Safety Recall 22S27 Rear Axle Bolt Fractures

[CareerFiremanGuy]

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 engineer, and most of you aren't either. So what we have here is FORD using a solid bushing (that from the pics I've seen, is the same one that came on the 2/4 bolt rear subframe) together with an upgraded bolt, inserted into the single bushing slot of the 1/2 bolt subframe.

Do we have concrete scientific data to support that this will not work? Is there a strucutral engineer on this forum who can accurately compute the stresses placed on components within the rear subframe assembly, and then compare that with the load tolerances of the new upgraded single bushing/bolt set up and say it is inadequate?

I know knee jerk emotional reactions are part of life, especially when talking about car enthusaists and their vehicles. But let's drop all that cr@p and talk facts.

So here's where I'm at: If my friend who let me use his lift to install the rear brace (he's an engineer for a large company who rebuilds cars as a hobby) has the time, I'd consider having him remove the rear brace. No big deal. I'm not running a 500+ hp tune, just the 430 hp FP tune. So there you go ...

 

[Kevin_FG23]

Regarding the comment: "what we have here is FORD using a solid bushing (that from the pics I've seen, is the same one that came on the 2/4 bolt rear subframe)".........

The "revised bushing" for the fix doesn't look anything like either of the original bushings on the 2/4 bolt cars. While the metal center section on the new one is "solid", the bushing itself certainly is not.

 

[FORZDA3]

Regarding the comment: "what we have here is FORD using a solid bushing (that from the pics I've seen, is the same one that came on the 2/4 bolt rear subframe)".........

The "revised bushing" for the fix doesn't look anything like either of the original bushings on the 2/4 bolt cars. While the metal center section on the new one is "solid", the bushing itself certainly is not.

View attachment 21395

Your information is great for anyone reading, but as a reply to the fire starter idiot it will mean nothing as he is well, stupid and refuses to acknowledge his lack of knowledge. Kinda like this:
When you’re dead, you don’t know you’re dead. The pain is only felt by others. The same thing happens when you’re stupid.

 

[FORZDA3]

Now to address the new bushing & bolt. Based on this new design bushing, it appears to a knowledgeable person that Ford thinks the root cause was the sheer angle not remaining perpendicular to the fastener centerline such that it wasn’t subjected to a pure sheer load resulting in the bolt bending at the max load location. After it was/is bent, its load carrying strength was/is severely degraded, building more angled load momentum until failure.
The new bushing, being much thicker with much less rubber cushioning, will attempt to keep the load in pure sheer which will indeed strengthen the mounting. I obviously don’t have the sheer load rating of the bolt, but the new bushing is designed to correctly utilize that load rating.

 

[Cdubya]

Anyone have a picture of the revised bushing? The one Kevin posted looks like the original for the 3bolt subframe.

 

[Kevin_FG23]

Anyone have a picture of the revised bushing? The one Kevin posted looks like the original for the 3bolt subframe.

The one I posted earlier is indeed the new, revised style. Compare to this pic of the original type for 3-bolt: Difference is apparent in the center metal portion.

 

[Cdubya]

This pic is from the first reported failure in this forum by blaster9, July 2021:



Looks identical to me but to be clear, this is what they put in after the failure, which back then was probably not a revised part for the 3 bolt. Plenty of people with early MY2022's have posted pics of their 3 bolts and the single bolt in back has the exact same looking bushing. The 1/3 bolt has always had a different bushing than the 2/4 bolt bushings. I don't even think the bushings in the 2 bolt are identical, even with the orientation 90* rotated.

People with the recall done should not sleep well at night. Replacing the bolt and bushing is not a definitive solution. It may placate the NHTSA by Ford saying they came up with a solution but I reckon this isn't the last we've heard from the problem.

 

[Kevin_FG23]

My '23 (not subject to recall) has the bushing style with the "solid" metal center. I'm beginning to wonder if the earlier ones actually lost torque on the bolts over time, allowing things to start wallowing around a bit and bending/overstressing the bolt?

 

[Cdubya]

My '23 (not subject to recall) has the bushing style with the "solid" metal center. I'm beginning to wonder if the earlier ones actually lost torque on the bolts over time, allowing things to start wallowing around a bit and bending/overstressing the bolt?

I see what your saying. The hollow. metal center portion has been filled in now. Interesting...

 

[JCR ST]

It appears as though there are 3 different versions now. Kevins pics 1,2 and then 3. Mine (1/2023 build) is the same as #1(First pic) so mine should be the "newer" style.

 

[CareerFiremanGuy]

Regarding the comment: "what we have here is FORD using a solid bushing (that from the pics I've seen, is the same one that came on the 2/4 bolt rear subframe)".........

The "revised bushing" for the fix doesn't look anything like either of the original bushings on the 2/4 bolt cars. While the metal center section on the new one is "solid", the bushing itself certainly is not.

View attachment 21395

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 setup, they don't even look anything like each other.

I'm beginning to think FORD's real "fix" is:

1. the change to a solid metal cylindrical insert
2. the upgraded bolt

With the whatever rubber insulator design they use as just being secondary/afterthought.

 

[bosephbarking]

I'm beginning to think

Oh my......

 

[Kevin_FG23]

["CareerFiremanGuy] said:

1. the upgraded bolt

Was there a different part number for the bolt used previously? I think it's the same bolt..

 

[Cdubya]

The bolt is NOT upgraded. It's the same grade bolt, just a different manufactured one. I personally think there is no difference between the new bolt and the old--just Ford showing the NHTSA that they came to a "solution". People were pulling the old bolt out of the single rear mount and it was bent--I myself pulled both old bolts out of my double mounts and they were straight as an arrow. Then Ford addressed that the double mounts had different bushings than a single. So that was modified slightly. Again, more window dressing. There would be no issue had Ford kept the double mounts on the 3.0L like the engineers designed. At the very least though, by doing the recall, Ford could be replacing bent bolts that may have failed given another year or two (or maybe not at all) and buy some time. So few or no failures in the next couple of years? Well, I guess the recall worked! (not!)

 

[CareerFiremanGuy]

["CareerFiremanGuy] said:

1. the upgraded bolt

Was there a different part number for the bolt used previously? I think it's the same bolt..

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 ...

 

[Cdubya]

new vs old:

W720988-S439 on the left.

 

[Kevin_FG23]

So, same grade, same geometry..... just from a different manufacturer?

 

[bosephbarking]

new vs old:

View attachment 21456
View attachment 21457

They are exactly the same. 10.9 is a spec itself and has minimum requirements. These bolts are identical and nothing has 'changed'. Ford marketing and management is trying to change physical for the sake of their checkbook. You Mr fireman are welcome to shill for them till you are blue in the face. The fact of the matter is a real fix is exactly why you bought a diff brace. The absolute irony of your purchase and refusal to remove it after ford 'fixed' the issue for you is not lost on us.

 

[bosephbarking]

The bolt is NOT upgraded. It's the same grade bolt, just a different manufactured one. I personally think there is no difference between the new bolt and the old--just Ford showing the NHTSA that they came to a "solution". People were pulling the old bolt out of the single rear mount and it was bent--I myself pulled both old bolts out of my double mounts and they were straight as an arrow. Then Ford addressed that the double mounts had different bushings than a single. So that was modified slightly. Again, more window dressing. There would be no issue had Ford kept the double mounts on the 3.0L like the engineers designed. At the very least though, by doing the recall, Ford could be replacing bent bolts that may have failed given another year or two (or maybe not at all) and buy some time. So few or no failures in the next couple of years? Well, I guess the recall worked! (not!)

You are correct Cdubya, the bolt is the exact same as the other. They are both 10.9 rated and when manufacturers are given MINIMUM requirements they will always meet the minimum without going over.

 

[CareerFiremanGuy]

So, same grade, same geometry..... just from a different manufacturer?

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 FORD hasn't made a power train to support their 550+ hp tunes. Lol

Again, caution. There's a reason why I had to block several whining/irrational types here, more than on any other forum I've ever been on.

I honestly expected a more mature, logical thinking audience. Nope. At times, it seems more like a Mustang/Camaro forum ...........