Cruise control recall - Page 7

kntryboy · #91 (**permalink**) 02-08-2005, 06:08 AM

I may try to check the number of amps this circuit draws this weekend....
It will require me to run some temporary wiring to the inside of my truck to check
the circuit............

Has anyone checked to see the amp draw of this circuit already???????

MBDiagMan · #92 (**permalink**) 02-08-2005, 08:20 AM

This being the case, if you want to make a circuit that draws an extremely small amount of current through the deactivation switch, use a small transistor circuit to energize a normally open relay. The contact of the relay goes in place of the existing switch and the power for the coil energizing circuit is switched by the ignition switch.

Actually if you used a simple relay, you would bring the current down less than an Amp and could fuse it accordingly. By powering the relay from some point that is hot only with the key on, you do away with the risk of fire while parked and drastically reduce the risk while key is on because of the drastically reduced current availability.

ORRrrr.... you could just wait for the new switch in April.

Have a great day,
Doc

LxMan1 · #93 (**permalink**) 03-02-2005, 09:25 PM

Why are only 2001 Supercrews being recalled and not the rest of the trucks like std and supercab? They all use the same switch.

MBDiagMan · #94 (**permalink**) 03-03-2005, 12:41 PM

I'm sure that the switches will interchange, but I expect that the difference is that there was certain run of these switches that were made by a particular manufacturer that are the problem ones. They know which trucks the known bad switches went into.

I fully expect that you could remove your switch and one from another model that is not being recalled would screw in place and fit perfect. Just because a switch is interchangable does not mean that it is of the same quality or construction technique.

Have a great day,
Doc

ALL4RD · #95 (**permalink**) 03-03-2005, 12:59 PM

I also have a 97 F150 and just got the recall on that one.
Still waiting on the offical "via snail mail" notice for the 2000.

fordguy21 · #96 (**permalink**) 03-05-2005, 08:15 PM

After trying to use cruise control on the interstate and it did not work I dissconnected the sensor and noticed wet fluid on the connector. I will tape it up and call ford monday to see what they say.

Mine is a 1997 f-150 4.2l SC

monckywrench · #97 (**permalink**) 03-05-2005, 09:36 PM

"What we don't yet know, and I think each of us don't learn first hand, is exactly how the switch fails. Is the switch portion down inside the switch exposed to fluid? Probably not. I am guessing that the diaphragm of the switch develops a leak allowing fluid up into the terminal area where it conducts enough to provide the right amount of resistance to develop heat."

If anyone with an Enerpac wants to try it, they could saw off the end of a master cylinder and tap the bore for an appropriate fitting, then apply pressure until the switch seeps.

I don't have one handy to cut up yet (I'll snag one from the next Ford wreck we scrap), but I expect the diaphragm-to-switch body seal is a gasket/seal retained by a crimp. Seepage would be almost inevitable with this design (even military aircraft engine switches made this way seep now and then) so I suggest the fault lies in using a pressure switch in the first place.
Using a pressure switch when a redundant mechanical switch would be safer and at least as reliable is an interesting choice. Since Ford has used pressure switches over so many vehicles, I wonder if they would view changing the design as an admission of guilt.
I like my Fords as machines, but no particular reasons exist to trust the company, especially given their delayed and obviously grudging response to this problem.

fordguy21 · #98 (**permalink**) 03-05-2005, 10:27 PM

tell me that their isn't a common factor between these stories?

www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/f150_fires.htm

Aftrmidnite · #99 (**permalink**) 03-05-2005, 10:35 PM

I have a feeling they used a Reed switch with a rubber compound isolating the terminals rather than a more expensive bellows type switch. I've seen countless bellow switches in the HVAC industry take unbelievable pressure/temperature changes 24/7 and all in all very few failures where they leak.

shane7209 · #**100** (**permalink**) 03-13-2005, 10:32 AM

is this the same switch as the 2000 year????

Thanks

projectSHO89 · #**101** (**permalink**) 03-14-2005, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shane7209

is this the same switch as the 2000 year????

Thanks

Unplug it IMMEDIATELY!

Steve

shane7209 · #**102** (**permalink**) 03-14-2005, 11:05 PM

oh I did. went oh WOW look at that!

monckywrench · #**103** (**permalink**) 03-17-2005, 06:37 PM

http://cbs11tv.com/investigations/lo...049191808.html
Seems these switches incorporate a Kapton membrane. I can't speak to Kapton failures in Navy service but in the Air Force a number of of fires and arcing incidents have happened due to Kapton deterioration. Literally miles of wire were removed from F-15s for this, and it was frequently mentioned in wire harness maintenance training.
Using an insulation that gets brittle in ordinary atmospheric conditions is bad enough, but in a BRAKE FLUID pressure switch? ANY switches with a Kapton membrane should be recalled, and it was known to be a problem material since the 1990s!
This kind of negligent behavior is begging for a class action suit, especially since many switches will inevitably be missed by a recall and be failing throughout the rest of the affect fleet life.

shane7209 · #**104** (**permalink**) 03-17-2005, 10:24 PM

Interesting I sent Ford a email asking about it and got the standard reply, thanks for your email. So as of yet nothing back from them. It has been a good truck and I do like it quite a bit. My problem is if there is an issue were it can burn my house down, endanger my family all for a simple inexpensive switch WELL! Why not just take care of it before the class action happens, or better yet a furture Ford buyer dies in a home fire caused by his truck. I really do not understand why they can't grasp one bad deal with a customer leads to WELL I HEARD FORD DOEN"T. and it snow balls from there.

monckywrench · #**105** (**permalink**) 03-18-2005, 10:09 PM

" endanger my family all for a simple inexpensive switch WELL!"
They may have evaluated the cost of insurance settlements (i.e. reimbursing customer for crisped family members) vs a switch replacement. Ford has demonstrated they only react to safety issues when they are repeatedly exposed and followed by litigation.
It wouldn't be the first time.
http://www.fordpinto.com/blowup.htm
http://www.firepanelllc.com/ ingenious aftermarket fix for Crown Vics that want to be Zippos-er, I mean Pintos. The crash videos are worth a look.
Switches again-
http://www.wxyz.com/wxyz/ys_investig...585993,00.html
"Ford’s own test showed five years ago that these cruise control switches can spit fire, even in a car long parked in the garage with the engine off. This, some say, has already been the result in a few cases. In others, only the vehicles themselves have been destroyed."
Priceless:
"Ford says only four models – the 2000 model F-150 Pickups, Expeditions and Navigators and the 2001 model Supercrew Pickups -- are being recalled, because none of the other 416 models built with the same switch design are burning up at the same rate as these."

http://www.wxyz.com/wxyz/ys_investig...583188,00.html