Rear end damage

Blown F-150 · May 28, 2022

Vehicles other than ST’s are failing, plain and simple.
So although I really believe that stock ST’s are in a very low risk category compared to those that are tuned/modded, it still can and has happened to untuned vehicles.

I’m going to assume based on the this thread and others, that the bulk of failures outside of the ST model are PIU’s which can have the shit beaten out of them.

We will see more of these failures in the coming months for sure, another 2 have popped up on Facebook in the last couple of days. If you don’t want to mitigate the risk with aftermarket options, then don’t.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Blown F-150 · May 28, 2022

kgschlosser said:

Agreed that there is a “better way”, but it’s totally moot as cost of design and install would be totally prohibitive IMO.

There are no known failures when two bolts mount through the rear subframe and that’s with several ST’s over the 600whp mark.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

CareerFiremanGuy · May 28, 2022

The fact that it might have happened to untuned vehicles that maybe weren't beat on in no way affirms that it's an "issue."

So after 3 model years and a non failure rate of 99.907% indications are that there will not be a significant increase in failures any time soon.

If people want to intentionally mess outside of FORD's original design parameters, then that's on them. It's been this way as long as people have been modding/racing cars.

Let's not forget the adage "Racing a vehicle is a constant game of finding the weakest link."

96cobra · Jun 12, 2022

I have a 2022 st on order expected delivery by end of June. Has anyone received or looked at any built this month and delivered? Curious what i will get. My wife wanted this model and has a heavy foot. It will be her daily driver.

Blue Beast · Jun 12, 2022

Welcome

Dark Knight · Jun 12, 2022

bottom line is Im pissed, 2 bolt is stronger and more durable, they misrepresented product by dumbing it down,

bigcat1185 · Jun 12, 2022

Dale5403 said:

Against videos on this forum?

Dale5403 · Jun 12, 2022

bigcat1185 said:

In general not at all.

CareerFiremanGuy · Jun 12, 2022

Dale5403 said:

Me neither, it seems both you and I are against videos that relay false notions/premises.

CareerFiremanGuy · Jun 12, 2022

96cobra said:

What do you mean "curious what I will get"?

If you mean a 3 bolt or 4 bolt, all retail (i.e. "individual private purchases") will be 3 bolt.

bigcat1185 · Jun 13, 2022

CareerFiremanGuy said:

What was false about the video?

CareerFiremanGuy · Jun 13, 2022

bigcat1185 said:

Falsely blaming the bolt shear on FORD after they tuned it, made tons of drag strip runs, while using a launch control "chip". That is immaturity at its highest level.

bigcat1185 · Jun 14, 2022

CareerFiremanGuy said:

I think the blame comes from the fact Ford weakened the area by using three bolts compared to previous models that came with four bolts. I'm fairly certain there has not been any broken bolts on models that have four bolts, regardless of the abuse they receive, although I could be wrong.

Imagine buying a hiking shoe and that shoe handles all the abuse you throw at it as you hike the mountain hills, and then imagine buying the same shoe next year and the sole is thinner and the shoe laces are not as strong, and hiking those same hills results in the shoe falling apart. I would say the blame would be on the shoe manufacturer, not the hiker.

Edit: Let's not forget that Ford labels the Explorer ST as a performance vehicle, well knowing it will be abused.

CareerFiremanGuy · Jun 14, 2022

bigcat1185 said:

The blame rests entirely on those people who use FORD's products beyond the manufacturers intentions.
To propose the notion that FORD is responsible for damage that occurs outside of their intended function belies common sense and reason.

The "hiking shoe" analogy lacks support on multiple counts:
The shoe was made for hiking, the ST was not made to be substantially modified and then live it's life at the drag strip.
The shoe was made to sustain specific wear, deviating from such is abuse, which parallels people tuning/drag racing/installing launch control chips in their ST's.
The shoe was made to operate within specific environments, any alterations to that and the wearer loses the right to durability claims, same as modding the ST.

I could go on ...

Lastly, let's not forget that FORD labeling the Explorer ST as a performance vehicle doesn't mean people can strap a Saturn V rocket to it and not call it abuse.
An exaggerated example? Well, then what arbitrary limits to do we put on the vehicle? 552 hp? 673 hp? Drag racing once a week? Once a month? Six times a day?

Performance Vehicles Do Not = Race Vehicles

st8 · Jun 14, 2022

CareerFiremanGuy said:

The blame rests entirely on those people who use FORD's products beyond the manufacturers intentions.
To propose the notion that FORD is responsible for damage that occurs outside of their intended function belies common sense and reason.

The "hiking shoe" analogy lacks support on multiple counts:
The shoe was made for hiking, the ST was not made to be substantially modified and then live it's life at the drag strip.
The shoe was made to sustain specific wear, deviating from such is abuse, which parallels people tuning/drag racing/installing launch control chips in their ST's.
The shoe was made to operate within specific environments, any alterations to that and the wearer loses the right to durability claims, same as modding the ST.

I could go on ...

Lastly, let's not forget that FORD labeling the Explorer ST as a performance vehicle doesn't mean people can strap a Saturn V rocket to it and not call it abuse.
An exaggerated example? Well, then what arbitrary limits to do we put on the vehicle? 552 hp? 673 hp? Drag racing once a week? Once a month? Six times a day?

Performance Vehicles Do Not = Race Vehicles

While I get what you’re saying, the vehicle was still designed for 4. And they know that. They know 3 isn’t right. Even for stock vehicles it’s not right. That’s why they’re fixing all police explorers with the correct 4 bolts.

CareerFiremanGuy · Jun 14, 2022

A vehicle is designed according to what the manufacturer calculates as being safe for its intended use.

So if a manufacturer decides x, y or z are no longer required to meet its original design specs, then they reserve the right to change those items at any time.

Regarding the PIU's, their intended use are clearly not the same as for retail units.
Also, recall that PIU's do not have electronic parking brakes, so FORD has no other choice in that regard to prevent roll away in those vehicles if a bolt shear occurs.

GearHead_1 · Jun 14, 2022

CareerFiremanGuy said:

I don't believe this statement to be accurate. These are breaking in cars that haven't been tuned, police vehicles that were designed application-specific, and breaking on vehicles that are towing within acceptable limits. Anyone that believes that failures aren't happening behind 3.0 engines isn't thinking this through.

I know of nowhere the numbers are to support this one way or the other but to simply assume that we know what Ford's intentions were for this vehicle is silly. If only the vehicles that were being "abused" for lack of a better word, were the problem, Ford would not have acknowledged any problems.

Tommyc · Jun 14, 2022

LOL the Ford solid rear end and axle can handle pretty much anything hahahaha. Whatever, I installed the AWR brace and most likely will not get the recall done. I will let the future owner worry about that as when gas gets to $20/gallon it won't be significant. Yeah my 21 calls for the 4 bolt but did not get that. Oh well modify and move on.

st8 · Jun 14, 2022

GearHead_1 said:

Ive said exactly this! They wouldn’t have issued a recall if all the effected vehicles were tuned/modded. Ford would of just attributed it to that being the issue.

Blown F-150 · Jun 14, 2022

GearHead_1 said:

Bingo! I’m a firm believer that they started throwing in one-bolt subframes to keep the assembly line moving and some engineer figured there was enough of a safety margin to give it a thumbs up. Bonus for Ford as it reduced cost when they reduced the MSRP of the ST’s. They also cut costs in other areas that we are all aware of.

It was a short-sighted decision that is now bitting them in the ass.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sign Up! To view all forums and unlock additional cool features

Rear end damage

Member

Member

1000 Post Club

New Member

1000 Post Club

Member

Member

1000 Post Club

1000 Post Club

1000 Post Club

Member

1000 Post Club

Member

1000 Post Club

1000 Post Club

1000 Post Club

1000 Post Club

Member

1000 Post Club

Member