😭😭😭 POST BATTERY CONTACTOR RECALL -- FIRST JUNCTION BOX FAILURE 😭😭😭😭

[DevSecOps]

Folks, everyone on the road around me was doing 80+ mph. This was a car that was not being tracked and should be considered by Ford to be operating within the absolute typical parameters that their product was intended to be operated at.

Not to diss your 2006 Mustang or your 2013 Equinox, but this is a $70k premium vehicle, and it shouldn't be failing like this.

Next update will be a warning when the car detects 4 seat belts locked in. "Warning, too many occupants detected. Limiting safety restraint mechanism to 3 occupants."

There's no justification for this happening period. If you can't load the car with your family, if you can't climb a hill, if you can't go the speed limit, then they need to replace the HVBJB - full stop.

I'm getting frustrated by anyone trying to defend anything else - going to get a Twinkie to relax.

Sponsored

 

[strangeengine]

Originally that was the plan. Install the new HVBJB and flash software to remove the band-aid. But things have changed.

But if the software is only designed to limit power at potential failure then it might not be problematic to leave it in addition to the new HVBJB.

It's probably actually what you want, since it changes the failure state into something still (somewhat) drivable, which is a heck of a lot safer.

It probably appeals to NHTSA, as well.

 

[ZuleMME]

I said weeks ago that the big elephant in the room is long highway trips at 75+. Heck my vegas trip in a week or so is 80mph for a lot of it with massive elevation changes.

 

[joebruin77]

So sorry to hear this happened.

I have a question re new cars that were recently built. My 2022 GTPE was built on May 19th, so I missed the May 25th cut off date for the recall by just a few days. The dealer called and said now that the software update is available, I should be able to take delivery of the car in mid July.

Is there any way I can find out if my car will have the new physical part as well as the software update, or will it likely only have the software update?

 

[jbirdzee]

Next update will be a warning when the car detects 4 seat belts locked in. "Warning, too many occupants detected. Limiting safety restraint mechanism to 3 occupants."

There's no justification for this happening period. If you can't load the car with your family, if you can't climb a hill, if you can't go the speed limit, then they need to replace the HVBJB - full stop.

I'm getting frustrated by anyone trying to defend anything else - going to get a Twinkie to relax.

You are totally right about this. The software update (hopefully) keeps people from getting stranded, but the benefit is biased towards Ford not having to reimburse tow trucks. Either the hardware design is weak, or the production parts aren't meeting specification - so the solution is an (upgraded) replacement.

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

Definitely not faulting scoopman, but just saying how even when driving reasonably and safely, the vehicle might still be experiencing a high-stress event for the powertrain.

I’ve done the Grapevine in my 2006 Mustang GT with four people in the car and maintaining highway speeds on that climb really pushes the engine. I’ve done the same alone in my prior 2013 Equinox, and it was close to redline the whole way up.

While true, that route is one of two primary road connections between SoCal and Norcal. Climbing the Grapevine is no more difficult than numerous passes into, within, and leaving California. All cars need to have the ability to climb it at a proper speed (it is I-5 after all, hardly CR 120 through Yosemite) without causing damage to the car or resulting in throttling to avoid damage, even if it means the car is pushing a max continuous limit for the engine or motor (as the case may be). Otherwise, that max continuous limit needs to be lowered and the operators (us), need to know what that new limit is.

 

[phil]

Ford hasn’t made any statement that it has redesigned the problem part.

This is perhaps the best reason not to rush to obtain the software update. I would kind of like to get the new part and be done with all this once and for all. But I have no confidence that even if my contactor fries, I limp to the dealer for service, and the part gets replaced that it won't be the same old inadequate part. I mean, they might give me one of the rumored bulletproof, "robust" contactors. But how could I be sure? There's a new part number? I bet there are old parts lying around dealer service departments too.

For now, patience is a virtue. I'm gonna keep driving my car, and wait for failure, or a real hardware recall, whichever comes first!

And if I need to go more than 25 miles from home, I'm taking the Lexus.

 

[phil]

I said weeks ago that the big elephant in the room is long highway trips at 75+. Heck my vegas trip in a week or so is 80mph for a lot of it with massive elevation changes.

What car will you be taking?

 

[scoopman]

This is perhaps the best reason not to rush to obtain the software update. I would kind of like to get the new part and be done with all this once and for all. But I have no confidence that even if my contactor fries, I limp to the dealer for service, and the part gets replaced that it won't be the same old inadequate part. I mean, they might give me one of the rumored bulletproof, "robust" contactors. But how could I be sure? There's a new part number? I bet there are old parts lying around dealer service departments too.

For now, patience is a virtue. I'm gonna keep driving my car, and wait for failure, or a real hardware recall, whichever comes first!

And if I need to go more than 25 miles from home, I'm taking the Lexus.

i have been told by ford that it is not even possible to order and receive the non robust part anymore.

 

[rcechinel]

Scoop obviously has his opinion on this and it's valid. My comment on the other thread is because people think that this is a "fix". The thread title by Mach-Lee even says "fix". It's not a "fix" and people are rushing to the dealer over a 0.5% chance of failure to "fix" something that's not "fixable" with software.

Personally, I would rather it just fail on me when I'm stopped somewhere. The anxiety for me, and I'm a calm person, of it happening while driving would be much greater than "oh my car won't start". I would also be pissed that I have to drive under the limit with flashers on if I was on a freeway somewhere. Additionally, there's gonna be a lot of people here on the forum and elsewhere that see this message, stop and TURN OFF the car. That could indeed brick it, so therefore the warning could be far worse because someone could pull over along side the road and then be stranded. Normally, when I park places, it's not along the I5 (10 lane) freeway.

I don't think we should applaud the software "fix" at all. I think we should all stand up against it and demand that we get new HVBJB's. So for some people, maybe the software gives them a false sense of hope that their HVBJB is more protected, or maybe they like the idea that they can drive to a dealer. Not for me.

Would you be supportive of a Twitter campaign now? When I tried before the recall was announced, you and almost everyone here were against it...

 

[rcechinel]

i have been told by ford that it is not even possible to order and receive the non robust part anymore.

I have a car arriving this month with the supposedly new part. A premium ER AWD. My idea was to take it to an immediate Atlanta-Miami road trip with the whole family (7 and 5). I still haven't heard reports of anyone driving with the new part and the new software. I'm afraid that the software might be also reading the part status incorrectly and activating the message you saw. Not sure if it's safe to drive either. ?

 

[phil]

i have been told by ford that it is not even possible to order and receive the non robust part anymore.

Wait, weren't you the one who said this: "Ford hasn’t made any statement that it has redesigned the problem part."

I'm not understanding. Is Ford promising a new, improved part for any owner experiencing one of these hardware failures? That would be good.

 

[MGHTYDX]

At some point -- which is very soon -- the MME is not a bargain. Just wait, you'll be seeing a video soon of my car failing as minivans and Honda Civics are able to make this road trip journey without a problem.

It is completely unacceptable to me to have a car that cost me this amount of money and does not work. Period.

Your trials and tribulations are causing me to reassess my GTPE plans.

My GTPE is supposed to be delivered in 6 weeks (Aug 11-17). Mine went into production 4/20, but like other GTs in my build week, I was not "built" until the week of 6/13 (that date sounds familiar). Non-GT models were shipped out shortly after our build week. Were our GTs held back to get the allegedly "new" part? One can only speculate. My VIN shows up as part of the recall on both the NHTSA site and the Ford ETIS site.

Nonetheless, I have now tested the i4 M50 ($10,000 markup) and Polestar 2 Performance (Oct-Nov delivery date) and will be testing the Genesis GV60 Performance ("only" a $2500 markup) tomorrow. Of course, the latest JD Power survey has the Polestar 2 ranked at the bottom. I really liked the BMW since I am so familiar with the layout having owned many recent 3-series. So I have decisions to make in the next 6 weeks.

Now if I decide to stay ICE and not go EV, BMW of San Diego has a sweet red M3 Competition with only a $995 mark-up that could tempt me (ugh, but that almost $7 per gallon gasoline). But then I'll have a newly-installed 240v outlet and EV charger wasting away in my garage!

 

[Kamuelaflyer]

This is perhaps the best reason not to rush to obtain the software update. I would kind of like to get the new part and be done with all this once and for all.

There are different scenarios that could be happening with @scoopman's car. We simply don't have enough information, and won't have it for quite some time. These scenarios include, but are not limited to:

1. The software fix failed. It did not do its job and scoopman was lucky to limp along to a dealer. If that's the case odds are very high that the people at Ford will be looking at the why and redesigning the recall software patch.
2. The software did its job properly and allowed the car to continue on, albeit at a less than desirable power level. In this case, the software was designed to prevent stranding people and nothing else. It still means there's too much part variance or that there needs to be a new part design altogether.
3. @scoopman's car is an outlier. Again. If this is the case, we still have no concrete idea of what the software patch is designed to do.

All in all, we all get to wait while Scoopman and family wait on a determination from the dealer and Ford.

 

[TGIF]

I have a car arriving this month with the supposedly new part. A premium ER AWD. My idea was to take it to an immediate Atlanta-Miami road trip with the whole family (7 and 5). I still haven't heard reports of anyone driving with the new part and the new software. I'm afraid that the software might be also reading the part status incorrectly and activating the message you saw. Not sure if it's safe to drive either. ?

What is the start date of the improved parts being put into new builds? Was that from the May 25 build date?

Sponsored