ARK
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 21, 2020
- Threads
- 45
- Messages
- 2,938
- Reaction score
- 4,297
- Location
- Los Angeles
- Vehicles
- '21 Premium SR AWD
But they are not going to go be able to do everyone's car soon - some people will have to wait a long time.I still don't understand when people say this. It is fine to have the software with the recall AND say to call your dealer to schedule a service visit to replace the HVBJB. There is no way they'd have to do all 20,000 cars in 6 weeks or whatever timeframe. This is the same as the roof/windshield recall, most dealers were scheduling people super far out or making them wait, etc. They didn't get all cars with the recall done in a month, they probably still have a good amount outstanding, I'd wager.
The correct approach was to stick to what seemed to be their original plan, based off the very first notice to dealers about the vehicle hold, which was to do a software update and/or parts and actually do parts. They communicate to dealers to prioritize the software updates if they cannot accommodate the full part replacement ASAP, but to schedule the part replacement visit when they bring the car in for the update. Or people wait for OTA. Then those that get a failure message from the update get priority on the fix, as Ford's opinion is obviously that not all of them are going to need replacement immediately when they get the update.
Shouldn't the people that have to wait be the ones like me with say a 1/1000 chance of failure on a SR AWD versus a GTPE with say a 1/50 chance of HVBJB failure (making up the numbers)?
Otherwise, if it was like the windshield recall and a total free for all for scheduling, there would be no guarantee someone with a GT didn't have to wait until Halloween while standard range Selects and Premiums were getting scheduled before Labor Day.
If they stagger it so that people who get the Service Vehicle Soon message don't have to wait maybe beyond a couple of weeks to get an appointment, and in the meantime deal with (from what you are describing), maybe not even as major of a performance limit as I speculated, isn't that a decent approach?
Sponsored