Search results

Nice job Sam!

Caution here Kevin. Recall that this platform also generates the type of members who advise others that 0.16% of reported breaks over 3 model years equals a massive across the board parts failure. I'm coming to the conclusion that the panic expressed by these types stems from the fact that...

On the new recall 23S55, the parts list identifies the bolt part number as W720988-S439 ... And FORD parts shows that same bolt (W720988-S439) as having replaced bolt W720701-S439 ...

I don't think anyone believes that FORD considered the EPB a "fix", just an emergency procedure to prevent roll away until they got a handle on what was what. The updated recall 23S55 shows the latest date for Explorers that need the fix is July 6, 2022 (my ST was made July 7th and has the...

When looking at "Revised Rear Subframe Bushing" (part #L1MZ-4B425-D) per 22S27, both the rubber insulator together with the metal cylindrical insert are what FORD refers to as the "bushing", not just the rubber insulator. And if you look at just the rubber insulators in the pic of the 2/4...

Good questions, of which we'll probably never get the answers to. I have some guesses as to the potential causes for the delay: identifying the issue compiling data as to exactly which vehicles were affected determining the proper "fix" organizing the manufacture/purchase/delivery of the...

Listen up everyone, I know we wish FORD would've said "Heh, we've got new 2/4 bolt's for 'ya so come on in so we can install it!" But that ain't happening. So my question for the still rationally thinking crowd is: "Why do you think the upgraded bushing/bolt will not work?" I'm no automotive...

That may be true about the bolt, but FORD is coupling that bolt with the upgraded bushing as well. So hopefully, the bolt bending will no longer be an issue. I vote you rethink making silly nonsensical remarks, that at best, aren't really that funny, and at worst, are grossly misleading based...

As much as I've been a long time FORD guy, I have to say I'm not surprised. I remember snapping several 7.5" rear end ring gears on a Fox body Stang until FORD introduced the 8.8" rear axle assembly. It was offered by SVO, which I then purchased and installed myself. Problem solved. Then there...

I was thinking about how much FORD's official repair (per 22S27) is costing FORD, so I ran some quick numbers ... Dealer Labor: $250 (2.5 hrs / replace bolt & bushing only / warranty labor rate ~$100/hr US) Parts: $28.23 (Revised Bushing L1MZ-4B425-D $22.83 US/ Diff Rear Cover Housing Bolt To...

One way to see if FORD's fix works (solid bushing/new bolt) is if vehicles that already had the upgrade done on the assembly line ever breaks a bolt. If not, we could conclude it's a legit fix and that the 2/4 bolt was never really needed in the first place. Just a solid bushing like the one...

Number Of Vehicles Effected -------------------------- 236,803 (reported 12/23) Number Of Fractures ------------------------------------------- 396 (reported 10/23) Percentage Of Reported Breaks ------------------------------ 0.16% Percentage Without Reported Breaks --------------------- 99.84%...

Another 4.8 sec 0-60 mph today, which includes tire spin on the cold pavement and tools/Winter items still in the car. And no 3rd party tunes to void any warranties on the power train. Ford Performance really hit it out of the ball park. Factory tune met/exceeded all my expectations. Well done FP.

careful there haphazard "thumbs downers", it's no wonder everyone is putting you on their ignore list ...

More precisely, the FP tune doesn't void the powertrain aspect of the 3/36 bumper-to-bumper (as do aftermarket tunes), which I'm sure you aleady knew.

Cool! No responses means people agree that a fully warrantied Durango SRT 392 is not any faster than a fully warrantied FP tuned Explorer ST. Here's my dragy and just one vid that proves yt it ...

No sir, I haven't heard the upgraded B&O audio for the ST, so I can't speak to that. And I know there are 3rd party tunes that make more hp, but I was comparing vehicles that still retain their power train warranties. The best I've run on the factory backed FP tune is 0-60 in 4.7 sec and a...

Interesting note: Just out of curiosity, I test drove a Durango SRT 392. Here are my thoughts ... the big hemi sounded great the SRT's upgraded 19 speaker sound system was much better than my ST's base sound system the 392 didn't feel any faster than my FP tuned ST (road tests confirm as much)...

Haven't had time to peruse the forums for a while, so I jumped on and saw your post. Great info, thanks! So I did some research, here is what I found: my ST was built one day after the recall cut off date per the latest 23S55 bulletin, so technically, my vehicle should have the fix checking...

Winter is upon us, many drag strips have closed for the season and it's too cold to safely make Dragy runs. So now's a good time to put all 1/4 mile times for ST's with intact engine warranties into one place. FMIC's, 3rd party tunes, etc. are out. My best two runs are 13.15 and 13.21 with...