Last post on Nov 26, 2006 at 10:18 PM
You are in the Ford F-Series
What is this discussion about?
Ford F-150, Ford F-250, Ford F-350, Ford F-100, Truck
#778 of 2180 Re: Mac24
Nov 16, 2004 (10:29 am)
"What I'd like to see is more detailed information on how the inevitable problems and defects are dealt with."
I agree, but they (CR) would need a whole other magazine to describe just a fraction of how that works. The thought is very cool however. A major flaw that I am not sure about how Consumer Reports deals with, is perception of problems and of brand loyalty and brand imaging. What I mean is, when a brand is imaged as being of high quality, then if a consumer encounters a problem with that "high quality" piece, they may think it is just a fluke and not report it as being a big deal on their annual CR questionnaire. Dealership experience also caused similar problems. If the dealership kisses your foot every time you have a problem, then it is possible that you might be less likely to report the problem. In reality, this should probably be more of a customer satisfaction issue, in which CR asks you, "what is the likeliness that you would purchase this vehicle again?" However, since the product is perceived to be of high quality, the problem may never get reported because in the mind of the consumer "this vehicle just doesn't have problems, my car is unique for having this issue."
If you do want a new F-150 there are many indicators that it is actually doing very well. I am just going to give you a few facts that I have run across.
Problem areas that I have seen with the new F-150 are mostly on 4x4 models and the issue(s) is/are vibration, and interior noises. That is pretty much it as far as consistent issues.
In CR along with their new reliability ratings are the customer satisfaction ratings. The biggest issue(s) in customer satisfaction with the new F-150 has been 1) Not enough power 2)13MPG average gas Mileage. With these two things in mind, the F-150 still gets very good customer satisfaction.
By todays ratings, the new F-150 would be much more reliable than your 93 would have been. Though if your 93 itself was close to perfect, then that would probably be hard to replicate, even today. When I say today's ratings, I mean that with the averages for today are better than they were then. For instance a truck back in the early 1990's that earned an average reliability rating, would today (if it were brand new) have a much worse than average reliability, because each year that the reliability average goes up, the bar is raised.
If you know you have a good Ford Service Dept. around that is half the problem solved. The other half of the problem (how good/bad the vehicle actually turns out to be) is much harder to find a solution to, seeing as how each vehicle, with each manufacturer is a gamble. Luck of the draw I guess. FWIW, the 2WD 2004 F-150 is the most reliable domestic pickup with an average reliability rating. However, the 4x4 version of the same truck is the least reliable pickup overall, but not by a huge margin. If Ford does with the F-150 like it does with the rest of its vehicles, both versions will be average by spring or this time next year.
Sorry for the long post, I didn't mean to type your ears off. Just a lot of information to convey.
#779 of 2180 Re: 91 Ford F250 [wijoco]
Nov 16, 2004 (10:44 am)
Thanks for reply. Truck has new rebiult motor. clean TB / has new tps. Dont think it's anything basic.
#780 of 2180 Re: Mac24 [jrc346]
Nov 16, 2004 (11:50 am)
"For instance a truck back in the early 1990's that earned an average reliability rating, would today (if it were brand new) have a much worse than average reliability, because each year that the reliability average goes up, the bar is raised."
You may be confusing reliabiltiy with build quality or overall satisfaction. Reliability is number of problems encountered per vehicle, or expense of repairs, whatever the criteria. I don't think anyone has established that reliabiltiy has increased for Ford over the last ten years, that's really the heart of the debate.
#781 of 2180 Re: Mac24 [jrc346]
Nov 16, 2004 (3:53 pm)
If Ford does with the F-150 like it does with the rest of its vehicles, both versions will be average by spring or this time next year.
That's the problem.............. I don't want to spend $30k+ for a truck that just about manages to pull itself up to 'average'!
#782 of 2180 Re:Mac24 & Wijoco
Nov 16, 2004 (5:48 pm)
"That's the problem.............. I don't want to spend $30k+ for a truck that just about manages to pull itself up to 'average'!"
Understood:) I don't blame you, though if you are looking for a truck, the only option you have above average is the Tundra, next most reliable after that is the 2WD F-150. I wish there was some way I could post that stuff from CR here, but that isn't possible, at least I don't think. Anyway, maybe the new F-150 will reach the better than average marks that the previous generation 1997-2003 F-150's trucks did?
Respectfully, I don't think that I have the two confused. Over the past 10 and 20 years especially, all domestic automakers have become much more reliable (this being based on CR information). This can also be shown in JD Powers "initial" and "long-term" quality scores, though in an indirect way since reliability and quality are different in that a quality constructed car i.e. Audi line, can have poor reliability. If Ford reliability stayed the same or decreased over the past 10 years overall, Fords market share would most likely be decreasing rapidly (it has increased since July I do believe (15.00% in July to 16.60% now).
As for averages increasing since the early 1990's: What I mean is that as cars become more and more reliable (and they have) the average grows. So, say you bought a GMC Safari back in 1992, and when you purchased it, it had a reliability rating of average. Since GM has done very little to that van since then, with only tweaks to the engine, transmission and body. It now has much worse than average reliability, because it continued on with close to the same parts and quality to this date. Ford in contrast, has not done much to update its Econoline van since 1991 when the new body came out. However, it has received new engines and transmissions since then. It used to float between much worse than average reliability and worse than average, though despite the increased in averages over the past 13 years for that vehicle class, it now almost makes it to better than average reliability. Sorry these are the best examples I could think of.
Anyway, this will either prove my point, or bring about more confusion, hehe.
#783 of 2180 Re: Rear end shift on acceleration [robs]
Nov 16, 2004 (8:20 pm)
hey robs i have had the truck stall on me in traffic before. im at the red light and it stallss and in the message display center it says LOW OIL pressure, but i know it has nothing to do with the oil. what the dealer say the problem is? also was the computer module the culprit of your truck stX2alling? please respond because i will be taking my truck to the dealer this week.
2004 f150 lariat 4X2 5.4
#784 of 2180 Re: light howling sound when accelerating [epbrez]
Nov 16, 2004 (9:39 pm)
MY f-150 IS A SUPER CREW XLT WITH 5.4, AND 3:73 REAR AXLE.
LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM AS DO LOTS OF OTHERS.tHE SELLING DEALER ASKED ME TO GIVE FORD 3 MONTHS TO COME UP WITH A FIX AND THEY WOULD EITHER GIVE ME MY MONEY BACK OR ANOTHER VEHICLE.
OTHER PERSONS WITH THIS PROBLEM THAT I KNOW ABOUT ADVED THE FOLLOWING: ONE PERSON SAID THE DEFECTIVE VECHICLE PROCEDURE WORKED FOR HIM,AFTYER 10 MONTHS GOT HIS MONEY BACK FOR EVERYTHING INCLUDING A BED LINER AND OTHER ITEMS HE HAD INSTALLED,(COST HIM A LITTLE FOR THE MILEAGE 13,000 MILES) ANOTHER PARTY WAS SUCCESSFUL IN TRADING FOR A F-250 COST HIM ABOUT $2,500 BUT IT HAD MORE STUFF THAN THE 150. SEVERAL YEARS AGO I HAD THE SAME REAR END PROBLEM WITH A USED CAR (MERCURY)AND AFTER TWO SETS OF GEARS, I INSTALLED A USED REAR END AND NO MORE NOISE.
I OWNED A GARAGE IN THOSE DAYS AND WAS DETERMINED TO FIND WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS. I FINALLY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THE REAR END HOUSING WAS IMPROPERLY BORED IN RELATION TO THE PINION AND RING GEAR SUPPORTS EVEN THO THE PATTERN ON THE GEARS LOOKED GOOD, UNDER LOADING THEY DISTORTED AND CAUSED A HOWL. IT TELESCOPED THE NOISE UP THE DRIVE SHAFT WHERE IT BECAME OFFENSIVE. I ALSO HAVE A VIBRATION ON THE THROTTLE PEDAL AT 30 TO 45 UNDER LOAD,A MOTOR SO NOISY IT SOUNDS LIKE A DIESEL AND A VERY ROUGH IDLE COMPARED TO MY 2001 5.4 CLUB CAB. (WISH I HAD IT BACK). I HAVE BEEN A FORD MAN ALL MY LIFE AND HAVE NEVER HAD A REASON TO COMPLAIN OTHER THAN TO THE DEALER. I CAN'T BELIEVE SOMEONE HASN'T STARTED A CLASS ACTION SUIT.
#785 of 2180 Re: Not Convinced... [mac24]
Nov 16, 2004 (10:00 pm)
ALL I CAN SAY IS CAREFUL--I HAVE A 2004 F-150,WHITE XLT, 5.4, 3:73 GEARS, SUPERCREW--MOTOR IS ROUGH AND SOUNDS LIKE A DIESEL WHEN IDELING IN MY GARAGE OR A FAST FOOD LINE. THE REAR END HOWLS UNDER LOAD FROM 40 TO 70 MPH (FORD CANT FIX ANY OF THIS)
OTHER THAN THAT IT'S A GREAT TRUCK, GOOD RIDE, ACCELERATION,16 HIGHWAY MILES PER GALLON. I HAVE ALMOST 3000 MILES ON IT AND WILL MAKE YOU A HECK OF A DEAL IF YOU ARE STILL IN THE MARKET?
Nov 17, 2004 (12:30 pm)
My '04 F150 w/ the v8 280 hsp gets 15 miles per gallon tops with mixed hwy and city driving (more hwy than city). I can't seem to go beyond 15 mpg even with HWY driving.
gas is now $2.30 gal in CA
#787 of 2180 Re: Not Convinced... [ronm1]
Nov 17, 2004 (1:26 pm)
Well, thanks for the offer, but the rear end noise and vibes are something I want to avoid.
It's interesting that a major thrust of the advertising for the '04 F150 centers on the smooth ride (outboard shocks), and the quiet cab ('Quiet Metal' dash).............. the very things that most complaints seem to focus on!
Incidentally, I think your diagnosis of the rear end problems is on the right track. It's either that or a distortion of the housing under load, or possibly a weird harmonics issue.