2001 Ford Explorer Xls Sport Utility 4-door 4.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Ford Explorer, Lincoln Aviator reportedly facing numerous QC issues

A lengthy report in the Detroit Free Press delves into a range of quality control issues confronting the 2020 Ford Explorer and its luxury platform sibling, the 2020 Lincoln Aviator. Freep says it's been following the issue for two months, tapping various unnamed sources for information on the automaker's unorthodox route to resolution. Seems the problem is Explorers and Aviators leaving the production line at the Chicago Assembly Plant with flaws in areas like the chassis, transmission and suspension, said vehicles trucked to Ford's Flat Rock Assembly Plant (FRAP) outside of Detroit for repair. The estimates range from 10,000 to 18,000 vehicles affected, numbers so high that Ford has sought help from Roush Engineering in nearby Allen Park, and brought workers and managers from other plants in the Midwest to FRAP to get vehicles repaired and shipped to dealers. Ford hasn't shared the nature of the problems with anyone outside the company, including dealers and customers. Freep's sources are said to include workers who have provided photos of certain vehicles and of tents used to house parts at the FRAP repair site. The Explorer chassis allegedly has an unidentified problem that engineers are using X-rays to diagnose, and the transmission is having problems sensing when it's in park or going into park. Both the Explorer and Aviator have come off the line with HVAC units that only blow hot air. And the Aviator's height-adjustable suspension enters failure mode for unknown reasons. These come on top of quotidian mishaps common to every new vehicle, but that are meant to be sorted in pre-production, like missing emblems and trim pieces. They also come on top of a recall in early August issued for the Explorer and Aviator concerning the instrument cluster and parking brake, and another at the end of August over rear seatbacks that could collapse in a crash. An automaker spokesperson told Freep, "Making updates to preproduction models based on all-new platforms as they roll off the assembly line – is standard industry practice." Except these aren't pre-production, these are early production vehicles that paying customers and dealers are waiting for, and some of the affected vehicles have been pulled off dealer lots. Dealers say they are fine waiting for the trucks to get sorted out, and they'd rather have Ford fix the problems before the SUVs go to customers.

Ford made three big mistakes in calculating MPG for 2013 C-Max Hybrid

It's been a rough time for the official fuel economy figures for the Ford C-Max Hybrid. When the car was released in 2012, Ford made a huge deal about how it would beat the Toyota Prius V, which was rated at 42 combined miles per gallon, 44 city and 40 highway. The Ford? 47 mpg across the board. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? Well, after hearing customer complaints and issuing a software update in mid-2013, then discovering a real problem with the numbers last fall and then making a big announcement last week that the fuel economy ratings of six different 2013 and 2014 model year vehicles would need to be lowered, the C-Max Hybrid has ended up at 40 combined, 42 city and 37 highway. In other words, the Prius trumps it, as daily drivers of those two vehicles have known for a long time. The changes will not only affect the window sticker, but also the effect that the C-Max Hybrid (and the five other Ford vehicles that had their fuel economy figures lowered last week) have on Ford's compliance with greenhouse gas and CAFE rules for model year 2013 and 2014. How did Ford come to this place, where its Prius-beater turned into an also-ran? There are two technical answers to that question, which we've got below, as well as some context for how Ford's mistakes will play out in the bigger world of green vehicles. Let's start with Ford's second error, which is easy to do since we documented it in detail last year (the first, needing to do a software update, was also covered). The basic gist is that Ford used the general label rule (completely legally) to test the Fusion Hybrid and use those numbers to figure out how efficient the C-Max Hybrid is. That turned out to be a mistake, since the two vehicles are different enough that their numbers were not comparable, despite having the same engine, transmission and test weight, as the rules require. You can read more details here. Ford's Said Deep admitted that the TRLHP issue is completely separate from the general label error from last year. Now let's move on to last week's announcement. What's interesting is that the new recalculation of the MPG numbers – downward, of course – was caused by a completely separate issue, something called the Total Road Load Horsepower (TRLHP). Ford's Said Deep admitted to AutoblogGreen that the TRLHP issue had nothing to do with the general label error from last year.

Ford Focus Electric and ST recalled over lighting issue

Ford is recalling 6,308 units of the 2012 and 2013 Focus Electric and 2013 Focus ST that were fitted with HID headlights because a "wiring incompatibility" could keep the front side marker lights from working. A bulletin from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration says the recall should begin in the middle of this month, after which owners can take their cars to dealers to have the wiring assembly repaired free of charge.
You can find more information in the NHTSA bulletin posted below.