In reality Pocket is right...but then I think that so are the others. Sure you can have a dirty housing on the outside and still have the inside done right but to leave that kind of buildup on a housing that is being rebuilt throws up a red flag to me. I don't see how the reman plant is run but that gunk on there could easily fall off and contaminate the works, whereas if it's not on there to begin with it can't. What process are they using to clean the inside of it that doesn't also get the outside at the same time? And if the outside's appearance is irrelevant why even paint it at all?

 

Well put Mark.

The way I see it is like this.

You take your car to a body shop because it is showing signs of rust just behind the driver front wheel. The paint is bubbling and becoming discolored. The rest of the car you are happy with and it is polished and clean like you like to keep it.

You are proud of your car, and how it looks inside, outside, underneath and even in the trunk. Attention to detail is something you strive for and take pride in. The little things make the difference when looking at a big picture with a lot of details.

Anyway, you get the car back and the rust is fixed with bondo, or a new piece of metal welded in, sanded, shaped and done right. The body work itself is top notch and you are happy to see that. Upon further inspection, you notice paint contaminants under the surface, looking even closer you see runs in the paint where the job may have been rushed or someone had a bad day and didn't care about the paint job. Even more, you notice there is orange peel in the new paint where the other body paint is smooth as glass.

Knowing that you take pride in what you work for and own. Knowing that the body work and paint job cost you a pretty good chunk of change whatever the dollar figure was. Do you just say "ah screw it, the metal is good underneath" or do you ask the manager, owner or whoever if that is their standard of work because you are not happy with it?

That is what I am trying to get across. The internals of the transmission as a whole that mtbraun purchased are more than likely fine and will last years to come. That doesn't change the fact that the case looks like a turd. They didn't even take the time to paint it out of the shipping container.

Mtbraun, I apologize if I have steered this off course. Like Pocket, I am attempting to keep things in perspective for those reading/participating in this thread now and into the future. Not everyone is concerned about the outside paint job, but some are. Not everyone is detail orientated, but some are.

I really hope we don't see you back here soon with issues, but I do hope you are back soon.

 

Look, I'm not trying to pick a fight here. We each feel strongly about our respective position. If Ford's pride of work has nothing to do with outward appearance then why are Motorcraft parts clean, shiny, etc.? Why do their new vehicles come waxed and spotless?


My whole point all along has been a matter of principle. The details matter to me. They don't to others, which is their prerogative.


I'm also completely aware of how the reman business works and that Ford doesn't do it themselves. But that's irrelevant because their name is still on it.


I appreciate FTE's resource and the great people here. The transmission is installed and working great. Thanks everyone for your thoughts and recommendations.

 

Don't get me wrong, I do appreciate craftsmanship. I would absolutely prefer if each tranny had a perfect exterior, as would just about anyone else.

But I have to ask myself why isn't it perfect? The only answer I can come up with is that it must be a business decision somewhere in the chain, either on Ford's side or the re-manufacturer.

Business decisions like this are almost always cost-driven. Someone figured out that there would be an insignificant number of people who would care what the outside of the case looked like, and that making it perfect would be a waste of resources and contribute too high of a cost to the finished product without returning any additional value to the product, or adding any additional reliability or function. At least that's my best guess, and in my mind it makes sense because that's exactly what I would do if that was my job at stake. Ford has to compete on the market, and that market includes junkyard transmissions, Jasper, and other sources of replacement parts. So make a product that works better than the competition, but still be price competitive. That's tough to impossible to do if non-essential components also have to be perfect. Every step adds costs, and you can't price yourself out of the market with unnecessary steps.

So sure if I was in the same position as the OP, my emotional side wants something shiny and new in the box for the money I paid. But the business side of me tells me to ignore that and focus on what's more important. That's where my thought process is coming from in this thread.

 

I don't see a fight anywhere. I hope you don't take any responses that way. Emotions don't translate well on a forum. Normal discussions can sometimes appear heated when they aren't. Often the way people type isn't the same as how they talk, otherwise each post would turn into lengthy reads.

I deal with Motorcraft parts on a daily basis. Trust me, they aren't all clean and shiny.

It all comes down to customer perception, reliability, and cost. If the customer perception is important, resources and costs to make something look pretty will be spent, such as that waxed and spotless new car. If customer perception is not a factor, then it's reliability. If a component must be made pretty on the outside to be built reliably without contamination or compromise, then resources and costs will go into making it look pretty. If the outside doesn't have to be pretty and has no effect on reliability, then cost is the final factor.

The number of people who care about what the outside of these transmissions look like is so insignificant, that from a business standpoint it make zero sense to spit shine these up. And if they can be rebuilt without a perfectly clean exterior and still have no impact on reliability, then why add to the cost if it's never going to be recouped?


But all principles can be categorized in order of importance, do you agree?

What is more important? Reliability or visual appeal?

As I mentioned earlier, you can get a rebuilt transmission from any shop that looks spotless on the outside. But inside the thing could be nothing more than recycled garbage.

So as a matter of principle, a responsible business should place far more importance on reliability and functionality. Visual appeal, when it's completely non-essential, would be one of the last things considered when working under cost constraints.

Does this make a bit of sense?

But Ford still has to carry the warranty and all responsibility of the warranty. Their focus is warranty related, ie: reliability.


Glad to hear it