Ford offers Fuel Tank repair kits to customers

[Directedby]

Blue Oval News -

Says they are $105.00 plus install.

Interesting article.

http://www.detnews.com/2003/autosinsider/0302/21/a01-91129.htm

[JerseyVics]

For the Northern New Jersey folks seriously considering fuel tank protection... I will soon demo FirePanel products on my Crown Vic... you're welcome to check it out once I get it... mostly I'll be just showing it to local Police Departments.

--Russ :)

[RCSignals]

you going to have your car rearended then Russ?

[looking97233]

Funny, I read at blue oval a while ago that these kits were FREE to law enforcement agencies. I guess regular customers just aren't important. Either that or regular customers aren't sueing Ford.

[RF Overlord]

I do have one issue with that article:

"Talarico recently had a harrowing drive on the Southern State Parkway on Long Island where an aggressive driver tailgated him in a large SUV. Talarico might get rid of his Grand Marquis, even though it has only 34,000 miles on it. "I'm wearing out my rear view mirror," Talarico said. "I think I'm going to get a Volvo.""

Is this guy a moron? I NEVER let people tailgate me...if someone is getting too obnoxious, I just pull over in the next safe area, and let them blow by me...takes only a few seconds, and gives me greater peace of mind that the ********* will now be harassing someone ELSE...

looking: I think the issue is that a patrol vehicle is far more likely to be involved in the type of collision being discussed than a civilian car...I don't remember hearing a word about this issue affecting ordinary street-driven cars until the whole thing about the highway patrol officers deaths was brought up...for the lousy $105.00, I'll probably put one on MY car, just for the peace of mind, as my wife drives on the highway fairly often...I realise that this fix is no guarantee, but if you get hit at 70 MPH from a dead stop, there ARE no guarantees...

[cyclone03]

Every time this comes up I ask the same question.....
Do the <2002 panther cars have the same rear frame/suspention as the 2003's?Have changes been made to help PREVENT the fires from highspeed impacts?

Just looking at that kit it looks like all it does is attempt to direct the rearend away from the fuel tank when the tank is driven into axle by a highspeed impact.

[prchrman]

Is there a higher incidents with the CVs than with other similar cars, say Impalas. There sure are a lot of CVs in law enforcement. And are these numbers being skewed by sheer quantity and not utilizing percentages. Anyone know?

[cyclone03]

Well there you go Willie,
Ford pretty much owns the big car police cruiser market because GM killed the Impala.
You only find info on Fords because thats all that out there.

The picture of the car that hit the big rig put ALL MY fears of MY car going up in flames to rest.

[Macon Marauder]

Didn't the referenced article say the government found that fatal accidents in the CV PI were no more likely than in other PI cars?

Or maybe I read that in another article. Doesn't matter. These cars are SAFE.

[Mark McQuaide]

All bets are off when a car is accordianed by a semi. I think the whole issue is being driven by lawyers looking to dip into Ford's deep pockets.

[Leadfoot]

Originally posted by cyclone03
Every time this comes up I ask the same question.....
Do the <2002 panther cars have the same rear frame/suspention as the 2003's?

Almost. The shocks have been moved outboard (to the outside of the frame). There may have been other tweaks such as spring rates. But that's about it.

I don't think there is any need for this kit unless you spend a lot of time on the shoulders of highways. I haven't heard of any taxies having these problems. A lot of taxies are G/Ms or C/Vs.


Originally posted by Mark McQuaide
All bets are off when a car is accordianed by a semi.

Exactly.

[LincMercLover]

After some of the accident I've seen with the Panther platform, I don't think I'll be getting this "mod"... If I'm in that bad of a crash, I might as well be dead...

[RCSignals]

Originally posted by cyclone03
Every time this comes up I ask the same question.....
Do the <2002 panther cars have the same rear frame/suspention as the 2003's?Have changes been made to help PREVENT the fires from highspeed impacts?


Yes, the shocks and shock mounts were moved outside the frame rails

[RCSignals]

The NHTSB declared back in the fall after their investigation that the CVs were no more susceptible to fire than another car. In fact unlike other cars Ford tests these to 50 mph rear impact. The Govt requirement is 30 mph

In a florida report, it was declared that the Caprices were at least 30% more likely to have fire in a rear collision

There is much more to that article than "safety" it is a clear anti-Ford bias and an attempt to bring the civilian owner element ito the issue creating by creating fear.

These cars are amongst the safest if not the safest on the road.

Also, this discussion is in another thread in the Lounge as well

http://www.mercurymarauder.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1647

[RF Overlord]

Originally posted by RF Overlord
...for the lousy $105.00, I'll probably put one on MY car, just for the peace of mind,

I don't want anyone to infer by my statement above that, just because I said I'd put one on my car, I'm buying into all the anti-Ford bias, fear and loathing, etc. I am not. I just think for a relatively small amount of money, ANYTHING I can do to even POTENTIALLY make my car a little safer is worth it.

Someone on CVN has in their sig: "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." It is well known that, in general, the American car-buying public is woefully ignorant, and can be persuaded to believe almost anything, so it should come as no surprise that the public is being asked to legitimise this agenda.

[B-26]

I drive a 2001 Crown Vic Police Interceptor everyday. It has been "fixed" by ford free of charge. Unless you plan to sit in the median running radar and get hit by 100 mph rear enders there is little to fear. Any car by any manufactuer be burn under those conditions. Y ou may never know about the fire at that point. i never worried before the fix and I'm not worried about the Marauder now. Nobody builds or tests a vehicle for type of impact.

[jgc61sr2002]

The MM, GM or CV is the only American rear wheel drive car (currently produced) with a full perimeter frame. Any uni-body automobile would discintegrate if struck in the rear at highway speeds. I think the panther platform is the safest American automobile on the road today. You would think FMC with all their prior legal problems would offer the gas tank shield as a recall. John :shake:

[MAD-3R]

A recall would be an admition of a problem that doesn't exsist

[prchrman]

B-26...very well said

[jgc61sr2002]

Originally posted by MAD-3R
A recall would be an admition of a problem that doesn't exsist What about the FMC tire problem. They made a recall after it cost them major bucks. A recall could save them major bucks. John

[Macon Marauder]

History shows us that American car companies hardly ever address things like this voluntarily. I'm convinced that there is NO problem with the Panther platform cars. I don't expect Ford to give me a fix for something I don't consider a defect.

But even if it was a problem caused by a design flaw, Ford would probably fight like Hell to keep from having to provide the fix. They wouldn't do it until after the "2x4 upside the head" affect of losing several multi-miliion dollar lawsuits.

That's just the m.o.

(Not flaming Ford. They all do it, refusing to learn from history and their mistakes.)

[tetsu]

Originally posted by RF Overlord
I do have one issue with that article:

"Talarico recently had a harrowing drive on the Southern State Parkway on Long Island where an aggressive driver tailgated him in a large SUV. Talarico might get rid of his Grand Marquis, even though it has only 34,000 miles on it. "I'm wearing out my rear view mirror," Talarico said. "I think I'm going to get a Volvo.""

Is this guy a moron? I NEVER let people tailgate me...if someone is getting too obnoxious, I just pull over in the next safe area, and let them blow by me...takes only a few seconds, and gives me greater peace of mind that the ********* will now be harassing someone ELSE...




I haven't been tailgated in my MM. Not sure why. :D

If an SUV is gating you, in a MM it's easy enough to rectify it, unless
it's an Aviator on your a$$.

Johnny

[Kelly]

The State Troopers up here in the north have been getting the shields put in pretty regular in the last month. A good friend had his done last week.

[jefferson-mo]

It IS a recall for the Police Units............


One thing you guys in the "snow belt" might think about is the shock covers may have a tendency to collect slush, mud, salt etc and a good place to start rust..................


just sumthin' to think about

3W7Z-9B007-AA 2003 models
3W7Z-9B007-BA 1998-2002 models

List price $105.32
a friendly dealer should sell 'em to you for about $80

I'm at the dealer so I get 'em about $55 but I'm not gonna do it............:D

[RCSignals]

I have a '03 Interceptor and got the letter in the mail. It is not an official recall. It's "voluntary" retrofit or wording such as that.
As I understand there are quite a few Police Departments that had opted nt to participate in the free installation

[jefferson-mo]

Yeah you're right...not 'Recall' but 'owner notification program'

[CRUZTAKER]

My dealer actually said it only fit police cars.....what an idiot. That was the office SERVICE MGR.!!!!

[Pantherman]

Jefferson-mo, because the rear shock absorbers were moved outboard of the rails for 2003, the 2003 version of the axle shields doesn't have the shock covers/snow scoops. Even the earlier versions are designed to drain pretty well. Despite all that, I'm not putting shields on my car. I very seldom park in the fast lane.

[CRUZTAKER]

Originally posted by jefferson-mo
One thing you guys in the "snow belt" might think about is the shock covers may have a tendency to collect slush, mud, salt etc and a good place to start rust..................


Good point, thanks. Guess I'll just stay out of the emergency lane.

[DLoreanMARAUDER]

Here in NY the State Troopers pulled their CV p-71s from road untill ford fixed em, they were using suburbans and tahoes for the mean time. althought the thought does concern me somwhat, if you rear-end any car at EXCESSIVE speeds it will either crumble, blow up, or in some way put you in mortal danger where the odds are against you. lets face it NOTHINGS perfect, ESPECIALY cars. although if ford Does have a fix or should I say improvement (which it does), why not use it. cars are always built to be improved thats why we but new cars, so why not take advantage of the technology! just my 2 cents

[looking97233]

RF-

I don't think the CV/GM/MM/PI is a waiting fireball either, actually just the oppisite. I think the platform is about the safest one on the road. I just thought that if Ford is going to offer this kit for free for one, they should offer it for free to all.

[Leadfoot]

Originally posted by jgc61sr2002
What about the FMC tire problem. They made a recall after it cost them major bucks. A recall could save them major bucks. John

The recall itself cost them several billions (literally). They were not at fault either but stepped up and recalled them anyway at their expense. I respect Ford for doing so.


Originally posted by Macon Marauder
But even if it was a problem caused by a design flaw, Ford would probably fight like Hell to keep from having to provide the fix. They wouldn't do it until after the "2x4 upside the head" affect of losing several multi-miliion dollar lawsuits.

That's just the m.o.

(Not flaming Ford. They all do it, refusing to learn from history and their mistakes.)

Since I work for the auto industry, I find your statement deeply offensive. Saftey is never an option. Any vehicle hit at 80 mph is not going to come out of it looking pretty. The PI vehicles exceeded all rear end impact tests. Ford spent a lot of time and money on determining the cause and provided these kits free of charge to those who actually need them. If they were concerned with money, they would have charged for the parts and for the money spent to develop them.

BTW you are flaming Ford.

[Macon Marauder]

Originally posted by Leadfoot
Since I work for the auto industry, I find your statement deeply offensive...
BTW you are flaming Ford.

I am offended that you are deeply offended! :)

Seriously, unless you are the person making the decisions about whether or not - or when - to issue a recall, my stated opinion has nothing to do with you.

And it's OK with me if you think I'm flaming Ford. I just don't see it that way. Like all car companies (all corporations for that matter) their purpose is to make money. Safety, or any other concern, takes a back seat to that. That's just the way it is.

Read my whole post. I don't think it's a safety issue either. But even in the Firestone tire fiasco, Ford didn't issue the recall right away. It was after many years and lots of multi-million $ lawsuits. It got to a point where there was just too much bad publicity.

Something similar MAY happen with the panther platform, but I doubt it. The problems are not on the same scale.

[jgc61sr2002]

MM I concur. John

[SergntMac]

Originally posted by jefferson-mo
It IS a recall for the Police Units.

Sorry Jefferson, I have to disagree. The C/O of our fleet group is a friend of mine, and it's not a recall. The kits are being paid for by the Dept., and due to fleet size and time concerns, the installs are being farmed out to local dealers, Ford and LM, and we don't patrol the expressways here in Chicago, the State has jurisdiction. But, the police union is pushing the upgrade, fueled by uninformed opinion. When I picked up my MM from the dealer today, he had five marked CV/PIs in for the upgrade, and there is a purchase order on file for billing.

This is another tiresome thread, because opinion greatly outweighs the facts. Let's move on already?

[Directedby]

Not good news for FORD on fuel tank.

Blue Oval reports;

HEADLINE:
"Ford Admits That Crown Vic Failed Crash Test; Dallas Official Questions Why Ford Can Provide Safer Technology to Civilian 'Protection' Car, but Not To Police"


http://www.blueovalnews.com

[RCSignals]

Directedby
Read the related link in the Lounge. That link was posted in the fuel tank issue thread

[Warpath]

Originally posted by Macon Marauder
I am offended that you are deeply offended! :)

Seriously, unless you are the person making the decisions about whether or not - or when - to issue a recall, my stated opinion has nothing to do with you.

And it's OK with me if you think I'm flaming Ford. I just don't see it that way. Like all car companies (all corporations for that matter) their purpose is to make money. Safety, or any other concern, takes a back seat to that. That's just the way it is.

Read my whole post. I don't think it's a safety issue either. But even in the Firestone tire fiasco, Ford didn't issue the recall right away. It was after many years and lots of multi-million $ lawsuits. It got to a point where there was just too much bad publicity.

Something similar MAY happen with the panther platform, but I doubt it. The problems are not on the same scale.

I'm offended that your offended that I'm offended. So there. :P

You implied that the auto industry doesn't move unless sued which is untrue. I have been fortunate enough not to be involved in a recall. But, others with whom I work have. They do not wait until a lawyer comes to them. There are people here that watch for unusual repairs. When they turn up, we investigate. It takes time to determine if it is a problem, what the cause is, the fix, and to prove it out. Unfortunately, the news media and courts can move quicker than us.

But, like Sarge said. This is my opinion. But, I have a different perspective than the others here.

[sailsmen]

After reading the NHSTA report this whole thing reeks of $$$$ and political posturing. The Dallas DA is posturing for political reasons, the union has a cause to justify it's existence, the "auto consumer safety groups" have a cause to justify their existence and the plaintiffs have a huge financial interest in seeing Ford portrayed as grossly negligent.

I ask you to remember the Audi "unintended acceleration" fiasco of a few years ago. I will never forget one of the major net works hired an engineer to highly modify an Audi to show "untinended acceleration". At the end of the day it was proven there was nothing wrong with the car and the law of physics also applied to Audi. In most cases the vehicles were driven by the secondary driver and the brake pedal was closer to the gas pedal then most US marketed vehicles.

I also ask you to remember the GM side saddle gas tank video done by another major network. The tank was purposely over filled, the wrong gas cap was purposely used on the tank and fireworks were attached to the frame rails.

The $$$$ issue is influenced by the tabbacco settlement in which the alledged victims received zero dollars. I personally know one of the lead plaintiff attorneys and his personal take is $30 million a year for 25 years. He also bought the leading witness a house before he testified againest the tobbacco industry.