You are here: Forums SUVs Ford Explorer Ford Explorer Mercury Mountaineer 2005 and earlier

Ford Explorer Mercury Mountaineer 2005 and earlier

3320 messages,  Last post on Oct 26, 2009 at 5:13 PM

You are in the Ford Explorer Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Ford Explorer, Mercury Mountaineer, SUV

Messages Page 260 of 333 1 ... 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 ... 333 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#2585 of 3320 05 Mercury Mountaineer Rear Window Failure by lateralg Jun 16, 2005 (1:42 pm)
Tempered glass is intolerant of even tiny nicks in the edges, as well as moderate impacts by very sharp, small objects. When you get this one replaced, carefully inspect all the edges & the mounts. I suspect damage during installation of the second one.
#2586 of 3320 Durability, cost of longer warranty to Ford by fsmmcsi Jun 16, 2005 (9:38 pm)
My 2002 Mountaineer came from the factory with three defects - a pinched fuel tank vent hose, a mark in the paint, and a rear differential which had been improperly assembled (it was singing loundly after just a few thousand miles). All were corrected promptly, and all would have been covered under any warranty. Since then, one small $25 idler pully on the front of the engine was replaced at 90-some thousand miles. That is it. It is radically more reliable than the 1996 Chevrolet Impala SS it replaced, and is significantly better than the 1994 Thunderbird we had. Replies to this message: chuck1 (Jun 17, 2005 7:18 am)
#2587 of 3320 Re: Durability, cost of longer warranty to Ford [fsmmcsi] by chuck1 Jun 17, 2005 (7:18 am)
Replying to: fsmmcsi (Jun 16, 2005 9:38 pm) My 2002 Mountaineer came from the factory with three defects - a pinched fuel tank vent hose, a mark in the paint, and a rear differential which had been improperly assembled (it was singing loundly after just a few thousand miles).   It's really amazing what we as owners settle for. We all know about the rear differential. I don't think the other two items should have ever gotten past the"QC" at the point of assembly! Just my thoughts......
#2588 of 3320 three defects by chuck1 by lateralg Jun 17, 2005 (11:25 am)
Three?   Out of how many thousands of parts, and thousands of connections? In addition to component complexity ... radios with more computer power than Apollo space ships.   And trying to test each combination in each of thousands of modes of operation in the field.   I wish my personal failure rate was that low.
#2589 of 3320 Three? Yes! But you are missing the point by daryll44 Jun 17, 2005 (12:59 pm)
You are missing the point. The point is that the Japanese, by and large, have (near) ZERO.   And INITIAL quality isn't really the big issue under discussion here. Three defects, five defects, zero defects...it doesn't matter really because they get fixed under warranty. The REAL issue is what happens AFTER the warranty period. In other words, will Explorer have good LONG TERM DURABILITY without unreasonable repairs? And how does that LONG TERM DURABILITY stack up to the Japanese competition?
#2590 of 3320 Three? Yes! But you are missing the point by lateralg Jun 17, 2005 (1:33 pm)
YOU madeTHE point VERY easy TO miss WITH your STATEMENT:   "My 2002 Mountaineer came from the factory with three defects - a pinched fuel tank vent hose, a mark in the paint, and a rear differential which had been improperly assembled (it was singing loundly after just a few thousand miles).    It's really amazing what we as owners settle for. We all know about the rear differential. I don't think the other two items should have ever gotten past the"QC" at the point of assembly! Just my..."   Do YOU have ANSWERS to THE questions YOU raised? Replies to this message: chuck1 (Jun 17, 2005 3:57 pm)
#2591 of 3320 Re: Three? Yes! But you are missing the point [lateralg] by chuck1 Jun 17, 2005 (3:57 pm)
Replying to: lateralg (Jun 17, 2005 1:33 pm) Here is the point in my thinking. It is inexcusable to release a new vehicle with a bad rear-end. Period! Car makers have been manufacturing cars for over 100 years. After one hundred years-you should be able to buy a first-year vehicle and not get a bad rear end. Before someone calls me a "Ford Basher"-I'll list below the Ford vehicles I have owned:   96 Contour 96 Mercury Mystique '98 Contours (2) 95 Mercury Sable 94(?) Tempo '02 Explorer (Currently) '05 Taurus (Not "owned" but company provided vehicle) Take the Contours and Mystique listed above. The Duratec V6 in these vehicles that was an option (I heard co-developed by Porsche) was nothing short of a remarkable piece of technology. However, to save on weight they used a water pump with a plastic impeller. It would break at 50K like clockwork. This is also inexcusable! Let's call it like it is and not make excuses for all the automakers!!
#2592 of 3320 My Mother Had a '98 Mystique by daryll44 Jun 17, 2005 (5:21 pm)
My mom had a '98 Mystique...she eventually dubbed it "Mercury Mistake". It was recalled about 10 times in the 25,000 miles over 4 years or so that she had it. Mom was a 65 year old "I'll never buy a foreign car" person. Until that "Mystake"...after years and years of Ford and Chrysler products. Finally she broke down and "went foreign". Since 2002 she's had a 4 cylinder Camry and swears she'll never drive anything but Toyota again. Not one defect, no hassle, no fuss, no muss. Ford lost a life customer.   I see the new Ford Fusion is supposed to be the wondercar of the future. Seems to me that the Contour/Mystique was supposed to be that 10 years ago and the Tempo/Topaz before that. In other words, you can fool me once, shame on me....
#2593 of 3320 Release with bad rear end? Toyota reliability. by fsmmcsi Jun 17, 2005 (7:59 pm)
Unless the rear end is singing from the factory, how are they to know it is bad? It took several thousand miles for the problem to show up, and it was probably an assembly defect. It was fixed promptly, so it certainly did not bother me. If anything, all of the evidence above suggests that Ford has improved dramatically.   I just do not buy the Toyota reliability myth. Why do they and others sell so many parts for Toyotas if they never fail? Why have they had their share of recalls?   I just discovered an outright design defect in my new Sienna. My back (shoulders / neck) have really been bothering me since I got it 4,500 miles and 45 days ago. It is definitely the car, not me. I thought the seat was junk, but thanks to another Edmunds user, I just discovered that the steering column is slanted to one side (closer to the front of the car on the left). It is a big enough angle that it amounts to several inches at the seat. I was planning to have the seat re-stuffed and the hot to sit on solid leather replaced with perforated leather (as on the Mountaineer) or cloth, but now I may sell the thing. It has the smoothness the 2002 Mountaineer lacks (and which the 2006 Mountaineer apparently will have), and is quiet and very handy for my needs, but I may not be able to keep it. It also gets only slightly better mileage than teh Mountaineer, even though it is rated much higher.   If I sell it, I will certainly re-consider the 2006 Mountaineer, 2007 Explorer SportTrac, and other Ford products. Replies to this message: tidester (Jun 17, 2005 9:11 pm) daryll44 (Jun 18, 2005 12:57 am)
#2594 of 3320 Re: Release with bad rear end? Toyota reliability. [fsmmcsi] by tidester HOST Jun 17, 2005 (9:11 pm)
Replying to: fsmmcsi (Jun 17, 2005 7:59 pm) Why do they and others sell so many parts for Toyotas if they never fail?   Because they wear out? Was that a trick question?   tidester, host

Messages Page 260 of 333 1 ... 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 ... 333 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums SUVs Ford Explorer Ford Explorer Mercury Mountaineer 2005 and earlier