Rear end damage

[ZookaRoo]

yup, it’s a joke. So what is the correct fix then ford?? You’re proposing two different fixes for the legit same exact issue. I mean it’s kinda insulting that they think customers won’t find this out lol the issue is the same, regular explorer vs police explorer. Yet you’re implementing two different solutions. Ford needs to pay.

Yeah, this is very disappointing

 

[Dale5403]

The way it reads it includes the models with the 2.3L also. That really seems odd.

 

[ZookaRoo]

The way it reads it includes the models with the 2.3L also. That really seems odd.

It does seem that way, but under the subject is say certain 2020-2022 models....which is still vague

 

[st8]

It does seem that way, but under the subject is say certain 2020-2022 models....which is still vague

That’s what I’m confused about. I thought all 2020s had the 4 bolt frame. And it doesn’t mention the 2022 police explorer.

 

[KANSAS]

And why are they recalling those of us that have four bolts?

Because to do otherwise would be admitting the problem is caused by the change to the three bolt design. I doubt Ford will ever do that.

 

[KANSAS]

Because to do otherwise would be admitting the problem is caused by the change to the three bolt design. I doubt Ford will ever do that.

Also note the bulletin only talks about what happens with a broken bolt when the vehicle is parked. Nothing about the real problem of the bolt breaking while driving which of course is the only time the vehicle is accelerating.

 

[ZookaRoo]

Because to do otherwise would be admitting the problem is caused by the change to the three bolt design. I doubt Ford will ever do that.

Does anybody have the TSB that was issued the the bolt did break? I thought the fix for that was to replace with the correct part. If that is the case the TSB seems to contradict the recall PCM update for the same issue.

 

[KANSAS]

Does anybody have the TSB that was issued the the bolt did break? I thought the fix for that was to replace with the correct part. If that is the case the TSB seems to contradict the recall PCM update for the same issue.

I think only applies if it breaks.

2020 Ford Explorer suspension TSB (Bulletin SSM 50471)

Bulletin Date: Feb. 7, 2022 Component: Suspension. Bulletin Summary: Some 2020-2022 explorer vehicles may exhibit a rear axle mounting bolt that has broken. In order to correct the condition, the rear subframe, differential cover, and mounting bolts will need to be replaced in addition to any other damaged

 

[MattJ716]

It'ss a full blown safety recall.. not just a TSB. Dealerships wont be able to deliver vehicles to customers until it is fixed and we that have the recall can go and get the remedy as soon as it's availalbe.

I'm off today but will dive into the recall further tomorrow when I'm at work.

The letter sent to dealers states that just a PCM flash is the fix... i hope thats not the case.. lol

 

[Cajun Heat]

Crap mo stink! I'll wait until enough ST owners get this done and complain to Ford about the loss in power. Hopefully they do the right thing and update this to a subframe swap.

 

[ZRX61]

And why are they recalling those of us that have four bolts?

They just want to look underneath to see if it has the correct part or not.

 

[TMac]

Of course, the jury is still out on the "fix", but I am betting that if it is a PCM fix, it'll be something that may not limit hp/torque, as that would just open up another can of worms. If you think of it from a manufacturer's perspective, the best way to handle this midterm would be something that would limit a tuner's ability to change the tune. Of course, if it's mechanical, some type of differential isolator might be an alternative (I can't see Ford replacing vast amounts of subframes, but it's possible). It's also possible that it's something as simple as some bolts that weren't heat treated correctly. We can all speculate as much as we like, but that would be the most likely "fixes" IMHO.

 

[KANSAS]

All I can see a software change doing is to limit all acceleration to be a soft start. You would still have 400 hp peak but it would take longer to get there.

 

[Cruising68]

If it's a PCM change only, my guess is they are tweaking the torque management. Most vehicles have some type to limit abuse. IMO it will definitely involve pulling power under certain conditions. With GM if you pounded the throttle and downshifted, there was always a noticeable lag before power came on. All was done to limit the internal bashing of parts in the transmission. At least in GM's this could be tuned out if you wanted to take the chance and/or beefed up your trans.

The more this appears to not be a mechanical fix, the better I feel about my subframe on order.

 

[Dark Knight]

ridiculous and unethical, we should start a letter writing campaign

 

[StarWhite22]

02/22 build. Has only 1 bolt. Was kinda bummed when I looked underneath. Just bought it back in March. Been excellent the whole time (one family trip to myrtle beach already under its belt. But I am curious what this fix entails. Would really like 2 bolts. Recall notice just popped up today on FordPass app.

 

[Blown F-150]

I’m just going to sit back and let it play out. Ford will often put of safety recalls and do the minimum to begin with and then there are subsequent recalls/TSBs. It’s all about the bottom dollar unfortunately.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RobHalo]

I'd of course rather see the proper parts installed than this PCM change bs. But what if they decided to pull some power from the launch to "protect" the bolt, and bumped up peak power to compensate? If the result of the "tune" was a faster vehicle, maybe there wouldn't be many complaints about slower 60 foots?

 

[Cruising68]

Unfortunately, all guesswork until we actually see what they do and if a PCM update I'm sure it won't be long until we get some results. I will avoid having the recall done until I see what others experience. And I am definitely installing the new crossmember even if before we know the results of this recall as I'm not willing to take the chance it breaks at speed.

 

[Blown F-150]

I'd of course rather see the proper parts installed than this PCM change bs. But what if they decided to pull some power from the launch to "protect" the bolt, and bumped up peak power to compensate? If the result of the "tune" was a faster vehicle, maybe there wouldn't be many complaints about slower 60 foots?

As already stated, we just don’t know what they are doing yet, but if I’m reading what was posted from Ford correctly, it’s for lower HP models as well and Ford really hits on the “safety” factor that the vehicle could roll if still in park with the busted bolt. It isn’t far fetched to think that they will flash the vehicles so the park brake is engaged when the vehicle is in park.

This is a safety recall first and foremost and there is already a TSB in place to replace the Subframe if you have an actual failure. We’ll find out more in the near future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk