zipnzap Posted December 19, 2017 Share Posted December 19, 2017 https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2017/ford-transit-driveshaft-recall-lawsuit.shtml How difficult would it be to switch to a normal U-joint? Could that be a possible permanent fix? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted December 19, 2017 Share Posted December 19, 2017 https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2017/ford-transit-driveshaft-recall-lawsuit.shtml How difficult would it be to switch to a normal U-joint? Could that be a possible permanent fix? But that would be doing more than just half-assed fixing the problem and the budget doesnt allow for that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted December 19, 2017 Share Posted December 19, 2017 I hope this and other suits force Ford to fix this issue. A design change to a standard u joint would cost nearly nothing going forward. Fixing the existing vehicles would obviously be more involved if, as I suspect, it would require disassembling the transmission to change out the output shaft to one with a different style flange. But this problem should have never happened. Interesting enough, our LS has the same style couplings, although an IRS vehicle is a slightly different application than a live axle. But 170,000 miles / 12 years and no problems with ours. I'd love a reason to get rid of that thing though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 https://www.carcomplaints.com/news/2017/ford-transit-driveshaft-recall-lawsuit.shtml How difficult would it be to switch to a normal U-joint? Could that be a possible permanent fix? A U-Joint won't work so good in place of the flexible coupling as the speed of rotation through a bend is not constant, it needs to be a better flex coupler or CV Joint......I think that's the real reason Ford just mucked around with it..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 I think that 'rag joint' style of U-joint was selected because of cost. Like a lot of things on the Transit.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 I find it hard to believe that Ford is NOT stepping up to the plate on this. To suggest they should be replaced every 30,000 miles should be proof enough that the part is defective. Is this suggested replacement at 30m a fact? What would Honda or Toyota do in a situation like this? My bet is, step up to the plate and pay for all associated costs. Ford would rather spend the money I'm afraid on a well staffed "Customer Service" organization that is trained to say.."sorry not covered" And Hackett wants to cut engineering and material costs??? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 I find it hard to believe that Ford is NOT stepping up to the plate on this. To suggest they should be replaced every 30,000 miles should be proof enough that the part is defective. Is this suggested replacement at 30m a fact? What would Honda or Toyota do in a situation like this? My bet is, step up to the plate and pay for all associated costs. Ford would rather spend the money I'm afraid on a well staffed "Customer Service" organization that is trained to say.."sorry not covered" And Hackett wants to cut engineering and material costs??? . Sounds like the Twin Traction front ends on 80's and 90's F-Series four wheel drive trucks...basically needed major serving every 30K miles... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 . Sounds like the Twin Traction front ends on 80's and 90's F-Series four wheel drive trucks...basically needed major serving every 30K miles... Oh please. I grew up driving those things and still had two as recently as last year. I only ever bothered doing bushings/ball joints/bearings/tie rod ends at about 200,000 miles and got excellent service out of every truck I had. The biggest problem with them was they'd get negative camber as soon as the coil springs sagged a little. That was easy to fix with a small spacer between the spring and the pad on the axle beam. I will admit that twin traction beam was a love it or hate it affair though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blksn8k2 Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 The only issue I ever had with the two vehicles I owned with that style front suspension had nothing to do with the suspension design. On my 1980 Bronco it was those stupid phenolic resin brake caliper pistons and on the 1994 Ranger it was the equally unreliable auto hubs. More reliable aftermarket parts solved both of those problems. Neither vehicle had unusual tire wear issues like so many people supposedly complained about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 A U-Joint won't work so good in place of the flexible coupling as the speed of rotation through a bend is not constant, U-Joints need to be installed in pairs. Each would be 180° of of phase with each other. CV joints are good, but expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 I think that 'rag joint' style of U-joint was selected because of cost. Like a lot of things on the Transit.......... Has this style of joint been used in previous RWD Transits in EU ? You have to remember, the Transit is a 100% FoE design. The rear seats are ridiculous, especially when compared to the "quad captains chairs" on the old E150 Chateau. I am wondering if fleets are going to stop buying Tramsits until this problem is actually fixed ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 Oh please. I grew up driving those things and still had two as recently as last year. I only ever bothered doing bushings/ball joints/bearings/tie rod ends at about 200,000 miles and got excellent service out of every truck I had. The biggest problem with them was they'd get negative camber as soon as the coil springs sagged a little. That was easy to fix with a small spacer between the spring and the pad on the axle beam. I will admit that twin traction beam was a love it or hate it affair though. The only issue I ever had with the two vehicles I owned with that style front suspension had nothing to do with the suspension design. On my 1980 Bronco it was those stupid phenolic resin brake caliper pistons and on the 1994 Ranger it was the equally unreliable auto hubs. More reliable aftermarket parts solved both of those problems. Neither vehicle had unusual tire wear issues like so many people supposedly complained about. . Not meant as a "slam" on the design per se, just that it was a more finicky system that needed more attention than a solid axle....that style front end was on two of dads trucks...just had to mindful of them and Ford could have done much better and subsequently did when they went to an true IFS design in 1997 for F150/F250 standard duty... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 Has this style of joint been used in previous RWD Transits in EU ? You have to remember, the Transit is a 100% FoE design. The rear seats are ridiculous, especially when compared to the "quad captains chairs" on the old E150 Chateau. I am wondering if fleets are going to stop buying Tramsits until this problem is actually fixed ! For sure on all counts. I thought one of the Transit selling points was.."bullet proof-been in service in Europe for years ..." And if I were a fleet manager and was aware of this "30,000 mile issue" my first thought would be.."yeah great vehicle-all I have to do is ad an NHRA drive shaft strap"- plus add.."replace flex joints" to my maintenance schedule. Ugly as they are the Ram Promasters start looking better if this is all factual info that is NOT being immediately addressed and at no cost to customer. This is NOT a normal wer issue-it is a design/part quality fault IMO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 . Not meant as a "slam" on the design per se, just that it was a more finicky system that needed more attention than a solid axle....that style front end was on two of dads trucks...just had to mindful of them and Ford could have done much better and subsequently did when they went to an true IFS design in 1997 for F150/F250 standard duty... Yeah there's nothing particularly wrong with the 97+ IFS front ends. What I don't like about them was they were either "full time" (no locking hubs at all) or used the completely unreliable pulse-vacuum system of unlocking. The 5.4L Expeditions actually got worse mileage than the V10 Excursions in my experience only because the Excursion front end would actually unlock. As for the vacuum lock IFS stuff, Ford should have known better; GM and Dodge struggled to get reliable performance out of that system for a decade before Ford tried it. The mechanical auto hubs on the TTB trucks was equally unreliable but at least it was easily replaced with the dead-reliable manual style hubs for $200 and a couple hours of work. On the other hand the only real fix for the vacuum-style system was to fix them in the locked position and suffer the gas mileage and tire wear consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 Bob...what would Honda/ Toyota do ?....nothing, they hide their issues completely, best damage control in the business...and that said...neither company makes anything that even borders on "Commercial". That's said, this should have been addressed a long time ago, one of the first batch of Transits I sold were 8 passenger when the car was first released....his were cracking after 6 months...Fords been aware of a potential material issue on this pretty much since product inception.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 Bob...what would Honda/ Toyota do ?....nothing, they hide their issues completely, best damage control in the business... But that’s not nothing. The point is they would go out of their way to take care of the problem quietly and avoid bad publicity. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 20, 2017 Share Posted December 20, 2017 (edited) They definitely have their fair share of lawsuits as well akirby...no one gets away scott free anymore, and Ford handled this miserably I agree...how something like this could rear its head when the basic vehicle has been in Europe for so longs makes me scratch my head...US powertrains power perhaps?.....whats strange here is the Plaintiffs issues, like my customer, must have happened before the TSB....ala recall....IMO the recall was late in coming. Edited December 20, 2017 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 FORD replaces the guibo **for free** at 30k mile intervals until the final fix is available in sufficient quantities. The final fix will be old universal style joints. Unsold units and units that break get moved up in the fix process. The original writer is mis informed. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 YT90, that's what I thought, I know they sent my clients a recall notice....what else can they do ?, but I think the guy with the lawsuits issue was perhaps he puts a BUNCH of miles on his unit to the point he was 30 plus BEFORE the recall, my guy was and did, but he has a fleet he self maintains and the mechanics noticed the cracking when the vehicles were on the hoist. I also wonder if the cracking is a result of the different...read more powerful and Torquey drivetrains, utilized here in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 Bob...what would Honda/ Toyota do ?....nothing, they hide their issues completely, best damage control in the business...and that said...neither company makes anything that even borders on "Commercial". That's said, this should have been addressed a long time ago, one of the first batch of Transits I sold were 8 passenger when the car was first released....his were cracking after 6 months...Fords been aware of a potential material issue on this pretty much since product inception.... Well Toyota's handling of the rusting frames on the "Taco" comes to mind. The fact this involves commercial vehicles makes it even worse in my mind. Something goes wrong with say your Explorer, fine- they give you a loaner-more likely you rent one- but say a contractor's Transit that is set up with repair tools, parts inventory etc-not so easily replaced But that’s not nothing. The point is they would go out of their way to take care of the problem quietly and avoid bad publicity. amen FORD replaces the guibo **for free** at 30k mile intervals until the final fix is available in sufficient quantities. The final fix will be old universal style joints. Unsold units and units that break get moved up in the fix process. The original writer is mis informed. Well glad to hear this is not as reported Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 But that’s not nothing. The point is they would go out of their way to take care of the problem quietly and avoid bad publicity. They don't always. My boss bought a brand new Camry in '06, and it had a crap transaxle. He said from the way he was treated by the dealer wasn't exactly stellar, and from his own research he learned that it wasn't an isolated problem and Toyota's attitude was "that's the way it is, get used to it." As I recall, the only solution he found was to get rid of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted December 21, 2017 Share Posted December 21, 2017 BMW used that style of CV joint (a.k.a. guibo) on some of their vehicles. Lots of failures. This is an aftermarket replacement. If the center section was made in 2 pieces you could use the equivalent of a heim joint head as the flexible part. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 FORD replaces the guibo **for free** at 30k mile intervals until the final fix is available in sufficient quantities. The final fix will be old universal style joints. Unsold units and units that break get moved up in the fix process. The original writer is mis informed. I don't believe the original writer is misinformed. I reread it again after reading your post and he does not say that Ford isn't paying for the 30k interval repairs. He says very carefully: "Ford requires van owners to replace the flexible couplings “every 30,000 miles” until a permanent remedy becomes available." - Ford requires van owners to replace it.. doesn't say the van owner is footing the bill. "The plaintiff also notes the recall notice doesn't mention anything about Ford reimbursing owners for past repairs or damage caused by the driveshaft flexible coupling defect." - PAST repairs.. I'm reading and assuming they are talking about prior to the recall coming out. He is very good at making it sound like Ford isn't doing anything without saying that Ford isn't doing anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 I was talking to svc mgr at my dealer today. He confirmed that replacement is recommended at 30,000. Issue is they have a parts availability problem. I'm dropping off wifes Explorer in AM so I will confirm.."who pays at 30,000?" Then again when was job 1 for Transit? Assume they have 5 yr, 60,000 power train warranty? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packardbob Posted December 27, 2017 Share Posted December 27, 2017 If its been recalled, why would the owner pay to replace it? 1 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.