Thinking about buying a 2008 Ford Escape Hybrid

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jul 3 2007, 08:52 PM) [snapback]472741[/snapback]</div>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Jonnycat26 @ Jul 3 2007, 09:01 PM) [snapback]472749[/snapback]</div>

I can't address these specific recalls - I didn't own either car. I can address the recalls on the cars that I have owned, and how they were handled. On the Ford Taurus - Ford insisted there was no problem, up until they LOST the massive class action law suit. On both of the Prius recalls that I've had (the MFD and the Steering), I was issued a notice before I ever saw a problem.

I, personally, am certainly more satisfied with how Toyota handled recalls on the vehicles I have owned than I am with the way that Ford did the same.

 

Over 90% of Ford's profits come from parts and service. That alone should help you make your decision. If you decide to not buy a Prius at least get some other Japanese car. The Big 3 are still counting on people thinking its anti-American to buy foreign, even while they still slip into oblivion from record loses. Its not anti-American to buy Japanese. Its anti-American to allow yourself to get screwed by the Big 3. The people who think its anti-American to buy foreign are too old to drive, or dead from preventable defects in American cars.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JackDodge @ Jul 2 2007, 03:58 PM) [snapback]471765[/snapback]</div>

So. Any decisions? What did the numbers come out to be?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jul 3 2007, 11:52 PM) [snapback]472741[/snapback]</div>

Your post was very well stated Daniel. I have never owned a Ford, nor probably ever will. The horrible reports I have heard from friends that owned Fords kept me from ever buying one. Plus, Ford doesn't make anything that even appeals to me.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JackDodge @ Jul 5 2007, 07:43 AM) [snapback]473443[/snapback]</div>

No car model has zero defects. Even Toyotas. But with probably a thousand defects in Ford for every one in Toyota, it amazes me that anyone ever buys a Ford.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(JackDodge @ Jul 6 2007, 06:13 AM) [snapback]473927[/snapback]</div>

Prius as a model has had defects. But there are so few that any one given Prius is extremely unlikely to have any defects. Conversely, an exhaustive search will turn up individual Fords that have no defects, but Fords collectively have so many defects, that a defect-free Ford is extraordinarily unlikely.

If you buy a Ford you may get lucky and get one without defects. But then, if you buy a lottery ticket you may win the grand prize. The two events are approximately equally likely.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jul 6 2007, 08:57 AM) [snapback]473948[/snapback]</div>

All machines can have defects from time to time. Even the most sophisticated vehicle of all time, the space shuttle, has had its fair share. The difference is the design philosophy. Toyota wants to design a car that will last 200-300K miles. The Big 3 intentionally design cars that begin to self-destruct in about three years.

Toyota's philosophy: Build the highest quality car possible and they will come to buy it, even it cost more up front. If we find a design flaw, fix it and redesign the car.

Big 3 philosophy: Build mediocre cars that begin to disintegrate every three years so buyers will keep us rich from parts and service sales. And after four years when all the paint has oxidized away, the electrical system is shot to hell, the car rattles like tin cans, and the car just looks like crap, they buy another three-year mediocre car from us, and the cycle begins again.

Now the Big 3 are scratching their heads, "Hmmm, I wonder why our sales are slipping so much."

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jul 3 2007, 10:52 PM) [snapback]472741[/snapback]</div>

You're perhaps oversimplifying the Pinto scenario. If you look at burn/fire deaths per hundred thousand miles traveled in a Pinto vs. other compacts of the day, you'll find that, actually, the Pinto doesn't do as badly as you'd expect. It was about even with the Vega, for example in this category, and it even stacks up okay against certain midsized vehicles of the day (which, I'll admit, likely had their own set of egregious defects).

What really got Ford was that certain internal tests revealed defects (which weren't discovered until the tooling was already manufactured).

At that point, Ford could have added parts to the car to fix it but didn't (bad). Instead, they had legal calculate how much it'd all cost...and made the final decision on that, instead of just adding the parts to make a safer car (really, really bad, and a PR nightmare). To top it off, they hid the results of their internal testing.

Yes, what Ford did was awful. And no, I'm not defending them. But the situation does tend to make for good conversation, too.

And there is another side --the actual crash performance of the car-- which is often overshadowed. The bottom line is that, statistically, its safety in regards to fuel fires (even in an unmodified condition) was more or less in the ballpark for cars of this size, of that time period. This is a fact.

It was the decision making process behind it all that's reflective of some deep-seated ills at Ford...and what, I believe, caused this to become such a talking point in the first place.

-----

There were two other issues with early Pintos; one had to do with the engine and one with the carb.

Sometimes the engine would be installed with the cam timing slightly off, which led to really bad drivability.

Worse, the float in the carb would become saturated and sink, flooding the engine. This is what happened to the woman who sued Ford; the float in her car failed, flooded the engine, and caused it to stall in traffic; she was then rear-ended and the car caught fire.

Interestingly, she testified that she'd been having serious problems with the car for some time, but decided to drive it anyway.

Again, not excusing Ford in any manner (they even delivered a test car to Hot Rod magazine with a mis-timed cam, for goodness sake!) but I am saying there were lots of things going on here --and, yes, all Ford's fault-- over and above the well-publicized problem with the fuel tank.

-----

Also, doesn't the US hire people to kill for money in Iraq?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Pinto Girl @ Jul 6 2007, 01:11 PM) [snapback]474206[/snapback]</div>

And thats the kernel of the matter for me: They knew they had a serious defect. They knew it would result in deaths. And they put that quarter's earnings figure above the lives of their customers.

You know more about cars than I do, so perhaps the Pinto was not as bad a car as I think it is. On the other hand, you obviously have an emotional connection to the Pinto, judging by your screen name. Regardless, it was Ford's decision-making process. And I've seen no evidence that that's changed.