Another recall - fire risk

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/16/for...les/index.html

sheesh when will it end? this is not going to help our resale values...

my 2000 Limited-how concerned should I be??
"J J Mcquade" > wrote in message
...
http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/06/16/for...les/index.html

sheesh when will it end? this is not going to help our resale values...

After seeing CNN tonight, I went out in my garage and disconnected the wire
harness that goes to the switch in question on my 1999 Explorer Limited. I
don't use the cruise around town so if and when I go on the highway, I can
reconnect it. I think it won't take long for Ford to get tired of the bad PR
and will issue a recall on all of the vehicles that use a switch that is in
question. An other option is to either park it outside the garage or to pay
Ford to change it before the recall takes effect. One could always tell Ford
that I will pay now and when the recall occurs, you can pay me back! As far
as resale value... WHAT resale value. When I decided on the Explorer in
1999, I also considered the Lexus RX300 for $3,500 more. I chose Ford. Now I
see that the Ford is worth about $9,000 and the Lexus is worth about
$19,000. I'm glad I saved $3,500 in 1999.... Duh...

There is good and bad in this.

Remember the 1970s and 1980s. There were no recalls. People were just
stuck with what they bought.

Regardless of a problem like this that seems really big, the manufacturers
used to just ignore the consumer.

Now, the reliability is better and the corrective actions are better.


> wrote in message
. ..
> After seeing CNN tonight, I went out in my garage and disconnected the
> wire
> harness that goes to the switch in question on my 1999 Explorer Limited. I
> don't use the cruise around town so if and when I go on the highway, I can
> reconnect it. I think it won't take long for Ford to get tired of the bad
> PR
> and will issue a recall on all of the vehicles that use a switch that is
> in
> question. An other option is to either park it outside the garage or to
> pay
> Ford to change it before the recall takes effect. One could always tell
> Ford
> that I will pay now and when the recall occurs, you can pay me back! As
> far
> as resale value... WHAT resale value. When I decided on the Explorer in
> 1999, I also considered the Lexus RX300 for $3,500 more. I chose Ford. Now
> I
> see that the Ford is worth about $9,000 and the Lexus is worth about
> $19,000. I'm glad I saved $3,500 in 1999.... Duh...

cars were better made then.
"Tommy Wood" > wrote in message
...
There is good and bad in this.

Remember the 1970s and 1980s. There were no recalls. People were just
stuck with what they bought.

Regardless of a problem like this that seems really big, the manufacturers
used to just ignore the consumer.

Now, the reliability is better and the corrective actions are better.


> wrote in message
. ..
> After seeing CNN tonight, I went out in my garage and disconnected the
> wire
> harness that goes to the switch in question on my 1999 Explorer Limited. I
> don't use the cruise around town so if and when I go on the highway, I can
> reconnect it. I think it won't take long for Ford to get tired of the bad
> PR
> and will issue a recall on all of the vehicles that use a switch that is
> in
> question. An other option is to either park it outside the garage or to
> pay
> Ford to change it before the recall takes effect. One could always tell
> Ford
> that I will pay now and when the recall occurs, you can pay me back! As
> far
> as resale value... WHAT resale value. When I decided on the Explorer in
> 1999, I also considered the Lexus RX300 for $3,500 more. I chose Ford. Now
> I
> see that the Ford is worth about $9,000 and the Lexus is worth about
> $19,000. I'm glad I saved $3,500 in 1999.... Duh...

Not true. The 1970s cars in particular were junk within 3 years.

"stevie" > wrote in message ...
> cars were better made then.
> "Tommy Wood" > wrote in message
> ...
> There is good and bad in this.
>
> Remember the 1970s and 1980s. There were no recalls. People were just
> stuck with what they bought.
>
> Regardless of a problem like this that seems really big, the manufacturers
> used to just ignore the consumer.
>
> Now, the reliability is better and the corrective actions are better.
>
>
> > wrote in message
> . ..
>> After seeing CNN tonight, I went out in my garage and disconnected the
>> wire
>> harness that goes to the switch in question on my 1999 Explorer Limited.
>> I
>> don't use the cruise around town so if and when I go on the highway, I
>> can
>> reconnect it. I think it won't take long for Ford to get tired of the bad
>> PR
>> and will issue a recall on all of the vehicles that use a switch that is
>> in
>> question. An other option is to either park it outside the garage or to
>> pay
>> Ford to change it before the recall takes effect. One could always tell
>> Ford
>> that I will pay now and when the recall occurs, you can pay me back! As
>> far
>> as resale value... WHAT resale value. When I decided on the Explorer in
>> 1999, I also considered the Lexus RX300 for $3,500 more. I chose Ford.
>> Now
>> I
>> see that the Ford is worth about $9,000 and the Lexus is worth about
>> $19,000. I'm glad I saved $3,500 in 1999.... Duh...
>
>
>

After watching the CNN story, I have two questions about the design of
this thing.

1) Why in heck is the switch hot without the key in the ignition?
Does it perform another function where that it required?

2) For years, I thought a two switch system was used. One using the
brake light switch and a second was a brake pedal mounted vacumn dump
valve to the speed control servo. I can understand getting rid of the
vacumn switch as vacumn servos have gone away I suppose. Why did they
change to this new system?

After watching the rather lengthy story on CNN, I have to say I don't
really enjoy owning a Ford anymore...All I can say is that I hope Ford
does the right thing and implements a total recall...The last thing
anyone should have to worry about is their car catching fire in the
middle of the night and burning down their house...I will not be parking
in my garage until the issue is sorted out...For that matter, I don't
really want to be driving it period....



"HerkyJerky" > wrote in news:1118976872.777800.203010
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

> After watching the CNN story, I have two questions about the design of
> this thing.
>
> 1) Why in heck is the switch hot without the key in the ignition?
> Does it perform another function where that it required?
>
> 2) For years, I thought a two switch system was used. One using the
> brake light switch and a second was a brake pedal mounted vacumn dump
> valve to the speed control servo. I can understand getting rid of the
> vacumn switch as vacumn servos have gone away I suppose. Why did they
> change to this new system?
>
>

On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 22:07:25 -0400, "D.D. Palmer"
> wrote:

>Not true. The 1970s cars in particular were junk within 3 years.
>

Total horse****. We drove lots of them in our fleet for many many
years and many many trouble free miles, both fords and chevys. Some
in particular were 1972 Impala, 1975 Malibu, 1978 Nova, 1976 Montego,
1979 Impala. We even had 1972 AMC Matadors and they were the worst
but still OK overall mostly because they could never get rid of a
front end shake they all had at high speed. They had a heck of a nice
Engine/tranny combo though. It's not a 70's but one of my favorite
cars was a 1980 full sized Plymouth police package. Rode and handled
beautifully.


>"stevie" > wrote in message ...
>> cars were better made then.
>> "Tommy Wood" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> There is good and bad in this.
>>
>> Remember the 1970s and 1980s. There were no recalls. People were just
>> stuck with what they bought.
>>
>> Regardless of a problem like this that seems really big, the manufacturers
>> used to just ignore the consumer.
>>
>> Now, the reliability is better and the corrective actions are better.
>>
>>
>> > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>> After seeing CNN tonight, I went out in my garage and disconnected the
>>> wire
>>> harness that goes to the switch in question on my 1999 Explorer Limited.
>>> I
>>> don't use the cruise around town so if and when I go on the highway, I
>>> can
>>> reconnect it. I think it won't take long for Ford to get tired of the bad
>>> PR
>>> and will issue a recall on all of the vehicles that use a switch that is
>>> in
>>> question. An other option is to either park it outside the garage or to
>>> pay
>>> Ford to change it before the recall takes effect. One could always tell
>>> Ford
>>> that I will pay now and when the recall occurs, you can pay me back! As
>>> far
>>> as resale value... WHAT resale value. When I decided on the Explorer in
>>> 1999, I also considered the Lexus RX300 for $3,500 more. I chose Ford.
>>> Now
>>> I
>>> see that the Ford is worth about $9,000 and the Lexus is worth about
>>> $19,000. I'm glad I saved $3,500 in 1999.... Duh...
>>
>>
>>
>

On Fri, 17 Jun 2005 03:13:53 GMT, Paulie > wrote:

>After watching the rather lengthy story on CNN, I have to say I don't
>really enjoy owning a Ford anymore...All I can say is that I hope Ford
>does the right thing and implements a total recall...The last thing
>anyone should have to worry about is their car catching fire in the
>middle of the night and burning down their house...I will not be parking
>in my garage until the issue is sorted out...For that matter, I don't
>really want to be driving it period....
>
>

You have more chance of being struck by lightening.

>
>"HerkyJerky" > wrote in news:1118976872.777800.203010
:
>
>> After watching the CNN story, I have two questions about the design of
>> this thing.
>>
>> 1) Why in heck is the switch hot without the key in the ignition?
>> Does it perform another function where that it required?
>>
>> 2) For years, I thought a two switch system was used. One using the
>> brake light switch and a second was a brake pedal mounted vacumn dump
>> valve to the speed control servo. I can understand getting rid of the
>> vacumn switch as vacumn servos have gone away I suppose. Why did they
>> change to this new system?
>>
>>