Fords ultimate screw up

[retiredfse]

Having spent 35 years with Ford retiring in 2007, and working on new vehicle launches from 87, including the original Explorer Launch Team I seen a lot, good and bad.

The worst design that anyone ever signed off on is the 3.5L with the waterpump inside the front cover. Never mind the 9 hour R&R time, ALL WATERPUMPS EVENTUALLY LEAK!!!! Is there nobody home in engineering! Can anyone say long term durability? Used vehicle resale value?

The 3.5L is the acheles heel in every vehicle built with it.
I was recently at one of my old dealers that had two wiped by waterpumps leaking oil into coolant!!

 

[Rick]

Occasionally you just have to wonder what the heck they were thinking. This is definitely one of those times...

 

[BrooklynBay]

Welcome to this forum! Were you part of the concept vehicle program?

 

[retiredfse]

Almost as good as the sign off on putting metal shields over plastic gas tanks on escorts without considering expansion ratios from heat. 100,000 tanks replaced! The guy that signed off on the waterpump has never worked on a vehicle either! GUARANTEED!

 

[hsquare]

Say retiredfse, can you tell us a little about the dodgy timing chain tensioners in the 4.0L V6?
Was that a design evolution or did that come from Cologne as part of the original design?

Welcom aboad too, by the way.

 

[sloop]

is this the 3.5l offered in the explorer or the 3.5l ecoboost? or both?

 

[retiredfse]

The german engine was great except for the oil leaks. The other screwup was the 4.0sohc with no keyways on the camshafts. Design engineering should be required to have hands on experience before they a
can touch anything. Had 250,000 on my 91 that I walked down the line in may of 90.

 

[hsquare]

Now that would be an experience . . . walking your own vehicle down the assembly line.
Then driving it home.

I haven't experienced a great deal of oil leaks on mine, touch wood! Thanks for the heads-up though, I'll monitor the levels more carefully.

Unfortunately, behind a good team of engineers is a small group of accountants that think they are engineers and make price based decisions, rather than realistic ones.
Most car manufacturers have a history of such silliness. Ford with the decision to use Firestone tyres, Volkswagon on their decision to mount gearbox shaft plummer blocks with blind rivets, the dodgy fuel tanks on the Pinto, rubbish airbags bought from the one source by many manufacturers, etc, etc . . .

We forum users are fortunate that you are on onboard . . . . and you can expect a few questions from many here from time to time.

 

[Turdle]

Honda's have had a timing belt driven water pump for years. Do the timing belt and pump maintenance when required and guess what? no problems. They are some of the most reliable cars out there. It also helps to check the oil once in while.

 

[retiredfse]

they are not inside the engine. Belt and pump replacement is not a 9 hour job on a honda.

 

[Turdle]

they are not inside the engine. Belt and pump replacement is not a 9 hour job on a honda.

Yes they ( honda water pump) are under the timing cover, and driven by the timing belt. I have done several. A lot of cars use an internal water pump, ford is just now catching up.

 

[bigdude2468]

No your are right but every Honda & Toyota has to have the timing belt changed every 60,000 miles. So you change the water pump as it is staring you in the face anyway. I believe that is about a $600 - $800 job. Drive 180,000 miles and you spent $2000 on timing belts and water pumps.
Certainly this design is questionable but hardly as bad as the Toyota's engines that generated sludge and Toyota blaming owners for not changing their oil when in fact most had changed the oil. How about 10+ years of Subaru's that went through head gaskets like clock work and only recently did Subaru make a design change.

Water pumps on the typical design do eventually leak but that is primarily due to the high tension the serpentine belt exert on the pulley. Wouldn't a timing chain reduce that tension substantially?

 

[sirhk100]

I thought moving away from the 7.3L powerstroke was Fords ultimate screw up personally.

 

[Turdle]

No your are right but every Honda & Toyota has to have the timing belt changed every 60,000 miles. So you change the water pump as it is staring you in the face anyway. I believe that is about a $600 - $800 job. Drive 180,000 miles and you spent $2000 on timing belts and water pumps.
Certainly this design is questionable but hardly as bad as the Toyota's engines that generated sludge and Toyota blaming owners for not changing their oil when in fact most had changed the oil. How about 10+ years of Subaru's that went through head gaskets like clock work and only recently did Subaru make a design change.

Water pumps on the typical design do eventually leak but that is primarily due to the high tension the serpentine belt exert on the pulley. Wouldn't a timing chain reduce that tension substantially?

Nope, on the Honda Accord of 2003 vintage, severe duty says 105k miles. This one is my most recent encounter at 130k miles. The water pump was changed but was also completely leak free. Timing belt also looked great but since it was overdue the work was done. 3.0 v6

 

[SlinginIron]

I thought moving away from the 7.3L powerstroke was Fords ultimate screw up personally.

Agreed

 

[NICE59FORDF100]

Having started my first gen production numbers project, I'm interested to pic your brain on some of the 1991 early production units - may I PM you asking some question? Sorry to hijack this thread, hard to find some folks behind the original UN46 program