What are your thoughts?
YouTube - FordQualityUp's Channel

 

But initial quality means only that the first 90 days are counted. My guess is that problems after 3 or 5 years may still favor the Toyota and Honda brands, given things like Ford Explorer transmissions that fail at 30k-70k miles, etc.

Still, I'll give a good "attaboy" to Ford and continue to recommend their products.

George

 

Does that mean that camshafts, tailgates and frames rotting out don't negatively affect reliability???? You don't work for Consumer Reports do you??

 

I tip my hat to Ford.

-but-

He quoted the, "....Global Quality Research System results...."


What's that?..........a Google search returns nada.

 

GQRS is a Ford internal process which takes into account the NVQS (New Vehicle Quality Survey), which record what this report is talking about:
TGW's (Things Gone Wrong)

Forgetting the acronym's here - for the layperson, it means that every issue identified on new vehicles that Ford sells, by the returned surveys filled in by the consumers (you know the one, where you buy a new car, and then after 3 months you get a survey asking what you think of it).
Each time a person ticks a box saying they are not happy with a certain part of the car for any reason whatsoever (they don't need to specify why) it counts as a "thing gone wrong".
Ford, Honda and Toyota are averaging around 1200 TGW's, which means for every car that they sell a customer has 1.2 issues with it.

That make sense?
While your experience may be different - statistical analysis has shown a direct correlation between LTIS (Low Time in Service) issues - this is the New Vehicle Quality Survey, and warranty costs in the first 90 days of ownership and HTIS failures (3 year warranty costs and dealer raised issues).
There will always still be design issues that may rear their ugly head down the track, but the majority of them are actually caught by owners noticing "something wrong" with their vehicle early in ownership.


As for the instance you mentioned regarding Explorer transmissions... do you have any experience with them personally?
My experience, that despite a couple of failures in early model 2001/02 Explorers, they are flawless...

 

That's odd. I guess I owe someone the cost of repairing my transmissions at least 4 times by now.

 

I do not have personal experience with Explorer transmissions, except that I did a LOT of Internet research on 02-04 Explorers last year when I was looking to buy a vehicle, and between anecdotal evidence from Internet sites as well as Consumer Reports ratings (which I do take with a grain of salt but which I do give a little weight to), AND a talk with my Ford service department manager (who I work with on my van), I felt that I did not want to deal with the possibility of problems with transmissions and failed wheel bearings. In particular, I found a minty 02 2WD Explorer on that dealer's lot, walked in to the svc manager, asked him if I should buy it, and he rolled his eyes...

It's become clear to me lately that the design of the Explorer transmission uses steel pistons in soft aluminum bores, and these wear prematurely and leak, causing problems. These are NOT going to be evident in 90 days. I bought a new '96 GMC Savana van which curiously had a steel piston in the valve body, and had SEVEN valve bodies and THREE transmissions put into it, under the 60k warranty that I bought. Trans problems started at 45k miles, drivetrain flawless until then (although the rest of the van was already Hell.)

In 2000, my wife and I both got "new" cars, two years old, off-lease vehicles. Hers was a 98 Sable, mine was a 98 Acura 2.5TL, Sable had 26k miles, Acura had 37k. We sold them both last year, the Sable with 109k miles, the Acura with 132k. In that time, I will say that both were equally good, reliable cars. But the Sable felt much "older" than the Acura--were we to have kept it, it would have needed new shocks/struts, it had some electrical issues (dome light switches in the doors), engine was using a bit of oil (1 quart/2k miles) and worst of all, it was starting to rust in many areas (we're in the Detroit area). The Acura looked like a new car, no rust anywhere. Every switch and control felt new and solid, whereas the Sable's turn signal switch was getting a bit flaky. Virtually no squeaks and rattles in the Acura, whereas the Sable had a number of noises. Rear springs were sagging on the Sable.

When the Sable was on a hoist early on, I noticed a "Ford Reman" sticker on the transmission, so that had been replaced in the first 26k miles.

The Acura was consistently a top-rated car (when new and when used) in Consumer Reports testing, with the only trouble area being the exhaust system, and I did replace the rear muffler twice, the center muffler once. The Sable, bless its heart, had the original exhaust system when we sold it--and I would not have wanted to pay the bucks for a new dual system for that car.

In conclusion, I'm definitely a cheerleader for Ford.

My '02 E150 has been a dream compared to the old Savana, and at 60k miles, I just ran out of warranty time on it. It needed a new starter when new (faulty part), bunch of front end parts, the usual brake replacements which I accept on big vans, and the big kicker was that it was a Romeo 4.6 with the bad run of early PI heads (insufficient cooling in the rear cylinder areas). So it got a new set of cylinder heads at 42k miles....I'm quite glad that it cost me only a $100 deductible. Had I only had the 3/36 warranty, I'd still be driving the original heads until the rear valves burned out, and I'd be unhappy about that. Oh, and the cruise recall--twice...

The only Toyota I ever owned was a 1980 FJ40 Land Crusher, and that certainly was not a typical Toyota or a typical vehicle. I currently hate Toyota's styling as well.

As I said, here's an "attaboy" for Ford. My next vehicle purchase is likely to be a 4 cyl Escape, and I'm waiting for the '09's to see if I want a stick or an auto. The 2.5 liter four is also appealing.

As a stopgap, I wanted a small SUV or wagon, skipped the Explorer based on the reliability along with the poor gas mileage, looked for used 4 cyl Escapes, and happened upon a Mazda Protege5, which has a Mazda engine (but that was used in the Probe), shares the auto trans with the Focus, and is what the Escort should have been had it evolved into a next gen with a Mazda design and offered a GT wagon. Consumer Reports likes that car as well, and so far, they're right. Zero problems from 52k to current 58k.

 

My neighbor has had one Explorer after another. No problems till the 1998 had a water pump fail. A first for them as I have known them for over ten years, and they have always had two Explorers. Hers is always the new one, and his which is usually five years old and looking at over 100K miles when he takes it over. But tranny problems, suspension problems? Nah! Not to them. They usually get over 200K miles on a truck and then trade for a new one, and do the user rotation. LOL!

 

It sounds like a bunch of BS to me. Ford might be improved and even close in initial quaility but in long term quality they are still sucking wind.

What the hell does initial quality mean anyways? Any vehicle sounds and runs good for 90 days.

They wish they were of the same quality as Toyota and Honda.

 

I will tell you based on my opinion for what that's worth we have had a good number of Yotas, Fords, and GM and I agree 100% with them mag. I don't see anything special with the yota or Honda maybe at one time they had an edge but, that's gone now IMO its only a matter of time before people start to realize it too. I think they are all very close but lets face it there was a really dark period there where the domestics ran into alot of probs that still haunt them and maybe made the imports look even better? IDK I am the most problematic vehicles we have had in the family are 1) Nissan Titan by a looooong shot 2)07 Toyota Camry 3) 01 GMC sierra it was beat pretty hard though 4) 05 Ram had a power steering line go that's it 5) 07 150 no probs 6) 99 150 only reg maintenance truck is bullet proof. I know that's not a scientific study but, from my experience I wouldn't have a prob buying any one of them.

 

Motor vehicles are alot like electronics. If it's going to fail or prove problematic, the part will usually make itself known in the first 90 days. After that your chances of having an issue with a part drastically drops. Unless of course you don't take care of your car, or you drive high miles where the wear becomes a factor.

 

For every Honda running with over 200K miles, there's a Taurus right behind it

Sorry, bad joke. Mostly true, but bad joke.

 

The electronics in motor vehicles are very much like electronics, but mechanical parts are not.

I was reviewing my service records for my '02 Econoline and in the first week, the starter was replaced, so I'll attribute that to the "bell curve" for electronics failures. It never stranded me, but would take a few clicks of the ignition to start...not good in the first week.

But, Explorer transmissions, I now know, have a problem with steel pistons riding in soft metal bores. They will not fail in the first 90 days, but after 500,000 shifts, they will wear out the bores, and this will cause other catastrophic transmission problems. This is a mechanical design problem, not a QC problem. I had a '96 GMC Savana that, in 66k miles, had 7 valve bodies and 3 different transmissions in it (under warranty, thank God). The problem? A steel piston that traveled in a soft aluminum valve body, wore the bore out, and took the rest of the transmission out when it leaked. You could drive either of these transmissions a million miles on the freeway and they'd probably live through it, but in a normal driving cycle, soft bores wear out in less than 100k miles...I'd think the engineers would sleeve the darn bores or something...but that might cost $2 more per vehicle.

Likewise, I have an early Romeo PI 4.6 in my van, and the bad design of the engine cooling passages in the rear of the cylinder heads would cause the valve stems to carbon up, and tick....probably eventually leading to burned valves. This is a design problem. I got a new pair of heads for $100, thanks to my Premium Care warranty, at 42k miles.

And even some electronic problems are longer-term things. Although the actual failure rate is fairly small, I'll use the Ford cruise control switches as an example. These do not fail in the first 90 days, but over years, when brake fluid eventually seeps into them. I think a plastic membrane eventually wears out due to heat and age. This is a medium-term materials failure, maybe like certain cars having dashboards that crack in the sun after 5 years when they really shouldn't. I think another stupid design problem with the cruise switch is to leave the thing hot at all times--can't imagine why that was done....

I am certain that Honda and Toyota have had similar problems with medium and long-term failures, but I believe that the domestic makers have more of these problems, likely due mostly to bean-counters. I think the problematic Explorer wheel bearings are cheap Chinese or Korean imported bearings, instead of high quality bearings that should be used...

 

I dont get it?

 

Meaning there's a whole crap-load of Tauruses (Taurii) that out-ran everything in it's class, that no one ever gives Ford credit for...