High Voltage Battery Junction Box (HVBJB) Replacement Recall for recall HVBJB in 30,013 Mach-E

[sotek2345]

To add the pile, we lost ours (SVS) while going ~35mph on town roads. No recent (for weeks) DCFC either.

Sponsored

 

[ChasingCoral]

These are the two lines from the post you quoted but edited out-

“
Instead only the Gt got limits.

That and the limit and the contactors welding shut or open also seem unrelated.”

It was a back and forth with the other poster about the GT and whether or not the power limit is related to the HVJB or not.

No worries though, easy to miss stuff on a 13 page thread. ?

Super brave to finish your laps though! I would have been afraid of having to get towed and would have babied it!

Yes, I saw that comment about the GT in your post but couldn't tell it was supposed to apply to the later line saying "Of the hundreds of cases posted on the forum, haven’t heard a single one where someone welded the contactors during a wide open throttle event."

I actually think it is important to consider all Mach Es when wondering if weld events happen during WOT. My First Edition can't pull as much power as a GT, so if it welds the contactors under WOT, it shows a bigger problem than if a GT does it.

I debated going back on the track but figured if the HVBJB was already cooked, I'd find out on the next run. Indeed I did. The mushy acceleration was evident right away.

I also wondered if the problem might relieve itself after a cool down. I tried a WOT later that day and the next day and it was all mush.

 

[dtbaker61]

Not sure that's correct. Between the first MachE sold and May of 2022 they sold 43,580 units, but only 30k are being recalled. That leads me to believe that the 13k excluded are SR units.

possibly because the SR batteries have slightly lower current thru the HVBJB ?

or, because 13k vehicles have had the physical HVBJB replacement and are off the 'danger list'?

 

[dtbaker61]

possibly because the SR batteries *may* have slightly lower current thru the HVBJB ? Although it may be a combination of SR vs ER and RWD vs AWD.

or, because 13k vehicles have had the physical HVBJB replacement and are off the 'danger list'?

 

[AngryMan]

I hesitate to post this because I dont want to poke the bear BUT ....SO FAR ?my SR AWD does not show ?up with this recall ?but it does fall under the manufacture dates ??

 

[ChasingCoral]

I hesitate to post this because I dont want to poke the bear BUT ....SO FAR ?my SR AWD does not show ?up with this recall ?but it does fall under the manufacture dates ??

The official NHTSA recall information clearly excludes SRs (for now):
https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=23V687

October 13, 2023 NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 23V687000
High Voltage Battery Contactor May Overheat
An overheated high voltage battery contactor can result in a loss of drive power, increasing the risk of a crash.
NHTSA Campaign Number: 23V687000
Manufacturer Ford Motor Company
Components ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Potential Number of Units Affected 34,762
Summary
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2022 Mustang Mach-E vehicles equipped with an extended range battery. The high voltage battery main contactors may overheat.
Remedy
Dealers will replace the high voltage battery junction box, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed October 30, 2023. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 23S56. Vehicles included in this recall that were previously repaired under recall 22V-412 will need to have the new remedy completed.
Notes
Owners may also contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), or go to www.nhtsa.gov.
2 Affected Products
Vehicle

MAKE	MODEL	YEAR
FORD	MUSTANG MACH E	2021-2022

3 Associated Documents

• Defect Notice 573 ReportRCLRPT-23V687-1334.PDF 215.297KB
• Recall AcknowledgementRCAK-23V687-2260.pdf 645.504KB
• Miscellaneous Document - Chronology of DefectRMISC-23V687-5070.pdf 14.489KB

1 Associated Investigation
High Voltage Battery Contactor Failure
NHTSA ID: RQ23004
Dated opened: August 17, 2023
On June 10, 2022, Ford Motor Company (Ford) issued a safety recall (NHTSA Recall 22V-412) on 48,924 model year (MY) 2021-2022 Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles produced from May 27, 2020, to May 24, 2022. This recall addressed high voltage battery main contactors that may overheat from direct current (“DC”) fast-charging and repeated wide-open pedal events. Overheating may lead to arcing or deformation of the electrical contact surfaces, which may result in a contactor that remains open or a contactor that welds closed. An overheated contactor that opens while driving may result in an immediate loss of motive power without re-engagement, increasing the risk of a crash.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has opened this Recall Query (RQ) after receiving 12 consumer complaints alleging a high voltage battery main contactor failure in MY 2021-2022 Ford Mach-E vehicles (subject vehicles) that were included in Recall 22V-412 and remedied prior to the reported incidents. The remedy in this recall was a Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Control Module (SOBDMC) software update to monitor contactor temperature and reduce battery power to prevent damage to the contactor, and a Battery Energy Control Module (BECM) software update to monitor contactor resistance to identify an overheated contactor and reduce vehicle power to prevent further damage.

Following the recall, Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin TSB 23-2020, to replace the High Voltage Battery Junction Box (HVBJB) on the subject vehicles. Consumers who experienced loss of motive power after receiving the recall remedy reported that their vehicle had the HVBJB replaced, as outlined in TSB 23-2020, to properly remedy the failure of the contactors. This RQ has been opened to assess the remedy of Recall 22V-412.

The ODI complaints cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following ODI identification numbers: 11472202, 11475350, 11477025, 11479095, 11479421, 11485995, 11493140, 11510437, 11511316, 11517977, 11525550, 11526050.
Request Research (Services fees apply)

 

[Mach1E]

Yes, I saw that comment about the GT in your post but couldn't tell it was supposed to apply to the later line saying "Of the hundreds of cases posted on the forum, haven’t heard a single one where someone welded the contactors during a wide open throttle event."

I actually think it is important to consider all Mach Es when wondering if weld events happen during WOT. My First Edition can't pull as much power as a GT, so if it welds the contactors under WOT, it shows a bigger problem than if a GT does it.

I debated going back on the track but figured if the HVBJB was already cooked, I'd find out on the next run. Indeed I did. The mushy acceleration was evident right away.

I also wondered if the problem might relieve itself after a cool down. I tried a WOT later that day and the next day and it was all mush.

No worries, but yeah was specifically talking about the GT.

But either way, if full throttle events were the cause, you’d think there would be dozens of cases of a full well (stop now and get towed) as a result of full throttle.

But if yours was driveable, not a full weld.

I’m assuming yours was post recall as well, I have separate theories about the recall “fix” and false positives, but that’s for another day.

Either way, it all still coincides with my theory that the GT power limit and HVJB failures are unrelated in the since that the HVJB wasn’t Ford’s reason for the limit.

 

[AngryMan]

The official NHTSA recall information clearly excludes SRs (for now):
https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=23V687

October 13, 2023 NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 23V687000
High Voltage Battery Contactor May Overheat
An overheated high voltage battery contactor can result in a loss of drive power, increasing the risk of a crash.
NHTSA Campaign Number: 23V687000
Manufacturer Ford Motor Company
Components ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Potential Number of Units Affected 34,762
Summary
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2021-2022 Mustang Mach-E vehicles equipped with an extended range battery. The high voltage battery main contactors may overheat.
Remedy
Dealers will replace the high voltage battery junction box, free of charge. Owner notification letters are expected to be mailed October 30, 2023. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 23S56. Vehicles included in this recall that were previously repaired under recall 22V-412 will need to have the new remedy completed.
Notes
Owners may also contact the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 (TTY 1-800-424-9153), or go to www.nhtsa.gov.
2 Affected Products
Vehicle

MAKE	MODEL	YEAR
FORD	MUSTANG MACH E	2021-2022

3 Associated Documents

• Defect Notice 573 ReportRCLRPT-23V687-1334.PDF 215.297KB
• Recall AcknowledgementRCAK-23V687-2260.pdf 645.504KB
• Miscellaneous Document - Chronology of DefectRMISC-23V687-5070.pdf 14.489KB

1 Associated Investigation
High Voltage Battery Contactor Failure
NHTSA ID: RQ23004
Dated opened: August 17, 2023
On June 10, 2022, Ford Motor Company (Ford) issued a safety recall (NHTSA Recall 22V-412) on 48,924 model year (MY) 2021-2022 Ford Mustang Mach-E vehicles produced from May 27, 2020, to May 24, 2022. This recall addressed high voltage battery main contactors that may overheat from direct current (“DC”) fast-charging and repeated wide-open pedal events. Overheating may lead to arcing or deformation of the electrical contact surfaces, which may result in a contactor that remains open or a contactor that welds closed. An overheated contactor that opens while driving may result in an immediate loss of motive power without re-engagement, increasing the risk of a crash.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) has opened this Recall Query (RQ) after receiving 12 consumer complaints alleging a high voltage battery main contactor failure in MY 2021-2022 Ford Mach-E vehicles (subject vehicles) that were included in Recall 22V-412 and remedied prior to the reported incidents. The remedy in this recall was a Secondary On-Board Diagnostic Control Module (SOBDMC) software update to monitor contactor temperature and reduce battery power to prevent damage to the contactor, and a Battery Energy Control Module (BECM) software update to monitor contactor resistance to identify an overheated contactor and reduce vehicle power to prevent further damage.

Following the recall, Ford issued Technical Service Bulletin TSB 23-2020, to replace the High Voltage Battery Junction Box (HVBJB) on the subject vehicles. Consumers who experienced loss of motive power after receiving the recall remedy reported that their vehicle had the HVBJB replaced, as outlined in TSB 23-2020, to properly remedy the failure of the contactors. This RQ has been opened to assess the remedy of Recall 22V-412.

The ODI complaints cited above can be viewed at NHTSA.gov under the following ODI identification numbers: 11472202, 11475350, 11477025, 11479095, 11479421, 11485995, 11493140, 11510437, 11511316, 11517977, 11525550, 11526050.
Request Research (Services fees apply)

Yeah this wording is different than the original posting . I like this one better ...because Im excluded ...maybe ...hopefully ?

 

[AKgrampy]

No worries, but yeah was specifically talking about the GT.

But either way, if full throttle events were the cause, you’d think there would be dozens of cases of a full well (stop now and get towed) as a result of full throttle.

But if yours was driveable, not a full weld.

I’m assuming yours was post recall as well, I have separate theories about the recall “fix” and false positives, but that’s for another day.

Either way, it all still coincides with my theory that the GT power limit and HVJB failures are unrelated in the since that the HVJB wasn’t Ford’s reason for the limit.

Not that it matters, and I am only basing this on memory, but my recollection is people who got the welded closed contactors didn’t even know about it at the time (prior to software) as that failure would not cause the car to not operate. Once they shut down it was game over. I believe in those cases it may have been high current events such as high speed passing and WOT that fused the contacts. I think one of the items that caused much confusion was many vehicle failed while at DCFC stations which lead people to believe that was what was causing the failure when in fact the HVBJB had already failed and they did not know it. Just my observation.

 

[ChasingCoral]

No worries, but yeah was specifically talking about the GT.

But either way, if full throttle events were the cause, you’d think there would be dozens of cases of a full well (stop now and get towed) as a result of full throttle.

But if yours was driveable, not a full weld.

I’m assuming yours was post recall as well, I have separate theories about the recall “fix” and false positives, but that’s for another day.

Either way, it all still coincides with my theory that the GT power limit and HVJB failures are unrelated in the since that the HVJB wasn’t Ford’s reason for the limit.

I think mine was a case of the 22S41 doing its job and catching the issue before a full weld occurred.

My SVS warning was over a week before the demonstration/delivery hold or issuance of recall. The failure was on October 7. It will be interesting to see if Ford's remedy is replacement with the current generation of HVBJBs and new software or if Ford is planning a more robust HVBJB. I suspect that the recall will still apply, at least in part, to those of us who received new HVBJBs prior to Ford issuing a remedy to the recall. That would include me.

 

[Logal727]

30,000 part recall during union strike challenge lol

 

[heisnuts]

I think mine was a case of the 22S41 doing its job and catching the issue before a full weld occurred.

My SVS warning was over a week before the demonstration/delivery hold or issuance of recall. The failure was on October 7. It will be interesting to see if Ford's remedy is replacement with the current generation of HVBJBs and new software or if Ford is planning a more robust HVBJB. I suspect that the recall will still apply, at least in part, to those of us who received new HVBJBs prior to Ford issuing a remedy to the recall. That would include me.

The more I think about it, the more I think you are right. As another poster pointed out, Ford can't have 30,000 reman parts available for replacements. That would tell me they are planning on a new part, and that new part is probably a revised "more robust" part. Maybe (hopefully) that is why Ford was so eager for my data tracker information so they could use their simulators to make sure the new part is up to the task.

That would mean that even MMEs that have had the HVBJB replaced with a reman part will require another replacement of the updated part. I would also not rule out the possibility that the SR vehicles will be included later down the road after a majority of the GTs and ERs are updated and more parts and dealership availability are available.

 

[2021-MMEx-RT1]

why are 23’s still failing?

*Social Pressure?

 

[HuntingPudel]

The more I think about it, the more I think you are right. As another poster pointed out, Ford can't have 30,000 reman parts available for replacements. That would tell me they are planning on a new part, and that new part is probably a revised "more robust" part. Maybe (hopefully) that is why Ford was so eager for my data tracker information so they could use their simulators to make sure the new part is up to the task.

That would mean that even MMEs that have had the HVBJB replaced with a reman part will require another replacement of the updated part. I would also not rule out the possibility that the SR vehicles will be included later down the road after a majority of the GTs and ERs are updated and more parts and dealership availability are available.

This is exactly what I have been thinking about the recall still being in a “pending” state. ?‍?

 

[thenew3]

30,000 part recall during union strike challenge lol

Isn't the strike UAW workers that work directly for Ford/GM? I don't think Ford UAW workers makes the parts. It's probably a 3rd party supplier that makes the parts. They are likely not part of the UAW strike.

Sponsored