Thread regarding Ford layoffs

Explorer Class Action: 1 Bolt Cost Save Backfire?

Back in April 2022, The Blue Oval recalled select 2020-2022 Ford Explorer models after it discovered that the rear axle mounting bolt may fracture when the vehicle is accelerating, which can lead to severe noise and vibration, or worse – disconnected driveshafts and the potential for the vehicle to roll away when in park. The automaker instructed dealers to replace these defective rear axle mounting bolts with new parts, but some customers felt like this fix was inadequate, which has prompted some to file a lawsuit over the matter, according to Car Complaints.

The lawsuit – Caricofe, et al., v. Ford Motor Company – was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California and is being spearheaded by Capstone Law APC. It alleges that Ford Explorer models affected by this recall are equipped with defective rear subframes attached by only one rear axle horizontal mounting bolt, which means that they’re incapable of handling the output generated by the Explorer ST’s high performance powertrain. It notes that when this bolt fractures, it causes the rear differential to drop.

When this occurs, the lawsuit states, it can lead to additional damage to a number of components including the exhaust, suspension, and driveshaft. However, the three plaintiffs named in the case have not experienced these issues – though each has had a dealer perform the recommended repairs as part of the recall process, which they claim are inadequate. Additionally, the lawsuit contends that Ford was aware of this issue, though it only made changes to a handful of models due to supply chain issues.

“Ultimately, Ford implemented the four bolt subframe in only a small subset of the 2020 Ford Explorer STs with higher horsepower and torque ratings, the rollout for which immediately preceded the Class Vehicles,” the lawsuit states. “On information and belief, Ford willfully substituted the unsafe rear subframe assembly (with one rear axle mounting bolt) for the safer-as-designed four bolt assembly due to supply chain issues beginning in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.”

by
| 1631 views | | 10 replies (last June 22, 2023) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1n6jQaaF

10 replies (most recent on top)

No, the "one bolt" (it's actually 3) was never part of the Explorer STs original spec. All inaugural redesign 2020 STs had 4 bolts holding the diff to the rear subframe. Ford's parts-database still showed this 4-bolt subframe assembly for later models that they had swapped for 3.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @9bae+1n6jQaaF

Now another recall on the Ford Explorer. This time it's the window switches... The plastic chrome edge wears off and has sharp edge. Another wasted trip to dealer service and wait. Cheap parts and no wonder quality is bad. And we expect the customer's to be loyal to lease or buy?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @2foy+1n6jQaaF

The one bolt system was always part of the original plan. The Ford got one bolt and the Lincoln got two bolts. Its a common sub frame. They knew the one bolts would fail on the higher torque versions on the Explorer. it came out of durability cycle. I management did not care

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1piv+1n6jQaaF

To note, this vehicle was not a Model e product. Don't expect this type of issue to occur on any next-gen Model e BEV mobilty products and services. Ford's future will be game changes for quality and advancement.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1jmr+1n6jQaaF

This is more than one bolt - it is really about a different cheaper subassembly made for one bolt rather than four, plus three other bolts. So it is a huge cost savings for Ford - if it worked correctly and does not cause any long term issue.

However, this is Ford so it will go bad. For something as important as rear axle subassembly, seems like there should be at least two bolts for safety in case on goes wrong. Don’t know if four is really better than two, but two is better than one for safety standpoint. I don’t see this going well for Ford at all..sigh just another day at Ford I suppose.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1qax+1n6jQaaF

...and yet the Management who pushed and approved this TVM action will never be held accountable. In fact they will probably be or have been promoted.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1etg+1n6jQaaF

Poor engineering period.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rdm+1n6jQaaF

I hope they don't blame Work From Home for this one!!! Sounds more like a management decision.. Get rid of TVM.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fet+1n6jQaaF

Who needs bolts, get some wire and duct tape at home de pot…you should be good!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @tjx+1n6jQaaF

Save a nickel on a bolt, spend ten million defending a customer lawsuit. All on Farley’s tenure. When will the Ford family say enough is enough?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @rfj+1n6jQaaF

Post a reply

: