Weldreality
Home Page.
TIP TIG Welding
Home Page
TIG Welding
All Weld and Steels Programs
Ed's Process Control Training Materials
MIG Welding
Steels   > 4mm
MIG Welding
Steels < 4mm
Pulsed MIG Welding
MIG Welding Gases
MIG Welders And Equipment
Robots & Weld Management
Robots and MIG
Welding Tips
TIG Welding Tips
MIG / Flux Cored
Pipe Welding
Welding Advice
Welding Forum
Ed's Bio / Contact
Ed's Weld Projects

Welding Books

MIG Welding Book, Management
A Management & Engineers Guide to MIG Weld Quality, Productivity and Costs

Gas Metal Arc Welding Book
Manual and Robotic (MIG) Gas Metal Arc Welding Book

MIG and Flux Core Welding Book
Flux Cored and MIG weld process controls

Manual MIG Welding Book
Manual MIG Welding Process Control

(Also in Spanish)
" Proceso de Soldadur MIG Manual "

Welding CD's

Robot Welding CD
Robot MIG welding. Best Weld Practices and Process Controls

MIG Welding CD
Manual MIG Welding. Best Weld Practices and Process Controls

Flux Core Welding CD
Flux Cored Best Weld Practices and Process Controls

MIG Welding Process Controls
DVD Film "MIG Process Controls Made Simple"

Order these MIG Welding or Flux Cored Training Materials Now




     
 
ED CRAIG. www.weldreality.com.

The world's largest website on MIG - Flux Cored - TIG Welding


Bad weld cars and trucks

Advanced TIP TIG Welding
TIP TIG Welding is always better quality than TIG and 100 to 500% faster with superior quality than TIG - MIG - FCAW.

 
 
   



Weld Isues on Cars
and Trucks.

 

I placed the above text in this picture in 2000
and 15 years later read the next paragraph.

Section 1.

2015: CHRYSLER: IMPORTANT AXLE SAFETY RECALL N26 / NHTSA 13V-239

This notice applies to vehicles (VIN: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx). This notice is sent in accordance with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Chrysler has decided that a defect, which relates to motor vehicle safety, exists in some 2012 model year RAM Truck Cab Chassis (4500/5500 series) trucks equipped with four wheel drive.

The problem is the front axle tube welds on the  trucks may not have been welded correctly during the manufacturing process. Improperly welded front axle tubes could allow the differential housing to rotate under high torque operating conditions while in four wheel drive. Should the front axle tube welds break, the differential could rotate and cause the front propeller shaft universal joint to break. This can result in a loss of motive power or damage to surrounding components if the propeller shaft continues to spin after separation. This could cause a crash without warning.


Axle weld issues are common in the auto - truck industy and the weld reality is with either robots or manual welds, these are the easiest applications to weld on any vehicle..


A look at Auto / Truck Industry:
Manufacturing Management,
Product Recalls and Accountability.

 


The greatest opportunity for dramatic weld productivity / quality improvements, and also for weld cost reductions, is typically found in large weld
shops and ship yards and especially in just about every global plant that provides robot MIG welds on car and truck parts.

 

 

 


Welding and Mfg. Management:

 


Robot welds that daily require weld rework,
ARE AN INDICATION OF WHAT?


 

 

GLOBAL MANUFACTURING, MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERS:

The latest ISO, Six Sigma and Lean Manufacturing practices and standards have been successfully implemented. The company has never had more Black Belts wrapped around over sized waists walking the factory floors,
yet from a manufacturing perspective it did not matter which direction you looked, the evidence of lack of manufacturing process controls was overwhelming and the weld rework bins are always over flowing.


I wrote the following in 2005: For the first time in this corporation's history, this companies global auto / truck recall costs in 2005 surpassed two billion dollars. Sounds unreal, take your pick, Chrysler, Ford, GM and many tier one companies easily meet this criteria..
Now come forward to 2015 and the annual recalls, rejects and rework costs from these and other global auto companies will typically far surpass the companies profits

AT THE LOCAL LEVEL: In production plant "B" in the old Detroit facility, the daily robot weld production efficiency was typically less than 60%, the down time was excessive and the manual weld rework required was in the 40 to 70% range. The management solution, " PURCHASE MORE ROBOTS" ....




The customers manufacturing & quality ignorance,
provides relief for many of the auto / truck manufacturers:

If auto / truck customers truly understood the requirements for weld integrity and the role vehicle designers intend their welds to play both in the vehicle life and more importantly when a vehicle is in a collision, we would have more people crawling under that car or truck before they put their money down.

In manufacturing and "welding" steel components for cars and trucks, their is little evidence from North American, Japanese or European manufacturers of the establishment of effective
"Robot Weld Process Controls" and absolutely no sign of any multi-plant, international corporations establishing "Global Robot Weld Best Practices".


I have been in numerous auto / truck facilities in ten different countries and rarely found a manufacturing manager that understood the real robot weld production efficiency from his robots and more importantly how to control weld cost / quality and keep the daily ro
bot weld rework to less than 2%.




2004. Robot frame welds on the world's best selling trucks:



WELDS AND PRODUCT LIABILITY:


Many of the poor welds witnessed for decades in auto / truck plants, along with the overwhelming evidence of corporate / manufacturing management process control apathy will one day provide the ammunition lawyers require. It will not take rocket science to prove that a critical structural component failure of a car / truck in a crash, was partially a result of MIG welds on the vehicle that lacked weld integrity. Lawyers will readily find evidence of poor quality welds due to "manufacturing management / engineering negligence".




Each day thousands die in vehicle collisions, yet how many may have
lived if the vehicle welds and structure were built in the manner the
designer and manufacturing instructions required?

 

 

 

Defective Welds and Recall Terminology.

defective weld1998: You will rarely see a car or truck recall for "defective welds", as they would have to replace almost every global vehicle and the costs and liability amifications could be extensive .

Lets face it, an auto or truck manufacturer will take great care in it's "product failure descriptions to avoid the words "weld failure". For example if a company discloses that the truck or car frame has a structural defect issue, it's typically an indication of a major manufacturing process control break down and therefore that break down will typically cover more than a single small defect. Also most high steel parts subject to weld repairs will be carried out at body shops who are not qualified to carry out the repairs so that the repaired product is now in compliance with the orgional design criteria with the mechanical properties specified.

A repeating major weld defect on high volume welded parts would point to the inability of manufacturing management and engineers to regulate and optimize a simple, two control, 50 year old manufacturing process, a process that could I could teach an 11 year old to learn and control in a few hours.





 

It's only an ASME pipe MIG weld..


Ed teaching Jesse 11 years old,
in a few hours how to MIG weld a pipe.

 

 

 


Robot - Manual weld failures initiate from "Bad Weld Practices" and
a management's apathy - ignorance on "Weld Process Controls"

weld failure


When weld issues are discovered on a vehicle, you are likely to see the weld issue recall notice announce something like this;

[]
this recall is due to a "design suspension, axle or body ISSUE"
[] this recall is due an "integrity issue in the suspension",
[] this recall is due to a "component issue near the rear axle",
[] this recall is due to a "defective, door, latch, lug, bracket, bolt nut etc.".






It was a brand new $26,000 LEMON

 

MOST AUTO / TRUCK CUSTOMERS WILL NOT KNOW THEY HAVE A WELD OR VEHICLE WELD FABRICATION PROBLEM, THAT IS, TILL THEY END UP IN HOSPITAL OR FACE UP IN A COFFIN. Ed Craig. DEC 2005:




Note: The complete lack of weld fusion and the poor visual weld appearence that would have told anyone in the front office that this weld was destined to fail.




WHEN YOU GAIN ROBOT AND MANUAL WELD PROCESS CONTROL - BEST PRACTICE KNOWLEDGE, (ED'S WELD PROCESS CONTROL TRAINING RESOURCES),
YOU WILL NOT MAKE WELDS LIKE THESE.

 

From steels to aluminum welds, in the majority of
auto / truck plants, you will find weld quality issues.

 

This robot truck weld macro indicates it has 200% more weld than it required, yet the weld joint is greatly weakened by the excess undercut. And another fact that impacts the costs, the robot required 70 % more time than it should have to make the welds, Small points lost on this Tier One company management and engineers.




2006. APPROX. 10 BILLION DOLLARS WAS SPENT THIS YEAR IN THE
AUTO / TRUCK INDUSTRY ON PRODUCT RECALLS AND WARRANTY ISSUES.
JOE, YOU TELL ME. ARE WE BLOODY WELL MANUFACTURING TO CREATE PROFITS OR MANUFACTURING TO PAY FOR THE COSTS OF REWORK, REJECTS AND RECALLS?


In a world where too many managers and engineers have shied away from weld manufacturing equipment and process ownership, this web site as it has for the last 15 years, remains dedicated to
the required manufacturing management and engineer
"Accountability - Responsibility and Ownership"

 

 

 


2007: As many auto part suppliers slowly sink towards chapter 11 or simply dissapear, and the global auto - truck mfg. executives bathe in their own design / manufacturing mediocrity, many of the corporate executives in this industry will sit back in their Ivory Towers, and place the responsibility for their poor mfg quality / productivity performance and the resulting annual profit quagmire on the trade unions and their wage demands, on the medical costs, on the pension costs, and with the ever changing so called third world labor costs. How often will you hear these same executives discuss the billions their companies have been loosing annualy for decades, costs on rejects, rework, recalls and warranty issues?

 



Manufacturing Managers, have you visited the
robot process control management
section?

 

 

WANT TO KNOW WHAT SOME AT FORD EXECUTIVES
THINKS THEIR CUSTOMERS ARE WORTH?

2000. The US Senate , after a "rolling block" passed a watered down version of a consumer protection bill addressing the issues of tires and auto manufacturers withholding safety information from the government and the public. Apparently, a few of the more cretinish senators didn't want to impose criminal penalties on corporate CEOs who, with intent, withheld public safety information. This is the result of your auto manufacturer's lobby and money at work -- for them, not for you. Shouldn't every tire and auto manufacturer be able to make unsafe or defective products with impunity? Apparently, your government believes so. It may have been Ford that calculated the value of a human life to be approximately $200,000 when it decided not to replace or re-engineer a potentially defective part, because it would have cost the company more money to do. For more, visit, ttp://www.autobuyology.org/car6.html



Remember this web site is not about the latest car or truck recalls, I would have to hire a team just to keep up with that demand. The random recall information provided here barely touches the surface of the real recall issues.

The recall data presented here is simply to show the reader the scope of the issues and to emphasize that global manufacturing management chaos and mediocrity is today the norm and few auto / truck executives appear accountable for their manufacturing end results.

As the total annual recall / warranty costs typically exceed 10 billions, it's logical to assume that global auto manufacturers would rather not conduct recalls or pay for unnecessary warranty work, and lets face it, manufacturing defects do little for a companies reputation and future sales. The sad reality however for the car / truck purchaser, is only a micro amount of a car's or trucks problems will be identified by the majority of the vehicle manufacturers. It's ironic in 2005 that Toyota reported more vehicle recall problems than Chrysler, the question that consumers could ask is did Chrysler report all the vehicle problems it was aware of?

It's a sad statement that once your warranty is up, too often you are on your own, even though the vehicle manufacture may have been aware that the defects you report thirty days after the warranty has expired were there the day the vehicle left the plant. It's also a reality in 2005 that many of the major global auto manufacturers are experts in defect denial, defect cover ups and keeping major problems isolated from the public in a cocoon of secret warranties and technical service bulletins.

The defects you will find at this site are not unusual and in many cases look similar to the manufacturing issues this industry had in the nineteen sixties, (see Ford Pinto Defects ). The majority of defects noted at this site also have much in common with the other auto / truck manufacturers and the amount of defects are almost overwhelming to keep up with.

 

 


2006: THE PRICE OF MFG APATHY - MEDIOCRITY:

At this time in the history of vehicle manufacturing recalls mediocrity and the never ending costly warranty work required, the associated quality costs are pushing many of the major auto / truck companies and their suppliers towards eventual bankruptcy.



 

 

 

ONE OF THE MANY GREAT VEHICLE COVER UPS.


Mitsubishi recalls over a million of its vehicles self-admittedly stating they are poorly built vehicles. Mitsubishi also reportedly acknowledges that it hid consumer safety complaints for the past ten years.

Mitsubishi Motors and Mitsubishi Fuso Truck and Bus had recalls, that combined to 2,869,366 vehicles, or 38 percent of the tally for the entire country. Last year, Mitsubishi Motors disclosed that it failed to come clean five years ago and had more hidden defects. Both companies have seen sales plunge in recent years over the scandal.

Kude said a recent cover-up of auto defects at Mitsubishi Motors Corp. and its truck making affiliate Mitsubishi Fuso Truck and Bus Corp have had led motorists to be more vigilant about notifying authorities of possible defects or safety concerns.

Note from Ed: Many people are in prison today for smoking a joint, and these guys like the greedy bankers and crooked on the take politicians will likely end up with a slap on the wrist or by paying a fine.

 

ABC News: ORLANDO, Fla. Oct. 12, 2005 — AAA and the National Fire Protection Association will issue a warning tomorrow about car fires. ABC News has learned that last year, 266,000 car fires resulted in 520 deaths, the organizations say. "It was a horrible explosion," said one car fire victim Bob Aymar, who, in less than a minute, suffered third degree burns on his face, hands and arm. He was sprayed by a gasoline fireball during a violent traffic accident on a Southern California freeway. "The Bronco behind me was hit and it ruptured the gas tank," said Aymar, who, after seven surgeries, was finally able to play the piano again. He is just one of more than 1,300 car fire victims every year. According to the NFPA, cars catch fire on American highways once every two minutes. "The risk of a car or vehicle fire is even greater than the risk of an apartment fire. More people die in vehicle fires than in apartment fires each year in the United States," said AAA President Robert Darblenet.

 

266,000 CAR - TRUCK FIRES IN USA. 520 DEATHS & 1300 FIRE VICTIMS.
I CALL THIS "MFG WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION"


The fires are again simply reflection of design and manufacturing engineering
issues found in so many vehicles....Is anyone going to tke responsibility?

 

 

 



Are these "Management Issues?"

 

AFTER BUILDING THEM FOR 100 PLUS YEARS, YOU THINK THAT QUALITY WOULD MEAN MORE THAN A WORD IN A LOGO.

Warning for those that have just purchased that new car or truck and are unfortunate to end up in a vehicle crash, please remember as the sound of screeching tires and tearing metal invades your body and your senses;

[] the tires may tear apart,
[] the seat belt brackets may not hold,
[] the steering wheel may fall off,
[] the seat welds may collapse,
[] frame and body welds will tear apart when they should have held,
[] the air bags may get stuck,
[] the axles welds may fails and the axles will collapse,
[] the
wheels may drop off,
and if you survive the crash, the poorly designed and poorly built gas tank will start to
leak and premature cremation is a good possibility.



When you see the fireman in the following recalls you know why when you buy a new car or truck your first accessory should be a fire extinguisher.





Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

Ford recalling 1.2 million trucks and vans recall is in addition to 4.6 million recalled last year for potential fire hazard.

August 4 2006: 10:45 AM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Ford Motor Co. is recalling 1.2 million large pick-up trucks, SUVs and vans because of a problem with the vehicles' cruise control system that could lead to a fire. This recall is in addition to a total of 4.6 million Ford vehicles that were recalled for the same problem last year.

The vehicles being recalled are: certain model year 1994 to 2002 F-250 through F-550 Super Duty trucks; 2000-2002 Excursion SUVs; 1994 to 1996 Econoline vans; 1996 to 2002 E-450 vans and 1998 Ford Explorer and Mercury Mountaineer SUVs. Diesel-powered vehicles are not affected.

In rare cases, the company said in a letter to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, brake fluid can leak through the cruise control deactivation switch causing corrosion in the switch. This can cause the switch to overheat and possibly burn. The switch shuts off the cruise control when the driver firmly steps on the brakes. The switch is located under the hood of the vehicle and is attached to the brake master cylinder on one end and wired to the cruise control on the other. On most of its models, Ford designed the switch to be powered -- or "hot" -- at all times, even when the vehicle is off. Inside the switch, a thin film barrier separates brake fluid from the switch's electrical components.

In January, 2005, Ford recalled approximately 800,000 F-150 pick-ups for the problem. Later that year, after numerous Ford owners complained that their vehicles caught fire when their engines were off and the keys weren't in the ignition, CNN launched an investigation into fires in Ford vehicles that had not been recalled .

In September, 2005, Ford recalled certain Bronco, Expedition, Lincoln Blackwood and Lincoln Navigator SUVs as well well as some Ford Ford F-150 and F-250 pick-ups for the same problem. A total of 3.8 million vehicles were recalled at that time. Ford stopped using the switch in 2002.

Associated Press:
WASHINGTON:
TRUCKS:

2005: Ford and Toyota, two of the world's largest auto manufacturers, today recalled nearly 5 million pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles in separate moves to respond to concerns of engine fires and problems with the power-steering system. The recall by Ford Motor Co., the fifth-largest auto industry recall in US history, involved 3.8 million pickups and SUVs from the 1994-2002 model years, including
the top-selling F-150 pickup.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Ford have been investigating complaints of engine fires linked to the cruise control switch system.

Toyota Motor Corp., meanwhile, recalled 978,000 sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks over complaints that a rod linking the steering wheel and the wheels could fracture when the steering wheel is turned while the vehicle is stopped. The affected Toyota vehicles include the 1990-1995 4 Runner SUV, 1989-1995 truck 4WD and 1993-1998 T-100 pickup.

In the Ford case, NHTSA said Wednesday it was reviewing 1,170 allegations of engine fires related to the vehicles and would continue a probe launched earlier this year. There have been allegations of three deaths in cases cited in news reports or lawsuits in Iowa, Georgia and Arkansas.

Ford's recall includes the 1994-2002 F-150, 1997-2002 Ford Expedition, 1998-2002 Lincoln Navigator and 1994-1996 Ford Bronco equipped with factory-installed speed control. It covers most of the vehicles being evaluated by NHTSA. Ford said its inquiry found brake fluid could leak through the cruise control's deactivation switch into the system's electrical components, leading to potential corrosion. That could lead to a buildup of electrical current that could cause overheating and a fire.

 

 

CARS OR TRUCKS, WELD - MECHANICAL OR ELECTRICAL ISSUES, the end results can be deadly.

 

 

 

2005: Filed under:
Automotive News

Ford recalling over 225,000 cars over fire risks

American auto giant Ford is finding itself in more trouble. If falling sales and dropping market share was not bad enough, it now has a huge PR crisis in its hand. The company is recalling over 225,000 vehicles over possible fire risks. These vehicles were sold in markets of US and Canada and include some popular vehicles like Ford Five Hundred sedan and Freestyle wagon. Most of the vehicles being recalled are from the 2005-model year and include the Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, Mercury Grand Marquis and Montego sedans. The recall includes 127,493 Ford Five Hundred and Mercury Montego sedans and Freestyle wagons. These have issues with their straps that secure the fuel tank to the vehicle body.

Another recall includes 98,444 Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, and Mercury Grand Marquis sedans. These recalls are related to the battery cable, which might scrape on an attaching bolt and could lead to a fire. This is bad time for such a publicity disaster for a company, which is suffering huge losses in its domestic market. And this latest recalls come just a few months after they had to recall nearly 4 million vehicles in September because of the risk of engine fires.

 

At the end of the day Joe, manufacturing defects are not a result of our robots or people on the shop floors, the defects are a result of inadequate design, poor engineering, poor manufacturing practices and inadequate quality control.

 

Vehicle fire data has some experts fuming.

Posted in the Sun, Dec. 11, 2005
By PAUL WENSKE.
Columnist

Partial Column.

Some safety experts are increasingly concerned that many vehicle fires are going unreported to government agencies. AAA in October drew attention to the danger of car fires by reporting that 520 persons died in highway vehicle fires in 2004 — more than
the number who died in apartment fires.

The automobile association said there were more than 266,500 vehicle
fires,
resulting in 1,300 injuries and nearly $1 billion in property damage.

But Clarence Ditlow, head of the Center for Auto Safety, a Washington-based consumer advocacy group, said AAA’s fire figures were “just the tip of the iceberg.” An estimated 500 to 1,000 fatal accidents involving fires never get reported as fire-related deaths, said Kennerly Digges, president of the Motor Vehicle Fire Research Institute, an independent nonprofit group based in Charlottesville, Va, specializing in automobile fire safety research.

In September, Ford recalled cruise control switches on 3.8 million 1994-2002 Ford pickups and SUVs that can overheat. But critics think the system can be made better by digging deeper into the causes of vehicle fires. They say the government’s two main databases suffer from serious information gaps and miss many non-crash fires.

Some experts say the Fatality Analysis Reporting System database can miss incidents because it was designed only to collect data on fatal accidents on public highways. To be counted, a car must be “in transport” — in other words: moving. Cars catching fire in driveways, along the shoulders of roads or in garages were’t always counted. Many problems stem simply from a failure to report fires correctly, said James Fell, research director at the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation. Fell said as many as half of all states appeared to underreport car fire deaths, often by simply failing to include death certificates with police reports.

THE REAL FACTS RARELY COME TO THE SURFACE.....“If the police don’t list a fire in their report, the death does not get reported as a "fire-related death” Fell said.


But the reporting codes used by firefighters to report vehicle fires are the same ones used for fires in apartment complexes, homes and even skyscrapers. A country wide coding system specifically for car fires does not exist. Fires that start in cars but spread to houses, where they sometimes cause deaths, are reported as structural fires.


A local case illustrates just how easy it is for a car fire to go unreported.

Pam Tarr said her parent’s 2001 Buick LeSabre filled with smoke last year as they were driving near Kansas City. After pulling over, flames shot from the floor between the front and back seats. Tarr’s father died of a heart attack after exiting the vehicle. The fire department reported the fire but not the cause, and did not list the death as fire-related. Apparently, in part because the car was not moving, the fire and death do not appear in the National Transportation Safety Administration’s database. Kevin Stanley, the family’s attorney, said the lack of reporting shows that there “should be a priority to find what causes car fires. That isn’t done now.”


A note from Ed:
If you are unfortunate enough to own one of the thousands of vehicles that could catch on fire due to the numerous issues that seem to occur mostly from manufacturing defects with the electrical system, fuel lines or fuel tanks, when the vehicle starts to burn there is only one logical thing that I would do.
If my vehicle catches on fire, I will exit promptly, mutter some expletives about useless, f- - - - - g North American Manufacturing Managers and then let the vehicle burn to the ground. With the insurance proceeds I would likely buy a Toyota or Honda.

 

 

Common auto / truck frame welds.


With some welds I wanted to say, please don't drop the parts.

If you tried to create a weld like this with almost
no weld fusion it would be a difficult task

 

 

According to Reuters:

 

Ford Quietly Fixing Expedition Weld Faults:

Ford, plagued by early quality problems with redesigned vehicles over the last two years, has been quietly fixing a defect on hundreds of new Expedition sport utility vehicles that could have led to an embarrassing recall. The problem involved faulty welding in the rear suspension area of early production models of the full-size SUV, which Ford began building in April at its Michigan Truck assembly plant outside Detroit. Ford held back the first month's production of 2003 Expedition and the similar Lincoln Navigator for extra quality checks and caught the problem before any vehicles were shipped to dealers. The work was being carried out in a hangar of the Willow Run airport near Ann Arbor, Michigan, which sits alongside a tightly secured parking field where Ford has held many of its new trucks, clad in white plastic sheeting, since April. Ford wanted to avoid the negative publicity that would have come with a recall after the recalls of the new Explorer in 2002 and the Escape in 2000.






Ford GM and Chrysler executive management could ask themselves a few simple questions.

What's happened to the more than a billion dollars your organizations
have spent on ISO, LEAN MFG DYNAMIC CONTROL PLANS. SIX SIGMA. TOPS. DOE. FMEA. KAIZEN. KANBAN. MRP. J.I.T. T.Q.M. SPC. POKE. YOKE. AND LAST BUT NOT LEAST THE BIG JOKE.

While your companies embraced the many available lean / manufacturing control programs or crutches that seem to be a requirement by organizations and individuals who lack manufacturing expertise, where were the;

[] professional managers that provided the required leadership. Managers that stated "the buck stops here". Managers that actually took ownership of the key manufacturing equipment in their facilities?

[] professional managers who had the ability to nurture their engineers and technicians to establish global, uniform Best Manufacturing and Quality Practices?

[] professional managers who could instruct their engineers to implement Process Controls that would guarantee the desired daily quality and productivity?

[] professional mangers who knew what was required for an effective training program?

[] designers who took an interest in weld processes used on their parts and followed through on the components they designed and did not enable design dimensional deviations or inferior products to replace the products they specified?

[] manufacturing engineers that rolled up their sleeves and built the parts as specified?

[] the corporate executives who had the leadership and vision to build a safe, stylish, quality vehicle that required low fuel consumption and was good value for a consumers buck.

As these corporate guys pick up their annual bonus, someone should write on the back of there bonus checks that "responsibility for design, engineering and manufacturing always starts with the leadership in the corporate office"

 

 

For more than two decades it looked like the Big
Three were intent on buiding Wall-Mart cars?


 

Corporate Questions for Auto / Truck Executives:

[] Why do the majority of North American cars you build all look the same and look like they are in the right place when parked outside a Wall-mart store?

[] Why have your auto / truck product recall / warranty costs now surpassed the medical insurance benefits you pay your employee's?

[] When looking for across the board cost reductions, why do you focus on employee benefit costs or lower overseas labor costs and never focus on the dramatic cost savings that could be attained from manufacturing recall or warranty cost reductions?

[] Why do you continue to award your manufacturing management and supervision with obscene bonuses at a time when their manufacturing production efficiency is rarely attained without overtime premiums?

[] Why do so many of the managers and engineers you hire lack the ability or resources to build parts without extensive rework, parts that actually comply to the engineering design standards provided?

[] Why do we keep letting your bean counters influence design, engineering and quality?

[] Why do so many of your plants lack the fundamental ability to establish Global Best Manufacturing Practices and implement effective shop floor Process Controls?

[] When did you stop valuing the opinions of your engineers, technicians and customers.

 

The following are typical examples of auto / truck MANUFACTURING MANAGEMENT problems that typically occur. If you wish to contribute your quality / productivity stories to this section or any of the data provided you believe is incorrect, contact Ed at ecraig@weldreality.com.

 

 


June 2006.

While Michigan and Ohio turn
into a rust belt, Ford looks to invest
9.2 Billion dollars in Mexico.



When he started Ford Motor company, Henry Ford's philosophy was to pay workers above the norm, and rely on efficient assembly of the affordable cars he built. The high pay to the workers would then enable the employees to buy their own vehicles and so began the great American Dream.

 

In 2006 as Ford shuts down American plants, Ford Motor company announces approx 9.2 billion dollar investment in Mexican plants.

 

 

 

 

Whats that American Dream?

Boys when you come home you will find
great jobs available at new
companies like Wallmart and McDonalds.

 

 

More bad welds at Ford.

Thanks to inexperienced Ford manufacturing management and engineer, Ford is recalling 87,515 F-250, F-350, F-450 and F-550 trucks from the 2008 model year to fix improper seat welds. The recall is expected to begin on March 24.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's recall summary says "some 40 percent split and captain's chair driver seats, equipped with lumbar supports, may have improper welds at the joint of the seatback pivot bracket and the seatback frame. In the event of a crash, the seat side pivot bracket may crack or break, increasing the risk of injury to the seat occupant."

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

RECALL: 2004 Ford Ranger:

NHTSA Campaign Number: 04V331000 www.nhtsa.dot.gov
Manufacturer FORD MOTOR CO.

Recall Date: 07/14/2004
Potential Number Of Units Affected: 1395

Description STRUCTURE: FRAME AND MEMBERS:UNDERBODY SHIELDS

Summary: ON CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, THE FRAME MAY HAVE A CENTER RAIL SECTION FLANGE THAT WAS NOT FORMED PROPERLY. Consequence.... IN THE EVENT OF A SIDE IMPACT CRASH, THE FRAME RAIL COULD PUNCTURE THE FUEL TANK, RESULTING IN A FUEL LEAK THAT IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE, COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

2000: A judge in Alameda County, California ordered Ford Motor Company to recall millions of its vehicles (various models) made between 1983 and 1995 - due to faulty and potentially hazardous ignition switches (thick, or thin film type) which causes vehicles to stall out when they heat up during use. Ford denies that the switches are defective and promises to appeal the decision.

The affected vehicles include: 1994-2002 model F-150s, 1997-2002 Expeditions, 1998-2002 Navigators and 1994-1996 Broncos equipped with factory-installed speed control.

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:
Ford Recalls 220,000 '05 Vehicles
.
Nov 16, 2005 4:18 pm US / Eastern
WASHINGTON (AP) Ford Motor Co. recalled about 220,000 vehicles from the 2005 model year on Wednesday amid concerns that a battery cable was rubbing against the vehicle frame, potentially causing fires, and that a fuel tank strap could separate after logging tens of thousands of miles. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration stated that so far it has received four reports of fires.

The company's investigation found that the manufacturer of the strap changed to a weaker grade of steel in December 2004, a grade that could not meet Ford's durability requirements. Ford declined to disclose the supplier's identity.

Note fro
m Ed. So much for manufacturing management standards & the millions Ford & its suppliers spent on ISO.

 

IF I OWNED A FORD VAN, RATHER THAN PARK IT IN THE GARAGE
I WO
ULD LIKELY PARK IT NEAR A FIRE HYDRANT:

Ford Motor Co. issues a pair of safety recalls on certain '03-'04 E-Series full size vans and is asking dealers to ensure that some of the vehicles not be parked in enclosed structures due to fears of unattended engine fires. The auto maker is calling back E-Series Econoline work vans and Club Wagon passenger vans built between April 23, 2002, and April 30, 2004. The recalls regard two different safety problems, both of which could potentially lead to vehicle fires, according to two recall notices provided to Ward's.All affected vehicles were built at Ford's Lorain, OH, assembly operation. About 235,000 Econoline vans built between 2002 and 2003 are being called back to replace defective parts associated with the vehicle's antilock brake system. A diode in the ABS could short itself out, leading to overheating even in unattended vehicles. Because of the risk of unattended vehicle fires, Ford is warning against parking affected vehicles in enclosed structures, such as garages and parking structures.


Additionally, Ford is recalling all E-Series vans with gasoline engines built between April 2002 and April 2004, including the affected Econolines, because air-filter paper was not properly manufactured. The paper is unable to prevent the filter from igniting when hot particles in the engine air system contact it, therefore leading to potential engine fires.


 


IT DOE'S NOT SEEM TO MATTER IF IT'S
MADE BY THE CANADIANS OR THE YANKS.



The Ford Windstar
and Manufacturing Management:

We purchased a brand new Canadian made Ford Windstar in 1999. When we drove it off the lot we noticed mechanical problems already occurring.

[a] The cruise control was not hooked up properly, we should of known then we were in for trouble.

[b] We have had a continual ping in the engine that the Ford motor company has told us we basically have to live with. "We can't seem to find the problem".

[c] When the car was two years old we noticed a leak coming from the back window. We took it in to Ford and they said not to worry it was just a bad weld and they fixed it. Little did we know that the moisture had already got into the wiring.

[d] We now are experiencing severe problems with the electrical system.

[e] The automatic sliding door works sparingly.

[f] The key faub no longer works for the driver side door.

[g] The lights and fans sporadically turn on and off, and the worst problem is that there is a constant drain on our battery because of shorts in the wiring that Ford could not (would not?) diagnose.

[h] We continually have to charge our battery nightly so we can make it through the day without getting stranded.


As we gave up on Ford, we took the Windstar to a reputable car mechanic and within two hours he was able to diagnose the problem and how we should go about fixing it. The mechanics advice, trade the Windstar in on a none Ford product. Ford will no longer be getting our business or our friends. Thanks for a lousy product Ford! Never Again. David Bianchini.

 


 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

IT'S 2004. FORD ENGINEERS MAKE A STARTLING NEW DISCOVERY
"SALT CAUSES CORROSION":

From Auto.com,
Jul 16 2004.

Ford launches at least its third Taurus and Sable recall in 2004, following a spate of actions earlier this month. Ford Motor Co. reportedly recalls some 899,060 Taurus and Mercury Sable sedans registered in 22 states that are located in what is considered cold weather regions, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Reuters says the recall includes '99, '00 and '01 vehicles with defective springs that potentially could sever due to corrosion, leading to tire punctures. The use of salt on icy roads is a major cause of corrosion and Ford dealers are asked to install protective shields over the springs.The action marks at least the third Taurus / Sable recall this year and Ford's fifth separate action this month, which include eight different models.


Ford Manufacturing
Management Issues:


It's been going on for decades:

[] 1991. Ford Explorer NHTSA Recall ID Number: 91V026000

STRUCTURE:BODY:BUMPERS Potential Units Affected: 220000 Summary: REAR BUMPER REINFORCEMENT MAY BE SUBJECT TO FATIGUE CRACKING UNDER EXTENDED TRAILER TOW SERVICE WHEN USING A BUMPER-MOUNTED TRAILER HITCH BALL.

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

2002. The Crown Victoria (Ford Motor, Company) is reported to be suffering rear gas tank / accident / safety issues. Two bolts may puncture the gas tank upon rear end collisions.

 

Note from Ed: For Gods sake Ford you have been having gas tank reliabilty issues for at least 50 years, could you put a little focus on building a simple, strong metal container. A rubber container inside the fuel tank was an idea presented to Ford in the 1960s. This product was designed to contain the gas if the gas tank was damaged in a collision, it was rejected, considered too costly at approx. $5.

 

Cars, Trucks and
Mangement Controls:

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

Monday, November 27, 2000
By JUSTIN HYDE
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS DETROIT -


For the fifth time in a little over a year, Ford Motor Co. told it's dealers either to prohibit sales or test-drives of its new Escape sport utility vehicles while they're checked for safety-related problems. The latest notice to dealers was sent Nov. 18, affecting 51,022 Escapes and about 24,000 Mazda Tributes, which share basic parts with the Escape and are built in the same plant in Claycomo, Mo. Of those, 27,516 Escapes and about 12,500 Tributes have already been sold. Ford spokesman Mike Vaughn said dealers were told to check for damaged windshield wiper link ball sockets and replace them if necessary. If the sockets were improperly built, the
wipers could stop working. Parts to fix the problem "are in the pipeline" to dealers, Vaughn said. Previous warnings to dealers on the Escape and Tribute, both of which only went on the market in August, have included warnings about the;

[] steering wheel coming off,
[] leaky fuel lines,
[] incorrect wheel hubs,
[] and a problem with th
e cruise control that could cause the throttle to stick.

 



THE BIG THREE INSIST THAT THEIR WELDED
PARTS ARE ONLY WELDED WITH ROBOTS.
WAIT TILL YOU SEE THE MANUAL WELD REPAIRS.

It's ironic that on the one hand we have the major auto / truck companies providing a logical mandate which insists that arc welds on cars and trucks will only be made by robots. Its not dawned on these companies that people who program robots need process control expertise. For more than two decades the majority of the companies that use robots will daily allow "unqualified" robot operators, programmers or maintenance personnel to daily make "unqualified" robot weld parameter changes to "unqualified" robot welded components. And then of course they will allow "unqualified" manual welders to make the "unqualified" manual weld repairs.

 

 

 

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

[] 1991 Ford Explorer. NHTSA Recall ID Number: 91V025000

FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:STORAGE:TANK ASSEMBLY Potential Units Affected: 18000 Summary: THE HOT PLATE WELD WHICH ATTACHES THE VAPOR VENT VALVE CARRIER TO THE TOP OF THE PLASTIC FUEL TANK MAY PARTIALLY FRACTURE, ALLOWING VAPOR OF FUEL TO ESCAPE FROM THE TOP OF THE TANK. Consequence: THE ESCAPED VAPOR OR LEAKED FUEL COULD CAUSE A FIRE IN THE PRESENCE OF A
SOURCE OF IGNITION.

 


Hey you Yanks, you don't need to visit Iraq to find those elusive
weapons of mass destruction,
simply visit your nearest American new car showroom?

 

 

[] 2002 AeroStar Van.

A report suggests that the placement of the pressurized fuel line and strategic fittings near the exhaust system or high heat features may contribute to the potential for vehicular
fires.


 

 

Plant and corporate manufacturing management would
do well to remember what Harry Truman or
Henry Ford once might have said.

"When it comes manufacturing issues,
the buck should stop in the plant managers office".

 

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

[] The Ford pickup F-150 along with the Chrysler Dodge Ram pickup got poor ratings in tests by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS). The driver and passenger cabs were smashed in, and their air bags discharged late. The Ford (Mush) F150 tested worst of four pickups tested. The Toyota Tundra scored best of the four. The Chevrolet Silverado received a marginal rating. The manufacturers claim their vehicles are safe and pass government test for which they design their vehicles, not the more rigorous IIHS standards and testing. The IIHS tests vehicles in offset collisions at 40 mph where half of the front of the vehicle impacts a solid structure which may more accurately reflect the majority of front end head-on accidents.



Ford issues 11th recall for Focus
Number of recalls ranks among most for any car, consumer group says
By BILL KOENIG
Bloomberg News
Last Updated: Nov. 4, 2002

Dearborn, Mich. - Ford Motor Co. is asking owners of 572,795 Focus models to come in for repairs in the 11th recall for its top-selling car. Focus models from 2000 and 2001 may have a loose bolt in the front-suspension assembly, said spokesman Todd Nissen. Cars with Zetec engines may also have a problem with the battery cable that can
result in smoke, melted wires or fires. No injuries have been reported,
he said. The number of recalls ranks "as one of the top three of all time," said Clarence Ditlow, president of the Center for Auto Safety consumer group. Ditlow's group said that General Motors Corp.'s X-Car, sold under Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Buick model names, had 17 safety recalls from 1979 into the early 1980s.

 

Ford has said it wants to improve the quality and image of the Focus, an entry-level vehicle that first went on sale in 1999. Sales of the model fell 9.8% to 211,126 through October, according to Autodata Corp. The recall is a setback for Ford as the company seeks to restore profits after losing $5.45 billion last year, analysts said. "It does no good to your brand to have all these recalls," said IRN Inc. analyst Mike Wall, whose company forecasts vehicle plans for suppliers. The Focus is Ford's top-selling car worldwide and its No. 2 car in the U.S. behind the Taurus sedan.


Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:


The Dearborn, Mich.-based auto maker said a small number of Aerostar vehicles contain a faulty accessory power circuit, which could short circuit and create the potential for engine overheating, smoke and fire. In the same vehicle population, some owners will also be notified of the potential for their fuel pump electrical connection to short-circuit. The company said
that condition could lead to loss of power, smoke and fire in the passenger compartment or vehicle underbody. The recall comes just three days after the company agreed to pay federal regulators a record fine of $425,000 for failing to recall vehicles with problem ignition systems soon enough and not providing government investigators with complete information.


[] 2000. Ford is recalling hundreds of thousands of 1997 F-series light duty pickups because of fire danger from possible fuel leaks.The automaker also issued a fourth recall on 800 small SUV's, called Escape, because of possibly defective speed control cables that could cause the throttle to stick.

[] The 709,000 F-series trucks, made from June 1995 to August 1997, have improperly installed mounting brackets that could rub a hole in the front fuel line.

[] Ford has had three other production problems with some Escapes involving wheel hubs, steering wheels and cruise control problems.

 

 



MANAGEMENT - UNIONS - MANAGEMENT - UNIONS

Most union weld manufacturing rules, guidelines and regulations in the auto / truck industry were established at a time when manual skills had more meaning than the complex requirements of automation.

A STRONG MESSAGE TO MANUFACTURING MANAGEMENT. There is time for engineers to be involved with a process and there is a time they are not required. In the case of robots and weld automation managers should ensure engineers are given the process and robot control training necessary to take the process ownership and responsibility necessary to manage and optimize the robot lines.

Ed Craig 2005.

 

 

 

 

LETS SEE, TODAY ITS ONLY 60% WELD RE-WORK.

FEW ENGINEERING MANAGERS IN THE AUTO INDUSTRY SEEM
TO UNDERSTAND THAT ATTAINING OPTIMUM ROBOT WELD QUALITY AND PRODUCTIVITY DOES NOT REQUIRE
CONFORMANCE TO ISO STANDARDS, AN OVERSIZED "BLACK BELT", OR AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE ENDLESS, EVOLVING, COMPLEX AND UNNECESSARY JAPANESE MANUFACTURING PRACTICES. IT DOES REQUIRE THAT SOMEONE IN THE PLANT CAN MAKE A RATIONAL ENGINEERING DECISION AND HAS ROBOT AND WELD PROCESS CONTROL EXPERTISE:


 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:



1964-1970 Ford Mustangs
seem to contain design flaws involving a "drop-in" gas tank. The top of the tank is the bottom of the trunk in the rear of the car. In rear-end collisions gasoline spilled forcefully into the passenger compartment which was only protected by the back of the back seat without more reinforcement or barrier. Many people have been incinerated in these automobiles and Ford is reported to have known about the potential safety problem associated with the tank and is being sued for withholding indirect test results and failing to warn the public or to take remedial action in a timely manner. Ford maintains that the Mustang was and is safe and that the gas tank does not represent a public safety problem.


Highly respected, Lee Iacocca, (I dont know why) former Ford and Chrysler management employee was quoted from White House Oval Office tapings during meetings with Richard Milhouse Nixon. Lea said that, "Safety was Killing us" reflecting on his obvious concerns for Ford profit over consumer safety.


Info at http://www.autobuyology.org/car6.html

Another Quote from Iococca, the man who thinks he's an American legand.

"I have always found that if I move with seventy-five percent or more of the facts that I usually never regret it. It's the guys who wait to have everything perfect that drives you crazy."

Perhaps this explains why the cars Iococca built at Chrysler and Ford were never quite one-hundred percent. Read about IACOCCA and his FORD PINTO, it's a fire ball of a STORY.

 


Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:


Recall Data From GE Insurance Solutions.


The following recalls are typical examples of what cost Ford billions each year. Also think about the billions spent on warranty claims and millions of man hours lost by the customers going through the recall / warranty issues. Also it's important we remember the lives lost and consequences to the families due to vehicle manufacturing management negligence. These recalls are not up to date as this web site could not handle the overwhelming quantity.


[] Ford 104000 Escort, Orion Danger of short-circuiting in electrical cables U.K. 5/1991
[] Ford 18000 Fiesta Presence of exhaust gases in interior U.K. 1/1991
[] Ford 81000 Fiesta Problems with the brake pedals U.K. 0/1996
[] Ford 200000 Fiesta Problems with the seat belts U.K. 0/1996
[] Ford 10000 Land Rover Discovery, Land Rover Defender Wearing of clutch U.K. 6/2000
[] Ford Mondeo Defective hand brake U.K. 10/1993
[] Ford 113000 Escort, Orion Problems with mudguard linings Germany 0/1988
[] Ford 160000 Focus Water may enter alternator and cause corrosion Germany 7/1999
[] Ford 9000 Focus Faulty airbag control unit Germany 7/2000
[] Ford 2100 Land Rover Discovery II Defect in ABS pump relay Germany 9/1999
[] Ford 3000 Land Rover Freelander Weld joint on longitudinal and transverse control
arm does not comply with standards Germany 12/1998
[] Ford Orion Replacement of tooth belt Germany 0/1989
[] Ford 2500 Mondeo Problems with air bag EUROPE 12/2000
[] Ford 2100 Jaguar V6, V6 Special Equipment, V8 A clamping device connecting a component to the suspension system may be weak, it could result in the loosing of the component JAPAN 11/2000

 


Instead of paying $3K, there is a reason some engineers and managers will pay $12K to $15K, for a MIG weld power souce that does what?

 




This MIG fillet weld was made with a $3000 powe source.




When the engineers and managers know little about the process that makes their MIG welds, weld equipment manufactures can take any tin can, install some electronis and circuit boards in it, then claim it has some unique bells and whistles and put it in a glossy brochure that states it's the latest and greatest pulsed MIG power source ever built..

If you MIG weld steels and wanted to purchase three MIG packages and decided on equipment like the pulsed, ESAB Aristo, the pulsed Panasonic HM 350 and the pulsed Lincoln Power Wave STT, MIG equipment, you could pay approximately $30 to $40K for these three units. Of course you could buy 3 traditional MIG packages like the Miller CP 302 or Lincoln CV 300- 400 amp units priced around $3000 for a combined cost of approx. $9,000.

With the lower cost equipment, your welds will be more consistent, the equipment will likely need less repairs and be more simple to operate. With some of the money saved you could consider paying me to visit your plant for a week. At your facility, using the lower cost, more durable traditional MIG equipment, I could provide a weld demonstration against any available, sophisticated electronic power source. In my demonstration I would produce optimum, spatter free, steel or stainless MIG welds at the highest possible weld deposition rates. Of course I could also improve your pulsed welds if requested. After the weld demo, I would then solve your robot or manual weld issues and provide your organization with all the weld process expertise necessary to attain optimum, manual or robot weld quality and productivity. After I have finished at your company, your organization will have enough cash left over for five additional MIG packages.




When an electronic MIG power source is developed that is easier to operate than a simple two control, traditional CV MIG power source, and this electronic power source can show real evidence that it will improve weld quality or productivity on steel applications, this web site will ensure you are the first to hear about it. Don't hold your breath, I have been examing this equipment for 25 years.


 



Ford Manufacturing
Management Issues:

[] Ford 7500 Range Rover Improper materials are used in hoses delivering engine coolant, leaks may
result in engine or ignition failures JAPAN 2/2001
[] Ford S80, V70 Defective rear seat belt JAPAN 4/2001
[] Ford 9900 Taurus, Taurus SHO Problems with engine may cause abrupt standstill JAPAN 6/2000
[] Ford 2700 Telster Belt on engine may lose tension and cause abrupt engine standstill JAPAN 6/2000
[] Ford 15355 2002 Ford Thunderbird The restraint system may be compromised U.S.A 7/2002
[] Ford 1096 2002 Ford Truck Ranger Rear axle differential case could fracture U.S.A 2/2002
[] Ford 380 Aston Martin DB7 Problems with front shock absorber U.S.A 1/2000
[] Ford 5100 Campers Possible brake defects U.S.A 1/1991



[] Ford 3700 Contour Damaged fuel tank filler pipe grommet causing the fuel may leak U.S.A 10/2000
[] Ford 186000 Contour, Mercury Mystic and Cougar Pressure conscious reducing valve may corrode and result in malfunction U.S.A 10/2000
[] Ford 1400 Contour, Mercury Mystique Child lock not fully functional U.S.A 1/2000
[] Ford 325000 Contour, Mercury Mystique Contact with salt leads to corrosion of rear brake valves
U.S.A 3/2000
[] Ford 23000 Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis Windscreen wipers may not work when snow or
ice is on windshield U.S.A 5/2000
[] Ford 3500 Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, Lincoln Town Problems with seat belt U.S.A 6/2000
[] Ford 875000 Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, Lincoln Town Car Incorrect jacking instruction could cause bodily injury, if followed U.S.A 8/2000
[] Ford 22000 Crown Victoria, Mercury Grand Marquis, Lincoln Town Car, Windstar Flaw could cause
air bag to deploy without a crash U.S.A 9/2000



[] Ford 13000 Delivery vans Replacement of fuel tank U.S.A 0/1984
[] Ford 252000 Delivery vans Defective wheel suspension U.S.A 12/1985
[] Ford 3300 Econoline Rear lug nuts do not hold the wheels tight U.S.A 7/2000

 

 


IF YOU WELD IT RIGHT,
YOU WONT BE UPTIGHT.

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

[] Ford 800 Escape Speed control cable may be defective U.S.A 8/2000
[] Ford 1500 Escape Four-wheel-drive rear hub is put on two-wheel-drive vehicle, wheels loosen and come off U.S.A 9/2000

[] Ford 10800 Escape O-ring seal in fuel line connector at the outlet end of the fuel filter is damaged and could result in fuel odor or fuel leakage U.S.A 9/2000
[] Ford 51000 Escape Defective windshield wipers U.S.A 12/2000
[] Ford Escape Fuel leak at the outlet side of the fuel filter U.S.A 2/2001

[] Ford 3600 Escort Faulty mounting of windshield wipers U.S.A 0/1989
[] Ford 260000 Escort Check on steering mechanism U.S.A 11/1992
[] Ford 226000 Escort, Lynx Check on engine gaskets U.S.A 0/1989
[] Ford 1,5m Escort, Lynx Defective seat mount U.S.A 0/1989
[] Ford 51800
0 Escort, Lynx, EXP Engine fire-safety check U.S.A 0/1989
[] Ford 566000 Expedition, Navigator Trailer hitch bolts may come loose U.S.A 3/2000
[] Ford 495000 Expedition, Navigator, F150, Taurus, Mercury Sable Fail to comply with requirements regarding child restraint anchorage systems U.S.A 11/2000

[] Ford 210000 Explorer Leak in fuel tank U.S.A 5/1991
[] Ford 475000 Explorer Weld joint on the hydraulic lift cylinder may break U.S.A 11/1999


[] Ford 137700 Explorer Sport, Ranger Hoot striker may fracture, could fly open while car is being
driven U.S.A 11/2000
[] Ford 3000 Explorer, Mercury Mountaineer Side crash sensor for side air bags may work improperly
and cause an inadvertent air bag deployment U.S.A 8/2000
[] Ford 110000 Explorer, Mercury Mountaineer Because of defective computer chip speed may exceed the speeding rating of the tire, could lead to a tire failure resulting in a crash U.S.A 12/2000
[] Ford 220000 Explorer, Mercury Mountaineer Accelerator can stick or hesitate U.S.A 2/2001
[] Ford 250000 Explorer, Mercury Mountaineers Problems with electronics affect function of windscreen wipers and indoor lighting U.S.A 3/2000

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

[] Ford 8966 F-150 Lightning pickup trucks Problem with its souped-up engine U.S.A 11/2001
[] Ford 4500 F150, F250, E150, E250, Econoline Label on the fuel filler door does not contain the statement 'See instruction on the fuel container for inspection and service life' U.S.A 9/2000
[] Ford 74500 Focus Defective deckled wire harness may cause an electrical short U.S.A 11/2000
[] Ford 95000 Focus Defective seat back hinge pivot U.S.A 1/2001
[] Ford 189000 Ford Contour, Mercury Mystic Problems with display of gear selected U.S.A 11/1998
[] Ford 1.4 m Ford Crown Victorias, Windstars, Rangers, F-Series Driver- and passenger-side seat-belt buckles may not latch properly U.S.A 11/2001

DONT FORGET TO TAKE ALONG A SPARE STEERING WHEEL
[] Ford 1300 Ford Escape Steering wheel may fall out U.S.A 8/2000
[] Ford 250000 Ford Trucks Problems with steering and brakes U.S.A 7/2000
[] Ford 17700 F-Super Duty Tie rod ends have insufficient hardnes
s in the ball stud, resulting in premature wear and separation of the ball stud U.S.A 11/2000


APART FROM A FIRE EXTINGUISHER NOW YOU KNOW WHY THE SPARE WHEEL IS IN THE TRUNK
[] Ford 1,7m ia Expedition, Lincoln Navigator SUV wheels may loose U.S.A 5/1998
[] Ford 21000 ia Minivans and ATVs Lighting system does not comply with US standards U.S.A 6/2000

[] Ford 3000 Land Rover Coolant for throttle body may leak and could ignite, causing a fire U.S.A 10/2000
[] Ford 2800 Land Rover Discovery II High-pressure hydraulic pump could lead to an engine compartment fire U.S.A 2/2000


[] Ford 7100 Land Rover Discovery II Idler pulley breaks, throwing off the serpentine belt that controls major functions U.S.A 10/2000
[] Ford 709000 Light duty pick-up F-series Improperly installed mounting brackets could
rub a hole in the front fuel li
ne U.S.A 11/2000
[] Ford 14000 Light trucks Defective seat mounts U.S.A 10/1990
[] Ford 1500 Light vans Defective engine U.S.A 7/1993



[] Ford 113700 Lincoln Unknown U.S.A 6/1993
[] Ford 13400 Lincoln Town Defective fuel line U.S.A 5/1991
[] Ford 130000 Lincoln, Jaguar Front suspension lo
wer ball joint may not have been tightened to specification, fracture of the ball joint stud may cause driver to lose control U.S.A 12/2000

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

[] Ford Mercury Capri Problems with airbag system U.S.A 8/1992

[] Ford 153000 Mercury Cougar Battery cable may have been improperly assembled, could cause a fire U.S.A 4/2001
[] Ford 42000 Mercury Villager Indicator light may loose from faulty fixture in taillight U.S.A 1/2000

[] Ford 67200 Mercury Villagers Bolts to mount the steering-gear are incorrectly tightened, reducing steering control U.S.A 10/2000
[] Ford 42000 Minitrans faulty welds U.S.A 2/1986
[] Ford 11400 Mustang Defective heater may not defrost windshields, loss of visibility could occur U.S.A 11/2000
[] Ford 695260 Mustang, Mercury, Taunus Engine cooling fan could seize, causing an underhood
fire
U.S.A 2/2002

[] Ford 446000 Passenger cars Faulty front seat belts U.S.A 0/1984
[] Ford 1,4m Passenger Cars Failure to comply with US emission standards U.S.A 0/1989
[] Ford 2700 Passenger cars Flaw in hinge of sun roof U.S.A 6/1990
[] Ford 270000 Passenger cars danger of fire at cables to motor for adjusting front seat U.S.A 5/1991

[] Ford 670000 Passenger cars Failure to comply with US emission standards U.S.A 5/1991
[] Ford 87000 Passenger cars Problems with catalytic converter U.S.A 2/1992
[] Ford 517000 Passenger cars Defective front brakes U.S.A 4/1992
[] Ford 73500 Passenger cars Door latches had to be fixed U.S.A 6/1996

[] Ford 2.3m1.8m Passenger cars (86-88 models)Lightweight utility vehicles
(86 and 87 models) Defective fuel line U.S.A 0/1987
[] Ford 495000 Pic
kup trucks Defective hood and tank cap U.S.A 11/1984
[] Ford 1,2m Pickup trucks Check on fuel line U.S.A 11/1993


Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

[] Ford 31000 Pickup trucks Wiring faults in power seats U.S.A 6/1996
[] Ford 670000 Pickup trucks F150 Front line assembly could have a hole rubbed through from
improper installation of the mounting brackets U.S.A 8/2000
[] Ford 300 School buses Defective handbrake U.S.A 2/1994
[] Ford 9000 Sierra Faulty mounting of seat belts U.S.A 0/1987
[] Ford 8100 Super Duty Problems with brakes U.S.A 6/2000
[] Ford 3000 Taunus, Mercury Sable Corrosion on rear-window frame U.S.A 3/1987
[] Ford 273000 Taunus, Probe, Mercury Sable (90 model) Failure to comply with US emission standards U.S.A 3/1995
[] Ford 8800 Taurus Check on ignition U.S.A 6/1993
[] Ford 700000 Taurus station wagon Danger of injury through loosening of interior component U.S.A 5/1992
[] Ford 5900 Taurus, Mercury Sable Child safety seat anchor latch fastener do not have adequate
residual torque U.S.A 8/2000
[] Ford 167000 Taurus, Mercury Sable 'Vehicle capacity weight' and 'designated seating capacity' information is not printed on the safety certification tire labels U.S.A 8/2000
[] Ford 7800 Taurus, Sable Faulty safety-seat anchor latches U.S.A 11/2000

[] Ford 500 Thunderbird Supercoupe Problems with accelerator pedal U.S.A 7/1993

[] Ford 275000 Trucks Faulty mounting of rear tires U.S.A 12/1984
[] Ford 31000 Trucks Faulty steering linkage U.S.A 2/1987
[] Ford 3800 Trucks Check on fuel tank U.S.A 0/1989
[] Ford 9200 Trucks Check on pneumatic brakes U.S.A 0/1
989

 

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:

[] Ford 102000 Trucks Impairment of fuel flow due to sharp bends in fuel line U.S.A 10/1990
[] Ford 18000 Trucks Replacement of valves on pneumatic brakes U.S.A 10/1990
[] Ford 60000 Trucks Transmission problems U.S.A 5/1991
[] Ford 3600 Trucks Defective airbag system U.S.A 2/1994


[] Ford 500000 Trucks F-series, Mercury Villages Fuel tank pressure regulators can wear out and
lead to a leak U.S
.A 2/2001
[] Ford 300000 Vehicles Flaw in generators U.S.A 0/1989
[] Ford 760000 Vehicles Failure to comply with US emission standards U.S.A 0/1989


[] Ford 246000 Volvo C70s, V70s, S70s Defective front turn signal U.S.A 2/2001
[] Ford 93700 Windstar Cracks may form in fuel tank U.S.A 11/1999
[] Ford 1500 Windstar Defective windscreen U.S.A 1/2000
[] Ford 3000 Windstar Fuel hose may come loose U.S.A 6/2000
[] Ford 180000 Windstar Power-operated window does not proper work in connection with different key positions U.S.A 10/2000
[] Ford 133000 Windstar minivan Problems with electronics U.S.A 2/1995
[] Ford 16000 Windstar, Crown Victoria, Lincoln Town Car, Mercury Grand Marquis Missing screws in the restraint control module or crash sensor U.S.A 12/2000
[] Ford Thunderbird Driver seat belt was found to be partially cut U.S.A 6/2002


[] Ford 417037 2000-2001 Ford Windstar Wa
ter can enter into the right rear passenger compartment, causing a short circuit in the electrical connector U.S.A 5/2002
[] Ford 369614 2000 Ford Taurus and Sable Potential for depressing both accelerator and brake U.S.A 10/2002
[] Ford 369614 2000-2002 Sable and Taurus Potential problems with the accelerator. U.S.A 11/2002
[] Ford 1999-2000 Lincoln Continental Passenger side air bag can deploy U.S.A 5/2003
[] Ford 448005 Explorer, Mountaineer, Do not comply with safety standards U.S.A 8/2003


Ford Manufacturing
Management Issues:

[] Ford 257.119 Windstar 2001-3 The seat floor-to-seat latch can release under load U.S.A 11/2003
[] Ford 132.243 Escape 2001 Problems with the seat belts U.S.A 12/2003
[] Ford 399.926 Taurus 2003, Mercury Sable 2003 The air filter paper can burn, leading to damage to the air induction system U.S.A 3/2004
[] Ford 25000 Contour, Mercury Mystique, Villager minivan 1995 models for various repairs CANADA 0/1996

[] Ford 31500 F-150, F-250 Fuel line can rub against a panel under the dash or the shifter linkage, resulting in a fuel leak CANADA 12/2000


[] Ford 245000 Tempo, Mercury Topaz (89-94 models) 2.3 litre engines, ventilation system may freeze up in extremely cold weather CANADA 12/1995
[] Ford Volvo (truck) 97-98VN, ACL, WAH, WCA, WIA, WG, WX Sealing disk on brakes may become porous, leading to braking problems CANADA 6/2000
[] Ford 5000 Volvo V70 Tailgate locking mechanism does not latch properly in cold weather CANADA 12/2000
[] Ford Passenger cars Problems with accelerator pedal AUSTRALIA 6/1990
[] Ford 9000 Trucks Problems with electrical system of accelerator pedal AUSTRALIA 4/1991


[] Ford 3900 Capri Loosening of coolant lines danger of engine burning WORLD WIDE 3/1991
[] Ford 66000 Ford F-350 Shimmying of front axle on vehicles equipped with double wheels WORLD WIDE 2/1988.


[] Ford 11000 Jaguar XK8.XJ8 Defective fuel gauge WORLD WIDE 2/1998
[] Ford 27700 Lincoln Continental Defective brakes WORLD WIDE 0/1988
[] Ford 9500 Mondeo Possible build-up of static at the bottom end of the fuel filler neck WORLD WIDE 4/1995
[] Ford 1,1m Passanger cars Problems with hoses of engine-cooling, heating and air-conditioning systems WORLD WIDE 0/1988
[] Ford 178000 Sierra Check on insulation on blower cables WORLD WIDE 0/1988
[] Ford 4700 Trucks Premature brake wear WORLD WIDE 0/1988
[] Ford 100000 Trucks Defective transmission WORLD WIDE 9/1990
[] Ford 36000 Trucks Faulty brakes WORLD WIDE 0/1990
[] Ford 235000 Volvo S70, V70, C70 Problems with airbag WORLD WIDE 11/1999
[] Ford 116000 Volvo S80, V70 Problem with ball joint in the front suspension WORLD WIDE 8/2000

Ford Manufacturing Management Issues:


[] Ford 322000 Contour, Mercury Defective engine cooling fan can lead to overheating
and
fire in the engine compartment USA / Canada 2/2001
[] Ford 876000 Explorer, Mercury Mountaineer Faulty part on the suspension system has to be
replaced USA / Canada 12/2000


[] Ford 247000 F-150 Rear spring may break owing to overloading USA / Canada 8/1998
[] Ford 260000 Focus Rear hub retaining nut can come loose and cause the wheel and brake drum assembly to separate USA / Canada 10/2000
[] Ford 279646 Focus compact Problem that could cause the rear wheels to wobble USA / Canada 12/2001
[] Ford 8400 Land Rover Discovery II Defective cable winch US
A / Canada 6/2000


[] Ford 8,5m Passenger cars and trucks (88-93 models) Ignition switches may cause fire near the steering column (total recall costs shared with United Technologies) USA / Canada 0/1996
[] Ford 310000 Taurus, Mercury Sable Salt corrosion may cause damage to front springs
USA / Canada 8/1998
[] Ford 440000 Mustang Defective handbrake USA / Canada / Mexico 11/2000


By Joe Benton
ConsumerAffairs.Com.

The recalled Trucks Burn
As the Ford Management Fiddles.

Massive Recall Moves Slowly
as New Fires Break Out
..

 


February 3, 2006

Despite a massive recall announced in September, Ford trucks are continuing to catch fire and burn -- some of them covered by the recall, some not. The September 2005 recall involved an estimated 3.8 million Ford trucks from the 1994-2002 model years; it included the Ford F-150 pickup as well as the Ford Expedition, Lincoln Navigator and Ford Bronco SUVs. But the recall is moving slowly. Ford says replacement parts are not yet available. Meanwhile, trucks continue to burst into flames and -- in many cases -- Ford representatives stonewall the affected consumers despite the recall, according to reports filed with ConsumerAffairs.Com. Adding fuel to the flames, recent fires suggest additional Ford trucks are afflicted by the flaw that led to Ford's reluctant and long-delayed recall.

Linda of Newman, Georgia, lost her 2003 F-150 to fire January 31. "It is destroyed. I am waiting for my insurance claim adjuster to contact me," she wrote. Linda called her Ford dealership and was told there are no recalls for her F-150. The recall does not cover 2003 models. "My truck was only two and a half years old and I still owe $14,500 for it," she told ConsumerAffairs.Com. "It is destroyed and a melted mess still sitting in my driveway."Linda wants to know if Ford is going to do anything to help. So far the answer to Linda is the same as that given to millions of other truck owners -- no. Ford stubbornly resisted recalling the trucks and gave in only after several people died in related fires and the resulting publicity put pressure on regulators. Ford has now reluctantly recalled 3.8 million vehicles to fix a cruise control flaw identified as a possible cause of the fires.

Steve's Ford truck sat in his Hilton Head, South Carolina, driveway on a cold January morning. "At 3 a.m. in 33-degree weather our 1998 Ford Explorer exploded in flames causing my 1994 Buick Century to go up in flames as well," he wrote ConsumerAffairs.Com. "The fire investigator ruled the fire a result of 'unknown causes' although he states that the fire started in the engine of the Explorer and no arson or foul play was involved," Steve wrote. Steve has complained to Ford, but so far has not received an answer.


Mary of Liberty Hill, Texas, is lucky. Her 1997 Ford F-150 caught fire but the blaze was put out before the fire could consume her house. "On Saturday, January 14, 2006, the 1997 Ford F-150 parked in the driveway caught fire. No one in the house was aware of the fire and a passing bicyclist came running in the house shouting that a truck was on fire in the driveway," Mary wrote. Luckily the fire was extinguished with a garden hose but the flames damaged a three-week old car also in the driveway. "The fire also melted the vinyl siding on the house, which is only 4 years old," Mary told ConsumerAffairs.Com. Mary's 1997 F-150 is covered by the Ford recall. Ford however, is delaying repairing the potential fire hazard in the cruise control system of Mary's truck and 3.8 million more pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles because replacement parts are not yet available. Mary's automobile insurance is paying for the value of the truck, and is paying to repair the damage to the new car. However, both vehicles are separate claims, and each claim has a $500 deductible. So Mary is out $1,000 thanks to her Ford F-150 fire. Her house is another matter. "The insurance does not cover the damage to the house, and a claim will not be filed for that damage, because the repair cost is so close to the amount of the deductible," she said.

 

Ford / Jag Manufacturing Management Issues:

2006: Jaguar XK 8 Convertible Select Different Vehicle

Component: Vehicle Speed Control: Accelerator Pedal

Defect Summary: ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL ARMS WERE INCORRECTLY ASSEMBLED BY THE SUPPLIER. THE CLEARANCE BETWEEN THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND THE BRAKE PEDAL MAY BE REDUCED. THIS CONDITION CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF BOTH PEDALS BEING OPERATED AT THE SAME TIME BY THE DRIVER.

Consequence Summary: THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL COULD BE HELD DOWN BY THE PEDAL STOP ASSEMBLY INCREASING THE RISK OF A CRASH.


[] Jaguar 19500 Jaguar XJS and series III Check on cruise control U.K. 0/1990
[] Jaguar 4200 Passenger cars Leaky tank or fuel line U.K. 0/1984
[] Jaguar 3500 Jaguar XJ12, XJS Air pump check valve failure, possibly causing excess hydrocarbon emissions U.S.A 12/2001


[] Jaguar 3500 Jaguar XJ6 Defective microswitch U.S.A 0/1987
[] Jaguar 16000 Jaguar XJ6 Flaws in front-wheel suspension U.S.A 0/1988

[] Jaguar 49174 X-Type 2002-03 On certain sedans, under some circumstances, the power circuit that feeds the direction indicator system could fail U.S.A 3/2003
[] Jaguar 39.448 Model XK 1997-2003 Do not comply with the safety standards U.S.A 12/2003
[] Jaguar 65000 Jaguar XJ6 Leaky tank WORLD WIDE 10/1990
[] Jaguar 28000 Jaguar XJ6 Problems with brake booster WORLD WIDE 0/1990
[] Jaguar 4700 Jaguar XK8 Rear axle problems WORLD WIDE 0/1997
[] Jaguar 11000 Passanger cars Safety check WORLD WIDE 3/1992
[] Jaguar 31
.646 Jaguar 2003-4 Gear failure WORLD WIDE 3/2004



It's only a $36000 Truck Frame.

 

 

Have you purchased a truck lately? Pity.

 

Frame weld issues. Would they apply to your plant?

 

Ford. May 14, 2005 New York Times reports in the Business Section that Ford (which owns Volvo) told Volvo to knock off the safer / safety advertising and engineering related to roof collapsing during rollovers. Yup, Volvos are safer then Ford thinks they need to be, should be, or can be, so Volvo has been told to make their vehicles less safe to meet Ford's run of the mill vehicle safety engineering standards.http://www.autobuyology.org/car6.html.



NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Ford Motor Co. engineers told Volvo engineers in 2002 that they needed to de-emphasize vehicle rooftop safety in order to get in line with the position of their then-new corporate parent, The New York Times reported Saturday, citing documents that have emerged in recent court cases. The issue has come to the fore in recent lawsuits concerning vehicle rollovers, which result in more than 10,000 deaths and 16,000 serious injuries each year, the Times said. The passenger vehicle operations of Volvo, acquired by Ford (Research) in 1999, have emphasized rooftop safety since the late 1960s and mentioned in 1970s advertising that its roof strength far exceeded U.S. standards. But the paper said American automakers have argued that roof collapses play little role in rollover deaths and injuries, which they believe occur when the occupant is thrown into the roof just before it crushes. According to the Times, a top Ford safety engineer told a Volvo counterpart in a Nov. 23, 2002 e-mail that it was "absolutely necessary to close the technical differences" between the companies, and that Ford officials wanted the differences solved "immediately".

U.S. does not currently believe in roof crush as the major contributor to head/neck injuries in rollovers," the Times quoted Ford engineer Priya Prisad as writing in the e-mail. "This issue has dragged on very long, is very litigation-oriented in U.S. (close to 110 cases pending) and the topmost management in the company is impatient," he wrote, adding that Ford's No. 2 executive at the time, Nicholas V. Scheele, wanted the matter resolved, according to the paper. The Times said the documents are under court seal, but that three people on the plantiff's side of separate cases read or copied the messages and provided them to the paper. The paper said Ford officials acknowledged the existence of the documents but provided no details of their contents. "Ford and Volvo do share the same views regarding roof strength and we have not disagreed," Ford president for environmental and safety issues Susan Cischke told the Times. "Where there has been some confusion is how we talk about things."

The paper said a Volvo safety official declined comment. Consumer groups are critical of Ford's position on rooftop safety. "It's malarkey," Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, told the Times. "When you tell people that the roof crushing in on your head is not the cause of injury, it's your head hitting the roof, it's laughable."




A paramedic works at the scene of the crash in which Claire Duncan suffered
a fractured skull when her Ford Explorer rolled and the roof crumpled.


All it would have took is a little steel bracing and this would not likely have occured

 

Tuesday, March 29, 2005
Memos: Ford made Explorer roof weaker
Automaker says SUV exceeds federal safety standards and is a safe vehicle.

By Jeff Plungis / Detroit News Washington Bureau.

Jacksonville, Fla. When 26-year-old Claire Duncan died of a fractured skull after a severe rollover accident in her 2000 Ford Explorer, her family wanted answers. Their questions about how the SUV's roof caved in led to a lawsuit and ultimately a trial this month that uncovered internal Ford Motor Co. documents and memos that raise serious questions about the Explorer's roof and the automaker's contention that stronger vehicle roofs do not prevent deaths and injuries in rollovers. On March 18, a Jacksonville, Fla., jury ruled the Explorer's roof was defective and ordered Ford to pay Duncan's husband $10.2 million for economic damages, pain and suffering. This story is continued here, it shows what happens when a company tries to save a few dollars per vechicle unit on safety concerns then spends hundreds of millions on law suits. Its been this way for decades when will they ever learn. Click here for the Ford / Volvo saftety design clash and the staggering results.

 

 

Ford issues ambulance safety bulletin

May 9, 2005

In January 2005, Ford Motor Company issued a service bulletin for 1998-2005 E350 and E450 chassis. The bulletin specifies that mechanics should be looking for cracks in the left or right spring tower flange. The bulletin states that frame replacement is the only authorized warranty repair, but also states that welding may work in some cases.

So when the Ford car or truck is in a collision or sets on fire, and the Ford ambulance comes to pick you up, the question is, should you call a taxi?.

VOLVO: As Volvo is part of Ford it too deserves a mention. Volvo faked safety and strength test advertising demonstrations to make its cars appear safer. Can any auto manufacturer or dealer be trusted to honor its marketplace privileges and to treat consumers honestly and fairly? The evidence suggests that consumers are fairly warned that trusting auto dealers and manufacturers is risky business. · · The Kiplinger Personal Finance Magazine (February 1997) printed a story entitled, Recycling Troubled Cars: How Lemons Get Back on the Road Again," by Ed Henry. This story traced a 1993 Volvo 940 lemon through four buyers without proper labeling or disclosures about the service problems associated with the vehicle. So while Chrysler (Chrysler, Jeep, Eagle & Plymouth) and General Motors has received the most public notoriety in laundering lemons, they are not alone. This data from http://www.autobuyology.org/car6.html

 

 

http://www.ford-problems.com/explorer-rear-axle.htm

Consumer Alert - Consumers Report Defective Rear Axles In 2002 - 2004 Ford Explorers
And Mercury Mountaineers!


Over the last year many Ford Explorer and Mercury Mountaineer owners have reported problems with the rear axle of the their vehicle. The symptoms usually inlcude a whining noise or humming from the rear of the Explorer. In some cases the noise is loud enough to drown out the radio in the vehicle. Ford's solution to the problem so far has been to replace the rear axle, but some consumers are reporting that the noise re-occurs shortly after the axle replacement. One consumer is now in need of a third axle, after having their first one replaced at 34,000 miles and again at 45,000 miles. Unfortunately, the consumer reports that Ford refuses to replace the second defective axle, leaving them with a $1500 - $2000 repair bill.

 

2004 Ford Explorer
Rear Axle Problem.

Hi all. I wanted to know if anyone has any advice or if this problem has happened to you. We have a V8 2004 Ford Explorer that we bought in August of 2003 and we have to get 2003 Ford Explorer rear axle replacement. Our 2003 Ford Explorer has been at the dealer for a week. It was flatbeded away last Tuesday and was diagnosed with a problem with the rear axle. I believe he said I popped a disc. We have never hauled anything. This is the second time the rear axle is being replaced. It was taken in last January (2004) because of a whining noise any time it was driven put on which fortunately is covered under warranty. I haul my bumper pull 2 horse trailer about 2x monthly (since Oct 2003) with my 1200lb Quarter Horse loaded. How could this happen to a new car? Is it my fault for expecting it to haul my trailer? I know other people who haul their horses with Explorer's and have never had any problems. Is this car of ours a lemon? I would like to know what you all think! Thanks!!!


2003 Ford Explorer needs third rear axle My 2003 explorer XLT, with towing package, needed a new rear axle assembly during warrenty period at 34,000 miles. The replacement axle failed again at 45,000 miles. Ford refuses to pay for the third new axle assembly. It seems to me that Ford replaced the first defective axle with a second defective axle and should be responsible. I've never towed anything with this vehicle and most miles on this vehicle are highway.

2003 Ford Explorer rear axle replacement. It was taken in last January (2004) because of a whining noise any time it was driven2003 Ford Explorer rear axle replacement Hi, Our 2003 Ford Explorer has been at the dealer for a week. It was flatbeded away last Tuesday and was diagnosed with a problem with the rear axle. I believe he said I popped a disc. We have never hauled anything. This is the second time the rear axle is being replaced. It was taken in last January (2004) because of a whining noise any time it was driven over 50 mph. At that point they supposedly replaced the rear axle. The dealer that I am using now said they 'replace the whole part' they don't "piece things together." I would say he is implying that the last time it was done half-assed. Now we are concered about keeping this car although to get rid of it we would be taking a financial lost...but we feel that when the whole computer had to be replaced when it was 5 days old...that it was just a lemon to start. Of course we joke that it is because I had to have red! This whole situation has left me feeling bad about Ford...I have to "beg" them for a rental because I don't have an extended warrantee...but why should I need to purchase an extended warrantee unless you are telling me that you have a faulty product! After reading the post that someone is already on their third rear axle replacement, I figure the financial lost may be less if I get rid of the car now. Any thoughts on whether you believe that they can actually repair this problem?Thanks for any help!

2002 Explorer Rear Axle Probelms. My 2003 Eddie Bauer has had similar axle issues (3.73 rear axle with trailer towing package and Class III hitch). I have never towed anything with it. First repair was rear differential's limited slip clutch packs. Next repair is complete rear differential. Symptoms include whining sound 65-75 mph especially as you lift off gas. I know what you mean about extended warranty, but mine came with one as a used vehicle (did not pay extra). SUV's in general tend to be high maintenance.

Ed's Involvement with failed Ford AXLE weld cracks:



CHRYSLER AXLE WELD CRACKS:

It's 2015, the most simple robot parts to weld on a car or truck are the axle welds, but it looks like some of the major axles manufactures cannot get the job doner.


CHRYSLER: IMPORTANT SAFETY RECALL N26 / NHTSA 13V-239 This notice applies to vehicles (VIN: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx). This notice is sent in accordance with the requirements of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. Chrysler has decided that a defect, which relates to motor vehicle safety, exists in some 2012 model year RAM Truck Cab Chassis (4500/5500 series) trucks equipped with four wheel drive.

The problem is the front axle tube welds on the Chryler Ram trucks may not have been welded correctly during the manufacturing process. Improperly welded front axle tubes could allow the differential housing to rotate under high torque operating conditions while in four wheel drive. Should the front axle tube welds break, the differential could rotate and cause the front propeller shaft universal joint to break. This can result in a loss of motive power or damage to surrounding components if the propeller shaft continues to spin after separation. This could cause a crash without warning.

 

HOW CULTURE CAN LEAD
TO THE ROBOT WELDING PLAGUE.


I wonder how much consideration management gave to the influence of the typical manual "Play Around" MIG weld shop culture on MIG welding robots. With the introduction of robots into an entrenched manual weld process, with it's self taught, unique culture and entrenched weld practices, it's logical to assume the robots would have some influence on the weld shop culture. and its also logical to assume that the manual welders will also influence the performance potential and health of the welding robots.




ITS THE YEAR 2006 AND FOR TWO DECADES THE MIG WELD PLAGUE HAS SLOWLY SPREAD FROM THE MANUAL WELD SHOPS TO THE GLOBAL ROBOT WELDING CELLS.

In a time when MIG weld automation has more focus than manual MIG welding, many weld shops are unknowingly spreading their manual weld shop myths and quality productivity diseases into the robot welding cells.
The results are lower than anticaipated robot weld production and extensive unnecessary robot weld rework. Think about it, your arc welding robots were not ill, confused or contaminated till they arrived at your weld department.

Anyone can "play around" with MIG equipment and make a weld without weld process control expertise. However it's virtually impossible with robots or weld automation to attain consistent, optimum weld quality and productivity without "weld process control expertise", and the implementation of effective weld process controls.

 

 

 


[] Ford / Volvo Manufacturing Mangement Issues.

[] Volvo Volvo 66 Possible corrosion and loosening of hood hinges if improperly maintained
Germany 12/1993
[] Volvo 1500 Volvo 440 Reinforcing plates required in front doors AUSTRIA 5/1990
[] Volvo 20000 Volvo 400 Over-sensitive mechanism for triggering air bag EUROPE 9/1994
[] Volvo 1800 Passanger cars Replacement of nuts and bolts between transmission and crankshaft JAPAN 0/1988

[] Volvo 35000 Passanger cars Problems with cruise control U.S.A 0/1988
[] Volvo 19000 Volvo S40 and V40 Problem with a diode in the electronic climate control system U.S.A 8/2001
[] Volvo 65000 1996 model 854, 855 Problems with the seat heaters U.S.A 12/2002
[] Volvo 3499 Volvo S 60 2002 Do not comply with federal safety standard U.S.A 8/2003

[] Volvo 15.067 Volvo V40 2002-3 Fuel leak U.S.A 1/2004
[] Volvo 33000 Passanger cars Replacement of brake cylinders due to defective gaskets WORLD WIDE 0/1988


[] Volvo Volvo 740 Defective steering linkage UK /
Japan 3/1992
[] Volvo 48000 Passanger cars Defective alternator cable USA / Canada / Japan 0/1984



Did the Ford culture contaminate the Volvo Swedes?




If you cannot trust the Swedes to make an honest reliable product,
who the hell are you going to trust. Ed Craig 05.

 

[] 2004 Volvo V40 Base Recall ID from NHTSA: 04V493000
Recall Date: 10/14/2004 Component: SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:POWER ASSIST:VACUUM:HOSES, LINES/PIPING, AND FITTINGS Potential Units Affected: 1719 Summary: ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES, THE NON-RETURN VALVE MAY CRACK DUE TO A POOR WELD CAUSING A VACUUM LEAK. Defect Consequence: IF THIS OCCURS, MORE BRAKE PEDAL FORCE MAY BE REQUIRED TO STOP THE VEHICLE AND/OR MAY EXPERIENCE A ROUGH ENGINE IDLE, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A CRASH.


[] 2004 Volvo V40 Base Recall ID from NHTSA: 03V424000
Recall Date: 10/24/2003 Component: FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE Potential Units Affected: 15067 Summary: ON CERTAIN SEDANS AND STATION WAGONS, THERE MAY BE A FUEL LEAK FROM THE FUEL RAIL DUE TO INADEQUATE WELDING. Defect Consequence: FUEL LEAKAGE IN THE PRESENCE OF AN IGNITION SOURCE COULD RESULT IN A FIRE.



 

Interested in Ford and Chrysler Axle weld problems?


 

 

WHEN IT COMES TO RESOLVING ROBOT WELD PROCESS OR MANUFACTURING ISSUES, HOW MANY AUTOMOTIVE PLANTS HAVE FIGURED OUT, THAT IT'S NOT THE QUANTITY OF BLACK BELT ENGINEERS, OR THE SIZE OF THE MANUFACTURING WELD TEAM THAT MATTERS, IT'S THE LEVEL OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROCESS EXPERTISE THAT EXISTS IN THE PLANT .

It's hard to imagine why in a global industry that has the highest amount of engineers versus blue collar workers, that industry would have so many manufacturing issues, unless of course many of the manufacturing management in that global industry was simply inept.

In the major auto manufacturers and their prime suppliers, engineers are typically in abundance and the majority of the manufacturing issues they struggle with daily will typically be found in three major process areas;


[1] The weld shop.

[2] The paint shop.
[3] The press shop.


The manufacturing issues that result daily with common processes that have been around for dedades, is usually a reflection of the lack of "management understanding" of the fundamental process requirements and for the requirements for process controls. If you cannot establish process contro
ls you cannot establish global best practices.

 

Your car insurance is with who?

State Farm Insurance Company is found liable to the tune of $456 million for short selling its auto consumers on after-market knockoff replacement parts on body and fender work. Replacing factory specified parts (most factory parts are as bad as the after market parts) with less rigorous after market knockoffs of inferior quality. (With steels 1 to 1.5 mm and poor weld joints there are few rigorous body parts on today's cars and trucks).

With the after market parts, it's believed consumers are in greater harms way, along with being shortchanged, because many after-market replacement parts are not made to auto manufacturer standards, (what standards? With average big three and tier one real world weld rework of over 40% how can you imply parts are built to standards?) and the parts may fail to perform up to the skimpy safety regulations for which they were intended, (most of the parts would fa
il if correctly tested). This paragraph was from http://www.autobuyology.org/car6.html.





THEY SEEM TO HAVE A HARD TIME BUILDING THEM, AND IT SEEMS
THAT MECHANICS HAVE A HARDER TIME REPAIRING THEM.





The CALIFORNIA BUREAU OF AUTOMOTIVE REPAIR reported that: "70% of automotive
repair technicians tested, c
annot diagnose & repair late model vehicles 1980 & newer.



Don't look under your car or truck carpet.

 

 

THE FRUSTRATED VICE PRESIDENT SPELLS IT OUT TO POOR
JOE THE TIER ONE PLANT MANUFACTURING MANAGER:

DAM IT JOE. IF YOU CANNOT CONTROL THE ROBOT WELDS WITH THE MILLIONS WE SPENT AND WITH ALL OUR ENGINEERING EXPERTISE, OUT SOURCE THE BLOODY PARTS OR BETTER STILL, SHIP THE ROBOTS AND PARTS TO MEXICO, WHERE WE CAN BURY THE BLOODY ISSUES IN THE INTESTINES OF BURRITOS AND CHEAP LABOR.

 

 

 

No sterotypes here. It gets better in section two. Find out why the Germans who typically love controls are from a manufacturing perpective too frequently out of control. Find out why it does not get any better with Chrysler and GM vehicles and the rest of the gang. Click Here.


Continue with other Vehical manufacturers at