Ford your SA. Seems like a few high mileage transits had the drive shaft come apart. No fix yet, but Ford is shipping parts for a temp fix to current owners. We can not deliver new units, even with the temp fix.

 

Beautiful...

 

Is it a giubo?

 

Honestly don't know which connector it is. I know it happened to a tiny percentage, like maybe a dozen units from what our Ford rep said. The problem is... think about what happens on a tractor when a PTO seperates and the amount of damage that can cause, now place that under a highway speed vehicle and you've got a real potential for damage and injury so Ford's taking the safe route, which is good for us consumers.

 

Good news indeed about Ford's taking the lead in this Frantz---thanks for sharing.

I've seen underbody photos showing a hoop installed to prevent the drive shaft hitting the ground should one of the giubo joints separate. Is that a regular production addition or optional?

 

There is some additional info inside of this one:

Ford Recalls 402,000 Transit Vans For Driveshaft Problems | CarComplaints.com

Oh... boy! So instead of using a U-joint on the driveshaft, they used a flexible disk joint? On the main power transmission path? What a place to experiment!

Note the possible permanent fix will be a "redesigned flexible coupling" (gonna try it again?) with what sure sounds like a driveshaft restrainer and a shield when/if it breaks free again!
OR,
"installing a revised driveshaft equipped with a universal joint" (duh, fix it the RIGHT way!).

Somebody(s) really screwed up. Either Ford Powertrain Engineers themselves with a poorly thought-out design of their own, or they believed the story from one of their suppliers who had "the next great thing", and did not do their due diligence in researching and life testing it. Mistakes like that are really inexcusable. All Engineering programs need some devil's advocates that use their brains and THINK, and blue-sky up possibilities to investigate, and not just depend on computer programs to "prove" that it works with sufficient margin.

Remember the millions of cruise control fail-safe pressure switches mounted on the master cylinders, that are powered all the time, even when ignition is OFF? And the reason their high-tech Kevlar diaphragms ruptured and caused fires? Because they specified to TI, the maker of the part, the range of pressures and the number of times of actuation before failure, way up there in number. But NO ONE ever thought to think about or add a "must survive with repeated negative pressure (vacuum) of XX".
It was the consulting company that they hired after it all hit the fan that postulated "what would happen if a brake system pressure went slightly negative?" Bingo! And when they then tested the Kevlar diaphragms under a slight vacuum, which made them flex the other way, they found failure with enough applications of vacuum.

Spark plugs? How long have spark plugs been around? How could you screw it up? Something like only 3 threads of engagement in an Aluminum cylinder head? Who does that?
Then a new design plug and head with long spark plug with plenty of cylinder head engagement, but with a stress point in the plug that corrosion increasing the applied torque to remove, causes it to break? Really?

Some of this stuff, from an Engineering perspective, you just can't make up! There needs to be devil's advocates, people who are not responsible for designing a specific part with the pressures of schedule and cost that that all entails, who can stand off to the side, and THINK!

Do I sound harsh? Yup! Should be! Do I want to hear "oh, but mfg. xxx has problems too"? NO! Should be the pursuit of excellence, not just a little bit better than the other guy(s)!

I'll put away my soapbox now, I hardly ever use it anymore now that I'm retired, and don't have to worry about what we might have missed as we were designing products and systems.

 

It's not as simple as making the best truck possible either. Ford's (and any company's) primary concern is making money by selling units. The majority of sales are not based on how well they hold up at 200k, but how cheap, quiet, and efficient they are when the stickers are still on them. It's a balancing act of compromises for sure. Even in commercial sales (my own main focus), it's amazing how many customers shop for a vehicle like they do a personal luxury lease. MAYBE everyone just does their homework online, but based on the other questions asked, I'd say no. Folks don't want to talk about lifetime maintenance cost too much. The big fleets trade out before getting to there in most cases and the mom and pops just assume whatever is cheapest will be the cheapest in the long run. Many aspects of today's vehicles were once considered exotic, short lived, and dangerous when first introduced. Hydraulic brakes, over-head valve, v motors, fuel injection, turbo chargers, tubeless tires, electronics in general, the list goes on. And for added fun, we need to include the requirements of government regulation to the game too.

 

In my experience, there is no 100% perfection. It does appear as if auto makers are working with a lot of virtual reality and not enough road time. That Ford is reacting quickly to real road problems is a good sign.

 

It's all about cost. Customers don't want to pay for perfection or long extensive road testing. Customers expect it though and seem to think they are paying too much as it is, which isn't the case. Manufacturers simply can't make them perfect before bringing them to market either.