Ford running into a few issues

[TTQ B4U]

They can NOT design a truck that will handle EVERY scenario that is thrown at it.....PERIOD!

 

Anyway, the point is that this has only affected the dozen or so trucks ON THAT DAY AND COURSE!!!! With that in mind it seems like the video clearly shows what caused the damage and ONLY those trucks have been affected. Some guys posted in the thread that they have done far worse and don't have any frame issues...

 

and that's exactly what happened with the 1999 Cobra's. not everyone came forth to get SVT to make the change. Only a few. So why are they not going to own up to something here?

 

Ford very clearly touts the capabilities of the truck as meeting what these guys did with theirs. That's not even open for debate. Compare Ford's vids with the one posted here and it's clear, Ford was way harsher on those trucks yet made no mention of a warranty issue being possible. They actually implied that the truck can easily handle even the toughest conditions and even be driven and enjoyed on the streets. That's very clearly implying it's first and foremost use is off-road. And that's at the tail end of one of those videos.

 

 

If it were a real problem there would be hundreds of these trucks with bent frames out of the 10k+ produced and that's just NOT the case. Even the bean counters factor in lemons and other issues that can and do happen with ALL brands. I would say that a dozen is pretty minor compared to total build volume and with your legal team, even that should have turned on a LIGHT...

Really? So Toyota had hundreds of people come forth with floor mat/accelerator issues? Did the GTR owners come out of the woodwork to get them to react? These are pretty serious situations and if the FTC gets a hold of this and feels it has merit, Ford is in some deep shit. That's why the above examples of low numbers got attention. In the case of Toyota lives were lost, but here the public is being deceived in masses and that financial implication is the #1 impact considered when looking at cases of false or misleading advertising.

 

Again, this isn't happening to ALL trucks only a select few so a mass recall is just STUPID!!! Think about what you are saying.

Think Toyota. Remember Tylenol back in the 80's ? There were two bottles found. Mass recall. In the case of the Lanham Act, the numbers matter most in terms of potentially being impacted. the potential here is big.

 

The 99's got a new catback exhaust and some cars got the extrude honed intake. Even then Ford made it right....same with the 03/04 Cobra's that had some bad catalytic converts from a SUPPLIER that were down on power...

and just the same the owners of a $50k truck deserve a fix too. especially when they bought the truck on the premise that it should hold up to a lot more than what they threw at it. Edited July 8, 2011 by TTQ B4U

[TTQ B4U]

It didn't void the warranty. It simply isn't covered under warranty. I see what you're saying, but I would never expect that deterioration of my vehicle due to use anywhere but public roads would be covered under warranty, even if it was marketed as having been built with offroading in mind.

 

The FTC and laws regarding this type of practice are there to protect you nonetheless. I see this as a pretty clear case and have yet to hear facts supporting otherwise. Their own videos are pretty damning if you ask me.

 

So hypothetically if you spend 1/3 more money to buy a new rugged iPhone that touts being able to take abuse and they show a dozen videos of this thing being dropped off roofs and thrown down stairs and dropped from purses and backpacks bag in all kinds of situations and then you simply drop yours off the table and it breaks and they in turn deny your warranty you mean to tell me you wouldn't fucking be pissed? If they told you they determined your actions which were no different than theirs showed in all their marketing hyped videos was too much for it, you'd simply bend over and take it? WOW!

 

FORD: Come watch all that we can do with our trucks, designed for this and made available to you, oh....but with a pussy warranty that won't cover any of what you just saw. :no: Sorry, you didn't really believe us did you?

Edited July 8, 2011 by TTQ B4U

[TTQ B4U]

Does not compromise factory warranty which does not cover anything done at a race track.

 

So what you're saying is the Ford Mustang warranty specifically says if you use the red key and take the car to the track and race it, that your warranty is void? Sounds pretty clear. However, you're welcome to use that same red key on the streets and be fine correct? That's how I read it.

 

The confusion comes in that the Boss 302 is a street car with a red key that changes it's capabilities to be a track car. The Rapter and it's entire image is that it's built with the Baha Racer DNA and engineered to take that abuse and they even goes so far as to state you can take it off-road without issue, yet Ford gets pretty fucking unclear in terms of what isn't covered when doing so and damage results. It's all very misleading and that lack of clarity is key.

 

Take a Mustang Red Key or a LS Mustang and Red Key to the track and viola....warranty gone. Take a Rapter off road and you're cool.....unless Ford determines otherwise. Even though they clearly imply you can do all those things they threw at you in the videos and back them up with statements from engineers over and over again selling you on a $50k truck with the DNA of an all terrain eating monster. Where are those disclaimers?

 

Sidestepping my friend.....total bullshit and IMO poor taste. Credibility. Let's see how much Ford and SVT value it.

[TurboGoKart]

The issue is not merely that they didn't fix the truck (however ridiculous), the issue is the fact that they're falsely advertising a product. I fully believe there is a case here as well.

 

 

Out of curiosity, what is the chassis warranty good for then?

[TurboGoKart]

Hehe. I love that this info has gone completely viral on the web. It's going to hurt Ford one way or another.

[Got-Boost?]

and that's exactly what happened with the 1999 Cobra's. not everyone came forth to get SVT to make the change. Only a few. So why are they not going to own up to something here?

 

Ford very clearly touts the capabilities of the truck as meeting what these guys did with theirs. That's not even open for debate. Compare Ford's vids with the one posted here and it's clear, Ford was way harsher on those trucks yet made no mention of a warranty issue being possible. They actually implied that the truck can easily handle even the toughest conditions and even be driven and enjoyed on the streets. That's very clearly implying it's first and foremost use is off-road. And that's at the tail end of one of those videos.

 

 

Really? So Toyota had hundreds of people come forth with floor mat/accelerator issues? Did the GTR owners come out of the woodwork to get them to react? These are pretty serious situations and if the FTC gets a hold of this and feels it has merit, Ford is in some deep shit. That's why the above examples of low numbers got attention. In the case of Toyota lives were lost, but here the public is being deceived in masses and that financial implication is the #1 impact considered when looking at cases of false or misleading advertising.

 

Think Toyota. Remember Tylenol back in the 80's ? There were two bottles found. Mass recall. In the case of the Lanham Act, the numbers matter most in terms of potentially being impacted. the potential here is big.

 

and just the same the owners of a $50k truck deserve a fix too. especially when they bought the truck on the premise that it should hold up to a lot more than what they threw at it.

 

 

Like to hear yourself talk much....LOL!?!

 

Yes, Toyota did have hundreds of people come out with complaints. A few hundred is a little different than a dozen.

 

My point is that where does it end? Pretty soon you won't have any niche vehicles or special models because anything besides going 55mph to/from work, etc. is going to be considered excessive because of claims by people using the product to the extreme. Then everyone will get there vag all out of shap because in there mind that's what it was built for REGARDLESS OF THE SCENARIO...

 

 

 

 

I took my Raptor off a 50' cliff and it didn't survive, damn you Ford I want a new truck... :lolguy:

[El Karacho1647545492]

So what you're saying is the Ford Mustang warranty specifically says if you use the red key and take the car to the track and race it, that your warranty is void? Sounds pretty clear. However, you're welcome to use that same red key on the streets and be fine correct? That's how I read it.

 

I think we're reading void in different ways. My understanding is that if you are chugging along towards Mid-Ohio with warranty protection and, say, your steering were to suddenly come loose, you're covered. However, if what you do on that track once you get there causes the steering to come loose, you're screwed if it happens on-track. If you are driving home from the track and your steering comes loose, you're covered because it happened on the road, but the burden is on the company to prove that negligent use on-track caused the fault. If they're successful in that, you're screwed.

 

In my view of the Raptor issues, their issues arose due to abusive usage off-road (description of absive usage is subjective and to be decided by the courts I guess). Regardless of the way the truck is marketed, I highly doubt that these issues would've come to light in the course of daily driving within the speed parameters of the law. That burden will be on the consumers, apparently, to prove.

[Nitrousbird]

The 2000 Cobra R was marketed as having 385 bhp. Owners who dyno'd their cars found that they were seeing 385 whp, making Ford's claim a probably miscalculation. I bet not too many people complained about that :gabe:.

 

Furthermore, that WAS marketed as a pure track car, and I bet Ford never honored any warranty claims on that car for issues had at the track.

Cobra R was never sold with a factory warranty, and was a rip off for the money.

[TTQ B4U]

Yes, Toyota did have hundreds of people come out with complaints. A few hundred is a little different than a dozen.

 

Pretty soon you won't have any niche vehicles or special models because anything besides going 55mph to/from work, etc. is going to be considered excessive because of claims by people using the product to the extreme. Then everyone will get there vag all out of shap because in there mind that's what it was built for REGARDLESS OF THE SCENARIO...

 

I took my Raptor off a 50' cliff and it didn't survive, damn you Ford I want a new truck... :lolguy:

Actually it was not initial hundreds of complaints that caused the NHTSA to open the investigation. The time line reads :

 

 

• March 29, 2007: NHTSA opens a preliminary investigation into pedal entrapment on model year 2007 Lexus ES350 models based on five consumer complaints alleging three crashes and seven injuries. The all weather floor mat is identified as the possible cause of these incidents.
  
• July 26, 2007: A fatal crash occurs in San Jose, CA involving a ‘07 Camry in which the driver suffers serious injuries and the driver of the struck vehicle is killed. The incident also appears to have been caused by a pedal trapped by an all weather floor mat.
  
• September 13, 2007: After determining the fatal San Jose crash was caused by floor mat entrapment, NHTSA tells Toyota a recall is necessary.
  

The rest of the complaints rolled in after the investigation expanded to cover the entire lineup of cars and news got out. Again, point being, it doesn't take a large number to make something valid. Reading through the thread it appears SVT and Ford are taking care of BlueSVT, the mod of the board and using his truck to gather data for the engineers. So far, he's happy with the results. That at least shows Ford is making an initial attempt to take this seriously.

 

Back to FORD:

 

Let's not make this Rapter issue more than what it is. 14 guys took their trucks into the dessert and had fun just like what the marketing of said truck shows and claims the truck was built to handle. Is it too much to ask that Ford actually back up what they say their truck is able to do?

 

Now if they showed it survive a 50' cliff drop, then fuck yeah, they better be prepared to back it up should mine take a 50' drop. Thankfully, all anyone is looking to do is have the truck survive a spirited run similiar to but no where near as abusive as the ones they show in Ford's own marketing campaigns.

Edited July 8, 2011 by TTQ B4U

[TTQ B4U]

Regardless of the way the truck is marketed, I highly doubt that these issues would've come to light in the course of daily driving within the speed parameters of the law. That burden will be on the consumers, apparently, to prove.

 

That goes without saying but then Ford hasn't spent all that money on engineering and marketing the truck for off road use with the belief that it would never see a run through the dessert by enthusiasts. They encourage owns to use the truck outside the course of typical daily driving.

[Scotty2Hotty]

I would say less than 25% of Raptor owners actually abuse their trucks enough to call attention to this "issue". Bet if I blew up my Lambo driving WOT everywhere I went, Lamborghini probably wouldn't honor the warranty either, being that it was my fault. Again, this opens up a market to help fix this issue if need be. Ford Racing/SVT/Every other aftermarket company could aid in solving it. I see no false advertisement by anymeans with the Raptor. I'd still love to see a Toyota or GM truck try to pull off what the Raptor can do at the speeds it does.

[Scotty2Hotty]

Fuck, I bet Jeep owners are having a party over this shit.

[/font][/size]

 

I'd love to see a Jeep go over 80mph on 35's, not death wobble off the road, or shake everything inside apart. Wanna climb shit? Buy a Jeep. Wanna blast around the desert? Buy Raptor. It's like drag racing and road racing, or the NASCAR vs F1 debate. Lesser vehicles wouldn't take the abuse like the Raptor. I'm not nut swinging, but again, it's a mute point honestly. Just like I won't sue Camel cigarettes if I have a tumor in my lungs down the road.

[Scotty2Hotty]

So a dirt bike track should be ok too?

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=%2F&gl=US#/watch?v=D293JE35vPE

 

Just saying, it's a little beyond the norm.

[Guest Z Fag Jr.]

http://cache.blippitt.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Popcorn-02-Stephen-Colbert.gif

Ford Y you design your truck so weak? Because race truck lol!

[Crossle]

I read the entire 31 pages lol. In this situation, they weren't doing over 50mph. And I'm not going to type everything he wrote again, but pdqgp is 100% dead on. Ford markets, and advertises this truck to do all these things and more. Ford, to my knowledge, never "advertised" the Mustang to be going down a drag strip. Ford's basis for the truck is you can run it hard and it'll hold up (in so many words). I stick to what I said that Ford is merely passing the buck and not taking responsibility for a design flaw.

 

PG32/33, lead truck on the Raptor run claims to be running 125+ off road and did NOT experience the same problem as others on the run. I know, you read to pg31, but more stuff is getting posted.

 

I AGREE that they are advertised to do so, but who knows what the bent frame trucks went through with un-expereinced drivers. It's the same sorta thing with say track prep cars. Just because you can afford one doesn't make you a star driver because you have the "best" (I say that loosely) equipment.

[Crossle]

Actually it was not initial hundreds of complaints that caused the NHTSA to open the investigation. The time line reads :

 

 

• March 29, 2007: NHTSA opens a preliminary investigation into pedal entrapment on model year 2007 Lexus ES350 models based on five consumer complaints alleging three crashes and seven injuries. The all weather floor mat is identified as the possible cause of these incidents.
  
• July 26, 2007: A fatal crash occurs in San Jose, CA involving a ‘07 Camry in which the driver suffers serious injuries and the driver of the struck vehicle is killed. The incident also appears to have been caused by a pedal trapped by an all weather floor mat.
  
• September 13, 2007: After determining the fatal San Jose crash was caused by floor mat entrapment, NHTSA tells Toyota a recall is necessary.
  

The rest of the complaints rolled in after the investigation expanded to cover the entire lineup of cars and news got out. Again, point being, it doesn't take a large number to make something valid. Reading through the thread it appears SVT and Ford are taking care of BlueSVT, the mod of the board and using his truck to gather data for the engineers. So far, he's happy with the results. That at least shows Ford is making an initial attempt to take this seriously.

 

Back to FORD:

 

Let's not make this Rapter issue more than what it is. 14 guys took their trucks into the dessert and had fun just like what the marketing of said truck shows and claims the truck was built to handle. Is it too much to ask that Ford actually back up what they say their truck is able to do?

 

Now if they showed it survive a 50' cliff drop, then fuck yeah, they better be prepared to back it up should mine take a 50' drop. Thankfully, all anyone is looking to do is have the truck survive a spirited run similiar to but no where near as abusive as the ones they show in Ford's own marketing campaigns.

 

 

 

Well, sure. I would be a little more concerned over peoples reaction to death rather than a couple off road guys bending their frames. Considering if you presented both issues to an average person. They will say that "well they shouldn't be beating on their cars like that". Or in the Toyota case "OMG thats horrible, what if that happens to me?" Since it was an "average" driver issue.

[Guest Z Fag Jr.]

I AGREE that they are advertised to do so, but who knows what the bent frame trucks went through with un-expereinced drivers. It's the same sorta thing with say track prep cars. Just because you can afford one doesn't make you a star driver because you have the "best" (I say that loosely) equipment.

 

Its not a matter of experience here, it is a shitty design but for cost and easy of maintenance that's at fault.

[El Karacho1647545492]

Its not a matter of experience here, it is a shitty design but for cost and easy of maintenance that's at fault.

 

English, motherfucker, do you speak it?

[Guest Z Fag Jr.]

English, motherfucker, do you speak it?

 

Shitty auto correct. Thankfully you seem to be fluent in speaking dumbshit.