economy and making throttle response better. 3.7l engine doesn't need the full capacity of the trans, so the reduction in weight of a few clutch discs results in their weight loss as well as the reduction in size of the component's size because the clutch drum can be reduced in size as well.

[2005Explorer]

6F50. 6F55 is used in the ecoboost MKS, Flex, MKT and SHO. 6F35 is used in the Fusion 2.5L and 3.0L applications.

 

Interestingly the Fusion and MKZ 3.5L still use the Aisin tranny, not the 6F.

My Escape with the V6 and 6F35 has been trouble free, but there is something up with that transmission I don't like. It acts a little different from time to time and gets confused about what to do at times. It is hard to explain because it might do something odd once and never do it again. I only have about 5,500 miles on it so maybe it is still "learning" and that is what is causing it to feel a little different at times. I haven't noticed any shift flare or engagement problems like some are complaining about, but it just feels sloppy compared to the Aisin unit I had in my Fusion. The Aisin never displayed any sort of inconsistencies.

 

It probably doesn't help reading about problems others have had either since that can make a person imagine things. LOL Still I just feel this transmission suffers from engineering problems and although it might run for thousands and thousands of miles without failure there is something that just isn't right about it. I am very happy with the performance and fuel economy of my Escape and it will fly when you mash down the gas, but I'd feel more comfortable if the transmission shifted with the same feeling 100% of the time.

Edited June 26, 2011 by 2005Explorer

[akirby]

My Escape with the V6 and 6F35 has been trouble free, but there is something up with that transmission I don't like. It acts a little different from time to time and gets confused about what to do at times. It is hard to explain because it might do something odd once and never do it again. I only have about 5,500 miles on it so maybe it is still "learning" and that is what is causing it to feel a little different at times. I haven't noticed any shift flare or engagement problems like some are complaining about, but it just feels sloppy compared to the Aisin unit I had in my Fusion. The Aisin never displayed any sort of inconsistencies.

 

It probably doesn't help reading about problems others have had either since that can make a person imagine things. LOL Still I just feel this transmission suffers from engineering problems and although it might run for thousands and thousands of miles without failure there is something that just isn't right about it. I am very happy with the performance and fuel economy of my Escape and it will fly when you mash down the gas, but I'd feel more comfortable if the transmission shifted with the same feeling 100% of the time.

 

I don't think there is any doubt there are issues with the 6F35 in the Fusion - not sure about other models/versions.

[2005Explorer]

I don't think there is any doubt there are issues with the 6F35 in the Fusion - not sure about other models/versions.

 

Some Escapes are having problems as well, but that is not surprising since the Fusion and Escape 2.5L and 3.0L use pretty much the exact same FWD power pack. I do think the 2011 models seem to be doing better and like I said I don't have issues, but it's a pretty mediocre transmission at best even when it is working right. In my opinion there just shouldn't be issues with a conventional automatic in this day and age. How many years have they had to perfect the whole concept of a conventional automatic? LOL I know the whole idea behind the in-house 6F35 was to maximize profits and not have to import the much better Aisin unit for use in these vehicles, but sometimes warranty claims and unsatisfied customers can cost more in the end.

 

After going on YouTube and viewing some Fusions that are having transmission problems I'm lucky mine works as well as it does. Ford needs to figure out why the failure rate is so high and fix it. I am not convinced the 2011s are actually fixed which is why I worry about the long term durability of the transmission in my Escape. Lucky for me it is a lease so it will end up being someone else's problem if it does not prove to be durable long term.

[timmm55]

Some Escapes are having problems as well, but that is not surprising since the Fusion and Escape 2.5L and 3.0L use pretty much the exact same FWD power pack. I do think the 2011 models seem to be doing better and like I said I don't have issues, but it's a pretty mediocre transmission at best even when it is working right. In my opinion there just shouldn't be issues with a conventional automatic in this day and age. How many years have they had to perfect the whole concept of a conventional automatic? LOL I know the whole idea behind the in-house 6F35 was to maximize profits and not have to import the much better Aisin unit for use in these vehicles, but sometimes warranty claims and unsatisfied customers can cost more in the end.

 

After going on YouTube and viewing some Fusions that are having transmission problems I'm lucky mine works as well as it does. Ford needs to figure out why the failure rate is so high and fix it. I am not convinced the 2011s are actually fixed which is why I worry about the long term durability of the transmission in my Escape. Lucky for me it is a lease so it will end up being someone else's problem if it does not prove to be durable long term.

 

I'm not sure how pervasive the problem is (still gets 4.5 stars from owners overall) but Ford does have a TSB and/or a recall.

[timmm55]

 

Store249, don't know you, but you seem to speak from experience. Are you a dealer? I can't imagine the tranny problems are as widespread as you're insuating.

 

He's a troll.

[aneekr]

How many years have they had to perfect the whole concept of a conventional automatic? LOL I know the whole idea behind the in-house 6F35 was to maximize profits and not have to import the much better Aisin unit for use in these vehicles, but sometimes warranty claims and unsatisfied customers can cost more in the end.

You read my mind.

Ford has never perfected the concept of a conventional automatic with its own designs, at least for front-drive platform vehicles. Aisin AW and Jatco (among others) have.

 

And now Ford plans to develop an 8-speed autotragic in-house!

[silvrsvt]

You read my mind.

Ford has never perfected the concept of a conventional automatic with its own designs, at least for front-drive platform vehicles. Aisin AW and Jatco (among others) have.

 

 

 

Um it was developed the GM also...have they had any problems with the 6T70 and 6T75 transmissions, since that's the 6F35 kissing cousin or sister.

[aneekr]

Um it was developed the GM also...have they had any problems with the 6T70 and 6T75 transmissions, since that's the 6F35 kissing cousin or sister.

Yes; in addition to software updates to address a number of issues like shuddering, shift "flares", and other anomalies, the GM 6T70 has had issues with the 3-5-R clutch wave plate breaking apart (which can lead to slippage in 3rd and 5th gears and/or non-engagement of reverse).

 

And as much as I dislike Ford's programming on the 6F series transmission, it seems that GM actually managed to implement software that makes their version even worse in terms of languid downshift response and random harsh upshifts.