POST Recall Software HVBJB Failure

[SnBGC]

I'm betting the software fix does a better job of identifying a failing HVBJB before it fully welds. like maybe there's more internal resistance, or the actuation time is longer. Either way...in the end I bet a lot of us will be getting new HVBJBs.

I would go a step further and say the software update is also intended to add some safety. Better to have a limp mode vs a total shutdown. It's never convenient to have a breakdown but if the vehicle is able to get pulled over to safety then that is what is the most important thing in the end. I would bet money there is a new part in the pipeline. I don't see any way around it for you guys.

Sponsored

 

[DevSecOps]

I would go a step further and say the software update is also intended to add some safety. Better to have a limp mode vs a total shutdown. It's never convenient to have a breakdown but if the vehicle is able to get pulled over to safety then that is what is the most important thing in the end. I would bet money there is a new part in the pipeline. I don't see any way around it for you guys.

Totally disagree ... limping down a 75mph freeway is far more dangerous that not being able to turn on the car after picking up a Twinkie at 7-11. I have no idea why so many people are acting like HVBJB failure (pre-software) was equal to being bricked in the middle lane on the autobahn.

90% of the people who are saying "just drive to a dealer" are probably either retired or have a job where they can "just drive to a dealer" without worrying about their kids being picked up, their job or other obligations. If a proper recall was done people could schedule these events in their lives. Burdening us with this software is not right and so many people are falling for it.

Example - Proper recall - Scoop schedules the recall prior to his vacation - Result: Enjoys Vacation
Example - Software BS - Scoop updates his car, it fails - Result: Vacation Hell

I just don't understand why people can't see that.

 

[ARK]

Totally disagree ... limping down a 75mph freeway is far more dangerous that not being able to turn on the car after picking up a Twinkie at 7-11. I have no idea why so many people are acting like HVBJB failure (pre-software) was equal to being bricked in the middle lane on the autobahn.

It seems they could have had their cake and eaten it too if the vehicle just threw up the service vehicle soon message without the power reduction, especially if it turns out the message triggers far more easily then a full-blown failure occurs.

 

[DevSecOps]

It seems they could have had their cake and eaten it too if the vehicle just threw up the service vehicle soon message without the power reduction, especially if it turns out the message triggers far more easily then a full-blown failure occurs.

Could be, but I think there's going to be instances where cars don't turn back on and the HVBJB is actually toasted. Based on the information I got back from Ford, Scoops car, with only 1k miles on the replaced HVBJB was no false alarm and his car very well might not have turned back on.

 

[Fixbear]

Nuclear joins the chat on tolerances.

True! I worked in one. And not many can waste money like they can. But I understand why.

 

[kennethjk]

Totally disagree ... limping down a 75mph freeway is far more dangerous that not being able to turn on the car after picking up a Twinkie at 7-11. I have no idea why so many people are acting like HVBJB failure (pre-software) was equal to being bricked in the middle lane on the autobahn.

90% of the people who are saying "just drive to a dealer" are probably either retired or have a job where they can "just drive to a dealer" without worrying about their kids being picked up, their job or other obligations. If a proper recall was done people could schedule these events in their lives. Burdening us with this software is not right and so many people are falling for it.

You are right that I am retired and I do have the time and extra car to deal with installation issues.

Even if I was working I would still rather have the software but in no way does this make what Ford is doing acceptable. I am not falling for anything but when I look at the alternatives, I still would rather have the slow go compared to no go.

Bottom line is that they have to get all of us the new part and we have to make that known so they are more proactive in doing the right thing.

 

[MellowJohnny]

This is what, three failures, all within DAYS of installing Ford's software "fix"? Three is not a big number just yet, but these failures all came awfully fast after the software update. That probably means something.

It may not be "false" positives, it could be conservative predictions of failure, or just buggy software. But most likely DevSecOps is right, and this software fix should be avoided until you want to start dealing with a big service job on your Mach-E.

I plan to wait until the dealers gain some experience, and service department capacity opens up some. Maybe I'll even wait to see how the 'robust' part performs in early installations, and see if Ford perhaps replaces it with something even better.

Three almost-immediate failure messages MIGHT just be random chance, but I doubt it. No software fix for me. Not yet.

I was thinking the same with with the false positives, so I'm kinda with you on this one. But there will be a lot of people getting post May 24 cars who have no choice - but maybe new hardware?

 

[MachEnthusiast]

After reading a few of these threads, I'm not sure what the low power mode after the update actually does?

 

[strangeengine]

I have no idea why so many people are acting like HVBJB failure (pre-software) was equal to being bricked in the middle lane on the autobahn.

Because that essentially happened to some people here, no?

And would have literally happened to @scoopman this second time without the software update.

But more importantly from Ford's perspective, this new failure mode likely mollifies NHTSA.

Personally, I would prefer this "softer" failure mode than a complete shutdown.

 

[SnBGC]

Totally disagree ... limping down a 75mph freeway is far more dangerous that not being able to turn on the car after picking up a Twinkie at 7-11. I have no idea why so many people are acting like HVBJB failure (pre-software) was equal to being bricked in the middle lane on the autobahn.

90% of the people who are saying "just drive to a dealer" are probably either retired or have a job where they can "just drive to a dealer" without worrying about their kids being picked up, their job or other obligations. If a proper recall was done people could schedule these events in their lives. Burdening us with this software is not right and so many people are falling for it.

Example - Proper recall - Scoop schedules the recall prior to his vacation - Result: Enjoys Vacation
Example - Software BS - Scoop updates his car, it fails - Result: Vacation Hell

I just don't understand why people can't see that.

What I am saying is if given a choice, I would prefer the car go into a limp mode at road speeds vs a total shutdown with complete loss of power. The engine on one of our fleet trucks shut off while going down the freeway. It didn't end well. Would have been much safer if the truck was able to limp away and get to a safer spot.

 

[DevSecOps]

Because that essentially happened to some people here, no?

No

And would have literally happened to @scoopman this second time without the software update.

Incorrect. If it welds closed, during normal operation of the vehicle it won't be noticed until power off and an attempt to power back on. So unless you shut off the car in the middle of the freeway, no it wouldn't have happened like that.

 

[ZuleMME]

No



Incorrect. If it welds closed, during normal operation of the vehicle it won't be noticed until power off and an attempt to power back on. So unless you shut off the car in the middle of the freeway, no it wouldn't have happened like that.

If it's the plastics melting then the failure mode can be open or closed. Semi-random on which you get I'd imagine. Unless perhaps you have reason to believe the welding is literally just the metal welded closed and the open isn't likely?

 

[buzznwood]

Because that essentially happened to some people here, no?

And would have literally happened to @scoopman this second time without the software update.

But more importantly from Ford's perspective, this new failure mode likely mollifies NHTSA.

Personally, I would prefer this "softer" failure mode than a complete shutdown.

I can see both sides but also where @DevSecOps is coming from, the original plan appeared to be issue a quick software fix followed by part replacement, if the fix stops people getting stranded out on some road trip in the middle of the baking hot desert and able to get to a dealer when they can then sure that is a lot better.

However we have no clue how sensitive the software fix is or preventative it is, it doesn't take much power to sustain freeway speeds on a level surface but hills will and merging will have you butting up against the reduced power limit so attempting to limp home the 100's of miles you have left on your road trip may not even be possible as even at the reduced power you may still fry the contractors.

This is just classic Ford bean counting and hand washing with a large does of it will do attitude so I can see why some will rather hold off updates as just get the part fried sooner than later. Then again as we are now already onto revision c of the part so now have another one we have to restart the countdown timer on until they start failing.

Regardless of which trim people chose the mach-e is not pocket change and for the price nobody should be in this situation of effectively paying to be a member of fords part durability testing department.

 

[DevSecOps]

If it's the plastics melting then the failure mode can be open or closed. Semi-random on which you get I'd imagine. Unless perhaps you have reason to believe the welding is literally just the metal welded closed and the open isn't likely?

It can weld open, but this, from what I've seen is when the car turns off and the contactor is in a molten state, which causes it to tack weld itself open. But the main positive contactor is always in the closed state when the vehicle is in operation.

 

[Mathington]

Well, it was finally my turn it seems. I completed the recall software updates via FDRS last week and noticed nothing adverse after the updates and then today I got the dreaded “Service Vehicle Soon” message.

For background, I never DCFC and never have with my GTPE. I purely level 2 charge to 90% every night.

I have a very short commute to work of about 15 miles that is 90% highway and slightly hilly, but nothing really crazy like @scoopman experienced. If anyone is curious, it is the 73 toll road in Orange County.

The failure occurred on my way home from work after my car sat all day in my office’s parking structure that kept it pretty cool. Ambient temps were in the low to mid 70’s on my way home. I had used BlueCruise the whole way set to 75 and had only “gassed it” slightly at the toll booth when BC disengages.

I then exited the freeway and “gassed it” one more time, from roughly 30 mph to 40 to pass someone. Shortly after the pass I received the SVS message and my power was severely limited to the same as @scoopman

Please note, neither of the power events were in anyway pedal to the metal or anywhere close to maxing my power meter.

I ended up going home as it was after 5pm. I turned it off and on a few times and was able to drive with the same messages and power limits in place. I just tried it again and am getting the same. Hopefully it works tomorrow.

I called a few dealers and got nowhere. They all said they’re booked out for weeks. I tried explaining but the appointment people wouldn’t budge. I emailed and left a voicemail for the GM of my preferred dealer, Tuttle Click Ford in Irvine, and hope I’ll hear from him or else I guess I just call Ford corporate and see what they can do?

Pretty bummed it finally happened to me but am also happy I’ll get the beefier part. The only concern is if I can get service! Pretty crazy this is gong on and Ford hasn’t told dealers to get people with issues like this in pronto.

What I find incredibly worrisome is how relatively gentle you were with your Mach-E and still had a failure after the software update. Given the lack of DCFC and normal driving, this part must be really crappy to fail in a normal operating environment.

I am thinking that I will still get the update this weekend, if there is a failure of the part, it's going to happen regardless, I would rather have it be able to limp to a dealer or still have the option to get it towed instead of having it completely fail.

I have been curious about the amperage loads when driving normally using CarScanner and haven't seen more than 165A when accelerating or under heavier regen on my SR AWD. I will keep an eye on this before and after my software update but if I get a failure message even with my typical driving not coming even close to 500A limit of the contactor part, then we can have an idea of how truly shit the part is.