dave91gt

I am one of the posters that hate it when we get off topic and start bashing one's engine choice. I was very much on the fence when I bought my truck and pulled every resource I could find when it came to decide. One thing that should concern us is the timing and response from Ford on this issue. I cant help but draw some comparison to the 6.0 fiasco, and the 6.4 radiator leaks and condensation problems they had. Several of these engines were great, serving their owners well. But to those that had a "bad" one, it likely drove owners (justifiably so) to look at other brands. Cross shopping isn't bad but for an auto company, it is detrimental if the owner is cross shopping because they had a bad experience. Especially one that could have been a safety concern. I hope Ford gets their head out of their butt on this one. GM and Ram are swinging hard right now and Ford is throwing Eco boost challenges all over the place. Once an engine gets a bad rap (6.0), it is really hard to overcome.

Left Plate

I think people tend to forget that large corporations and engineers tend to be an arrogant bunch, and in the end, the decisions made on how to handle an issue tend to be dictated largely by the bean counters! IMO these decisions tend to favor the bottom line more than the consumer. Dosen't make it right, just seems to be the way things work anymore!

11screw50

So is it the engineers being arrogant or the bean counters making the decisions? I doubt that it is both. If the engineers are arrogant, they would be denying that a problem exists therefore the bean counters would have no decision to make however, if the engineers come up with a solution that is too costly, then the bean counters could be overruling them.

I happen to know a bunch of engineers (not Ford engineers, not even automotive engineers but licensed professional engineers nonetheless) and while some of them are arrogant, others immediately look for solutions when there is a problem.

My guess is that they are looking for a solution that fixes the problem but does so in a way that costs the least amount possible. Not always an easy task.

XFJunkie

This ^^ i know quite a few PEs in my field (Heavy Civil Construction) and I concur.

Truck owner

Here is the simple truth about auto makers. If all you guys who have been affected in the past and current with a FORD truck/product yet you go back and buy another then why should FORD be concerned or tremble over an issue. Look at Toyota, had a huge PR mess with there vehicles, there sales dipped a bit but there back to record sales. The ONLY way for FORD to care enough is if there F150 sales drop significantly and losing market share to Toyota,GM,Ram..other than that they will try to repair trucks if WARRANTY requires it, if this doesn't meet your needs then sell your truck and buy another brand. In big corp world, ONLY significant or trending lost sales will catch there attention not websites, bs boards, or lawsuits..

Left Plate

Here is what I base my opinion on. Do you remember back in the early 90's when the F series paint was peeling? And it also affected GM and Chrysler.
I was a body shop Forman far a major Ford dealership and we were making bank refinishing these trucks. At first they were not concerned about us painting over dents, then it occurred to them that this was kind of stupid! So we started to charge for body repair, as we should have.
Nobody ever came forward with a root cause of the problem, although later on during Ford certification classes one of the instructor indicated that they skipped the seal coat as a cost saving devise. And as managers get together and talk at the bar after hours, that is why it affected GM and Chrysler! At that time I had to give Ford credit for stepping up and trying to fix the issue, but the funny thing is, as far as I know, they didn't change the practice that caused the problem as it was cheaper in the long run to keep doing it that way?
So with all this, nobody at the dealership level was really getting answers. One day I had a customer come in questioning why this was happening? At the time I didn't have an answer, but I knew that a big wig from Ford was at the main store so I sent him over there. I figured get it right from the horses mouth?Needless to say, they weren't too happy with me about that! IMO they like to insulate themselves from the public so it makes it harder to hold them responsible for their decisions?

So that brings us to today where the bottom line in a down economy is scrutinized even further. Dosen't take much to figure out that the best solution is not always best for the bottom line? I also suspect that there are contracts with vendors and/or inventory that has a lot to do with the decision to put on a band-aid vs. a retrofit or re-design?

11screw50

OK, so now I am trying to figure out why you were bashing the engineers when the story you just added does not include any decisions that were likely made by engineers but plenty of decisions that were likely made by the bean counters and or mid-level managers.

Wow, hey, what if Ford's engineering team has a fix for this but the bean counters have decided that it is more cost effective to NOT implement it? Or maybe it is not even a bean counter blocking it but some mid-level manager who has no clue?

Conversely, maybe Ford's engineers have not been able to find a solution yet.

Either way, typically, the engineering staff is given a task, what is done with their work after they complete their job is out of their control.

Heck, the entire issue might not even be the design engineer's fault, someone somewhere along the way might have said hey, this part looks about the same and it's 49 cents cheaper, lets just use this. Engineering decisions do sometimes get changed by people who think they know what they are talking about but really have no clue.

Left Plate

I think you need to go back and read what I have posted. You seem to be taking this personally as I have not bashed engineers! Arrogance is not necessarily a bad trait, but can have some bad side effects? But if the engineering group presents a questionable design, then where does that responsibility lie when it fails? I think we are saying pretty much the same thing, but in a little different way? IMO at the end of the day it is the economics of a situation that is usually the dictating factor!
The point is, and has been stated here before, it seems that Ford has gone back to the 6.0 diesel play book? Didn't the "fix" for the 6.0/6.4 diesel power plant largely come from the aftermarket? I see the EcoBoost "fix" going the same way!