Jump to content

Ford Sued For Using Defective Gas Tanks in F-Series


Recommended Posts

Your last paragraph is totally correct unless it is a design flaw, which ford will never admit too.. FWIW I fullyintend to take your advice..

 

Design flaws happen. Engineers aren't perfect, you know.

 

Go for it, switch to another brand. And when you have a problem with that one, switch again. Eventually, if you can't accept the fact that all makes have problems, you will end up walking.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Design flaws happen. Engineers aren't perfect, you know.

 

Go for it, switch to another brand. And when you have a problem with that one, switch again. Eventually, if you can't accept the fact that all makes have problems, you will end up walking.

 

I give that advice frequently to people who bitch about everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Design flaws happen. Engineers aren't perfect, you know.

 

Go for it, switch to another brand. And when you have a problem with that one, switch again. Eventually, if you can't accept the fact that all makes have problems, you will end up walking.

 

It's not so much that a vehicle has problems as they all do in some way, it's really how the manufacturer deals with them. I remember back in the 80's my wife had an Accord she brought to the marriage and how I hated that car. A real pain in the ass as everything cost so much more to fix. Kind of like owning a Porsche. Anyway, the fuel tank rusted out, and took it to Honda and they installed new one free of charge. There was no recall on it, but they admitted to premature rusting and just fixed it with no arguing. Now the foor boards rusted out also in about 7 years, and they wouldn't do anything about that, but at least they owned up to fuel tank as it is a safety item and did the right thing. I will give Honda kudos for that. Sometimes you need to step up and be responsible and ethical.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Ford had learned from past mistakes and wasn't going to skimp on materials to save a few dollars in the short term and ultimately have to pay billions to fix the problem later down the road! Monetarily, it sounds like the Explorer/Firestone fiasco all over again! Ford can't afFORD to lose TRUCK customers!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Ford had learned from past mistakes and wasn't going to skimp on materials to save a few dollars in the short term and ultimately have to pay billions to fix the problem later down the road! Monetarily, it sounds like the Explorer/Firestone fiasco all over again! Ford can't afFORD to lose TRUCK customers!

 

I've owned two Ford vehicles that had class action suits against them. One was the '85 Bronco ll that had tendancy to roll over. Ford lost the suit a I remember, and what I got out of it was video from Ford showing me how to drive my Bronco ll without rolling it over!!!! Yeah! The other was my Mustang 5.0 Convertible. Forget now what suit was over, but I don't remember getting anything if Ford lost. All I know it's always better to admit your errors and not try to cover them up. Lots of examples out there. I have no idea if Ford is culpable, but even if not, better to make the customer happy if it's not a wear and tear item or victim of abuse. Personally, I don't have a problem with silent recalls if it's not a big safety problem. Customer complains, you fix it, especially if problem is not wide spread. Toyota did that for years with no big PR nightmares. So did Honda. As far as Firestone/Explorer nightmare goes, I'm not sure what Ford could have done in that they did supply owners with new tires that cost billions, and it was later proven that roll overs were result of driver error, and not some design flaw in vehicle. I don't think any cover up was ever proven. I sure hope there is no cover up in Super Duty gas tank design. That would be nightmare of highest order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Design flaws happen. Engineers aren't perfect, you know.

 

Go for it, switch to another brand. And when you have a problem with that one, switch again. Eventually, if you can't accept the fact that all makes have problems, you will end up walking.

Please read the last sentence of post #29 sums up my feeling exactly....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've owned two Ford vehicles that had class action suits against them. One was the '85 Bronco ll that had tendancy to roll over. Ford lost the suit a I remember, and what I got out of it was video from Ford showing me how to drive my Bronco ll without rolling it over!!!! Yeah! The other was my Mustang 5.0 Convertible. Forget now what suit was over, but I don't remember getting anything if Ford lost.

FYI

 

If the 5.0 was a pre-87 it was probably chassis re-enforcement - (My mother had an 85 mustang droptop back then and we got a notice about the class action)... nothing ever came of it - just made a note to myself that anything pre-87 needed 'help' in the chassis rigidity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vehicles involved are:

2004-2007 Ford E-150

2004-2007 Ford E-250

2004-2007 Ford E-350

2004-2007 Ford E-450

1999-2008 Ford F-250 SD

1999-2008 Ford F-350 SD

2003, 2005-2008 Ford F-440 SD

2005-2008 F-550 SD

2004-2008 F-650 SD

2004-2008 F-750 SD

 

Notice the F-150 is not on this list. However most copies of the report I found had a big picture of a 2004 or newer F-150. Why? Because the F-150 is the best selling of the F-Series and more likely to get attention from the reader. This coupled with the report's intentional omission of the list of vehicles that are actually involved in the law suit is proof of journalistic defect. I am launching a class action law suit against Reuters and the other copy and paste journalist for intentionally misleading readers.

Edited by F250
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vehicles involved are:

2004-2007 Ford E-150

2004-2007 Ford E-250

2004-2007 Ford E-350

2004-2007 Ford E-450

1999-2008 Ford F-250 SD

1999-2008 Ford F-350 SD

2003, 2005-2008 Ford F-440 SD

2005-2008 F-550 SD

2004-2008 F-650 SD

2004-2008 F-750 SD

 

Notice the F-150 is not on this list. However most copies of the report I found had a big picture of a 2004 or newer F-150. Why? Because the F-150 is the best selling of the F-Series and more likely to get attention from the reader. This coupled with the report's intentional omission of the list of vehicles that are actually involved in the law suit is proof of journalistic defect. I am launching a class action law suit against Reuters and the other copy and paste journalist for intentionally misleading readers.

So do u think the f-150 is not really part of this tank problem or omitted by design????
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is another one of those 6.0 diesel problems. I guess I've fixed two 7.3 E series ambulances too. It requires a complete fuel system (all 8 injectors, pump, fuel pressure regulator, and tank of course $$$). It only seems to happen on E/F350-450 and F550 with aft-axle tanks.

 

A problem we had was tank availability. A few customers had to wait 3+ months for replacement tanks. This required them to run on the midship tank, which is quite a bit smaller. Smaller than the typical F-series with just the midship tank. E series aren't equipped with dual tanks so they were just stuck.

 

They were constantly on back order for "engineering changes". These "changes" appeared to be a lack of lining in the tank. Instead of waiting for the replacement, some technicians (not at our dealer) would send the tank to a radiator shop to have them stripped and relined. I thought this was rather dangerous due to lack of testing on the lining the rad shop was using. How did they know that lining won't flake off and clog the fuel system?

 

I still stand by the theory that it is ULSD and bio content. Additives in the ULSD? Additives used to suspend bio in the fuel?

 

This is something I just didn't see before the new fuel came out. Some rusty F52 tanks due to a lot of sitting around, but not lining delamination.

 

If customers drained there water seperator every now and then like they're supposed to, they would have noticed the large silver flakes and (if they went to a repair shop) could have saved their injectors.

 

I am with you. The tank issues we have seen are just aft tanks. I am surprised the didn't put LCF on that list. We had a couple of them. Only diesels seem to be giving us issues. I have not seen any gasoline vehicles with tank problems like this. I am assuming that is because gasoline has fuel vapors inside the tank instead of air and occasional water like diesel. I do feel a lot of this is due to the quality of fuel and lack of maintenance.

 

I have noticed that the 6.7 is much more sensitive to water in fuel. It will really take you to the cleaners. We had one that the fuel tank had a large amount of water, but the WIF light was not on. After all was said and done, we put high pressure pump and 8 injectors to clear all the driveability issues. Were are talking a huge amount of $$$$. If these fuel systems are so sensitive to water/contaiments, the filter system and water seperators should be larger/better so save components up stream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do u think the f-150 is not really part of this tank problem or omitted by design????

 

F150 is not involved

 

You would know this if the report had bothered to include the list I provided.

 

Since the best selling F-150 is not involved why did most reports include pictures of the F-150? To get the most reader attention regardless of the facts.

Edited by F250
Link to comment
Share on other sites

F150 is not involved

 

You would know this if the report had bothered to include the list I provided.

 

Since the best selling F-150 is not involved why did most reports include pictures of the F-150? To get the most reader attention regardless of the facts.

Thanx for the info it is good news for me.....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...