Ford Everest catches fire on Test Drive

[GTLEGEND]

Originally Posted by tempted

I didn't bring up bush fires, so perhaps you should ask the person who did.

You can't blame me for being skeptical when you consider Ford has hardly acted honestly and ethically with matters like this in the past. I'm not going to blindly believe everything they say and defend them like some fan boys here.

You'd have to admit that it's all a little too convenient for them to come out and say it was just a loose battery terminal when there is no onus on them to show proof.

Ford do employ and have on hand experts in not only Fire but also crash investigation. I have attended a similar training course and there were Ford employees there that knew a hell of a lot about fire and how to investigate causes. The vehicle was not a pile of total ash, there were alot of clues and even I could tell where (but not how) the fire started.

Do you honestly think that Ford would cover up such a finding if it was something else and risk possibly one of the best cars they have released lately wit a fire risk and possibly kill people in the process. Dont think so!! You know by the fact that there are recalls on cars by Ford, that they fix and advise any faults they find. This would be no different.

Pull your head in..

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by GTLEGEND

Do you honestly think that Ford would cover up such a finding if it was something else and risk possibly one of the best cars they have released lately wit a fire risk and possibly kill people in the process.

Yep:

Likewise in the Pinto case, Ford’s management whatever its exact reasoning, decided to stick with the original design and not upgrade the Pinto’s fuel tank, despite the test results reported by its engineers. Here is the aftermath of Ford’s decision:

Between 1971 and 1978, the Pinto was responsible for a number of fire-related deaths. Ford puts the figure at 23; its critics say the figure is closer to 500. According to the sworn testimony of Ford engineers, 95 percent of the fatalities would have survived if Ford had located the fuel tank over the axle (as it had done on its Capri automobiles).

NHTSA finally adopted a 30-mph collision standard in 1976. The pinto then acquired a rupture-proof fuel tank. In 1978 Ford was obliged to recall all 1971-76 Pintos for fuel-tank modifications.

Between 1971 and 1978, approximately fifty lawsuits were brought against Ford in connection with rear-end accidents in the Pinto. In the Richard Grimshaw case, in addition to awarding over $3 million in compensatory damages to the victims of a Pinto crash, the jury awarded a landmark $125 million in punitive damages against Ford. The judge reduced punitive damages to 3.5 million.

On August 10, 1978, eighteen-year-old Judy Ulrich, her sixteen-year-old sister Lynn, and their eighteen-year-old cousin Donna, in their 1973 Ford Pinto, were struck from the rear by a van near Elkhart, Indiana. The gas tank of the Pinto exploded on impact. In the fire that resulted, the three teenagers were burned to death. Ford was charged with criminal homicide. The judge in the case advised jurors that Ford should be convicted if it had clearly disregarded the harm that might result from its actions, and that disregard represented a substantial deviation from acceptable standards of conduct. On March 13, 1980, the jury found Ford not guilty of criminal homicide.

For its part, Ford has always denied that the Pinto is unsafe compared with other cars of its type and era. The company also points out that in every model year the Pinto met or surpassed the government’s own standards. But what the company doesn’t say is that successful lobbying by it and its industry associates was responsible for delaying for seven years the adoption of any NHTSA crash standard. Furthermore, Ford’s critics claim that there were more than forty European and Japanese models in the Pinto price and weight range with safer gas-tank position. “Ford made an extremely irresponsible decision,” concludes auto safety expert Byron Bloch, “when they placed such a weak tank in such a ridiculous location in such a soft rear end.”

http://philosophia.uncg.edu/phi361-m...he-ford-pinto/

But that doesn't mean thats what happened in this case, seems to be unique in that given that how many Rangers are on the road with a similar or same engine bay there have been little issues.

[GTLEGEND]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Yep:



http://philosophia.uncg.edu/phi361-m...he-ford-pinto/

But that doesn't mean thats what happened in this case, seems to be unique in that given that how many Rangers are on the road with a similar or same engine bay there have been little issues.

That was the 70's, they were most probably all stoned anyway as they say if you remember the 70's you were not there lol..

I think they would have learnt by then...

[vztrt]

Originally Posted by Top_Ghia

I've seen a loose terminal get that hot that it melted the wire so it's plausible. It may not actually be the terminal directly on the battery. My guess is it's the next connection along, at the back of the terminal, probably the alternator wire.

Haters gonna hate.

There are a few different 'busbars' on the the electrical system. Seems one wasn't connected.

Ford will write up SOP for this and send it to all the relevant personal.

Originally Posted by GTLEGEND

That was the 70's, they were most probably all stoned anyway as they say if you remember the 70's you were not there lol..

I think they would have learnt by then...

Few other companies had the same issue. That's why the US changed the rules over there.

[HULK EF]

Alf Stewart Approves.......

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by tempted

I wasn't aware that Ford employed qualified forensic scientists. How can their findings be proven?
Ford have a track record of denials and cover ups. Territory ball joints spring to mind.
I don't believe a single word that comes out of their mouths.

Given your track record for seemingly bashing almost anything concerning Ford products, we would have to wonder why you're still a member here.

[FlipXW]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Given your track record for seemingly bashing almost anything concerning Ford products, we would have to wonder why you're still a member here.

His bashing seems to be of anything thats not Australian. Extremely sour about the boys packing up shop here it would seem.

[FPV+fteT3]

It was within spec nothing to see here move along…...

[Vesper Martini]

So your only purpose on this forum is to Troll Threads
on anything that's not large rwd sedans/wagons/utes

I note you even dislike the Territory.

there's an old saying if you have nothing good to say then shut the F up

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by tempted

And? Your point is completely irrelevant in the context.

I thought Australian cars are superior compared to Thai junk. I wouldn't expect an Australian car to have common faults.

[GCRXR6]

Originally Posted by tempted

Yep.

Sour that the only vehicles I am interested in are being discontinued (large rwd sedans/wagons/utes).
Sour that the Australian car industry has been killed.
Sour that Australian jobs have been lost
Sour at the contempt Ford have shown its Australian customers by charging exorbitant prices for cheaply built Thai third world .
Sour at the way they always dodge and sweep issues under the carpet.

The list goes on

So....would you be tempted, to tell us what you drive?

[MercurySilver]

Originally Posted by tempted

Yep.

Sour that the only vehicles I am interested in are being discontinued (large rwd sedans/wagons/utes).
Sour that the Australian car industry has been killed.
Sour that Australian jobs have been lost
Sour at the contempt Ford have shown its Australian customers by charging exorbitant prices for cheaply built Thai third world .
Sour at the way they always dodge and sweep issues under the carpet.

The list goes on

**** me drunk how do you sleep at night?

[sprintman1]

Originally Posted by GTLEGEND

That was the 70's, they were most probably all stoned anyway as they say if you remember the 70's you were not there lol..

I think they would have learnt by then...

I thought I spent most of the 70's in the military, but maybe I was just drunk...

[munners]

Originally Posted by tempted

Yep.


Sour at the contempt Ford have shown its Australian customers by charging exorbitant prices for cheaply built Thai third world garbage.

The list goes on

My Ranger is Thai built third world garbage?

You sir, are an idiot.

[Benno91]

http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-news...nnection-37276

[barra240t]

Originally Posted by tempted

Yep.

Sour that the only vehicles I am interested in are being discontinued (large rwd sedans/wagons/utes).
Sour that the Australian car industry has been killed.
Sour that Australian jobs have been lost
Sour at the contempt Ford have shown its Australian customers by charging exorbitant prices for cheaply built Thai third world .
Sour at the way they always dodge and sweep issues under the carpet.

The list goes on

You do know Ford is a US owned company right?

[SpoolMan]

Guys can we stick to the topic, its drifting to matters that have no consequence to this thread.
Editing and or thread closure will happen if the path continues, quality informative posts is what people want to read, not quantity..

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by tempted

Yep.




Sour that the only vehicles I am interested in are being discontinued (large rwd sedans/wagons/utes).
Sour that the Australian car industry has been killed.
Sour that Australian jobs have been lost
Sour at the contempt Ford have shown its Australian customers by charging exorbitant prices for cheaply built Thai third world .
Sour at the way they always dodge and sweep issues under the carpet.

The list goes on

And what of people like me who are employed in development of these vehicles? There are over 1000 of us, more than are actually employed at the Broadmeadows plant these days.

[munners]

I read it was a battery clamp had come loose? Anyone have any more info? I mean it sounds like a pretty easy mistake to make?

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by munners

I heard it was a battery clamp had come loose? Anyone have any more info?

Not keeping up, are you ?

Post 109
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...1444931&page=4

And page 5, post 146

[Davehoos]

Originally Posted by Top_Ghia

Maybe they should look at the Ranger XL Plus. It has most of the things you're asking for including duel battery set up and wiring for driving lights, work lights and beacons. It also has more aggressive tyres and canvas seat covers.

Not heard of this option. It is the same spec as hilux we purchase. On line there is no mention of beacon or work light option other than you can connect to the additional battery with a stand alone wiring. Its listed online for more than $10K what we pay for our fleet vehicles.

I have seen some new look single cab recently in this spec used by some of our contractors.

[GTLEGEND]

I checked out the battery on an Everest whilst waiting for a service at a dealer today. If you look at the battery the positive cable is not like an old XY. There is a main cable and then a metal buzz bar holding about 5 or 6 more wires with bolts as obvious power feeds to other items.

From what I can make out from the article it looks like one of these other wires were accidently left off after a battery change. Although left off the wire terminal was still touching and arching against the battery and the heat/spark created from this was the cause of the fire. So not just leaving a normal battery clamp loose like we all know from the old days.

Easily done I guess, but I feel for the poor employee who accidently did this. I bet he will never leave it off again!

Glad no body got hurt and although unfortunate, the concern was a bad accident and not a severe product issue!

[Top_Ghia]

Originally Posted by GTLEGEND

I checked out the battery on an Everest whilst waiting for a service at a dealer today. If you look at the battery the positive cable is not like an old XY. There is a main cable and then a metal buzz bar holding about 5 or 6 more wires with bolts as obvious power feeds to other items.

From what I can make out from the article it looks like one of these other wires were accidently left off after a battery change. Although left off the wire terminal was still touching and arching against the battery and the heat/spark created from this was the cause of the fire. So not just leaving a normal battery clamp loose like we all know from the old days.

Easily done I guess, but I feel for the poor employee who accidently did this. I bet he will never leave it off again!

Glad no body got hurt and although unfortunate, the concern was a bad accident and not a severe product issue!

So do they know who did it? Hate to be that guy.

[csv8]

http://www.everestpartssupplies.com/...inal-universal

[RANGEREST]

http://www.carsales.com.au/editorial...xploder-100523

[munners]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Not keeping up, are you ?

Post 109
http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthr...1444931&page=4

And page 5, post 146

Sorry, my bad. I didn't explain what I was trying to say. Surely there had to be something else to it? If a battery terminal being loose (or any fault really) is sufficient to turn the car into a ball of flames surely there would be a reasonable amount of warning.

The article states

"warning lights started to appear before the instrument display went blank and the engine shut down.

“As I rolled to a stop it just burst into flames,” said Mr Barnwell. “There were flames licking out from under the bonnet.”

Did this all happen in 10 seconds or 5 minutes?

[mik]

if warning lights appear to flash abnormally and a vehicle seems to be not running right , that is probably a clue to perhaps stop and investigate further, but if i remember the article correctly ......the dude was on the job and proceeded as normal ,
the thing to remember is little fires turn into big fires ,
imo it would depend totally on the electrical fault, wiring can take a while to cook or cook straight away .
As an example i dropped a spanner in an engine bay of a newish early escort many years ago , by the chance the spanner hit the alternator terminal and the chassis rail and welded it self there ,
i did not see where it went for a couple of seconds , by the time i grabbed the spanner in a matter of seconds elapsed with large current available at the alternator terminal wiring was cooking/had cooked through the insulation, it depends entirely on the nature of the fault as to how long it takes to get the BBQ going..

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by mik

As an example i dropped a spanner in an engine bay of a newish early escort many years ago , by the chance the spanner hit the alternator terminal and the chassis rail and welded it self there ,
..

LOL I did the same thing on a MKII escort many years ago. it also had a fire later on but for different reasons.

[Canyonero]

Originally Posted by olds

Canyonero !

Can I help you?

[Syndrome]

I remember when I used to deal with the Holden engineering dept. they told us we were not allowed to use the word fire in any correspondence. All such issues were to be called "thermal incidences".