fordtech1 Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/ford/2017/03/23/ford-shelby-gt-issue/99527864/ I would like to know the details. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YT90SC Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 They DIDN'T check the box for the Track Package. They bought base or Tech package cars. No track pack, no coolers. Where is their leg to stand on in this? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordtech1 Posted March 24, 2017 Author Share Posted March 24, 2017 I'd be interested in finding out what conditions these vehicles are subjected through. I'm sure they have to be pretty intense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 What a stupid lawsuit....if anything, Ford would provide the coolers to the affected plaintiffs.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuzzymoomoo Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 What a stupid lawsuit....if anything, Ford would provide the coolers to the affected plaintiffs.... Its not that simple, it would require a transmission replacement. The cars that don't have transmission coolers equipped don't even have the ports for it in the casing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Stupid $%&*@! ambulance chasers. There are 8-10 of these sleazebags running constant commercials in Atlanta. "In a wreck? Get a check!". It's the new welfare system. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 I just checked the 2017 order guide, and the Track package has been deleted and the Track package contents have been made standard now: The following features are Standard Equipment:Aluminum Tower to Tower Brace, Engine Oil,Transmission and Differential Coolers, MagneRide™Damping System I bet that's what spurred the lawsuit. "Oh hey, Ford is acknowledging they screwed up not putting those features on non-Track pkg cars. Let's go sue them!" Still a stupid meritless lawsuit but there are stupid juries out there who just might side with them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 GT350R R = Race Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 GT350R R = Race GT350 Track Pack = Track Use Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Theres been reports of people driving the car in a "normal"* manner and the car going into limp mode from the heat * define normal use...up the user. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 (edited) It will be interesting to read Ford's response to this, I think there's a moral obligation to make good on owner's expectations but also the press from having such a glaring issue with a prominent Mustang will surely irk a lot of potential buyers... This is part ambulance chaser but also Ford cheaping out on the base GT350 by not permitting those early buyers to access track pack as well as the tech pack. The fact that Ford added the main elements of the track pack as standard in the '17 cars but also charged more for them are also points for consideration......was the original base car deficient for intended customers? That maes sense when we realize that Ford takes the apex car, the GT350 R and de-contents it down to a level where an acceptable sales number is guaranteed. I think on the early cars, the base version was a littl underdone in terms of heat control and limp mode issues. The expectation when buying a $50K Mustang is obviously different to that of a $32K GT, Ford needs to recognize that and hold out an olive branch to owners, lest this action results in burned bridges and unnecessary bad press...they should have make this go away quietly. Edited March 24, 2017 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 (edited) Theres been reports of people driving the car in a "normal"* manner and the car going into limp mode from the heat * define normal use...up the user. Covered by warranty? Ford actually covers the cars for track days provided owners don't directly compete with others... That and the fact that Ford saw fit to add track pack elements as mandatory to the '17s is in itself is fodder for this case. I'm not siding with the ambulance chasers here but Ford should have manages this much better than it did. A manual gearbox subject to so much heat that it requires a cooler is quite an astonishing miss and smacks of de-contenting at its very worst as they can't even be retro-fitted with cooler because there's no bosses in the gearbox castings. Edited March 24, 2017 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 What Ford should do is offer to buy back the vehicles at FMV and sell them a 2017 at a-plan price. Period. End of story. And that's only for PR and customer service purposes, not because they legally owe them anything. You can't consciously turn down the track pack and then complain that you can't abuse it on the track for more than 20 minutes. And I'm sure the non track incidents were also cases of abuse. I think Ford assumed that buyers wanted a nice street car or a track car but not both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 (edited) Correct and those assumptions have now proven to be in error as Ford now includes those main elements in the revised '17 cars as compulsory and added price. The '15 & '16 owners shouldn't have been forced to choose between track and tech. Offering buy back deals is an excellent idea and gets the lawyers offf the table and owners into cars they will just loves Heck there mightn't be as many complaints as the lawyers make out..... I'm not a fan of the adversarial approach. Edited March 25, 2017 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Correct and those as The '15 & '16 owners shouldn't have been forced to choose between track and tech. That's really not the point. They had a choice and they chose wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 That and the fact that Ford saw fit to add track pack elements as mandatory to the '17s is in itself is fodder for this case.. Maybe it only means that the previous models had underwritten enough of the cost that Ford could make it standard equipment without jacking the price of the car. Or maybe its take rate was high enough that it making it standard was more cost-effective than keeping it as an option. IMHO, it's just ambulance chasers chasing ambulances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Maybe it only means that the previous models had underwritten enough of the cost that Ford could make it standard equipment without jacking the price of the car. Or maybe its take rate was high enough that it making it standard was more cost-effective than keeping it as an option. Not really, the '17 car came with both higher price and track packs parts included. . Ford realizing that the basic car needs to have those pieces and buyers paying for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 Not really, the '17 car came with both higher price and track packs parts included. . Ford realizing that the basic car needs to have those pieces and buyers paying for them. And having a high enough take rate (or a take rate on the upswing) in previous years to make it standard equipment would be the simpler explanation. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 (edited) And having a high enough take rate (or a take rate on the upswing) in previous years to make it standard equipment would be the simpler explanation. Yeah, I get that and absolutely backed up by the broader use of magneride as an option on the regular GTs. It's like Ford evolved the Mustang to get similar equipment as given to the Camaro but without all the hoopla. The track pack as standard is understandable but the customer is still paying the $6,500 premium so no price reduction for buyer but obviously, more streamlined build proces for Ford. Perhaps if Ford had their time over they would have made the coolers standard..from what i see that's the only area that was really deficient from an otherwise well planned out car / guesstimate of various options. And really, if you're correct about good take reates, we're probably not talking about many affected cars at all. the buyback idea may in fact be a much easier solution than trying to make good on the base cars. Edited March 25, 2017 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted March 25, 2017 Share Posted March 25, 2017 (edited) That's really not the point. They had a choice and they chose wrong. Only 27% of the 2016 GT350 production was fitted with track Pack...:ILINK So at worst, there's about 1500 odd cars that don't have coolers on them but not all those folks will be part of the Suit either. I wouldn't like to go down the road of blaming the buyer of being stupid when the salesman would probably be right there telling them there's not that much difference. As I said above but for the fact of mission coolers,, all car would have been great and as road cars still are for people who never intend putting their car on the track. I wonder if these lawyers actually get much traction with this suit, seems to me a simpler solution is at hand... Edited March 25, 2017 by jpd80 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.