For mine the ship says arriving Antwerp 11/7 the dealer says he is expecting to deliver it 6/8 so about one month.
My car was built last June (2021) Arrived at Antwerp mid july- where it sat undergoing qc checks until later in August. Got to me Sept 1st. Ordered late April 21.
Thanks Tony,
The best thing is to try it in each mode. I did this and found in whisper there was no point in using it. Active was pretty good (the best imo) and for an interesting experience try it in traffic using untamed.
If it happens it happens. Our MME's are no more or less likely to have a major failure than an ICE car. I had a Ford Focus convertible a few years back and stupidly they put the ECM (brains) in a box in the front nearside wheel arch where it would get all the wet when I went through a puddle etc. After I had it replaced it didn't make me move further to the middle of the road. Your ICE car could have a catastrophic engine failure any time during it's life. Did that nag you in any way?
Tow bars aren't factory fitted anyway. They are a dealer fitted after market extra so you should still be able to get one fitted. Ask your dealer. I would be VERY wary about putting any load whatsoever on the glass roof.Hey folks. Got my car last month but stupidly didn't get a tow bar fitted. If I want to carry any bikes am I screwed having the glass roof or am I going to have to install a tow bar? Struggling to find any solutions.
I was worried particularly because I had taken delivery of the car only 5 days previous to the announcement. However, after much debating with a Ford Master EV Technician, independent of my supplying dealer, he assures me that the software update is a preventative measure, to stop the contractors overheating under extreme conditions. The extreme conditions that appear to have caused the issue has occurred when cars have been taken off a fast 150kwh charger and the car is then immediately subjected to multiple full throttle acceleration. I imagine in my mind, very similar to driving the car at Santa Pod. The fast I see the logic, as fast charging in generates considerable heat in the battery, and then multiple ‘Santa Pod’ style starts, which generates further heat, then something is going to give. On the basis of what I have been told, there is nothing to worry about, and just drive your car as you normally do. That is, unless your normal is as described in the first instance?
I had one or two long boring train journeys recently so I have read many of the pages on the main threads. Here are my few(ish) thoughts on the matter of the contactor issue (also known as HVBJB):
I had one or two long boring train journeys recently so I have read many of the pages on the main threads. Here are my few(ish) thoughts on the matter of the contactor issue (also known as HVBJB):
The required design rating of the contactor is not straight forward as it is not set by a static load that can be calculated but rather by the thermal impact and build up from driving, charging, regenerative braking etc, their magnitudes and durations and the thermal capacity of the contact block and the airflow around it.
I expect Ford considered a “worse case” duty- cycle with which to carry out its tests on the contactor. However, there will be some manufacturing spread for the contactor’s capability perhaps like a normal distribution as shown below. Ford may have tested several contactors against their duty cycle, but we don’t know where they would have been along this normal distribution curve nor how wide this curve is (i.e. the standard deviation) nor how representative their “worse case “ duty cycle was. Perhaps the contactors they used were better than the mean, perhaps not. Perhaps their duty cycle is realistic, perhaps optimistic. However, it seems that there are some where the thermal capability of the contactor is lower than what people are experiencing in the real world and so some vehicles are at risk of contactor failure when they are running hot perhaps due to driving and/or DC charging. If I recall correctly Ford suggested it may be of the order of 1% affected – the hatched area on the diagram.
Ford have issued a software update where they seem to try to monitor the health of the contacts by calculating the resistance across the contacts. I understand an alarm is raised “Service Vehicle Soon” if an abnormal condition arises. My view is that if the resistance has increased above normal then it is likely that the contactor will fail fairly soon as a higher resistance means more heat is generated and so it snowballs until there is full failure by melting or welding. If I got that alarm, I would try and get to a garage as soon as practical and make sure I only reverse park so I can be towed if necessary.
So, in my opinion, some vehicles may never be affected because their contactors can manage the temperatures generated without degradation, but others may be impacted. I would get the software update as soon as practical as in my opinion, it is better getting some warning than none at all.
Finally, is does appear at present to only impact a few so I would say enjoy driving as normal but make sure you reverse park – which is normally the safest way to park anyway
Hi @grovepI had one or two long boring train journeys recently so I have read many of the pages on the main threads. Here are my few(ish) thoughts on the matter of the contactor issue (also known as HVBJB):
The required design rating of the contactor is not straight forward as it is not set by a static load that can be calculated but rather by the thermal impact and build up from driving, charging, regenerative braking etc, their magnitudes and durations and the thermal capacity of the contact block and the airflow around it.
I expect Ford considered a “worse case” duty- cycle with which to carry out its tests on the contactor. However, there will be some manufacturing spread for the contactor’s capability perhaps like a normal distribution as shown below. Ford may have tested several contactors against their duty cycle, but we don’t know where they would have been along this normal distribution curve nor how wide this curve is (i.e. the standard deviation) nor how representative their “worse case “ duty cycle was. Perhaps the contactors they used were better than the mean, perhaps not. Perhaps their duty cycle is realistic, perhaps optimistic. However, it seems that there are some where the thermal capability of the contactor is lower than what people are experiencing in the real world and so some vehicles are at risk of contactor failure when they are running hot perhaps due to driving and/or DC charging. If I recall correctly Ford suggested it may be of the order of 1% affected – the hatched area on the diagram.
Ford have issued a software update where they seem to try to monitor the health of the contacts by calculating the resistance across the contacts. I understand an alarm is raised “Service Vehicle Soon” if an abnormal condition arises. My view is that if the resistance has increased above normal then it is likely that the contactor will fail fairly soon as a higher resistance means more heat is generated and so it snowballs until there is full failure by melting or welding. If I got that alarm, I would try and get to a garage as soon as practical and make sure I only reverse park so I can be towed if necessary.
So, in my opinion, some vehicles may never be affected because their contactors can manage the temperatures generated without degradation, but others may be impacted. I would get the software update as soon as practical as in my opinion, it is better getting some warning than none at all.
Finally, is does appear at present to only impact a few so I would say enjoy driving as normal but make sure you reverse park – which is normally the safest way to park anyway
