join me in filing a NHTSA complaint on the HVBJB to get a better recall than 22s41

[dml105]

What's your argument? My comment is about the availability of the parts, which are available. I have no idea what each dealers schedule looks like in the entire world.

My point (because I'm not sure I'm having an argument with you) is that I don't know if Ford and its network of service providers have the bandwidth to repair 50,000 cars with the new beefier part in any reasonable amount of time. Before demanding via the NHTSA that Ford recall and replace these parts in all 50,000 vehicles, I would want to know the effect of doing so if the dealers wouldn't be able in practice to get to my vehicle in a timely fashion.

I've read with appreciation your posts on other threads about this and other topics. You're knowledgeable. Describe the logistics of a recall that swaps out parts for 50,000 vehicles.

Sponsored

 

[DevSecOps]

My point (because I'm not sure I'm having an argument with you) is that I don't know if Ford and its network of service providers have the bandwidth to repair 50,000 cars with the new beefier part in any reasonable amount of time. Before demanding via the NHTSA that Ford recall and replace these parts in all 50,000 vehicles, I would want to know the effect of doing so if the dealers wouldn't be able in practice to get to my vehicle in a timely fashion.

I've read with appreciation your posts on other threads about this and other topics. You're knowledgeable. Describe the logistics of a recall that swaps out parts for 50,000 vehicles.

First of all, I don't consider anything I type to be an argument. I have my opinions and others have theirs. I actually welcome opposing opinions because we can always learn something new. I'm not correct all the time, and neither is the next person.

I acknowledge that there's a huge logistical challenge behind replacing them. Just like there was with the windshields, or the batteries for the Chevy Bolt. But that's not our problem to deal with. That's Ford's issue. Just because something is "hard" doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. That's all I'm trying to say.

 

[jlauro]

If it fails they will fix it (assuming in warranty). So far, AFAIK the expect failure rate of the existing part is higher than we would like, but not any worse than say a hard drive failure rate. I rather Ford not waste 50 million on something that impacts probably less than 1 in 100 vehicles.

 

[SFC]

My point (because I'm not sure I'm having an argument with you) is that I don't know if Ford and its network of service providers have the bandwidth to repair 50,000 cars with the new beefier part in any reasonable amount of time. Before demanding via the NHTSA that Ford recall and replace these parts in all 50,000 vehicles, I would want to know the effect of doing so if the dealers wouldn't be able in practice to get to my vehicle in a timely fashion.

I've read with appreciation your posts on other threads about this and other topics. You're knowledgeable. Describe the logistics of a recall that swaps out parts for 50,000 vehicles.

Ram recalled over 200k trucks to replace the fuel system because of a poor design... I'm confident Ford can figure out 50k.

https://www.trucks.com/2021/11/22/ram-recalls-diesel-trucks-fuel-pump-defect/

 

[dtbaker61]

I’m not joining the complaint.

The replacement parts are not presently available. Ford is doing what they can to mitigate the problem until the fix is available.

What do you expect Ford to do, recommend that all MME’s be taken off the road? I’m not parking my car.

The replacement 'beefier' HVBJB is available... version C I believe, which is probably what is being installed in all new builds.

What I am hoping for is an official recall that INCLUDES removal/replacement of the HVBJB with the new and improved version. Like any other recall, it doesn't mean all Mach-e are pulled off the road, it means you schedule the recall service with your Dealer, and they let you know when they are trained and have the new part ready to swap in.

If we don't push for Recall repair to be done proactively, we all will continue to drive in fear and wait for failure to enable repair as a Warranty service while our vehicles are dead and off the road waiting for parts rather than a scheduled recall.

I don't understand why anyone would NOT 'join the complaint' since the solution is known, parts are available, and recall work can be scheduled rather than an emergency.

 

[dtbaker61]

If it fails they will fix it (assuming in warranty). So far, AFAIK the expect failure rate of the existing part is higher than we would like, but not any worse than say a hard drive failure rate. I rather Ford not waste 50 million on something that impacts probably less than 1 in 100 vehicles.

I understand that, but you'd see it differently if YOU were the 1 instead of the 99.

If ONE failure causes a crash, and it turns out to be from sudden loss of power, steering, or brakes.... the lawsuit will cost a lot more than replacing all the HVBJB.

what was the failure rate of the Takata air bags? why do you think that escalated to a recall that hits 19 different mfg ?! Even though its an open recall, not everybody tries to get the work done, and certainly not all at once.

I would think a well managed recall is a lot LESS expensive, and spread out, than random failures, unhappy customers, and emergency tows and warranty repairs.

 

[dtbaker61]

Have you read the recall? Despite what we all would like, there is no instruction to replace the HVBJB when updating the software.

THATS what is pissing me off.

 

[jlauro]

I understand that, but you'd see it differently if YOU were the 1 instead of the 99.

If ONE failure causes a crash, and it turns out to be from sudden loss of power, steering, or brakes.... the lawsuit will cost a lot more than replacing all the HVBJB.

That's what it was without the software fix. So far it's been a good indication that it lowers power safely. If you are coasting it doesn't take much power to maintain speed so no need to worry about a sudden loss of speed or breaks, etc... If you want to be safe, get the software update from your dealer.

If you think you are the 1 in 100 with the part ready to fail, then stress it out and try to make it fail.

 

[dtbaker61]

I'm not sure that filing a complaint with NHTSA for a problem with your car that you haven't actually had is the right course of action. But I understand the frustation, so good luck.

The 'problem' does exist in my car.... I am one of 49k owners with undersized Contactors

Mine haven't failed yet, but may well be damaged already. My HVBJB might fail tomorrow, or last 8 years. But since we can't inspect it, and don't get any warning until after damage occurs, I want a replacement part!!!! Not just a software patch that doesn't actually FIX the problem part.

 

[mwtechy]

Last I heard Bronco's engines were exploding on the road...think they have bigger fish to fry right now. I personally don't have the same type of information some others on this forum do. So from my perspective it appears as though the software as a fix is the only reasonable fix to random manufacturing defects if they truly don't know how to eliminate those defects through QA or some other basic testing. The way I read the recall it sounds like it could be anything from EM coils failing to disrupt the arc, to cracked seals on the contactor tubes, to moisture in the contactors (one guy claims his is sticking in cold weather), to simply poor quality metal alloy in the contactors. Given the amount of software in this thing though controlling everything it could also be some weird surge from the battery packs, regen process somehow unbelievably causing more current than the battery, or DCFC monitoring getting a little bit over zealous in its ability to monitor a battery pack while charging. I don't really get the impression anyone knows what the problem is. I hear very very strong assurances from some on the forum...but you know hey it's the internet, NDAs, not actually seeing the real specs of the part only seeing the specs of parts in the same category. I don't know what's going on even still but if we had access to all the info Ford does we'd have a lot better chance at knowing it...guess we should hope for the right to repair bills to pass. Till then I'll be glad I still have a warranty. But I'll be right behind you filing something as soon as I get the same problem.

 

[dtbaker61]

That's what it was without the software fix. So far it's been a good indication that it lowers power safely. If you are coasting it doesn't take much power to maintain speed so no need to worry about a sudden loss of speed or breaks, etc... If you want to be safe, get the software update from your dealer.

If you think you are the 1 in 100 with the part ready to fail, then stress it out and try to make it fail.

I don't want to 'make it fail' by surprise while I am out somewhere potentially far from home, deal with a tow, and be without my car for xx weeks while the Dealership lines up parts and training. I want to get notice of a recall, schedule the removal/replacement with my Dealership, and have them put in the beefier parts.... hopefully in a day.

 

[ChuckA]

Have you read the recall? Despite what we all would like, there is no instruction to replace the HVBJB when updating the software.

You are correct. I thought 22S41 was meant to fix the problem. I didn’t realize that HBVJB was also a problem.

 

[dtbaker61]

... the software as a fix is the only reasonable fix to random manufacturing defects if they truly don't know how to eliminate those defects through QA or some other basic testing. ...

But I'll be right behind you filing something as soon as I get the same problem.

The problem is not a mfg defect, it is an under-designed Contactor inside the HVBJB enclosure that overheats because it is not big enough to carry all the loads that can occur under combinations of 'normal' driving and weather. Combined with poor thermal management of an enclosed space, that is death for electronics.

The fix is known.... beefier Contactors in the new 'C' version HVBJB

I don't want to wait for a surprise problem to be repaired under warranty, I want the hardware remove/replace scheduled via Recall.

 

[JohnFoxeSheets]

I wish they would replace the part but, unless I am reading things wrong, there is no longer a safety issue based on the fact that the few who have the event have been able to drive. I just do not understand why Ford would want to take the PR hit taking place to their “flagship” EV. I guess money may be driving it. I wonder how many of the 50,000 owners are aware or even care about the issue. If I were not on the forum I would know nothing yet about the recall and most likely would have been fine when I got the letter and the OTA took place. To be clear I agree that we should get the new part but I suspect most people do not care or are unaware.

I get where you're coming from, but consider this scenario: You are passing on a country road, confident that there is ample passing room as an 18-wheeler is headed towards you. Suddenly your power is reduced by 2/3rds. I think that would qualify as a safety problem. And it easily could have happened to @scoopman or @Neil4Real had they been on different roads.

 

[JohnFoxeSheets]

I do not believe a software-only recall will address the HVBJB issues; and the current Ford recall 22s41 does not include remove/replacement with the new HVBJB which we as a group know has 'beefier hardware'. I am going to file a complaint to encourage the inclusion of the hardware in the recall.... and I would like to invite ALL Mach-e owners to do the same.

Filing an official complaint is the only way I can think of for us to push for the new hardware to be installed in a managed Recall rather than possible accidents or safety issues being stranded somewhere far from home or in bad weather, Emergency tows, untrained Dealers and/or being without your car for weeks.

PLEASE TAKE 5 MINUTES AND FILE A COMPLAINT WITH NHTSA
========================================

Here's what I am doing:

- go to https://www.nhtsa.gov/report-a-safety-problem#vehicle/vehicle-information

- plug in your VIN , continue

- review information on page, scroll to bottom and click 'NEXT'

- select 'problem parts'. I would suggest:
electrical
fuel propulsion
steering
or brakes
.... you can only pick three.

- for those of you who have HAD an actual incident, write your personal experience and how if affected your safety. Myself, I am going to write about the potential safety risks that will not be addressed fully with a software fix.... especially since current condition of my original HVBJB is unknown and could fail at any moment. This is what I am writing, which you can borrow and edit as you wish.

The HVBJB subassembly in ALL Ford Mach-e vehicles has known defects with 'under-designed' main contactors that are known to fail under normal charging and driving conditions as outlined in current open Ford recall notice for my vehicle 22s41. Unfortunately, the internal damage to contactors is not visible externally, and warning notices on display only after damage has occurred, and can result in sudden loss of propulsion power at highway speed, loss of power steering, and power brakes... and failure of other 12v systems due to failure to charge the 12v battery properly after contactors are damaged. Less catastrophic results can include failure to start; which can 'strand' driver's and passengers in remote areas, bad weather conditions, as well as cause loss of use for weeks due to delays in replacement parts and local Dealerships needing equipment and training to effect removal/replacement of faulty unit with a new HVBJB having re-designed 'beefier' components.​

​

My complaint is that Ford's recall notice 22s41 is a software-only attempt to prevent future damage, and does not require removal of the part(s) which are KNOWN TO FAIL to be replaced with the re-designed components which are available, and have been used to repair failures under warranty. I have no way of inspecting the original equipment to evaluate current condition; and failure can result in sudden and unexpected loss of power, steering, and braking as well as potentially 'stranding me' in unsafe conditions unable to re-start my vehicle.​

​

I would like to see NHTSA strengthen the Ford recall to include both improved software AND removal/replacement of the HVBJB sub-assembly with the new 'beefier' parts.​

I am using my build date as date of 'incident' since this is a design flaw from day 1

Done! (I edited your text some, but it's largely the same. I also included links to @scoopman's and @Neil4Real's thread here for real world examples of the failures.)

Sponsored