 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Ford / Ford Cars / September 2006Windstar fire
We were at the drags last night when my friends wife called to say her 99 Windstar had smoke coming from under the hood. She called about five minutes later to say she opened the hood and hosed down the engine compartment and the whole thing caught on fire. She called 911 and the fire department put it out. It's toast:) Fire got into the passenger compartment and burnt the dash, seats and even the headliner. Under the hood is a mess of melted wires and aluminum. We're guessing it's the cruise control switch failure. Anyway, is Ford taking responsibility for these fires? The van was put away about three hours before the fire started. Al > We were at the drags last night when my friends wife called to say her 99 > Windstar had smoke coming from under the hood. She called about five [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > three > hours before the fire started. http://www.vehicle-injuries.com/ford-windstar-fire.htm You probably need a fire inspector to figure out the cause of the fire and a report from her. You probably need to have specific things done, like what it says under "What to do if your vehicle has caught fire." Also, search the internet. If you use a lawyer, you might end up paying the lawyer far more than the deductabl that you would lose if Ford doesn't pay for it. Keywords would be windstar and fire. Jeff > Al im hoping it wasnt in the garage! > We were at the drags last night when my friends wife called to say her 99 > Windstar had smoke coming from under the hood. She called about five minutes [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Al > We were at the drags last night when my friends wife called to say her 99 > Windstar had smoke coming from under the hood. She called about five minutes [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Al The Windstar's crusie control deactivation switch is wired differently from the infamous switch that Ford is recalling in the case of trucks. The Windstar's cruise control deactivation switch is not under power when the ignition is in the off posiiton (the feed is hot only when the switch is in the run position), so it seems very very unlikely that this switch is the source of the fire. Since the first hint that a small number number of cruise control deactivation switches might cause a fire, every Ford that has a problem is suddenly bursting into flames becasue of this switch - even Fords that don't use those type of switches. It is really interesting to compare the number of fires attributed to crusie control decativation switches before and after the original reports. Before the original reports, there were very few fires in Ford trucks and all were in a tightly defined groups (certain date range of switches). After the intial reports all sorts of Fords suddenly started bursting into flame, most supposedly due to the cruise control deactivation switch. Ed > > We were at the drags last night when my friends wife called to say her 99 > > Windstar had smoke coming from under the hood. She called about five minutes [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > > Ed Have no idea how they are wired buy the fire started just to the left (viewed from the front) and below the master cylinder. http://www.vehicle-injuries.com/ford-windstar-fire.htm Al > Have no idea how they are wired buy the fire started just to the left > (viewed from the front) and below the master cylinder. > > http://www.vehicle-injuries.com/ford-windstar-fire.htm Well that web site is just setup by lawyers trolling for clients. They are wrong about the Windstar's wiring. For certain model year Expeditions and F150's the switch is powered by a feed that is hot at all times (power to the switch no matter what position the ignition switch is in). However, for the Windstar (and all Ford Cars, Explorers, and Rangers), the cruise control deactivation switch is powered only when the ignition which is in run. I suppose it is possible that the fire got started when the vehicle was being driven, and then smoldered for 3 hours before bursting into flames, but it seems highly unlikely that this would occur. There are four complaints in the NHTSA database against the cruise control deactivation switch for a 1999 Ford Windstar. All were filed after the Ford Truck CC Deactivation Switch recall was announced. Two mention fire one is detailed, the other is just a whine to Ford asking for money to do repairs. They both say the fire started while the vehicle was being driven. This seems plausible. However, it is not clear that the switch was actually the source of the fire. One of the complaints mentions several items were damaged by the fire, any one of which could be the actual source of the fire. It could not have been too serious since the total cost of repairs was $250. Two of the complaints mention that the switch was leaking, but did not mention fire. None of the complaints mentions the classic symptom that should warn the owner that a fire was imminent - the cruise control stops work. Ed > We were at the drags last night when my friends wife called to say her 99 > Windstar had smoke coming from under the hood. She called about five minutes [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Al http://www.vehicle-injuries.com/ford-windstar-fire.htm http://www.carcomplaints.com/Ford/Windstar/2000/recalls.shtml http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2162/act/usedc arreviewreliability/ http://www.carcomplaints.com/Ford/Windstar/1999/recalls.shtml http://www.safetyforum.com/fordfires/defrec.html Bob >> We were at the drags last night when my friends wife called to say her 99 >> Windstar had smoke coming from under the hood. She called about five [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> > http://www.vehicle-injuries.com/ford-windstar-fire.htm This site is full of incorrect information. For most Ford models, the CC Deactivation Switch is not powered at all times. > http://www.carcomplaints.com/Ford/Windstar/2000/recalls.shtml No reference to CC Deactivation Switch at all here. > http://auto.consumerguide.com/Auto/Used/reviews/full/index.cfm/id/2162/act/usedc arreviewreliability/ > > http://www.carcomplaints.com/Ford/Windstar/1999/recalls.shtml No reference to CC Deactivation Switch at all here. > http://www.safetyforum.com/fordfires/defrec.html No reference to CC Deactivation Switch at all here. Ed OK, lets say it was not the CC deactivation switch. What would cause it to start smoking about three hours after it was parked? When the hood was opened to see what was smoking there was a very small fire just to right of the driver's seat area. (Right if you were sitting in the car.) Right along the area where a rear wheel drive car's transmission tunnel would start to level out. Small drops of something burning were dripping from the same area to the ground under the car. What is there that could start burning that long after it was parked and why would it burst into flame when she sprayed water on it? A friend of ours had a Taurus catch fire while he was driving it but it was power steering fluid and the catalytic converter. Even if the Windstar had trannie fluid or power steering fluid everywhere, it was off to long for anything to ignite it. BTW: This Windstar is absolutely as produced. No add on stereo, alarm, or anything else. The insurance investigator is there today trying to figure it out. I'll post whatever they tell us. Al > OK, lets say it was not the CC deactivation switch. What would cause it to > start smoking about three hours after it was parked? When the hood was [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > it > out. I'll post whatever they tell us. Hopefully the insurance investigator will figure it out. I suppose the fire could have started while the van was being driven, and then eventually flared up later when it finally hit a good fuel source. I just know that the Ford wiring diagram for the Windstar shows the CC Deactivation Switch receiving power only when the ignition switch is in the Run position. And I though the cruise control deactivation switch was to the left side of the driver, in the area of the Master cylinder (you might consider this directly in front of the driver). There are circuits that are powered at all times, so maybe one of those is the cluprit. In the past Ford had big problems with ignition switches, although I don't see how that could be the case this time since you are indicating the fire started under the hood. Any chance you had a fuel leak? The fuel lines run in that area you described. It will be interesting to hear what the investigator decides. Ed > > OK, lets say it was not the CC deactivation switch. What would cause it to > > start smoking about three hours after it was parked? When the hood was [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Ed Ford and the people at NHTSA finally came up with the answer after maybe 15 years. The construction of the TI-made switch is such that the rubber membrane separating the electrical contacts for the CC cutoff is slightly pulled on the return stroke of the brake that causes a very small vacuum force. This vacuum force keeps pulling at the membrane for years until it finally weakens & splits or otherwise separates, allowing brake fluid to come in contact with the still live electrical contacts, causing a corrosive effect that leads to a short, combustion, and then a fire. It's been known for about a year what causes the fires. See: http://trucks.about.com/od/carsafety/a/ford_cruise.htm but only in the past month or so was it determined what caused the switch to fail. See: http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/08/nhtsa_ford_fires.html > Ford and the people at NHTSA finally came up with the answer after maybe > 15 years. The construction of the TI-made switch is such that the rubber [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > switch to fail. See: > http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2006/08/nhtsa_ford_fires.html This is all very interesting information, but how does it apply to the 1999 Windstar? The switch circuit is different in Windstars than in the Ford trucks that are being recalled. I wouldn't claim that the switch couldn't cause a fire in a Windstar, I just think it is very unlikely that the switch casued a fire in a vehicle that had been turned off for three hours, since in the case of the Windstar, the switch is not connected to a power source when the ignition switch is turned off. And your comment that "Ford and the people at NHTSA finally came up with the answer after maybe 15 years" is way over the top. Until 2 years ago, there were less than 10 complaints relating the cruise control deactivation switches to fires. Initially all the complaints were in a tightly defined grouping that could be related to switches built in a certain date range. Suddenly, after the initial investigation was announced, Ford Trucks and SUVs began caching on fire at an incredible rate. In some cases the vehicle that were alledged to have fires related to the switch didn't even have the type of wiring that was supposed to cause the fires. Now you may believe that this is coincidence, but I find it hard to swallow that from 1994 to 2004, there were fewer than 10 out of 5 million trucks that had faulty switches that caused fires, and suddenly after Jan of 2004, 10 a week were catching fire due to this switch. If you don't think people will fake damage in an attempt to get money from insurance comanpies, you should have a look here - http://insurancefraud.org/fraud_of_the_mo_set.html (or http://tinyurl.com/emc6h ). The funniest insurance scam I have seen lately is detailed at http://www.kfvs12.com/Global/story.asp?S=5392282&nav=menu51_2 (or http://tinyurl.com/hraf2 ). Here is the text in case the link doesn't work: Couples videotape themselves committing insurance fraud By: CJ Cassidy Union County, IL - Why would you tape yourself committing a crime? Police and prosecutors in Union County don't really care, they're just glad they got their hands on the evidence. People video tape birthdays weddings and anniversaries. A few, it seems, like to watch themselves committing a crime. Still, two Union County couples never expected to end up out on a limb, the way they did. The plan they put into action was to slam Robert and Teresa Hammond's van into a tree and pick up the insurance check. "The first time the van is crashed into the tree, Robert Hammond is driving the vehicle. Then the next two times, it's driven by Paul Gaines; Margaret Dillavou's boyfriend," States Attorney Allen James says. He adds, the Hammonds owed Margaret Dillavou rent money. She picked up the insurance check, but then, lost the tape. "Her husband received a stack of video tapes as part of his divorce settlement. Going through those tapes he realized on one was footage of insurance fraud being committed," James says. The angry ex-husband turned the tape in to police, and the States Attorney had a case as clear cut as black and white. So, why would you videotape yourself committing a crime? "It appears they were having a party," James offers up as an explanation. He adds "we'd like to educate people you can't do this, but we may end up educating people you don't videotape yourself committing a crime!" Joking aside, James says insurance fraud is a very serious crime. Initially the couples faced felony charges that carried up up five years in prison, but after paying the insurance company the $4,300 they defrauded, they pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges instead. The couples punishment involves 24 months of probation, seven hundred and fifty dollars, plus court costs and forty hours of community service. > > Ford and the people at NHTSA finally came up with the answer after maybe > > 15 years. The construction of the TI-made switch is such that the rubber [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > switches that caused fires, and suddenly after Jan of 2004, 10 a week were > catching fire due to this switch. <snip - unrelated stuff> Those CC-related fires have been going on for many years; first one I heard about directly was a '96 Ford CV (in '98) that was used in airport shuttle service, i.e., HEAVY brake usage that weakened the separating membrane. The fires have been reported all the way back to '91 models; back then though, they were still wrapping up on the ignition switch fires, so not much was heard about the CC deactivation switch fires. Focus on the info I gave you. The ignition being on or the CC switch being powered doesn't cause the fire directly. What it does is, when the membrane fails, brake fluid leaks through, sets up a corrosive effect that travels downward to something that's hot (electrically active) at all times. This means that the fire can start many hours after the ignition's turned off, Windstar circuitry, F-150 circuitry, even old '93 Mark VIII circuitry. It's all still basically the sane switch, circuit hot or not. > Those CC-related fires have been going on for many years; first one I > heard about directly was a '96 Ford CV (in '98) that was used in airport [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Mark VIII circuitry. It's all still basically the sane switch, circuit > hot or not. I spent some time looking through the NHTSA database and I can't see a single model year of the Crown Victoria since 1992 where more than 1 complaint was lodged against the cruise control that blamed a fire, or near fire, on the cruise control deactivation switch. And in every case, the complaints were not filed until after the truck recall. Seems strange that the few that failed waited until 2004 to do so. You would think if the switches were so bad, the switches in the 1992 CVs would have failed at an increasing rate with complaints spread over a number of years. Outside of the Crown Victoria (with a total of 5 complaints over 15 years), other Ford cars have no complaints related to the cruise control deactivation switch. Likewise Rangers and Explorers have only a few complaints and almost all were filed after the F150 recall was announced (and only a couple of Explorer complaints involved a fire). Funny how they didn't fail earlier. And if you look at the F150 and Expedition failures (an there are lots in the 1997 - 2001 model years), almost all the complaints were filed after the investigation was announced. Now some of this is probably because people were made aware that the switches might be the cause of the problem, so they are actually checking them. But there appears to be a tendency to blame any underhood fire on the cruise control deactivation switch (I loved one complaint that blamed the switch while at the same time indicating that the fire started on the passenger side of the engine compartment). Clearly there is a significant problem with some Ford trucks. A leaking switch and continuous power applied to the switch seems to be a recipe for trouble. However, most Ford vehicles do not apply power to the switch when the ignition is off. While I can see how a leaking switch might start a fire when the engine is running for these vehicles, I find it hard to believe that a fire could start hours after the vehicle was turned off. The brake fluid might provide fuel for a fire, but you need a source of ignition as well. Without power to the switch, I don't see where that source of ignition is (at least not hours later). Ed > > Those CC-related fires have been going on for many years; first one I > > heard about directly was a '96 Ford CV (in '98) that was used in airport [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Ed Again from the above; The ignition being on or the CC switch being powered doesn't cause the fire directly. What it does is, when the membrane fails, brake fluid leaks through, sets up a corrosive effect that travels downward to something that's hot (electrically active) at all times, and completes a connection. This means that the fire can start many hours after the ignition's turned off; Windstar circuitry, F-150 circuitry, even old '93 Mark VIII circuitry. It's all still basically the same switch, circuit hot or not. What all that means is that the failed switch is the beginning of a path TO something that's always electrically hot, like the ECU or ABS relay constant power side. The current finds a path, heats something up, and something high-temp flammable bursts into flame, like the master cylinder reservoir. This phenomenon is similar to the Ford ignition switch fires of the 84-91 model years where the culprit was carbon tracking between ignition switch contacts that allowed current to continue flowing even after the ignition switch was turned completely off. After so long (years, in fact) the carbon trail built up sufficiently to allow enough battery current to flow to generate enough heat to make the switch catch fire - hours after operator electrical shutdown -, then the steering column catches fire, then the dash material, and finally the entire car interior is in flames. > Again from the above; > The ignition being on or the CC switch being powered doesn't cause the > fire directly. What it does is, when the membrane fails, brake fluid [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > something high-temp flammable bursts into flame, like the master > cylinder reservoir. This is just one we will have to disagree on. I understand what you are saying, I just don't think it is very likely (in fact the scenario you are describing is very unlikely). With the live feed system (as in the F150's that are being recalled), you have fuel and an ignition source in close proximity. And once you get the small fire going, you have a ready source of additional fuel (the master cylinder reservoir). In your scenario, the brake fluid has to leak onto another component, corrode that component in such a way as to make a high resistance connection, without blowing a fuse, without affecting some other function, AND you are counting on enough fluid to leak from the switch to actually affect another component, but not so much fluid that the brakes fail. Then, the newly corroded live feed (that hasn't caused another problem) must find a separate source of fuel (connectors and pcb boards are very difficult to ignite, as is wiring), smolder for a while until you build a small fire that can then get hot enough to ignite the larger masses. None of the cases NHTSA seem to support this failure mode. There were numerous complaints (particularly for Rangers) of noticeable amounts of brake fluid leaking from the switch, but no Ranger fires. I looked under the hood of my Grand Marquis (essentially a Crown Victoria) and there is not anything close to the switch that is likely to have brake fluid drip on it that might lead to a fire. I think it is far more likely, that if this switch caused a fire, the fire would actually start at the switch while the car was being driven, and then spread after the car was parked. But I don't think this sort of fire would take 3 hours to become noticeable. And you seem to completely ignore the fact, that before the announcement of an investigation into Ford Truck CC deactivation Switch related fires, there were virtually no complaints about this switch. Why did all those switches suddenly start causing fires in 2004 and beyond? Ed > > Again from the above; > [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > > Ed The factory recall is going all the way back to 1994 models. In point of fact, there were complaints about underhood fires going back to 1991. I'm not sure when Ford knew about the problem, but here's an interesting fact: I have a 1994 Lincoln Mark VIII where the CC deactivation switch was factory located up inside the RF wheel well, yet the FACTORY Service Manual shows it to be in the more "traditional" location of under the master cylinder reservoir. ONLY the 1993 Mark VIII has the switch by the reservoir, so someone at Ford must have figured it out back then. In fact, many people on Lincoln forums with 1993 Mark VIII cars have reported (on said forums, but NOT to NHTSA) small fires or smoldering in the master cylinder area, and many of those owners have disconnected the switch and bypassed it, depending only on the brake pedal mounted BOO switch to do an emergency deactivation of the CC. As far as a sudden rush of reports to NHTSA about this problem, there are several things in play here: 1. Time - it takes TIME for the initial event to occur. 2. Vehicle Load - It seems this affects larger heavier vehicles like 3-ton SUVs a lot more than say, a Focus with a solitary occupant. 3. Switch mounting POSITION (NOT location) - One of the things that the latest investigation has determined is that the switches mounted in an upright position are more likely to fail than the horizontal mounted ones and the upright mount is NOW way more common than years ago. 4. Driver attention - Cell phones distract people, making for a LOT more emergency braking than before the damn things (cell phones) started appearing by the millions) and brake USAGE is one of (about the only thing, really) that cause the switch membrane to fail, and then the rest of the events follow. 5. Road Rage - Mandatory DRLs are really pissing a lot of people off (thank GM for that crap), and some people have begun driving WAY too aggressively in densely populated areas, slamming on their BRAKES when a DRL-equipped vehicle is behind them, and playing bumper tag (and riding the BRAKE) with a DRL-equipped vehicle in front of them, just because DRLs piss them off. 5a. Fuel costs - Just pisses people off in general, changing their driving attitudes to more aggressive ones, resulting in greater BRAKE usage. 5b. Fast food hamburger joints - People ingest millions of pounds of BGH-laced hamburger meat every day, also altering their driving habits from unknowingly putting a type of STEROID in their systems. I'm sure there are other reasons, but it all comes down to BRAKE USAGE that causes the switch to fail. Ahem, if it's NOT the CC deactivation switch any other ideas? Al > Ahem, if it's NOT the CC deactivation switch any other ideas? > > Al It's 99.99% certain it IS that switch. Ford is taking responsibility for the switch fix, but not any resultant damages. That's a matter for the courts. >> Ahem, if it's NOT the CC deactivation switch any other ideas? >> >> Al > > It's 99.99% certain it IS that switch. Ford is taking responsibility for > the switch fix, Not for Windstars. Different switch part number, different wiring, no history of failures leading to fires, etc. Why would you expect Ford to take responsibility for something that has not been a problem? Ford has already bent over backward tby recalling hundreds of thousand of vehicles that probably don't have a problem. Do you think they should recall even more? If I was worried about the switch, I'd buy a new one myselft (it is a $14 part from Rock Auto). Ed > >> Ahem, if it's NOT the CC deactivation switch any other ideas? > >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Ed You seemingly WANT to believe it's something other than the CC switch, but all the investigations and associated recalls for Ford vehicles all the way back to 1992 point to that switch. Here's another tidbit about the CC deactivation switch indicating that the insulator used INSIDE the switch is a HIGHLY FLAMMABLE material (Kapton) under certain conditions: http://www.motherjones.com/news/outfront/2006/03/flaming_fords.html > Ahem, if it's NOT the CC deactivation switch any other ideas? Almost any electrical short could cause a fire. You need to have an experienced fire investigator look it over. Do you have insurance on the vehicle? If so, the insurance company probably can help out with that. It could even be the CC deactivation switch, but it is my opinion if this was the source of the fire, the fire would not have started 3 hours after the vehicle was parked. But it is only opinion, and never having even seen the vehicle, it is impossible for me to have too provide valuable guidance. I can say that there is almost no history of cruise control deactivation switches causing fires in Windstars. But even if they are trouble free 99.999% of the time, there is still room for doubt. And one more thing, not only is the Windstar CC Deactivation switch not powered when the ignition is off, it is not even the same part number as the switch in Ford Trucks that was identified as a bad switch. Before the fire did you have any trouble with the cruise control? Did you need to add any brake fluid? Ever notice any leaking fluid under the hood? To cause a fire in the manner that Sharon is suggesting, the switch would have to have been leaking for a significant period of time. Seems like you should have seen some symptoms. The tight layout of the Windstar engine compartment is going to make any definitive determination difficult. There is lots of stuff in the area of the master cylinder that might cause a fire if there is a short to provide an ignition source. If I was a betting man, I'd guess there was a fault in the primary power feed or ground from the battery that resulted in a high resistance short that over a period of time that eventually started the wiring burning. Now I suppose this short could have been caused by corrosion related to brake fluid leakage from the CC deactivation switch but that is not the most likely cause in my opinion. If you don't have a related symptom to narrow it down to the cruise control deactivation switch, any claim that this is the fault is just speculation. The fact that spraying water on the fire caused it to spread indicates to me that there was a liquid fuel involved. Of course, after the fire got going, any of the plastic reservoirs under the hood could have melted releasing brake fluid, and power steering fluid, both of which will burn. Melted fuel lines will release gasoline, so that is another source of fuel. Ed |
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
|
©2009 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.