Safety Recall 22S41 - 2021-2022 Mach E - HVBJB Recall [high voltage battery main contactors may overheat]

[Jimbo]

Sorry to say, but I was quoting the document by FORD and not some "genius/Nostradamus" on the internet with no firsthand knowledge. I was expressing a counterpoint to the opinions determined in a vacuum.

You were not 'quoting' a document by Ford, you were reading a vaguely-worded Ford document and conjuring meaning from it.

Ford's NHTSA notice says the remedy is to "monitor contactor temperature and intelligently reduce battery power to prevent damage to the contactor."
It doesn't say how conservative that temperature-based throttling is: is it incredibly conservative, such that most cars get throttled after five minutes of DCFC, or is it much more targeted?
It doesn't say how often it will apply: is the aforementioned damage they're trying to prevent cumulative (with relays and contactors, it often is), and this throttling will therefore occur quite regularly, or are these contactor failures single-incident damage, and the throttling will therefore be rarer? To both of these, Ford has provided no answer, and inferring anything else from the NHTSA notices is haruspicy.

Yet somehow you deduced "you could expect to see a power reduction less than .5% of the time"

And this is EXACTLY the operative point I was trying to make: deciding exactly what will happen with no actual first hand information, and then using that as a basis to foment internet rage is ridiculous.

Yes, I agree. It's also equally outrageous for Ford apologists to say "stop speculating! By the way, Ford is magically able to tell the precise moment a contactor will fail, and only then throttle power milliseconds before. This is totally not speculation, because Ford said they have 'intelligent monitoring'"

Sponsored

 

[KevinS]

Yes, I agree. It's also equally outrageous for Ford apologists to say "stop speculating! By the way, Ford is magically able to tell the precise moment a contactor will fail, and only then throttle power milliseconds before. This is totally not speculation, because Ford said they have 'intelligent monitoring'"

Guess you're cancelling your order too, huh?

 

[Shayne]

Your situation definitely is outside of the wording of the recall. Ford knows that there are other conditions that can cause this failure, but they might not know exactly what those are yet. This software update will be monitoring HVBJB resistance and sending that info back to Ford, which hopefully will allows the engineers to piece together what happened in your car.

Agree the explanation of occurrence is not close to my cold weather 12V dying issue. None of the above.

I don't think this is the answer to the cold weather problem people experienced last winter but just as my roof is fine we all get grouped in one and are required to get a real cheap basement window fix. Appears on this one they are pinning an obvious design flaw or hardware defect on the user operating the vehicle like it should be (charging and accelerating). Finger pointing is an admirable trait in engineering. They are not problem solvers they all just finger point when one is encountered; joking just to get all them (us) going .

It can be real difficult to fix hardware with software but will watch them knock themselves out trying and see what they can or cannot do. One must wonder why there is a new part number on the HVJB (contacts) when software fixes it? Wish they held off on mine and put the new part in not another defective one or how is it worded one that is not robust enough. Just make it more robust with software.

Toke 3-500 miles trips since I got it back with a new (old) hvjb in mid-April and it is running well right now. Certainly not going to drive or charge any different moving forward. Not worrying about it and just deal with it again if need be. Drive it like you stole it until the warranty ends then treat it like your girlfriend after. Bring all those bugs to the surface and complain about the ones you do not want to live with. I have never been such a complainer in my life but no charging schedule and randomly stranding me are hard to live with.

 

[buzznwood]

I think you’re just trolling but…

Suppose you’re writing a piece of code that controls a car component. The part is designed for currents between X and Y amps.

You notice an issue in the software that occasionally sends a spike of
25% more amps than the design range - and NOT because it’s necessary for performance reasons. Going outside the tolerance on a regular basis burns the part out eventually.

You fix the code so the current never exceeds that limit at any given time.

The part was fine. The code needed to be fixed.

Software bugs are not imaginary concepts or PR nonsense, dude.

This is perfectly valid, but we already know there is a revised part out there with a new part number.

So either it was a duff part not up to the job that now has a fixed replacement that will be used going forward on new builds, or that new part is just a happy coincidence and part of normal scheduled model year part revision and it really is all down to some poor code, only time will tell.

However as Ford has a track record of attempting to fix duff engineering choices with software band aids in an attempt to avoid taking a costly hit on fixing older models I fully understand those that are not best pleased about this fix being a software only solution.

 

[BMT1071]

This is perfectly valid, but we already know there is a revised part out there with a new part number.

So either it was a duff part not up to the job that now has a fixed replacement that will be used going forward on new builds, or that new part is just a happy coincidence and part of normal scheduled model year part revision and it really is all down to some poor code, only time will tell.

However as Ford has a track record of attempting to fix duff engineering choices with software band aids in an attempt to avoid taking a costly hit on fixing older models I fully understand those that are not best pleased about this fix being a software only solution.

Do we know it is a revised part? There are many possible reasons for a P/N change. A new supplier is one. A change in the supplier P/N is another. As you said, time will tell. All the people claiming they know exactly what is wrong and how disastrous the SW only fix is are being ridiculous.

 

[buzznwood]

Do we know it is a revised part? There are many possible reasons for a P/N change. A new supplier is one. A change in the supplier P/N is another. As you said, time will tell. All the people claiming they know exactly what is wrong and how disastrous the SW only fix is are being ridiculous.

Agreed part number changes happen all the time for a variety of reasons, shame that the part getting revised is one with issues.

Until the software fix is out nobody knows what sort of neutering to the vehicle it will do if you are lucky you will not notice, or maybe all the other trims now get to partake in the authentic GT / GTPE performance limiting experience having being left out.

 

[newmme]

All the people claiming they know exactly what is wrong and how disastrous the SW only fix is are being ridiculous.

I think the Bolt did a software fix for the battery issue, and it worked out ok.

 

[timbop]

Is the powershift transmission debacle recent enough for you? Not saying an under spec'ed HVBJB was on purpose but Ford are no strangers to fitting parts that turn out later to not be fit for purpose.

As much as I have enjoyed most of the Ford vehicles I have owned Fords recent history means I go in with the mind set that I get in early on a new model and then put up with the inevitable parts not fit for purpose or wait for a later one with the revised parts that are but then have the potential of dealing with the inevitable decontented features.

At least that is more relevant. The alternatives seem to be:

"Ford sucks, they keep making the same old car and don't innovate"

"Ford sucks, they keep trying to innovate and make mistakes"

While I agree and would hope that Ford has learnt from the powershift situation, you just have to look back at all of Fords recent model launches to see problems in all of them .

In the back of my mind is that before the mustangification of the mach-e it was to be an all electric replacement for the cmax / focus electric so at most a 200hp to 240hp FWD EV with a 300mile range with zero sporty intentions.

Instead we have gone to a higher powered RWD & AWD setup so apart from the obvious revised suspension a new design for the top hat & interior your guess is as good as mine as to how many components where updated to account for the new design direction and performance targets and how many have been left as a carry over with band aid fixes due to cost saving mentality.

Armchair quarterbacking is a much easier job than designing a whole new platform from scratch. Throwing darts on the internet when you clearly have absolutely no domain knowledge, and obviously no clue whatsoever is also an piece of cake. Being a legend in your own mind is also a fairly cushy gig.

Fortunately for me hitting the "ignore" button is easy, too

How are you so sure, chief? Work for Ford on the problem?

He's just certain he's the smartest guy in any room.

Too bad he's not smart enough to pick up on the fact that he's been trying to "school" some "in the know" Ford insiders.

 

[nvabill]

Blah blah blah blah blah, page 59, blah blah blah blah blah, let's see if we can make it 159 pages!

 

[generaltso]

I think the Bolt did a software fix for the battery issue, and it worked out ok.

I don’t see a smiley, but I assume this is a joke?

 

[machdady]

When is the sweet spot to break this. Once parts come in so you aren’t without the car AND before the software fix AND after your dealer has replaced a couple so they know what they are doing. LOL

It would be fun I’m trying to make this happen

 

[Motomax]

A few things come to my mind here.

- Thanks for posting conclusive information.
- Glad it's software and not hardware.
- Other threads were popcorn time and entertaining.
- Hopefully someone sees when the new software is avail on FRDS.
- Tread lightly on the pedal until the software is loaded on ones MME. (Guessing here)
- Way to much talk about Job 1 - Job whatever being better or worse, so far that has not proven to be true.
- Software - Software - Software is the new location location location.
- Still love my MME FE JOB 1 2020 build, it's been a joy.

Happy hump day all!

It’s 100% hardware. Not sure how you can see this as a software issue. The software is being used to cut power as a bandaid to an engineering mistake.

Sponsored