Survey review:

The Ford Wingbeat that Mr. Wang has been using normally suddenly encountered difficulty in starting, and there was a serious setback during driving. The maintenance staff of the 4S shop claimed that the gearbox was rusted due to water ingress. The car has passed the warranty period, and the maintenance cost of more than 16,000 yuan needs to be borne by him. Mr. Chen has driven the Ford Wingbeat for six years, and also during normal driving, the gearbox made abnormal noises and lost power. The 4S shop insisted that the gearbox rusted after the car went through blisters. Mr. Chen could only spend 7,200 yuan to repair the gearbox, and the same failure reappeared only one year later. Many Ford owners have encountered the same problem: There is no vehicle for wading, but the gearbox is flooded, and the rusty is malfunctioning. Why is that?

The reporter came to the 4S shop that Mr. Chen visited to investigate. Under constant questioning by reporters, the maintenance personnel said that there is a hole in the rain catchment plate. If it is not blocked, water will drip from here, and it will drip on the place where the gearbox and the engine are docked. While the 4S shop allowed car owners to repair the gearbox at their own expense, they quietly patched up the leaks on the rain catchment plate. In response to this design flaw, manufacturers have a solution as early as March 2020. This 4S shop staff told reporters that the solution issued to them by the Ford manufacturer was an internal notice. Obviously it is a design flaw, and 4S shops everywhere have all the responsibility to the car owners. As for why the car owners are not proactively informed, according to Changan Ford’s solution, vehicles with corresponding faults will be quietly remedied during repairs, but owners who are still using the vehicle do not know that the vehicle has such a safety hazard.

zhiwo

By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
helpmekim
7 months ago

Update 3/16: There are a lot of questions about the quality of Volkswagen DQ200 in the comment area, so let’s talk about it here. First of all, the joint venture brands except Volkswagen have stopped using dry dual-clutch on new models. Volkswagen’s DQ200 will only remain as it is until 2026, and will not develop any new dry dual-clutch. This means that this technical route has come to an end. Volkswagen’s DQ200 has undergone multiple rounds of optimization, and its current performance can be said to be the best among all dry dual clutches, and its quality is relatively stable. You don’t have to worry too much. The following is the original answer. Unexpectedly, in this year’s 315, the gearbox failure forced Tesla to become the protagonist. As a DCT research and development (dry + wet) for many years, he has participated in the dismantling of almost all DCT development dogs on the market with bare hands. Here is something to say. (The gearboxes that were dismantled in those years-Volkswagen DQ200&DQ250&DQ380&DQ400E&DL382, Ford Getrag DCT250&DCT450, BYD 6DCT&7DCT, SAIC DCT250&DCT360, etc.) Ford Getrag DCT250-the main cause of the failure of Yibo today, is also being removed by Jiaming Column of boxes. The 6DCT250 showing the sky. From the picture, the clutch of this 6DCT250 has almost been rusted out, and it has also appeared on the sky. There is no doubt that this is because of water ingress. According to official information, the reason for the water ingress is that water dripped from a hole in the rainwater plate to the connection of the engine gearbox. However, if the sealing performance is intact, the connecting surface of the generator and transformer can almost completely isolate the flow of internal and external liquids. It may be more difficult for the external rainwater to flow in than to reach the sky. Even if there is a joint surface where oil seeps, it is almost impossible for water to flow in naturally. The most likely place for water to enter is the vent hole on the dual clutch housing, as shown in the figure below. Since the heat dissipation of the dry dual clutch can only rely on air circulation, a vent hole must be opened on the clutch housing. In order to prevent water from entering the clutch through the vent, the opening is generally designed to face upwards as much as possible to avoid contact with water splashing from below the chassis. At the same time, the clutch itself should also have a certain waterproof function. A small amount of water entering will be evaporated and discharged at high temperature without affecting the function of the clutch. A dry DCT that Jiaming participated in the development can clearly see the vent position of the dry DCT from the picture above. However, the design belongs to the design, and the actual work situation is complicated. For example, during the development process, Jiaming found that one of the sensors shown in the figure above often failed. Opening the inside of the sensor housing found that all the ingress water was corroded. Later, it was captured by a camera installed inside the clutch housing. When the vehicle passed through the wading section at a certain speed, the water splashed by the wheels would flow into the clutch through the vent holes. Although the clutch itself had no problem, after the water entered The resulting high temperature and humidity environment caused the sensor to hang up. The later solution was to improve the waterproof level of the sensor by changing the design of the sensor. The Ford dry dual clutch is already quite serious in terms of the degree of clutch corrosion. The path of water inflow is probably not only the one way of dripping on the rain collecting plate, and the situation of wheel splashing is likely to exist at the same time. Judging from the maintenance strategy given by the manufacturer, the design flaws in the sealing performance of the coupling surface of the generator and transformer and the design flaws in the water intake of the vent are basically solid hammers. The seal on the coupling surface of the generator and transformer has a design defect. The exhaust hole has a design defect. However, the water in the clutch does not necessarily cause the clutch to enter due to the hole in the rain collecting plate, and the clutch does not necessarily cause the clutch to malfunction. Therefore, the official did not choose to recall with a fluke. They didn’t take the initiative to change the corresponding accessories, but came to change one by one, aiming to change the pillars without knowing it. Whether it is a manufacturer or a 4S shop, they do not actively implement rectifications for this existing defect, and they should indeed play 50 big boards. Recently, various car-related after-sales problems have occurred frequently. I think the fundamental reason is that the car is almost the most technically difficult and most complicated consumer product that the general public can touch every day. The car itself has a huge information mismatch between manufacturers and consumers. Every aspect of a car, such as design level, manufacturing process, assembly quality, supplier quality, durability performance, etc., may not even be understood by ordinary employees of car companies. Jiaming’s suggestion is that ordinary consumers can learn as much as possible about the basic knowledge of automobiles, so that they can know how to understand any problems they encounter. Finally, a piece of advice for users of dry dual-clutch models (Jia Ming himself): When encountering watery roads, try to bypass as much as possible, and control the speed as much as possible if you can’t, and pass slowly. Don’t ask me how I knew it. The experience of tracking more than 500 after-sales cases single-handedly in the past was teary.

heloword
7 months ago

As the “chicken” of this year’s festival, under the heavy blow, I still recommend Centennial Ford: lie flat on the spot, give up struggling, take the initiative to recall, stop losses in time… As far as Centennial Ford’s situation in recent years is concerned, 315 unexpectedly became popular. It cannot be said that it is not “the house leaks in the night rain.” The previous answer has analyzed the dilemma and predicament of Ford in China today. Interested friends can browse the auto industry under the current wave of tremendous changes. To some extent, it represents the response of some traditional car companies when facing challenges. When facing disruptive changes in the industry, some traditional car companies actively respond, adjust their strategic direction in time, and deploy in advance; some companies choose Continue to rejoice, and smile contemptuously when facing the change. However, the attitudes and responses of major companies in the face of industry changes determine whether they can continue their previous glory. Today’s market has really changed. With the lowering of the threshold for car-building, the strong joining of multiple forces has made the seller’s market gradually transform into a buyer’s market. If you still maintain the “Party A” thinking and rely on the “big shop” to deceive customers, users who vote with their feet will naturally be selectively lost. “User thinking” has never been a new word. It should be a normal thing to build a car well and provide a good service. It is only because the traditional car companies with deep-rooted “Party A thinking” are in the “service” and “user operation”. “This aspect is really bad. Therefore, the new forces that emphasize user service naturally win the top spot and steal the limelight.

helpyme
7 months ago

First of all, I sigh that 315 is not in the same era with us. I care about the quality of new cars. They are more concerned about the quality of cars 5 years and 10 years ago. This reputation pitted Ford’s gearbox, and it was still caught by CCTV for Ford in 2021. However, according to reports, the manufacturer of the design of the catchment plate has already notified the 4S shop, but the 4S will not be implemented. This is The disadvantage of the franchise relationship, if it is directly managed, may be more binding. Let’s talk about the problem of dry DCT rust. I don’t think it’s a case of Ford alone. In fact, the same is true for DQ200. I use it myself. This. The dry dual clutch box has an obvious air-cooling port. I didn’t find the picture for a while. Anyway, when I maintained it, the opening was the same as the crankshaft axis of the engine, and the height was about the same as the height of the chassis, so this semi-open clutch must be It is affected by the humidity of the environment and rusts up. The same is true for the clutch and flywheel of a manual gearbox. Wuhan is watching the sea every year in summer, so it is unrealistic for you to say that the water is not pressured. Sometimes the water reaches the calf and you have to go, but if it is a dry DCT, try to go as shallow as possible. DQ200 gearbox quality Stability, I think it basically meets my expectations, but the design and use environment is such that it is a normal response to rust. As the owner of the DQ200, I try not to wading. I have a repair shop. I have also seen rusty DQ200 clutch components, but the failure rate is still quite low. In my opinion, the quality problem of Ford’s powershift DCT gearbox is comparable to that of Volkswagen’s first-generation dry dual-clutch gearbox. Unfortunately, Ford did not persevere and did not persevere. If you persevere, you can also become a hero of DCT. Like Volkswagen, Ford will not be today in 2021. The new car will only be equipped with three-cylinder + AT to reduce fuel consumption, and this gearbox is an old news from N years ago. It is necessary to hammer out Volvo together. The masses, watching the excitement are not afraid of big things).

sina156
7 months ago

This time CCTV really almost broke the news about the rust problem of Ford’s gearbox. It was a good thing. It was an old model and finally replaced it with a 4S shop. In order to earn maintenance fees, customers who had been insured. Ford was wronged. There were more gearbox quality problems than them. Then they came to Infiniti for quality problems. The main imported cars are imported cars. Anyway, the Infiniti brand is niche, and the hammer will not affect domestic production activities. After all, the automobile is a pillar industry related to people’s livelihood.

yahoo898
7 months ago

Let go of Tesla. In line with policy and strategy. Ford is a soft persimmon. However, it has little impact on current products. Infiniti was to beat Nissan. Nissan’s problems are more serious, especially the gearbox. If Nissan does not pay attention to it early, sales will respond. [Knowing about dismantling a car, you can focus on it] Generally speaking, it is relatively friendly to the automotive industry. Automobile is still a pillar industry. The government naturally has channels to inform in advance of the quality problems of various companies.

leexin
7 months ago

Everyone is wondering why Tesla did not have the menu for the 315 party, and there is not enough food tonight. Instead, it is Ford Yibo, which will be delisted from the market in 15 years and now, and Infiniti, whose business is now squeezed in China. Briefly share my views. First of all, as the 315 party, the problems that were exposed must be very real. In view of the wide audience, the questions and answers themselves must be very well understood (who is at fault, how to be held accountable, and why). The program group is at the 315 party. The content published in must be verified, not just guessing. To achieve a real hammer, the conditions are: 1. The problem is extensive and reproducible, and sufficient proof materials are available 2. The problem is best verified by “owners” (usually through unannounced visits) 3. Industry experts endorse and provide evidence For example, if there is a problem with the product, to show the problem with Ford’s gearbox, one is to prove the widespread nature of the problem. The perspective of multiple car owners was used many times in the party, and a large group of 4*500 people on WeChat has been used as the background. It is necessary to prove The cause of the problem and the imputation. At the party, we visited Ford’s 4s shop unannounced to collect “confession” from the staff who knew it. Everyone knew that 4s knew the cause of the problem for a long time, and knew that the product design was flawed, but it concealed it from consumers. In fact, high maintenance fees are charged. Then Tesla, let’s break down the problems that can be used as a guilt: everyone is familiar with “abnormal acceleration” and “brake failure”, in addition to autopilot failure crashes, and central control large-screen failure card machines. If you go to the party for the first two questions, after interviewing several car owners who have been involved in the accident (you have to filter out those who may have exaggerated or misrepresented the car owners, and you have to filter out the car owners who violated the rules and speeding at the time of the accident (this is the one in Henan)), then What are you going to do here? It’s not alive anymore, abnormal acceleration and brake failure. First, there is not enough proof material left. Second, don’t look at frequent hot searches. The extent of the problem should be as wide as Ford’s tens of thousands of scale problems. It is estimated that it was not possible. Next, I interviewed Tesla employees and learned that Tesla had known about this for a long time. This is nowhere. Then look for an expert to verify that the car in the accident really has a problem with the system? As far as I know, the Tesla detected by a third-party organization has not had any problems. Tesla’s closeness on the system has led to the fact that it is not easy to verify without Tesla’s cooperation. In addition, the probability of these problems being reproduced is very small. In other words, I am looking for a Tesla and say that this car is accelerating abnormally or the brakes are malfunctioning. I can’t find this opportunity while carrying the camera. . Let’s talk about the failure of autopilot. Autopilot is an auxiliary function. Tesla clearly wrote the limitations of these functions in the manual, and the car owner should bear the responsibility. Failure to do so can only break Tesla’s false propaganda, exaggerated advertisements, or the naming issue of fsd (fully autonomous driving), but since Tesla’s false propaganda on autonomous driving has been spread around the world, Tesla Special attention has been paid to the education of employees in direct-sale stores and advertisements, and it is difficult to catch major problems. Finally, it is worth mentioning that the big screen freezes, freezes, and freezes. This is the only point where I think I have a chance to go to the 315. There are many car owners who have met. There may not be many people on the screen, but there are always many people who are stuck. There is also a complete set of evidence materials. Many videos on the Internet have taken the scene of the failure of the large Tesla screen. Not only that, it is also feasible to interview the sales staff of directly-operated stores. The employees of direct-operated stores are definitely aware of the problem of big screen freeze/huaping. If you ask for solutions, Tesla employees will say restart, or ota updates the software, then restart it. Can the problem be solved? No, many people’s problems still exist, and they continue to recur. Can the ota update solve the problem? It also solves the temporary problem. The next update may still have it, and there are some bad updates, such as that ” Model Y first mentioned the problems encountered by car owners. In view of the severity of the problem to be exposed in the 315, the impact of large screen freezes, blurred screens, and crashes on driving safety is far from loss of power, loss of power assistance, etc., plus the large screen freezes, blurred screens, and crashes are not Teslas. A unique problem, the central control of traditional cars will also have, but the large screen on the Tesla model 3/y is the instrument, which has a greater impact on driving safety. All in all, Tesla’s problems are very complicated. Tesla may be a good model, but it is not a perfect or even an excellent product. A good product does not pick users. Even if the user misuses or misuses, For example, the “single-pedal mode”, so the troubles to customers are all real, and the design mistakes in the product. I also hope that Zhihu’s problem with Tesla can be discussed on the matter, and the truth of the problem can be analyzed on the basis of facts. Don’t rush to stand in line and make comments as soon as you see Tesla. This will not help the ecology of the entire car circle. Someone will eventually take advantage of this for their own benefit. If the wolf comes and shouts too much, it will be useless.

greatword
7 months ago

What’s this? Dig the grave and whip the corpse? Or who do you cover? Ford’s dry dual-clutch has long been replaced with ATs, and Yibo is about to discontinue production. The complaints are mainly concentrated on 13 models. Although it is indeed a problem, Ford has no problem with the whip, but since it wants to work on the car, Did Mercedes-Benz, Tesla, etc. have better materials, more problems, and closer timing that made consumers more angry to be exposed in the past year? Raise it high and gently put it down, whip Ford’s use of something that a car company in the sunset west of the hills has stopped. Do you want to tell everyone that I have worked very hard? Don’t dare to offend the boss, and have to deal with it. This 3.15 is really difficult.

loveyou
7 months ago

In fact, the Ford manufacturer itself has done a good job. Ford’s cars, there are indeed many minor problems, but people just know their mistakes and correct them next time… Basically, the recall is really unambiguous. This time it was stinky by the dealer pig teammates. In other words, there was negligence and confusion in management. Since Ford’s previous CEO’s wrong strategy, the speed of new cars has slowed significantly. The three-cylinder Focus and Ford Ruiji have been tepid. This exposure is undoubtedly adding fuel to the fire. In fact, Ford’s car uses good materials, but it is not called Ford without any problems. Many of the problems here are design defects rather than pure quality control problems.

strongman
7 months ago

I am curious why 315 should take a car that has been discontinued for two or three years as an example? I don’t mean to say that there are problems should not be talked about, but as an annual program with high attention, how can it promote the progress of the industry? Nowadays, it is completely itchy, the form is greater than the content. The future of the automotive industry lies in autonomous driving. At this stage, mass-produced products are in the assisted driving stage. There is still a long way to go to truly autonomous driving. Tesla is overly exaggerating that it is a high-tech product, blurring the distinction between autonomous driving and assisted driving in publicity. In addition, Tesla has recently reported a lot of failures in handling and braking, but the reports have not received a good response from the manufacturer. As far as the 315 topic is concerned, these should be better themes, which can promote the attention of the entire society and the automotive industry to the safety of autonomous driving. Unfortunately, for some reason, CCTV avoided this topic.

stockin
7 months ago

This is a bit unkind. Old models such as Ford Yibo and Focus only have dual-clutch, that is, dual-clutch is used, and Ford’s sales have fallen off the cliff. It made the situation worse, but then all of them went to the AT, with their hands as one.

Besides, it was not the Ford family that had problems with the dual clutch in previous years.

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x