Any Disappointed Transit Owners?
 

May eventually---in the next 2-3 years--start looking for a gently used Transit, cargo only version for work purposes. The cubic footage space along with taller roof options make one quite attractive, I'm just a bit too cheap to spring for a brand new just now.

I don't and would never tow anything so that isn't a concern however I do add about 2,300# of tool boxes, shelves, plywood floor, insulation and materials. That cargo weight fluctuates upward 200-300# maximum but only for a day or more at most.

Any standard features you wish you would have added if bought new, any that have proven a bit useless?

So those who've moved from an E-Series to the Transit----any real downsides to that change? Apart from minor glitches and such does the Transit fit the need, is it a real improvement in the areas we own vans for?

Love to hear any impressions or experiences---TIA.

16 and newer has standard back up cameras, which is nice. The mirrors are great. Other than towing, I don't think there is a single reason to want an econoline. Ford looked at both and said, lets make the better one everywhere. Haven't had a customer wish they stuck with their old van yet.

We've had a few glitches with ours that I chalk up to first model-ear issues. The no-start concern seems to have been cured with a reflash of the computer. Couple weeks ago it went in for weak A/C and the intermittent wipers not working. They evacuated and recharged the system and the air works well, but the rain sensor for the wipers is backordered.

Overall we are quite happy with it. The Transit seems to handle weight quite well. In this photo the wheelchair and carrier on the back are about 480 lbs, and there are three kids and one adult sitting just in front of the rear axle.

Attachment 219520

Don't have a weight ticket, but I think I have another ~1,400 lbs of available capacity on my rear axle when loaded up.

Thanks Frantz and Tom----good insight. :-X22 I love Frantz's input---he's very dedicated to spreading the Transit gospel. :)

I've read a few first year glitches, one slightly troubling about a front unit body part incorrectly welded in place affecting or preventing a proper steering wheel alignment. There is or will be an acceptable fix so its not a deal breaker. I'm sure if this is true it was caught early on so shouldn't be too wide spread.

Body configuration and increases space especially head room and/or door opening dimensions are of huge interest to me for hauling my glass parts---those too are larger these days, trends toward even larger yet to come. I can make do with the E-Series but even a somewhat taller roof would be great.

Drive train reliability is a huge concern too---I'm thinking the current offerings have been in use in other Ford vehicles which is comforting. Feel free to correct me there if I'm in error.

I haven't seen the steering wheel alignment issue, so I can't speak to that. The only early issues I had was with water getting into the air cleaner. I posted about it here and eventually Ford did push a TSB and then a recall. Haven't seen it reoccur. I'm just a small sample, but I get to hear about concerns from any of my customers rather than just owning a single unit myself.

Motors all seem to be good. The ecoboost is an awesome choice, but I'd probably restrain myself and get the base motor. But I'm very utilitarian, the ecoboost is worth the money if you need to get on short on ramps or have steep hills when you're loaded down. Ecoboost is slightly detuned from the F150 version, so it should be even more reliable (by conventional thought of less stresses).

The only van I've had trouble with was in the transmission of a single unit. Around 10k it had an error and would slip a little (maybe 200 RPM swings). Techs followed Fords steps and seemed to get it right and van was good. I honestly can't remember what they ended up replacing. Customer still traded it in for an F250 at that point for 4x4. I sold it again as a CPO and the same condition came up after about 1200 miles. I traded him back for what he paid and sold him a brand new one for a net deal. That one has been great for him! The one with the issue is still sitting on my lot waiting for Ford to figure it out. It would have been my first sold unit eligible for lemon law had we not just traded the first owner out of it to bypass the process. Now we've sold around 100 of these so far and that was our only major issue I've heard about, so I wouldn't be concerned myself, but in the interest of full disclosure I shared the experience.

I do have one fleet that bought three from me in March, and they have about 20k on each one now. They only keep their vans 2 years max, but I'm looking forward to watching their service records to get a little picture of any trends. Frankly I spend time in this forum just trying to get a feel for any trends of issues folks have. You guys are where I get my data (-=

As always Frantz great info---thanks for sharing all of it.

I'm very impressed your avoiding the lemon law issue---that's just great customer service all the way around.

I'll keep watching this forum for further developments but the Transit seems quite solid and glitch-free relatively speaking. If not there would be more than a few replies here. :)

There's not much activity over here though, but hopefully that will change.

Check out Ford Transit USA Forum. It's relatively active, and you'll find a few dissatisfied owners over there. I think most of them are just being picky though. ;)

I have been reading there Tom---yeah they're a bit "particular" for sure. It was a bit comical but interesting reading through the gripes thread. :)

No kidding! You see that on just about any new vehicle forum though. I've lightened up a bit over the last few years and don't sweat the small stuff.

One of my favorite things about internet forums is being able to get a sense of common issues. I'd be more frustrated with my van if the issues I had were widespread, as that would indicate a design problem. Since they're not, I chalk them up to flukes and that stuff happens.

I haven't seen anything that appears to be a common problem yet, but of course I keep my eyes open. I'm extremely reassured by the fact that the powertrain is shared with the high-volume F150, and those have been outstanding IMHO. I'm also reassured that they use a full-floating version of the well proven 9.75" axle. If you couldn't tell I really like this thing! :-X22

Very much in agreement again Tom----I've not noticed anything epidemic which is indeed good news.

That the Transit shares drivetrain components with the F150's is another plus---that's one well proven platform by now.

I think I'll just rent a cargo Transit for a day, make a round trip to the Fin, Fur & Feathers Outfitter about 85 miles north of me. :) The combined miles should give me an idea what to expect over the longer term.

The Transit does seems well suited to your current needs----the affection is very noticeable! :-X22 :)

We test drove all 3 engine choices and rented a uhaul transit with the 3.7. Final decision was (3) 2015 transit 250's with medium roofs and the 3.5 ecoboost and (2) 2016's on order. We also opted for the 8 year 150k mile bumper to bumper warranty on all the vans. When we rented the 3.7 transit and loaded it up for a 1 week trial run working out of it we were disappointed with the power and mpg. Opted for the ecoboost and not very happy with mpg. All 3 vans run with about 500# of tools and 200-400# of equipment. No ladder racks on our vans and each van has a tracker that tracks location, speed, and hard accelerations and a few other things. For the most part the employees are driving pretty normal now... MPG is very disappointing best highway mpg ever was 14.7 average is 13.2-14.1 and best city mpg was 13.3 average 9.9-12.7 I wouldn't consider that an improvement over some our old trucks that had v-10's. Traction and the skinny tires are our biggest complaint. 4 tow bills just this week. Reliability is our biggest concern. That's why we decided to get new trucks. Most of our v10's were starting to get tired with most of them 220k miles and up. All 9 of our 6.0 powerstrokes have been sitting in the back lot collecting dust. Gave up on those. Happy that someone broke into our lot and stole one of the 6.0's. Don't know how they got it out of there but glad one is gone and claimed it on insurance.

I think the medium roof has much to do with your fuel economy concerns. Ours seems to do 18-19 on the highway, but those I've talked with who have medium roofs never do that well. Pushing that much wind takes its toll on efficiency.

Here's our van on Fuelly, I've logged every tank we've put into it:

http://badges.fuelly.com/images/sig-us/427562.png

Note a half-dozen of those were with E85, which drags the average lower. You can see which ones they are in the notes.

Well I dont own one, but drive a 2016+ for work, and while I like it the niggles I have are No sync, but the (IIRC) 2014 Fiesta has it standard (go figure, come on Ford get with it....), CVT transmission (would rather have a hand shaker as I have used in the past...), where our E150 didn't we had well over 220K+ on our E series, I hope this transit will prove to be as reliable...

back up camra while nice I hate having the screen in the mirror and wish the screen was seperate some place else in the drivers view

the back windows are just about useless if you have a steel partition in place (again thats a design flaw of the partition, not Ford's side...

the thing at times likes to take a few seconds to decide "its time to go" when my foot has told it to get moving at least 5 seconds prior! the E series...well I said go she was already trying to get out of her way...

CVT...are you sure? They've never offered a Transit with a CVT, but of course there may be some aftermarket conversion I've not heard about. From the factory they all have a 6-speed automatic.

Nope, the back windows are also useless without the partition. Virtually nothing for visibility with the wide door pillars. We just use the side mirrors.

That surprises me, virtually no hesitation with ours at all. Which engine do you have?

Transits do NOT use a CVT...maybe the smooth shifting and many ratios of the 6-speed makes it seem like a CVT? The big Transit uses a 6R80 (same as the F150, 6=speeds, R=RWD, 80=800 lb feet of torque rating) and the Transit Connect uses the 6F35 which is a joint Ford/GM developed transmission (6=Speeds, F=FWD, 35=350 lb ft). Heavier Transits may use the 6R140 which is used in Super Duty trucks.

I think we are a long way from CVT's being used in large, high-torque vehicles. Ford's next step in large vehicle transmissions is a 10R80 due in 2017 or 2018(?) for the F150 and Expedition... (You can figure out what it is from the numbers and letters.)

George

my responses in red

All Transits have the 6R80. The most powerful engine offered is the EcoBoost V6, and according to Mark Kovalsky transmissions are sized according to engine torque rather than GVWR. My T-350 has the exact same transmission as my F-150 does.

Interesting...the Fiesta has a 6-speed "PowerShift" automatic that operates like an automated manual transmission. No torque converter, but it has an automated clutch and changes gears just like a manual transmission. The Transit Connect also has this transmission.

You don't have one of those, do you? The Transit Connect is a completely different vehicle than a Transit.


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.for...ce8d53a831.jpg

The only thing common between the two is the "Ford" emblem, and the name "Transit" on the door.

The Transit Connect does not have a Powershift. It uses the 6F35, like the Escape. The Fiesta and Focus use the Powershift automated manual. I've driven a number of CVT's and they shift like the centrifugal clutch on the go karts we played with when we were kids :) Like an infinite torque converter, sort of, with no shifting at all that you can feel (except for simulated steps on some cars to give the feel of a real transmission).

And yes, I wonder if Jaime is talking about a Transit or a Transit Connect; I think Ford was stupid to use this naming convention. In Europe there is also a mid-sized FWD Transit Custom... If they really want to use the Transit name for 3 vehicles, you'd think they could use identifiers that signify SIZE like "small, medium, large". There is nothing about the word "Connect" that makes me think "small" and nothing about "Custom" that makes me think "medium". This is almost more stupid than all the car makers using letter/number designations. (MKS, MKC, MKZ, MKT...or for a real laugh look at the Infiniti lineup.)

Hard to keep track of the players without multiple programs :) Sometimes I wonder why this stuff is important to me, but I've been memorizing car specs since I was 10 years old in 1962...

George

The two vans I drive both say Transit 150 on them (one may be a 250) but they are transits, and a fiesta…

So the big Transits have the 6R80 which is a traditional automatic transmission and the Fiesta would have the Powershift, which is a manual trans that clutches and shifts automatically. They may feel similar but neither of them would feel like a CVT; they have discrete and separate gears.

I would not expect either of these to feel like a CVT because the CVT doesn't shift. When you hit the throttle hard, the engine revs will rise into the power band and simply stay there as the vehicle "catches up" to the engine using the infinitely variable gearing of the CVT.

If you ever have the opportunity to drive a known CVT vehicle, check it out. My now-engineer son and I went and drove the Saturn Vue (crappy CVT with low power 4 cyl) and Nissan Murano (better CVT with a powerful V6) shortly after they were introduced...maybe 2002 or so when my son was 14(?) We had a loaner Subaru Crosstrek a couple years ago when my (stick shift 5 speed) Forester was in for service, and I have to say I was impressed with how far CVT's have come.

George

You have valid points, I do have a bike (scooter) that is a 250CC motor with CVT and I have driven that many times, but the transits are frustrating at times when you mash the pedal and it takes a moment to figure out what it wants to do...:-X18

I have not driven one, but cars did not downshift instantly in the old days either--they had mechanical and vacuum controls instead of today's electronics. But without lockup torque converters, the engine would begin to spin up instantly. These days, the computer has to confirm what you really want to do (is your foot gonna stay down on the throttle, or are you gonna stab it and take your foot right off, etc). Then it has to unlock the torque converter if you are semi serious, and then downshift if you're really serious. And even electronically decide if it's gonna give the engine a lot of throttle or not quite a lot. All in the interest of gas mileage and not over-reacting to a driver with a nervous foot.

My new Dodge Grand Caravan has a little "thinking time" on the horn activation that drives me crazy. Every other vehicle I've had, when you hit the horn for a gentle little toot, it gives a gentle little toot (I use these to politely wake up a napping driver). The Dodge takes a half second to sound the horn...and makes it hard to meter out what it takes to get a little blip of noise.

Computers are great but they can suck too. I have 2 cars with stick shifts and enjoy the directness of those especially in my older '91 BMW, but my newer '09 Subaru has an electronic throttle which I can feel when it tries to out-think me. I kind of miss the "snap" of old carbureted cars with accelerator pumps that were seriously responsive when you hit the throttle (at the expense of using more fuel with the squirting accel pump and probably too rich a mixture for today's emission rules and even for optimizing engine life).

George

Get with the times people. It is the metric system!
the 80 in 6r80 is 800 newton-meters. NOT 800 ft-lbs
800NM ~ 590 ft-lbs

Ha! So it is. At the age of 64, I don't think I will even see the US car industry move from horsepower and lb ft to kilowatts and newton-meters. No poetry there. I still think in terms of engine cubic inches a lot and remember the "61" conversion factor for liters. And our road signs are still in miles and miles per hour.

George

Transit updates
 

We have unfortunately been have many issues with our transits. They have been in the shop quite often. One has had the throttle body assembly replaced twice (it won't go faster than idle when it breaks), 1 turbo replaced, split plastic intake hose replaced, and a cracked intercooler replaced. Another van has had all the door lock actuators replaced, ecm and bcm replaced, 1 throttle body assembly replaced, all they keys replaced due to bad transponders, and a fried drIvers side headlight wire harness replaced. And our 2015 3.7L transit has had all new coils, new blower motor and resistor, and many fried wiring harness replaced. All the transits keep having water injestion issues while driving in the rain. Air filter gets wet and eventually disinegrates and gets sucked up into the motor causing extreme power loss. Ford has yet to determine why the air filter box keeps getting water in it. This is a major issue since we are down here in South louisiana and it rains often. The highest mileage we have on any one van is 35k on a 2015 3.5 ecoboost( that's the first van I've described with issues on this post). Fuel economy is still an issue with every van. Very poor fuel economy. So far we are not impressed with these trucks as soon as the 8 year 150k mile warranty runs out they are all getting sold. The plan is to phase them out and replace with 4x4 f250-f550 crew cab 6.7 powerstroke trucks with utility tool boxes on the backs.

Been away a while----thanks to all who've contributed and apologies for not keeping up here.

Thanks 2002exPSD, helpful info and the very info I'm seeking. To my mind the first 3-5 years of any new platforms in-service experience will significantly affect my decision whether to purchase a Transit or simply look for another gently used E-Series. From a tradesmans POV Transit's approach ideal but small nagging issues that could have been designed out of the production models bother me.

Success of the E-Series prompts me to initially favor Ford but as much as it troubles me the Pro Master is nicely configured too, at least from my needs/wants perspective. Making that leap into a Chrysler product is scary as he77---not had a good feeling about that brand since the late 60's. :)

Because I tend to buy only vehicles with 50-70K miles already on the clock I'd hope the vehicle would have already had all its issues ironed out. I'd loathe buying brand new only to have it spend so much time in the shop or simply not performing as I need. The level of up-fitting I do makes me highly dependent on one main vehicle so transferring my tools and equipment even once a year is something I don't care to consider as part of ownership.

I will follow up on the dedicated Transit forum too but at last viewing it wasn't really helpful or speaking to my concerns or questions, those of reliability for the most part.

This has been an interesting read----thanks to all who've added their own experiences. :-X22

Hey JWA: I wouldn't hold my breath for the ProMaster to be any more reliable than the Transit. The base drivetrain is identical to what is in my minivan which seems really pretty weak-kneed for a big payload.

And Chrysler is going thru EPA investigations on its diesel engines right now, so no telling how that will come out. Sounds like they have "sort of" cheated the emissions testing. Not as blatant as VW...

If you look at Consumer Reports reports, Chrysler and Fiat sit squarely at the bottom of their reliability reports. I just bought a lifetime warranty on my Grand Caravan ($2500 but lots of peace of mind if I have costly problems down the road with a transmission or something)...I am currently waiting for the dealer order for a new $2000 radio/navigation unit to come in at 11k miles... I do really enjoy the new minivan, though. My wife adores the dual 8-way heated seats and we will never again get another vehicle without them.

My long-term bet would be with the Sprinter and the Transit, when Ford gets their act together.

George

If a company tells me they are disappointed with the Transits and want to replace them all with PSD SuperDuty's, I can pretty much wager they are using the vans beyond their specs. I'd have to seriously question who sold them on the idea that a sub 10k van (or 10,300 tops) would be a suitable replacement for an F550.

YoGeorge I'd temporarily lost my better judgement saying anything Chrysler-built was a serious consideration. :) Along with your observations their reliability since having been acquired all those years ago has just sucked. :eek:

What I do like about the Pro Masters is their stock body configurations---very nicely designed, would fit my work truck needs very, very well.

By the time I'm ready to buy most likely it will be a Ford Transit---Sprinter's not to my liking due their own body rust issues, at least the earlier USA versions.

Frantz that does sound like a bad choice, someone along the line simply not doing their research about capacities and suitability. Sorry for the buyer.

On another note----I've heard of front end geometry issues due incorrectly built unibody "chassis" as in this thread: http://www.fordtransitusaforum.com/w...et-far-33.html Keep in mind that thread is a whopping 48 pages long first begun in late 2015. Page #33 post #324 somewhat sums this up well enough.

The owners patience is over whelming and unfortunately he's in limbo between Ford USA and Ford Canada, neither one doing too much to resolve the real issue. The one reason I'm hesitant to buy brand new is because of issues like this however I'd have insisted on at least a 50 mile round trip test drive with the salesman, would not accept any new vehicle exhibiting these symptoms.

Like Tom's failure-to-start issues the suspension issues seem isolated yet its troubling too. Buying a few years old would conceivably avoid these sorts of problems assuming the original owner paid attention to performance and driveability or at least tire wear. :)

I do want to stay with Ford especially if the Transit proves to be a solid and dependable long-term as the E-Series have been for me.

Funny but I drove and considered a Sprinter back in 2003 when I bought my E150. Had a good deal going on a demo but was concerned about body rust and didn't really want a diesel. And that was when Chrysler was bouncing between Freightliner and Dodge as a brand name and I did not want to be caught with an orphan. I recently looked at the new MB Metris and that is a really nice (but smaller) package and almost thought about one of those in lieu of my Grand Caravan. But the lumbar hump in the seatback destroyed my back in a half hour test drive and I pulled them off the list. Plus premium fuel was needed for the turbo 2 liter 4 cylinder engine. Great box, though.

I am guessing they may be doing better with rustproofing, and with Transits being as new as they are, they may have similar or even worse rust issues than the Sprinter.

That said, I have looked at a few ProMasters lately and they seem to be very well laid out. The US Postal Svc is using a lot of them. So the jury may still be out on their reliability...the 3.6 Pentastar in my Grand Caravan has more horsepower than the old 4.6 in my van did.

Take care,
George

I'd argue that point up and down. The sprinters continue to have rust issues for whatever reason, and to suggest Ford would have the same problem because it's a new model to the US lacks any base. The Transits have been in production since '65. Ford didn't borrow MB paint technology in order to raise the roof. That's simply a silly notion.

The Promasters biggest downfall is the FWD layout. For heavy loads you're likely to get a fair amount of understeer. For light loads it might be ideal. Did they change the parking brake lever on them yet? Last one I was it had it right in your left leg of the driver when getting in and out. Plus it's a Fiat.

Frantz I'm with you on this rust issues. Apart from what I consider a horrible year rust-wise for the E-Series (2003, one rusting away sitting in my driveway right now :)) Ford's bodies overall when properly maintained seem to hold up very well. My 2000 E250 salvage-titled E250 just topping 280K miles says they're capable of building a sound body.

If Ford simply maintains whatever current practices they use in painting the Transit's as was used for the E-Series I'm "hoping" premature and excessive rust is NOT an issue for The Blue Oval stuff.

Pro Masters----they're Chrysler which says so much unfortunately. :(

I'm hoping that Transits do well with rust in the future. When the Sprinter was new to the US, my instinct told me that the thin sandwiched body panels were too much like a Jeep CJ (etc) or my old FJ40 Toyota Land Cruiser and that they would be prone to rust from the inside out. The issue here is not so much paint as it is internal galvanizing and rustproofing. This was one reason I did not buy one in 2003 and went with a new E150 instead.

Ford continues to have *some* silly paint issues like Expedition aluminum hoods and tailgates which continue to be a problem even with the new gen 2015+ models. So far, this aluminum body paint adhesion problem does not seem to affect F150's which is a good thing as there are so darn many of them out there. I am seeing a lot of badly rusted out Super Duty pickups around Michigan, however.

And yeah, it's not like either Chrysler or Fiat have done well with QC....their merger reminds me of my prediction when AMC (worst QC company in the US) merged with Renault (which like all French and Italian car companies built only garbage in terms of US market).

I am driving a 2016 FCA Grand Caravan--loaded R/T model (and waiting for a new nav unit to arrive at the dealership after 1 year and 11k miles). My trust in it went as far as my buying literally a LIFETIME FCA warranty for the van. Cost me $2500 and I am banking on cashing in if I hold onto the van for my usual 125-150k miles. Otherwise it's a nice vehicle... And I do have friends and family who have driven various Chrysler vehicles (Dodge pickups and vans, Cherokees and Grand Cherokees, and even minivans and cars) 200-300k miles.

George

beware of the Transit
 

I'm in the expedited business. I've talked to 2 Transit owners. Both run the high cube Transit vans. We put on 75K mi per year, mostly highway miles. The first owner had a 2013, and at 150K miles, the driveshaft and reat failed. The brakes and tires last half as long as the Chevy van he ran before. He was looking for a laywer to sue Ford. The second owner had a brand new 2017. At 4000 miles the engine blew. It was replace under warranty. He vary wary about the Transit. While I was talking to him I noticed is battery light was on. I run a 2012 Ford E350 Econoline 5.4L flex fuel. I have 3131K miles on it. The only repairs I have done are I replaced both front O2 sensors, the rear brake pads, and the climate fan motor resistor. The A/C cold side line was dripping right on it so I duct taped it to redirect the condensation. I replaced the tires once, but they will soon be replaced. I replaced the headlights twice. That's it. I still am running the original spark plug and coils.

Ford could have kept the very reliable Econoline and just put a Transit body on it, but they stupidly ended this van's life.

Odd but good this thread comes back at this time---and thanks for sharing your experiences ISG! :-X22

I too have talked with one or two Transit owners who haul similar loads to mine, my being mostly tools and windshields transported to jobs. Not a lot of city driving, most at freeway speeds but during our winters the engine will idle for upwards of 4 hours some days.

They're not overly fond of the stock engine as it doesn't have the same ooomph as the 5.4 or 6.8. I refuse to own a turbocharged motor for hauling cargo so the Eco Boost motor is a deal breaker for me.

Here's an interesting but troubling link to one guy's troubles with an earlier Transit: http://www.fordtransitusaforum.com/w...et-far-33.html----between this being an earlier version and the lack of Ford's ability or willingness to correct the problem buying brand new isn't something I'd consider. Like so many vehicle manufacturers once they have your money you're really pretty much on your own when problems like detailed in that link. (The owner has patience I've rarely seen. :))

I've been looking for an E-Series wheel transporter van, raised roof with extended height doors will be perfect. Since most of these are just the E-350 chassis outfitted as a people hauler the rear cargo area windows will be replace with sheet metal panels painted to resemble dark tinted glass.

The plushy interior panels and seating would also be removed and either sold off dirt cheap or just given away. Same with any chair lift---remove and discard/donate quickly.

I'm with you on lamenting the E-Series for we who need that sort of chassis and power train capacity. I'm not willing to gamble the Transi would suit my needs.

Thanks again for sharing!

Can't type much, have been having some carpal tunnel problems for the last few months, but a couple of thoughts...

He dropped in and started a thread with this very same post on the Transit forum. Looks like his thoughts aren't shared among the Transit owners over there.

Beware of the Transit - Ford Transit USA Forum

I haven't driven a 5.4L-powered Econoline in over a decade, but the 4.6L wheelchair van we rented in Florida felt like a gutless pig compared to our 3.7L Transit. Times are changing, and turbocharged engines are becoming more and more common. By most accounts the EcoBoost engines are acquitting themselves well, even in heavy service. Lots of high mileage examples out there without issues, some over 300K.

It seems to me that a lot of Ecoboost 3.5's have been idled for thousands of hours in police vehicles. I haven't really researched but would guess if there was any general problem idling an EB extensively that we would have heard of it already.

That said, I am still considering an Edge as a DD and the Sport with 2.7 EB is tempting, and the 2.0 EB 4 cylinder is tempting as an economical choice. I am still a bit cautious about getting one of these engines...with the 3.5 V6 as probably my default choice right now.

One concern is intake valve carboning on any direct injection engine as well as fuel dilution of the oil. Ford's Gen 2 3.5 EB in the pickups has port and direct injectors both (like Toyota) and this seems to be the best remedy for intake valve carboning. Not sure when the Transits will get the Gen 2 EB engine, and the Gen 2 2.7 EB is supposed to hit for 2018 in the pickups but not sure if it will show up in the Edge Sport that same year or be delayed for another year or two.

George

Sorry to hear about the CTS----can't be easy in today's age where we're typing so much so often. Get well soon Tom! :-X22

In the end my decision will be made 100% relative to usefulness for my needs---never been a consensus sorta person especially when the usage isn't directly comparable to my own The potential for problems NOT easily fixed DIY as I do now greatly concern me. I'm sure there are high mileage or hours Transits in use and maybe the EB motors are doing well----good on Ford if that's the case. Being a bit of the glass half full type though so the concerns or situations where downtime is the result that I've so far only read about concern me enough that the T-Series is still "too new", the E-Series much more tried-and-true that fits my comfort levels.

I know enough about the 5.4 & 6.4 Modular Motors/transmissions where repairs tend to be quick, relatively inexpensive and nearly always fully within my DIY capabilities----all factors that will influence my choice. Because my work is 100% dependent on a reliable vehicle reliable is my watch word. If simply moving even temporarily from one vehicle to another were possible this wouldn't be a concern at all. Moving nearly 2,000# of tools and tool boxes, racks, supplies and such isn't all that easy. :)

Admittedly the E-Series is old skool yet the nature of my work is pretty much unchanged since me first beginning it about 1988. Apart from a few very subtle advances in some aspects (adhesion technology) its the same job as was being done in the 60's. So it and the E-Series would be contemporaries, right? :)


I myself would and will avoid any E-Series with the 4.6l motors. To my mind the 5.4l with 3.73 final drive is border line adequately powered, would much prefer the 6.8 for my load situations. Mobility-equipped vans I'm shopping have nothing less than 5.4 motors.

Of course in my perfect world I could have a long wheelbase medium roof Transi on the antiquated E-Series frame complete with a modular motor. The ride height would be insane, couldn't fit under most fast food drive through windows though---bummer.

Back to the reliability and glass half full issues---I could NOT sleep at night fearing my "times are a changin'" vehicle clogging up the drive way couldn't make its daily runs. :eek: :D :D


Good gravy who'd ever think spending more than $20-25K would be so tough? :)

Update on our transit's. Both ecoboost vans have been doing fine just broke 50,000 miles in both vans. Only issues is still water injestion while raining. We have advised both drivers of those 2 vans to pull over and wait when it rains. We check the air filters weekly now and carry a few spares in the vans just in case. This has reduced our down time considerably. The other van has just over 30,000 miles. A few months ago we took it to ford because of a growling noise from the rear end. A few days later they called to tell us that the rear axle is being replaced under warranty. This van has never towed and hasn't hauled much weight. I guess we got a lemon axle.

Could your rear axle issue be related to the Guibo, that flex-joint replacing the typical U-joints of years past? I understand those tend to fail somewhat regularly around the 60K miles mark.

I do hear the water ingestion issue has been solved in the later models.