Spend enough time driving a manual transmission, and odds are you’ll eventually slip your car’s shifter into the wrong gear. Most of the time you’ll catch it, but if you don’t, and downshift when you meant to upshift, you can risk “money-shifting” your car. Inadvertently going from a higher gear to a lower gear while accelerating can, at worst, cause catastrophic damage to your engine as it over-revs to keep up with the wheels. It’s called money-shifting because the shift causes damage expensive enough to empty your bank account.
If you’re lucky, and your engine can handle the revs, you might just get away with a tire-chirp as the engine slows down the rest of the drivetrain to match revolutions. I’m not ashamed to admit this has happened a couple of times in my driving career, and I’ve learned from it.
Automatic transmissions usually don’t have this problem, since they have computer logic that shuffles the gears in sequence as the car accelerates and decelerates. But what if that software goes haywire? Well, a bunch of Ford F-150 owners have apparently found out first-hand.
Following an investigation launched in February, Ford is recalling nearly 1.4 million F-150s built in the mid-2010s over worn-out electrical connections in the transmission’s computer system, which could send incorrect signals to the gearbox, ordering it to suddenly shift from sixth gear all the way down to second gear without warning. It’s like a money shift that you have absolutely no control over.
The recall, published to the NHTSA’s site this morning, targets 1,392,935 F-150 pickups built between 2014 and 2017 and equipped with the six-speed 6R80 automatic transmission. Specifically, the problem lies with the Transmission Range Sensor (TRS), which tells the car’s ECU which gear the transmission is in. This is part of the transmission lead frame, a molded plastic piece mounted to the gearbox that’s sort of like a circuit board for the transmission, connecting all of the valve bodies to the solenoids.
According to Ford, it’s this lead frame piece that causes the problem. From the recall document:
Degradation of the electrical connections in the transmission lead frame due to thermal cycling and vibration can result in a momentary detection of incorrect TRS signal positions by the PCM. A faulty TRS signal can lead to an unintended downshift.
Basically, the faulty sensor is giving the wrong data to the ECU, communicating incorrect positions that make the transmission think it should be in second gear, not sixth. This is pretty scary, because usually you’re only in sixth gear when you’re already moving at highway speeds. And as anyone who’s nearly money-shifted a car knows, dropping your car into second gear while moving at high speeds is a bad time.
Like I mentioned before, in addition to over-revving the engine, shifting from sixth to second forces the wheels to match the engine’s speed (which is suddenly much higher due to the 6-to-2 downshift). This is where things can get really sketchy, especially if you’re moving quickly. From the recall doc:
An unexpected downshift to a lower gear may cause an abrupt wheel speed reduction for a short duration, which in some situations could cause the rear tires to slide until the vehicle speed slows. This condition could result in loss of vehicle control, increasing the risk of a crash.
Ford predicts that only 1% of the nearly 1.4 million potentially affected trucks actually have a problem with their lead frames (around 14,000 vehicles). The company says that in the U.S. alone, it’s received 444 warranty claims, 121 field reports, 105 customer service reports, and 316 complaints through the NHTSA. Despite the scariness of the fault, only two injuries and one crash are potentially related.
Interestingly, this isn’t the first time Ford has had to deal with this problem. Back in 2019, it recalled a bunch of 2013 model-year F-150s with the same transmission for a similar sudden downshifting problem.
The fix is pretty simple. Anyone with an affected F-150 can take their truck to a dealer to have the software updated. Ford says the updated software includes “additional time for the control system to recognize failed or failing TRS hardware prior to commanding the downshift during this unique shift command fault.”
And if your truck comes into the shop showing signs of a failing lead frame, like trouble codes from the ECU, Ford says it’ll simply replace that part altogether, along with the new software.
My advice? Even if your F-150 is running perfectly, just get the damn recall done. This is one of those things that, if not addressed, could cause huge damage to your car and even yourself if you end up in a crash. I wouldn’t want to know what a 6-to-2 downshift feels like if I were piloting something as big as an F-150 at highway speeds, much less while potentially towing a huge trailer.
Top graphic image: Ford
I guess you’d call that an Effed-One-Fifty?
Ford sucks…Fix Or Repair Daily/Found On Road Dead
Well, the CEO’s Xiaomi SU7 certainly won’t have this problem.
No wonder he wants to ban them all for us.
Fix Or Recall Daily strikes again!
Should have made the engine capable of revving that high safely. Then it wouldn’t have been an issue. But, listening to a turbo V6 at high revs can get old fast. Not enough cylinders to make exhaust pulses for good sound.
If it had been an early 1950’s Packard, you’d be in high gear and doing just fine.
Wait wait wait wait. Plastic part is crumbling under heat and vibration, potentially causing a money-shift, and the fix is a SOFTWARE update? Call me skeptical, but this sounds a lot like an attempt to push the problem outside of a warranty window as cheaply as possible when the responsible, durable fix is an updated lead frame made from a more durable material. I’m not entirely against plastic in cars, but we keep seeing where some of these plastic parts are causing stupid failures (plastic intakes, oil pans, chain guides, that damn elbow buried under 6 hours of other parts…), and the average customer would happily have paid another $500 initially for better durability of the vehicle over expensive repairs later in the vehicles’ life.
2017 is already way out of the warranty window
“Spend enough time driving a manual transmission, and odds are you’ll eventually slip your car’s shifter into the wrong gear… Inadvertently going from a higher gear to a lower gear while accelerating can, at worst, cause catastrophic damage to your engine as it over-revs to keep up with the wheels.”
I’ve driven manual transmission vehicles since shortly after I learned to drive back in 1986. It seems if I ever tried to put the transmission in the ‘wrong’ gear, (i.e. 2nd when I meant 4th) it just wouldn’t go. Then I would go, “Duh!” and put it in the right gear. Maybe I just wasn’t trying to force it hard enough. And while slowing down, if I tried to shift from 5th to 2nd instead of 4th, again, it wouldn’t go, or if it did actually attempt to engage 2nd, it would definitely grind, even with the clutch pedal depressed. I’m guessing this was to let me know I was an idiot by not following the correct order while downshifting.
The only time I’ve ever actually succeeded in selecting the ‘wrong’ gear would be if I put it in 3rd while at a stop instead of 1st, but as soon as it bogged down as I tried to take off, again, I would go, “Duh!” then put it in 1st and off I’d go.
Maybe that’s why I’ve never heard of the term “Money-shift”.
I managed to miss 4th and grab 2nd once at 60 mph. The engine revved out to about 7200 RPM (6500 RPM redline). Nothing broke, thankfully. The engine was being run at 7400 RPM in a more demanding application just fine. So intellectually I knew everything was likely okay but couldn’t stop my reaction of “oh snap”.
How does the rev limiter come into play in this scenario? I get the physical connection will override it, but does it try to drop the RPMs or does it just leave the chat?
Probably cut fuel. Not sure, honestly. As soon as I realized what happened I stomped the clutch and slapped the stick into neutral. At the time I had a ScanGauge in the car. It logged max RPM. So that’s where the 7200 came from.
I did the 5th-4th downshift but caught 2nd coming off the freeway once in a Datsun 720 pickup truck. The lever slipped right into 2nd without any complaint, and it was only as I was letting the clutch out that the lightly loaded rear end started slewing off to the right on wet pavement that I realized what I’d done. I don’t think the revs got close to redline before I stabbed the clutch back in and the rear end straightened itself out.
I’ve definitely selected third instead of fifth more than once, no harm done though.
Years ago, I was driving a manual Ram with a Cummins and accidentally started off in 4th. Normal driving meant starting in 2nd and I was one slot over.
It did it just fine, because torque.
Does this transmission have a torque convertor? That would probably soften the blow a bit, though I’m sure it’s still pretty catastrophic.
Unless the torque converter clutch is in the locked position. I’m sure that clutch would slip some, but not enough to prevent a wild ride with a high revving engine.
Modern cars and trucks usually keep the torque converter locked as much as possible for efficiency, so I guess it depends on whether the fault also causes it to unlock.
My Honda Odyssey still has Takata air bags. I live dangerously.
We’ve got a true daredevil in the chat, folks
Eh, just wrap it with duck tape and it’ll be fine.
My 2012 exhibited very similar behavior. Cost almost $1,000 to drop the tranny and replace the “output shaft speed sensor” (or whatever they called it) because the stupid part was mounted on the top of the transmission instead of on the side or bottom where it would be more easily accessible.
A year to two later we got a recall notice for a “fix” – same as here, it was a software update to teach the computer how to recognize and deal with the bad sensor readings, rather than a fix to the physical part itself.
I own a 2014 Expedition with a 6R80 transmission. I’ll be calling the Ford hotline number to see if it is one of the covered vehicles or not, but in general I’m wondering – why would this not be a ‘6R80’ recall rather than an ‘F150’ recall? These transmissions were used in Mustangs, Expedition/Navigators, Transits and Rangers in the date range in question as well.
my only guess is that the F-150 body/use cases might be putting the most wear and tear on the part, bringing the issue to light more frequently than those other cars
Could be something to do with how they routed the connector, where it’s located, or they’re just not getting reports of this in other cars and are crossing fingers on them.
While it wasn’t recalled, my Focus ST engine went due to a closed-deck Ecoboost 4 coolant passage issue, but it was not listed as an affected model in the TSB nor the CA suit. Recently, I found out that it seems some of the cars got this affected engine while others did not and there didn’t seem to be any way to tell unless you start it one morning and kills the entire neighborhood’s mosquitoes (good riddance). Being mainly familiar with mainstream Japanese cars, this is not something I expected, but (being generous here) maybe with Ford’s larger sprawling global network and number of factories, some locations use slightly different parts and the models that are built in those other factories or the transmissions coming from different plants that primarily go in other models and use different connectors.
the ecobosst 4’s in general seem to have a pretty big problem with the open deck setups. there seems to be a recurring thing where the #2 or # 3 cylinder starts taking in coolant because the shared head gasket. with the steam port in the middle fails quite often.
Yeah, there’s a TSB on it and CA suits for it, though the ST isn’t listed with all the other models that used the same basic engine. The TSB states that remedy is engine replacement and, in the middle of covid, mechanics literally hung up on me when I asked about engine replacement and I’m not doing that shit myself anymore, especially not on a job listed as 17 hours in a shop with lifts, all the proper tools, etc. I thought all the 2.0s and under were closed decks, but maybe not. The ST was supposed to be one, but maybe mine wasn’t and that’s how I ended up with the issue. You’d think a company would want to reduce parts count to save money, reduce potential liability, and streamline traceability, but Ford seems to think different. If they’re not careful, that’s going to cause them some quality issues someday!
I think it is all obver the board, pretty sure the older, pre-2019 STs were closed deck, and maybe even had the seem passage versus the slit on the head surface, but after that and even on earlier more basic 2.0 ecoboosts the open deck issue really made for some bad reputations for these little guys.
Mine was a ’16. Supposedly, there were some changes that fixed the issue around ’18, but I don’t know how true that is.
I have the same question. I have a 12 Navigator and it’s on it’s 3rd lead frame. The first one died after 12 years, the second one was a shitty Dorman. I did not want to use it, but I could not get a Ford part at the time and I needed the car to work again so I did it.
It really is a hateful job. You have to drop the pan off the transmission. In Ford’s wisdom, the pan does not have a drain plug. You get to take a bunch of the billionty little 8mm bolts out and the fluid just oozes out of the lowest part of the pan. Might be the front, could be the side, who knows. You will get wet on this ride. After you soak yourself in smelly old ATF, you can probably get the pan under it. It matters little because that will only drain out a quart or two, soaking the exhaust and other stuff as it drools out. Then you get the real fun. Taking all the bolts out and trying to lower the pan like a pizza while it is mostly full of ATF. You can use some sort of sucker tool to pull a good bit of the fluid out from the dipstick hole, but you’re doing it in the blind, you’ll have no idea how much you actually got compared to what is left in the pan.
After you drop the pan and make another mess on the floor/yourself, you have to drop the valve body. Oh wait, you can’t yet because it’s soaked in ATF, so you leave it a while to drain down. Now you get to pull the connector sleeve from the back of the transmission where you can’t really get a good hand. It is a pain in the ass and it’s hard to grab, usually stuck in the hole really well. Now you can get the valve body down and oh boy it will leak MORE ATF all over the place. Don’t drop the thermal expansion valve in the pan and lose it, nor the little spring attached to it.
Valve body on workbench, still leaking fluid everywhere because it’s a warren of little passages and tubes, all full of ATF. unbolt the old lead frame, bolt up new one.
Now bolt valve body back up and in, and enjoy the worst part. Installing the connector collar again. It’s utter misery trying to get that thing to push in all the way. Videos show using a metal hockey puck thing and a pry bar to push it all the way in. I don’t know about you, but I don’t own a metal hockey puck so I had to use swear words and then later, a piece of wood that I would bang on from the back to try and seat that stupid thing. If you don’t get it in all the way (and there is no easy way to tell) the wiring harness to the lead frame won’t actually seat in the lead frame and you’ll get a bazillion error messages, check engine light, etc. Put the pan back on, refill the transmission through the tiny dipstick hole that is UNDER the truck. I was able to run a vinyl hose down through the engine bay and use a funnel to fill from the top.
The first time I did the job, I did not get the sleeve pushed in far enough and the connector did not seat. I got to take the WHOLE thing down again, made another horrible mess with ATF and wasted a lot of it in the process. I also used up all my cat litter cleaning up the mess and ran out of swear words, had to learn another language to finish up.
I’m in the middle of doing it again. I should have just bought a spare pan the first time and drilled in a plug. Such a miserable design.
I can relate. I own a 10R80 truck (which I can’t say it’s better or worse) and it doesn’t have an ATF drain plug either. I do my own drain and fills at home. What I do is I grab my hand pump from HF and pump the fluid out from the fill plug.
I’d try doing that before removing the pan to avoid some of the mess
Cue Friends opening song.
I had to roll through too much of that song in my head to pick up the reference. Then when I did, I groaned.
It certainly wouldn’t be your day, month, or even your year. Thankfully, Ford recalls are there for you.
and you’ll be broke when the repair bill comes.
Ford, at it once again.
Personally, I’m going with Sammy Hagar.
OK Autopian, it’s time for a little field test to bolster your journalistic credentials. Find a cheap high-mileage F150 from this generation. Set David on rigging the sensor. Get Torchinsky behind the wheel on a closed track. Drop ‘er into 2nd at 75 mph. Film it from multiple angles inside and out (Jason’s reaction and commentary could be golden).
Then conduct an autopsy on the F-150, because I’m curious what part of the driveline and engine internals would get wrecked by this.
Not an automotive engineer, but I do have significant related knowledge on automotive systems, you can’t really “rig” a sensor to fail, what you COULD do is perform a UDS attack to knock the TCU offline then command second gear at the desired speed, however this will probably cause the vehicle to go into limp mode as soon as the TCU goes offline negating the intended consequence.
As to what happens when something money shifts at 75 MPH, in a RWD truck, those wheels are going to force the engine to over-rev immediately as the wheels are “mechanically” connected to the engine’s crankshaft. The weakest link will fail, catastrophically. IF the gears in the trans properly synch, that will likely cause bearings in the engine to fail and quickly re-purpose internal parts as external parts. This is worse in an interference engine as the valvetrain cannot keep up with the crankshaft RPMs, and valves will meet pistons. The rear wheels will lock and the truck will probably skid to a halt.
In a 4wd truck, this will be worse, as all four wheels will lock up causing a skid.
Either way, this is just intentional destruction of a working vehicle, and not something I can endorse, and proves nothing but what is already known, over-driving an engine will cause it, and things connected to it; to fail.
You know I’m not serious about this, right? The safety aspect is far more important than ruining a high mileage pickup.
But I do appreciate the detailed response on the mechanicals.
Sorry, I didn’t catch the sarcasm, I’m too analytical 🙂
No worries! Tone doesn’t always transfer well in text and I liked the analysis.
One of my friends had his 2013 F150 money-shift at around 65 on a 2 lane road. Fortunately he was able to wrestle the truck into the shoulder. The downshift was so hard the driveshaft got detached from the whole thing. It was a scary thing.
Glad he was OK, that would be a few seconds of startled terror.
“conduct an autopsy on the F-150”
JT: “I’ll bring my chainsaw”
“Set David on rigging the s̶e̶n̶s̶o̶r̶ shower spaghetti”
Now that alone is worth it to me to upgrade my membership. Needs to be a staffer who doesn’t have children.
Ford:
Job Number One – Quality
Job Number Two – Second Gear, Always.
Jobs Number 3-6: See Job Number 2
When it happens, a Number 2 might be the unintended result.
Of course they money shift! Most 10-13 year olds can’t even drive a manual transmission!
Sounds about right. This “Luddite old man” can’t wait for DBW steering to take over the industry. Corrosion, manufacturer error, vibration and strain over time? Inconceivable! Wires chewed by rodents of unusually small size? I don’t think they exist.
Our family fleet has 2 Toyotas with over 250k. The other 2 Toyotas are in the 150k range. This is unacceptable – cars MUST wear out and need replacement at regular intervals to keep the economy churning.
As I just replied to someone else, a vehicle that was actually built to last, not just long enough to retain customers to buy another one, would be far more mechanical. They wouldn’t be as efficient, but we’re talking a theoretical economical operation for decades, not the realities of meeting CAFE or top tier emissions and, more importantly, “line always goes up” demands (this could lead to a whole rant about the bike industry’s current woes in contrast and comparison).
I’m not advocating carbs and distributors, just pointing out that some things are better as mechanical systems than electronic especially when that less reliable and unpredictable electrical system doesn’t improve anything for the customer experience or are safety issues, where the benefits are pure marketing nonsense used to sell an inferior feature because it’s cheaper for the OEM, like DBW steering. One could argue, hur dur this is Ford, but hur dur any of the companies, particularly one offering DBW steering without redundancy right now. Things like this are the potential reality for any manufacturer and the consequences of failure extend well beyond the owner of the particular car and aren’t generally predictable and can easily hit without warning and without as much potential mitigation that a mechanical system could offer (they often failure more gradually so that some control is maintained and they most often come with warning before hand).
So many of us have become a bunch of pansies obsessed with safety to the point of allowing constant tracking, monitoring, and nannying and readily trading daily joy for increased safety that might not even be needed or effective enough during statistically very highly unlikely events, yet let very real risks to not only car occupants, but those outside and without warning with no benefit to the customer go with a shrug? What that tells me is that we’re also stupid and easily controlled by marketing BS, not that I needed cars to tell me that. When I was a kid, it was the peak toy age and they’d advertise all this plastic crap in these cool settings and have kids using them all different ways, then you get the thing and the boat sinks and the parts barely hold together, and your yard doesn’t have streams and cool rock formations, but that’s good because sand and grit would only get in and wear out joints all the sooner like that time you stupidly brought them to the beach. Point is, I learned at a very young age not to believe what I’m shown or told (would have been cheaper to just listen to the lyrics of I Heard it Through the Grapevine, but I never was one for Motown even if I respect it). What the hell happened? Was it later helicopter parents who didn’t let kids learn anything on their own or think for themselves? Whatever it was, I’m glad I was a latchkey kid and my father was a psychopath (though not that bad of one, so he wasn’t excessive).
To the point of Toyota, they tend to keep older tech around longer than most because it’s perfected and it works and that’s what their (many) customers want. If they had only made them corrosion proof, I don’t doubt that I’d daily spot their cars from the ’80s around here.
The two with moon mileage are actually the Hybrids.
Rust is the only true enemy of Toyota and Honda.
Toyota HSD hybrids are an excellent example of the argument that better technology can make things simpler and more robust rather than more complicated and fragile.
Or analog “logic” in ye olde autos that would pop the transmission into neutral in a bad overspeed event. Sounds like maybe they need to dust off some old ideas.
I hit some road debris in a car with the venerable 700R4 and the chunk hit dead-on the shift bracket and shoved it into 1st at 75mph. The engine blipped up a little and then went to idle. When the car coasted down to something livable in 1st gear it reengaged.
A vehicle built with the intent of indefinite lifespan would have more mechanical features, not more electronic. They wouldn’t be as efficient, but they would be far more resilient, more accommodating to aftermarket support when old, and they’d be more customer serviceable with predictable failures and wear points that often give warning well before the issue is serious.
I often argue peak reliability was ’95 – ’10. OBD2 but not full ‘systems integration’. Cars of this era will run forever with care.
*Some restrictions apply. Offer not valid for Land Rover, BMW, Mercedes, or Volkswagen.
Completely agree. Electronics have their place, they worked well, were robust enough and had enough redundancy that failures gave warning, yet they were still very serviceable by someone who wasn’t a professional and they certainly didn’t require a diagnostic scanner (and a subscription, of course) that still can’t figure out that a bad LED in a tail light is why the car is bricked because that stupid shit simply wasn’t possible. Insane canbus BS aside, how much power does an expensive f’n LED array used for an intermittent lighting situation really saving, especially if failure requires entire unit replacement at very high cost vs a simple bulb that cost $5 for a pack of several that probably lasted over a decade* and could be replaced in a minute by pretty much anyone**? The other thing is that manufacturers had to get things right in regards to programming (other stuff, too, but that’s a separate rant) as there was no OTA crutch to rely on and I think programmers were actually competent then or were held to account or both where neither appears to be true today.
*Early ’00s VW excepted. **VW excepted here, too, specifically the New Beetle.
One customer’s can bus is a manufacturer’s cannabis.
Ridiculous. While modern automotive electronics are poorly designed – obfuscated, proprietary, unreliable, and inconsistent – electronics are intrinsically more reliable than mechanical systems. A transistor will outlast a relay; an integrated circuit will outlast a vacuum hose network. Speaking of points, a mechanical ignition will be less reliable, resilient and shorter lived than an electronic ignition. Fully mechanical cars had lifespans so short nobody put a sixth digit on the odometer, and that’s not just because materials and lubriants engineering was so primitive.
It seems like you didn’t read my response to Tbird and are making a lot of bad assumptions on my original post that I’m talking all electronics when it’s in regards to the most modern cars that have things converted to electronic for the sake of it that offer no benefit whatsoever, like door handles or dangerous DBW steering or canbus systems with absurd failure cascades. Moreover, much of the issue seems to involve electronics that are programmed rather than replacements of mechanical systems. In the days before OTA, programmers had to actually be good and old ECUs were treated more or less as mission critical components. Not anymore—corporations now have OTA to patch over incompetence and it allows for forced obsolescence when something doesn’t get its “necessary” update out of warranty or, I suspect, sometimes pushing updates that intentionally cause problems and push a customer to replace an otherwise functioning device (not that any corporation has ever done that, of course https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batterygate).
There was once a thing called a valve body. Full of squiggly fluid paths and orifaces… and they WORKED.
It was hard to money shift a ’94 SHO since they rev’ed to the moon anyway. Now get off my lawn!
Ok, everything on a car wears out, what then necessitates a recall for THIS but not for other wear items that can cause safety issues after 10-15 years?
This recall seems to track with Ford’s recent “better safe than sorry” type approach, where they’re simply deciding to recall anything that might cause an extra liability down the line
I appreciate getting ahead of an issue and helping the customer. But this shouldn’t be an issue to begin with.
There’s no way they’re doing this to get ahead of the issue or help the customer. The only reason this is being recalled is there have been enough accidents caused by this suddenly happening and they don’t have a way to blame it on the owner (lack of maintenance, improper inspection, etc). It’s something that is undetectable until it fails, and when it fails it can lead to immediate loss of control.
The engine can be destroyed, which can be a safety issue as well as a “never buying a Ford again” issue and this isn’t a typical wear item that the customer can monitor, nor would it even be covered in the manual under a maintenance schedule most owners ignore. These are essentially expected to be lifetime parts, which, OK the engine blows, that might mean the lifetime of the truck is up, but that’s not the intent of the term.
That’s fair. The key part for me is not being a typical wear item.
Ha. By that definition, engine oil is also a lifetime part.
Having had some experience with recalls at an OEM, the difference here is that it can be a sudden failure that causes (or rather, has already caused) an uncontrollable safety issue.
If it was a cable failure that let you coast to a stop with functional steering and brakes they wouldn’t have recalled it. Or if it was something that happened gradually and could be caught at a standard service interval by a dealership (regardless of whether cars that age are going to dealerships at standard service intervals) they wouldn’t have recalled it.
The only reason they recalled this is it has a sudden, unpredictable onset that can lead to immediate loss of control of the vehicle.
Source – I was an engineer at an OEM that dealt with a corrosion recall for fuel tank bands and rear suspension.
We had to recall them because the corrosion happened from the inside out, so it wouldn’t be seen in an inspection, and sudden failure resulted in dropping the fuel tank on the road or the rear wheel suddenly turning which could cause an accident.
The fix was a “fail safe” fix, where we added bracketry that would catch the suspension or fuel tank if the original support failed and allow for continued control of the car to a safe stop.
Ford saw GM screwing up their bread and butter V8s and said hold my transmission fragments.
I have an f-250 and the shifting is horrendous. It basically, even in tow mode, won’t let you get rpms over 1500-2k. So when I am going down big hills (constantly where I am) I am forced to use my brakes way too much, or manually shift my entire drive. I am extremely disappointed in the programming points. I WISH my truck knew what 2nd gear was. It goes right to 3rd, and I don’t know if I’ve ever seen it in 1st without forcing it. I will be going 5 mph in Tow mode and it has me in fucking 3rd gear.
I love the truck overall, but Ford really sucks right now, and Farley needs to go. I don’t give a shit how fast he drives a car around a track.
What transmission? 10 or 6 speed? Ford literally just released a new 10speed update for Super Duty’s
I’ve got the 10 speed, thanks, I’ll get on it!!
(around $14,000 vehicles)
Is that the going rate for crappy trucks?
nah that’s just the most I’d pay for any F-150 (that’s been fixed, thank you!)
No wonder Jim Farley wants protection from Chinese imports –
He can’t compete – His company can barely even build cars.
Find Open Recall Daily.
Our 25 Maverick is a year old and has already had 4 recalls. I’m somewhat conflicted about it.
One one hand I think it’s ridiculous that the vehicle has been on the market for 4+ years yet still has manufacturing and design bugs. That’s some pretty poor quality up front testing and engineering.
On the other hand, 3 of the 4 recalls were taken care of with software updates, and all so far have been done in my garage by a Ford dealer’s mobile service tech. All done at no charge, and in about 10 minutes each. In that regard it’s been no hassle at all, and I am thankful that Ford is actively fixing these issues
I am sure they wouldn’t even acknowledge they existed if not for the (actually still working for now ) government safety regulations, but glad to get the fixes. Since this defect/design problem is potentially life threatening, they have no choice. If it just grenaded the transmission in your driveway. I suspect it just would be an out-of-warranty expensive repair.
If I had an affected F-150, I’d try to get the recall done at home and not waste time going to the dealer and waiting around.
Sigh – what happened to them? We had a number of ’80s -’90s Fords and they were honestly great cars. Better than my one GM experiment. Are they Toyota? NO, but they were once the best of the domestics.
They do seem to be more cyclical over time than the other domestic brands.
Early 2000s Escape and Focus were recall-heavy, by 2005 Consumer Reports had the Focus as their top pick small car and then their products by the end of the decade seemed to be all pretty good. ~2010 +/- a couple years Fusion, Escape, Edge etc are still common sightings for me.
Then after that the early EcoBoost + MyFord years tanked it (PowerShift just assumed in there).
“All done at no charge” – at no charge to you directly on that day in that place.
However 4 recalls costs someone money and that money WILL be recouped somehow, perhaps via the price on your next Ford. Or it was already built in by the 50% increase in Maverick base price over 4 years. It will also affect (perhaps minutely and unmeasurably) your resale value as enough people become aware of the mass recalls and just avoid the car (or Ford in general), thus reducing the number of buyers and therefore the demand which affects the value. Again, not really a problem the Maverick in general suffers from due to its limited supply and rapid increase in new price but it is a thing in general. No different really from why people might value a Camry higher than an on paper equivalent Altima etc.
Fix Or Repair Daily…
Found On Roadside Dead.
Fill Oil Repeat Daily.
I had a supervisor in the Navy in the late 80s that loved his Mustang, he countered with Cheap Heads Every Valve Rattles Oil Leaks Every Time. I had to give him credit for that one.