Houston we have a problem! (the bent frame thread)

[SilverBolt]

A few more thoughts....

Someone needs to get SVT on the phone about this incident. Based on the description of what happened, Ford is on the hook to make people whole here. The trucks were being used as intended. There's an owners manual supplement that explains how to do it, and a tremendous amount of marketing has been done to show that these trucks are designed to handle this treatment.

Note how it doesn't say "do not attempt". It says "do these things before you do this."

Given that it was 10/14 trucks, and assuming the data provided about this event is accurate, I can't imagine Ford/SVT giving anyone grief about replacing/repairing the damaged trucks (including trucks out of warranty). I've heard the word "litigation" mentioned but I'd be severely disappointed in Ford if it came to that. If these trucks failed in the manner described, Ford really should have your back. They're fools if they don't, the damage to their reputation will dramatically exceed the $500,000 it'd cost to replace these trucks. I wouldn't try and deal with 10 different dealers to repair it...deal with Ford/SVT itself as a group.

Probably the best way to start is calling 1-800-FORD-SVT.

You have to know that Ford will play the "abuse" card.

 

[Chrisandalex1]

i am curious if anyone has been told that Ford would not cover this yet?

Also the SVT guys monitor the forums, I am surprized they haven't at least pm'd anyone yet. I am sure that Jamal Hameedi, SVT CChief Nameplate Engineer, would be keenly interested in this problem. Another guy to email would be Tad Ohtake. He is the Chassis Engineering Supervisor.

If you want emails, pm me. I don't think I should post them.

 

[Scottysspeedshop]

i am curious if anyone has been told that Ford would not cover this yet?

Also the SVT guys monitor the forums, I am surprized they haven't at least pm'd anyone yet. I am sure that Jamal Hameedi, SVT CChief Nameplate Engineer, would be keenly interested in this problem. Another guy to email would be Tad Ohtake. He is the Chassis Engineering Supervisor.

If you want emails, pm me. I don't think I should post them.

He is aware of what happened. I talked with him at the ford Shelby meet yesterday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Chrisandalex1]

Hey Scotty, I am glad to see you are enjoying yourself rather than sweating out in the oil fields.

What did he have to say about this shit?

 

[RPG]

A few more thoughts....

Someone needs to get SVT on the phone about this incident. Based on the description of what happened, Ford is on the hook to make people whole here. The trucks were being used as intended. There's an owners manual supplement that explains how to do it, and a tremendous amount of marketing has been done to show that these trucks are designed to handle this treatment.

Note how it doesn't say "do not attempt". It says "do these things before you do this."

Given that it was 10/14 trucks, and assuming the data provided about this event is accurate, I can't imagine Ford/SVT giving anyone grief about replacing/repairing the damaged trucks (including trucks out of warranty). I've heard the word "litigation" mentioned but I'd be severely disappointed in Ford if it came to that. If these trucks failed in the manner described, Ford really should have your back. They're fools if they don't, the damage to their reputation will dramatically exceed the $500,000 it'd cost to replace these trucks. I wouldn't try and deal with 10 different dealers to repair it...deal with Ford/SVT itself as a group.

Probably the best way to start is calling 1-800-FORD-SVT.

I don't disagree Ford marketed this truck for driving hard in the dirt, and it does that very well. Now that this is something thats shown up all of a sudden, and the fact it seems to have happened on a group run under the same conditions for everyone, I don't think its a stretch for Ford to question the manner in which the run was conducted.

Just go to Ford's own website and check out the video of them talking about the durability of the truck. They end it with Biffle and McCackren (sp) talking about personal responsibility and the owners using their heads because you can, and will break the truck if used hard enough.

Bottom line you cant take marketing material as fact. Lets say a Prius add claims 55mpg, but you only get 45, should Toyota be blamed for misleading the consumer? No, driving conditions change, and clearly the limits of this trucks rear-end was found on this particular run because for over a year now, many of us have done the exact same kind of driving these guys did with out similar results.

 

[debate]

bump stops

it seems like it would be pretty easy to fab up a brace to attach the bump stops to or even just weld some reinforcements to that section. had to be a pretty violent jolt to bend the frame IMO

Believe the frame is high-strength low-alloy structural steel; probably 945 YLF, good stuff. The spacer block between axle and leaf spring on my Raptor has a radius shelf, like a baseball bat. The F250 spacer block that appeared flat. The other F150s spacer blocks don't have a shelf.

Maybe the Raptor blocks could be swapped side to side so the shelf is outboard and the F250 bump stop used as a replacement for the Raptor bump stop.

 

[SOCOMech]

I don't disagree Ford marketed this truck for driving hard in the dirt, and it does that very well. Now that this is something thats shown up all of a sudden, and the fact it seems to have happened on a group run under the same conditions for everyone, I don't think its a stretch for Ford to question the manner in which the run was conducted.

Just go to Ford's own website and check out the video of them talking about the durability of the truck. They end it with Biffle and McCackren (sp) talking about personal responsibility and the owners using their heads because you can, and will break the truck if used hard enough.

Bottom line you cant take marketing material as fact. Lets say a Prius add claims 55mpg, but you only get 45, should Toyota be blamed for misleading the consumer? No, driving conditions change, and clearly the limits of this trucks rear-end was found on this particular run because for over a year now, many of us have done the exact same kind of driving these guys did with out similar results.

X2............

 

[Raptorguy21]

There's a great 4min YouTube vid of BlueSVT on the Raptor Run thread that is a great example of the rhythm of the run. Here is the link: BlueSVT on Raptor Run

I saw nothing outrageous in that video.........

He is aware of what happened. I talked with him at the ford Shelby meet yesterday.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well what did the man say?

 

[Droid]

I don't disagree Ford marketed this truck for driving hard in the dirt, and it does that very well. Now that this is something thats shown up all of a sudden, and the fact it seems to have happened on a group run under the same conditions for everyone, I don't think its a stretch for Ford to question the manner in which the run was conducted.

Just go to Ford's own website and check out the video of them talking about the durability of the truck. They end it with Biffle and McCackren (sp) talking about personal responsibility and the owners using their heads because you can, and will break the truck if used hard enough.

Completely agree, they absolutely should investigate it before taking any action. If it's within the realm of what a Raptor should do, they are most certainly obligated to correct it though.

On the one hand it may be that the run was obviously way too extreme. On the other it may turn out that conditions on the run created a just-right scenario to expose a weakness of the trucks that was intended to be well within its designed performance envelope. As a Raptor owner, I *REALLY* want to know what Ford itself thinks of this. If they fault the 10 owners, I want to know what design parameters they blatantly violated and how to avoid doing so myself. If they fault the trucks, I want my truck to be equipped with whatever modification will prevent this from happening.

Bottom line you cant take marketing material as fact. Lets say a Prius add claims 55mpg, but you only get 45, should Toyota be blamed for misleading the consumer? No, driving conditions change, and clearly the limits of this trucks rear-end was found on this particular run because for over a year now, many of us have done the exact same kind of driving these guys did with out similar results.

This is where I disagree. You CAN take marketing material as fact. This is where truth-in-advertising comes in to play. As a for instance, if you tell me a truck can tow 8,000lb in a TV ad, show in specifications on your web site, discuss in the owners manual, and have a dealer network that explains point blank to me that it will tow 8,000lb, it sure as hell better work when I back it up to a 5,000lb trailer. If the transmission falls out after a 1,000 mile drive with said trailer, the truck manufacturer can't come back to me and say "well yeah it'll tow 8,000 lb, but we didn't mean to say that you could tow anything close to that for any distance."

In the Toyota example as well, they would absolutely be liable. The exception is if they're simply quoting the EPA's estimate for the vehicle (and assuming they didn't screw with the vehicle in such a way to deliberately score high in the EPA testing with no other benefit). But if there's no way in hell that the marketed product can deliver that result without using a completely self-serving "downhill both ways with a tailwind"-type test, then Toyota is going to be (and should be) in trouble.

Again, I'm not knocking Ford/SVT here, my hope and guess is they'll do what is right. But if they do, it won't necessarily be *only* an act of kindness.

 

[SOCOMech]

Tow ratings and even gas mileage figures are more pinpoint than off-road use. We still have yet to get a definitive answer as to just how hard core the situation was that caused this. On the "other forum", one guy said it was just while going down somewhat smooth roads. Unless there's a video of the exact moment it happened, the spectrum of advertised and abuse is very wide.