Thank You Ford

[incavulator]

There is no evidence to indicate the OP's neglect caused the problem, and it's not unreasonable to expect a transmission to last more than 130,000 miles these days. But, Ford doesn't provide any guarantee or warranty that ensures they will be problem free at this mileage. Once we're beyond the warranty, the risk is all ours.

I think the only thing the OP could potentially be accused of is possibly not doing research to find out how trouble free these vehicles are (or are not) at higher mileage, especially if that was going to be the use case. Yes, the title of his post implies he is not happy with Ford and I can't say I blame him for that. I wouldn't expect a transmission failure at 130,000 miles on most new vehicles, but based on my pre-purchase research, transmission and RDU failures (among other things) in these vehicles are not exactly rare, so it's not a complete surprise to me, because I did research, to hear about another one. If I was planning on driving a vehicle 40,000+ miles a year, I either wouldn't have chosen a BS, or I would have gotten rid of it when the warranty expired.

As @RSH said, there's no benefit in piling on. I feel bad for anyone staring at an $8000+ repair bill for a 3 year old vehicle. If he didn't do the research and expected it to last 150,000 miles or more (that is considered "full useful life") without trouble, then it's understandable that he would be upset.

Again, as @RSH said, I too hope things work out for him.

Sponsored

 

[Escape2Bronco]

Also, it’s not just Ford. My stepson’s Honda Civic‘s tranny took a crap at 150k as well. But, his is 20 years old and the subframe is rusted beyond repair so it’s going to the scrapyard. I’m sure the OP wasn’t expecting a major repair after 3 years of ownership even at 130k miles. I surely wouldn’t given there was little long term history on this vehicle 3-4 years ago given when they first started shipping.

 

[RidingTheBronco]

OK, there is some problem with the tranny, they say. It will probably be best to fix it and drive like a retired person.

I'm gonna look at this a different way.

The cost vs value.

What I see... OP is retired and does not need to drive so much any longer. The OP is retired and credit rating means virtually nothing in retirement (you'll learn).

A new BS will be in the high $30's and maybe even $40k.

That BS should have cost less tahan 30k when new. His 2022 is 3+ years old now. How does he owe so much still? To me, those numbers don't work. Since the vehicle was used for work, it may be depreciated. That would make more sense than $17k left on a loan.

Anyway, he will have 17k + 8k to 11k for the fix. Starting from today, he'll be in 25k - 28K. For comparison, at National rent-a-car car resales, he could get a decent small suv for the same price range.

The question really is does he want to have this car, or another car when spending 25k+ over the next 3 years?

By the way, he could buy a different used BS BB 2022 for about 22k-28k in my area now. He won't be negative, but it will be close. Again, assuming all previous costs are "spent resources."

With all that in mind, how does OP feel about the BS he owns? It is pretty much a break even deal, cost wise, no matter what he does. Personally, I would look into what happens when he defaults on the loan. I might be the person to say, "come get it." At that point, they might find a better way to deal with you. Otherwise, I'd probably start talking to alternative repair shops.

Best of luck.

 

[sajohnson]

There is no evidence to indicate the OP's neglect caused the problem, and it's not unreasonable to expect a transmission to last more than 130,000 miles these days. But, Ford doesn't provide any guarantee or warranty that ensures they will be problem free at this mileage. Once we're beyond the warranty, the risk is all ours.

I think the only thing the OP could potentially be accused of is possibly not doing research to find out how trouble free these vehicles are (or are not) at higher mileage, especially if that was going to be the use case. Yes, the title of his post implies he is not happy with Ford and I can't say I blame him for that. I wouldn't expect a transmission failure at 130,000 miles on most new vehicles, but based on my pre-purchase research, transmission and RDU failures (among other things) in these vehicles are not exactly rare, so it's not a complete surprise to me, because I did research, to hear about another one. If I was planning on driving a vehicle 40,000+ miles a year, I either wouldn't have chosen a BS, or I would have gotten rid of it when the warranty expired.

As @RSH said, there's no benefit in piling on. I feel bad for anyone staring at an $8000+ repair bill for a 3 year old vehicle. If he didn't do the research and expected it to last 150,000 miles or more (that is considered "full useful life") without trouble, then it's understandable that he would be upset.

Again, as @RSH said, I too hope things work out for him.

This ^^^^.

It's interesting how some posters jump to the conclusion that the OP didn't have any maint work done and proceed to bash him. It's almost as if they do not like any story that is in any way critical of their precious.

It would be interesting to see the replies to the OP if his post was identical, but posted in a forum dedicated to another mfr: "Only 130,000 primarily highway miles before a total trans failure? That's pathetic! What a POS! My [year/make/model] has 400,000 miles on the original transmission!"

In short, there's not a lot of objectivity on forums...

I also have to question the idea that 130,000 mostly highway miles is ultra severe/extreme "she's gonna blow captain!" duty. Highway miles are the easiest miles. From a quick Google search:

"There's no exact conversion, but a common rule of thumb is that 10 highway miles are like 1 city mile in terms of wear and tear, because city driving involves harsh stop-and-go traffic, braking, and idling, while highway driving is smooth, consistent cruising, making highway miles much easier on a car's engine, transmission, brakes, and suspension, even though the odometer reads the same."

If that 10:1 ratio were used, or even say 5:1, his transmission would be well within warranty.

The OP's situation is not a huge black eye for Ford. Most people would disregard the fact that 80% of the 130K miles are highway miles and think 130,000 miles isn't too bad.

However, with the age of the BS (3 years) and highway miles taken into consideration, it is understandable that the OP is disappointed -- esp with the insane $11,000 cost to replace the trans.

He deserves sympathy not ridicule.

 

[incavulator]

What @sajohnson said!!! 100% on the highway miles not being severe. More steady state driving with less trans fluid temperature variations, fewer shifts, minimal acceleratioms, etc., etc.

 

[rugedraw]

"There's no exact conversion, but a common rule of thumb is that 10 highway miles are like 1 city mile in terms of wear and tear, because city driving involves harsh stop-and-go traffic, braking, and idling, while highway driving is smooth, consistent cruising, making highway miles much easier on a car's engine, transmission, brakes, and suspension, even though the odometer reads the same."

This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. So my F150 with 25k miles has the equvalent of 250k miles because I do mostly city driving?

I am done with this thread.

 

[Whpony96]

This ^^^^.

It's interesting how some posters jump to the conclusion that the OP didn't have any maint work done and proceed to bash him. It's almost as if they do not like any story that is in any way critical of their precious.

It would be interesting to see the replies to the OP if his post was identical, but posted in a forum dedicated to another mfr: "Only 130,000 primarily highway miles before a total trans failure? That's pathetic! What a POS! My [year/make/model] has 400,000 miles on the original transmission!"

In short, there's not a lot of objectivity on forums...

I also have to question the idea that 130,000 mostly highway miles is ultra severe/extreme "she's gonna blow captain!" duty. Highway miles are the easiest miles. From a quick Google search:

"There's no exact conversion, but a common rule of thumb is that 10 highway miles are like 1 city mile in terms of wear and tear, because city driving involves harsh stop-and-go traffic, braking, and idling, while highway driving is smooth, consistent cruising, making highway miles much easier on a car's engine, transmission, brakes, and suspension, even though the odometer reads the same."

If that 10:1 ratio were used, or even say 5:1, his transmission would be well within warranty.

The OP's situation is not a huge black eye for Ford. Most people would disregard the fact that 80% of the 130K miles are highway miles and think 130,000 miles isn't too bad.

However, with the age of the BS (3 years) and highway miles taken into consideration, it is understandable that the OP is disappointed -- esp with the insane $11,000 cost to replace the trans.

He deserves sympathy not ridicule.

Again the OP is not stating when he had the transmission service completed. So I will bet he never did.

How many highways in the US are not full of "Stop + Go" traffic today? The OP said he used his Bronco Sport for traveling work. So he was clearly traveling during work/rush hours. So, he NEVER sat in traffic.........it was all consistent driving....right?

The transmission fluid is what keeps the transmission cooled and lubricated. 130,000mi with not one fluid flush & exchange........Sorry you can't blame Ford for your own negligence. So you are going to tell me when you go onto a lot and you see a vehicle with 130,000mi on the OD you say "Holy crap, this thing isn't even broke in yet!".....yea, I thought so.

 

[incavulator]

From the owner's manual....

The OP wasn't required to have the transmission fluid changed. If he was required to and IF that is the cause of the failure, then it is Ford's fault for not recommending it be done at a lower mileage.

There is still no evidence that the OP did anything wrong or should have done anything different (other than buy a different vehicle or sell this one sooner), and more importantly, that changing the trans fluid would have prevented this from happening. We don't even know what's wrong with it. I'm familiar with one particular transmission having snap ring issues that resulted in a failure but it had NOTHING to do with fluid changes and doing so would not have prevented it from occurring. How do we know it's not something along these lines? The answer is we don't.

So, it's really pointless to keep suggesting the OP didn't have the fluid changed and claiming that would have prevented the problem. There is simply not enough information to determine root cause. Without that, it's not possible to conclude having the trans fluid changed would have prevented it.

 

[Dannyp56]

They are purposely making cars to fail. No Auto manufacturer makes cars to last any more. they don't want people working on their vehicles either. I wish I would have kept my 2015 RAM Cummins. But I really want a 78 or 79 Ford with a Cummins swap 4x4.

 

[Garth]

Thats like subaru extending the service interval for cvt oil changes because it can cost $900 and it was becoming sales issue.

Sponsored