 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Explorer / April 2006Cracked liftgate!
I have now joined the "Esteemed group" of those with cracked liftgates. While washing my 2002 XLT, I discovered something that I thought would just come off. Oh, no, its a crack, near the FORD emblem. Some of it runs north and south, part east and west! Even after reading about how dozens of other Explorer owners had had this "rude" awakening, I somehow didn't think it would happen to me. Ha! It makes me wonder how many "made in China's" we might find hidden away? Next time I go to look at a new car (and it won't be a Ford!), I will take a small magnet, just to see what they're up to. WLW > Next time I go to look at a new car (and it won't be a Ford!), I will > take a small magnet, just to see what they're up to. I have had several vehicles with "plastic" and aluminum body panels. Never a problem. In fact, on my Saturn Vue, the only problem I had was with the steel hood! You can screw up a part no matter what material is used. The plastics makers have been doing a hard sell to everyone on plastic parts for years. Engineers are just like everone one else - they can be sold a bill of goods. The only thing a magnet is going to tell you is that the part is steel. And if you don't think steel part can crack, I wish I could send you a picture of the GD Toyota I owned. If you think that Toyota and Nissan and.... don't screw up, you are living in a fantasy land. Ed Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material engineering is far far better than American. Look at the small things like door pulls in early explorers or the flimsy exterior door handles on GM Vans. The list is virtually endless. The Subaru I bought (2004 Forester) is such an improvement over anything American I have ever bought. The Exlorer is a bloated, sluggish SUV that wouldn't sell anywhere but the US. QUALITY IS JOB NONE >> Next time I go to look at a new car (and it won't be a Ford!), I will >> take a small magnet, just to see what they're up to. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Ed > Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and > Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Exlorer is a bloated, sluggish SUV that wouldn't sell anywhere but the US. > QUALITY IS JOB NONE Three times we test drove Subaru's offerings, 1999, 2002, and 2006. The Subaru's always have and still do feel like you are driving a modified go-cart or hay-wagon with a tractor engine in it... >> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and >> Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Subaru's always have and still do feel like you are driving a modified > go-cart or hay-wagon with a tractor engine in it... go-cart, do you mean it corners like it's on rails such as a go-cart does? Your other comments don't even warrant a response. Look at consumers reports magazines or web-site. They have the Forester rated as TOP PICK for small SUV and theb WRX as TOP PICK for fun to drive performance. They also have better crash test ratings, reliability ratings, hold thier valure ratings, fuel consumption ratings, braking, skid pad, and almost every other thing you can think of. The only area which ANY north american SUV out rates the Forester is in overall maximum payload and trailer pulling. I bought this 93 Explorer to use as a beater for a 6 month project for which I needed the low-range 4x4. It was cheap...initially. I'll be so glad to dump this pig as soon as the jobs done. >>> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and >>> Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > which I needed the low-range 4x4. It was cheap...initially. I'll be so > glad to dump this pig as soon as the jobs done. I'm talking about their all wheel drive CARS, not their so called SUVs.. I wouldn't drive Subaru's "SUV" or the explorer for that matter. The Subaru's still feel CHEAP and UNREFINED inside, compared to other sedans. Go drive the Volvo platform all wheel drive Ford 500 and than get back to me about how nice the rustic Subaru is. If that is what you like, have at it... >>>> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and >>>> Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > me about how nice the rustic Subaru is. If that is what you like, have > at it... Yeah, I was going to suggest he compare his Forrester to the Freestyle, makes more sense. >>> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and >>> Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > SUV out rates the Forester is in overall maximum payload and trailer > pulling. The Forester is a station wagon, you are comparing it to the wrong class. > I bought this 93 Explorer to use as a beater for a 6 month project for > which I needed the low-range 4x4. It was cheap...initially. I'll be so > glad to dump this pig as soon as the jobs done. Thirteen year old Subarus have problems too. >>>> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and >>>> Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] >> > Thirteen year old Subarus have problems too. My 19 YO Subaru doesn't, Nor does my 16 year old 270,000k Subaru. But my 13 YO Explorer is a P.O.S. > They also have better crash test ratings, reliability ratings, hold thier > valure ratings, fuel consumption ratings, braking, skid pad, and almost > every other thing you can think of. The only area which ANY north american > SUV out rates the Forester is in overall maximum payload and trailer > pulling. Not true. As I pointed out in another post, Subarus finished well down in the JD Powers long term depndability survey. CR ratings are more positive, but then they are totally non-scientific (not that the JD Power rating are really great). And to be fair to Ford, in the CR October 2000 comparison of small wagons, they rated the Ford Focus Wagoin higher than the Forrester (and the Focus wagon cost $6500 less). And although Forrester do well in the IIHS crash tests, the real world results are no better than Escapes and slightly worse than Explorers (see http://www.iihs.org/brochures/ictl/ictl_4wd_util.html ). As for Fuel economy, The best mileage Forrester and Escape models (4 cylinder, 5 speed manual models) have essentially the same MPG rating. So despite all your praise of Subaru's, it appears to me that in a fair comparison, based on published comparisons, Subaru's are no better (and in many comparison categories worse) than Fords (especially when you factor in cost). Everyone buys what they like, so I can understand your preference for Subaru's. However, I think you should be aware that other people have differing opinions and you should respect those as well. Ed admittedly, CR's test methods leave a lot to be desired, BUT, at least they are not an industry controlled entity. When I see some of the JD Powers stuff it makes me laugh. Categories like "best in initial quality", Huh?, I guess if you put enough qualifying criteria defining a category even a Skoda would qualify sometimes. Regarding the 2000 Focus, that was seven years ago, AND, that was the ONLY time Ford had that kind of rating from CR. The type of data that I make decisions on are "Owners satisfaction", "would you buy a car from this maker again", "reliability", resale value. And most important, How consistently the make AND model rate highly. For instance, Hyundai has received very high quality reviews in the past few years, BUT, I won't consider them until they maintain that level for more than ten years. I don't want my hard-earned cash going to a flash-in-the-pan review, ala 2000 Focus. Subaru, Toyota, Honda have had consistently high ratings on virtually all of their models for decades! On the other hand, look at Volvo, VW, LandRover, these supposedly "higher end" makes have had abyssmal quality ratings for decades. Ford, Chrysler, GM, have had spotty ratings for decades. Some models are great, many are average, some are very poor. Some years are great, some average, some poor. This thread started out as a cracked liftgate comment. My initial reply was regarding materials engineering. I have a hard time believing that corporations the size of Ford or GM don't know, or couldn't have predicted the failure of the lift-gate. Look around, it's no accident that the american manufacturers are struggling to maintain market share. Put me in the "they must think we're stupid". I think the north american consumer is far from stupid, but this die-hard "I'm a Ford man" (or GM Man etc.) really challenges that point of view. As I said earlier, the Exploder wouldn't sell anywhere but America and even then, it's mostly because they're cheap or have so many dealer incentives attached that they end up comparing favourably. But please, don't try and tell me that these explorers are fine, well-engineered cars. >> They also have better crash test ratings, reliability ratings, hold thier >> valure ratings, fuel consumption ratings, braking, skid pad, and almost [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > Ed > admittedly, CR's test methods leave a lot to be desired, BUT, at least they > are not an industry controlled entity. No they are not controlle dby anyone. The methodology for the collection of these opinion is so poor as to reder them compeletely useless. > When I see some of the JD Powers stuff it makes me laugh. Categories like > "best in initial quality", Huh?, I guess if > you put enough qualifying criteria defining a category even a Skoda would > qualify sometimes. Well I quoted the results of the long term reliability study. This is prestty straight forward. A random selection of owners of various models are asked to report on the numer of problems they have experienced. Ford and Chevy clearly scored better than Subaru and were well above average. > Regarding the 2000 Focus, that was seven years ago, AND, that was the ONLY > time Ford had that kind of rating from CR. Actually Consumer Reports consistently ranks the Focus highly. In the May 2005 Small Car comparison test it was the highest rated vehicle. > The type of data that I make decisions on are "Owners satisfaction", "would > you buy a car from this maker again", > "reliability", resale value. And most important, How consistently the make [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > ten years. I don't want my hard-earned cash going to a flash-in-the-pan > review, ala 2000 Focus. The Focus has been highly rated for 7 years. Hardly a flash in the pan. > Subaru, Toyota, Honda have had consistently high ratings on virtually all of > their models for decades! On the other hand, look at > Volvo, VW, LandRover, these supposedly "higher end" makes have had abyssmal > quality ratings for decades. Subaru has had consistenly poor ratings for a decade. Toyota has been declining in quality (relative to almost everyone else) for at leat 6 years. I wouldn't touch a VW product with a 20 foot pole - but that is just my opinion (however, they get terrible JD Power ratings as well). Personally I don't think of VW as high end. > Ford, Chrysler, GM, have had spotty ratings for decades. Some models are > great, many are average, some are very poor. Some > years are great, some average, some poor. Same is true for Toyota. They have built some real junk (still do). > This thread started out as a cracked liftgate comment. My initial reply was > regarding materials engineering. I have a hard time > believing that corporations the size of Ford or GM don't know, or couldn't > have predicted the failure of the lift-gate. And Toyota should have been able to predict that the crappy plastic they used in my last Toyta wouldn't last 4 years without turing white and craking - or that mounting the alterantor next to the exhaust manifold would overheat the regulator and cause it to fail every damn August, or that the starter solenid contact wouldn't last 3 years, or that the paint would desinigrate in less than 2 years. The paint is literraly falling off my Sisters Honda and the interior palstic is shedding - shouldn't those geniuses at Honda have know that was going to happen? Or how about the mega-geniuses at Toyota that redesigned engines so that they were prone to sludging up? I like my new Nissan Frontier, but I swear it has plastic that literally bonds with dust. I've never had a vehicle get so dirty so fast. And I'd love a chance to go one on one with the genius that located the oil filter or the one that designed the dip stick. All manufacturer's make mistakes. Just be on the look out for 10 year old Camry's (if you can find one still running). Chances are the bumpers will be discolored and the interior will look like crap. The two in my apartment complex smoke badly in the morning and sound like rock crushers. The 11 year old beat to hell Firebird my son just bought becasue it was cheap is in much better shape than my sisters 9 year old Honda. > Look around, it's no accident that the american manufacturers are struggling > to maintain market share. Put me in the "they must [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > well-engineered > cars. The pre IRS Explorers sold all over the world (promentently in England, Autralia, New Zealand). When they redesigned them to be larger in 2002, they desiced not to export them (and since they bought Land Rover, it made little sense to compete with Land Rover in many markets). In most other markets, they sell home grown SUVs in preference to the larger Explorer which was targeted to US buyers. I have not owned an Explorer in long time. I do have a 4 year old Expedition that I am very happy with (it repalced another Expedition that was a very good vehicle). Regards, Ed White An interesting discourse anyway. I guess we all have our biases. Me, being, what I would consider, environmentaly aware, choose to drive the smallest, most efficient vehicle that meets my needs for 90% of my driving. For me, that means a 4 cylinder, AWD with 5spd. I suppose if your a Navigator driver, these points are moot anyway. I think the vast majority of people drive WAY too much car for their needs. You stick with JD Powers and the V8, I'll go with the grassroots Consumers Reports and the 4 banger. It's like the difference between a labour party and a conservative party. Hey good luck this summer finding fuel, eh. >> admittedly, CR's test methods leave a lot to be desired, BUT, at least > they [quoted text clipped - 119 lines] > > Ed White Are the OUTBACKS/LEGACYS still like my old 1990 Legacy...with no window frame? So if you close the door with the window half way down, it makes this tinny "twang". Interesting that Subaru has not substantially changed that vehicle in 17 years. >> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and >> Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Subaru's always have and still do feel like you are driving a modified > go-cart or hay-wagon with a tractor engine in it... > Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and > Japanese cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Exlorer is a bloated, sluggish SUV that wouldn't sell anywhere but the US. > QUALITY IS JOB NONE I really like those Subarus but when I made my latest purchase I bought an Acura. In ten+ years of owning/leasing Explorers and/or Mountaineers I've had VERY few problems. When it is time to replace our '04 Limited the Explorer will be the first truck I look at, that is how happy I've been with them. > Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and Japanese > cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material engineering > is far far better than American. Look at the small things like door pulls in > early explorers or the flimsy exterior door handles on GM Vans. The list is > virtually endless. The Subaru I bought (2004 Forester) is such an > improvement over anything American I have ever bought. And yet Subaru usually rate poorly in most quality ratings....lower than Ford or GM. In the 2005 JD Power Long Term Vehicle Depedability Survey, Subarus averaged 260 problems per 100 vehicles. Ford averaged 231 problems per 100 vehicles. Chevrolet average 232 problems per 100 vehicles. The average was 237 problems per 100 vehicles. Hmmmmm Ed > Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and Japanese > cars has taught me that, generally speaking, Japanese material engineering [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > bloated, sluggish SUV that wouldn't sell anywhere but the US. QUALITY IS JOB > NONE What until you are presented with the bill from your Subaru for the transmission self destructing. It happened on his l Legacy. 4 grand for a rebuild!!! His wife talked him into another one.. and less than two years later... transmission problems. I don't believe he would own another Subaru at this point (nor would I). >> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and >> Japanese [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > transmission problems. I don't believe he would own another Subaru at > this point (nor would I). This sounds like an urban legend that ford owners like to believe is true. I don't think the vast majority of Subaru owners would agree, nor does Consumers Reports As for my experience 1st Subaru, a new 1986 GL Wagon, we don't own it anymore, sold it two years ago with 314,000km on it. It's still running around town. 2nd Subaru, a used 1990 Legacy Wagon, 268,000km now, Still own it, runs great. CV Joints and fiddly door locks the ONLY problems. 3rd Subaru, a new 2004 Forester, 46,000km and perfect! . Oh and there's a website for high mileage subarus too. > >> Better yet, go for the Subaru. My experience with American Cars and > >> Japanese [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > This sounds like an urban legend that ford owners like to believe is true. No legend, just fact. This was my Cousin's experience and it happened just a few years ago. If you won't believe him/me, check the recalls/TSBs on Suby trannies. $4000 for a rebuilt tranny... Ouch! My 2002 explorer that has 95K miles and is waaay out of warranty had that cracked liftgate also. When it went in for the rear glass recall they did the cracked liftgate part for free as part of the recall. > I have now joined the "Esteemed group" of those with cracked > liftgates. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > WLW > And what did the dealer say? Or have you taken it there yet? Are you the origional owner? PS: I've had 2 replaced on our '02 First one the dealer replaced trapped water behind it for days, or until you opened it up and then the water would trickle out on the garage floor. Told dealer it needed to be replaced again because water freezing in the winter would push it off the glass in a year or two...and they did the 2nd replacement. wth >I have now joined the "Esteemed group" of those with cracked > liftgates. [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > WLW >And what did the dealer say? Or have you taken it there yet? Are you the >origional owner? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >because water freezing in the winter would push it off the glass in a year >or two...and they did the 2nd replacement. Yes, we are the original owner. Haven't taken it to the dealer yet. Also, have the AC switch problem to be looked at. You must have a very lenient dealer. WLW >wth > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> >> WLW |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.