1997 Ford E-Series Problems

WE PURCHASED A 1997 FORD E150 RAISED ROOF CONVERSION VAN FROM JIM O'NEAL FORD IN SELLERSBURG, INDIANA JUST ACROSS THE BORDER FROM LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. THE CONVERSION WAS BY SUPERIOR IN LOUISVILLE. WE PURCHASED THAT PARTICULAR VAN BECAUSE IT WAS HIGHLY RATED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AS A CONVERSION COMPANY. WE DROVE THE VAN FOR SIX YEARS AND JUST RECENTLY TRADED IT IN. IT HAS 97,000 MILES ON IT. THE MAJOR PROBLEM WE HAD WITH THE VAN WAS WITH THE FRONT END. BOTH FORD AND OUR LOCAL TIRE DEALER HAVE TOLD US THAT BECAUSE THE VAN IS RAISED ROOF AND HEAVIER THAN NORMAL, WE SHOULD EXPECT EXCESSIVE TIRE AND BRAKE WEAR. HOWEVER, WE OFTEN WOULD HAVE TO PUT BRAKES ON THE VAN MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR AND REPLACE ALL FOUR TIRES YEARLY. THE FRONT TIRES WOULD GET ABNORMAL WEAR (CUPPING) WHICH WOULD DESTROY ALL FOUR TIRES EVENTUALLY WITH NORMAL ROTATION. AT 60,000 MILES, A FORD REPAIR SHOP IN JOPLIN, MO TOLD US THE BALL JOINTS WERE BAD AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THEY FELT THAT WAS THE PROBLEM ALL ALONG. ONLY 30,000 MILES LATER, WE WERE ONCE AGAIN TOLD THE BALL JOINTS WERE DESTROYED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN. ANY TIME WE ASK IF THIS WAS NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR, WE WERE TOLD (WITH A SHOULDER SHRUG) THAT IT WAS DUE TO THE RAISED ROOF. I THINK FORD SHOULD WARN POTENTIAL BUYERS OF THEIR CONVERSION VANS THAT THEY WILL EXPERIENCE ABNORMAL BRAKE, TIRE AND FRONT END WEAR AND SHOULD EXPECT TO HAVE $6-800 DOLLARS IN REPAIRS YEARLY. IF THEY CANNOT MANUFACTURE A FRONT END CAPABLE OF HANDLING A HEAVIER LOAD FROM THE RAISED ROOF, THEY SHOULD NOT BE SELLING RAISED ROOF VANS.

AT 70 M.P.H. ON FLAT , DRY ROAD THE TREAD SEPERATED FROM THE INFLATED FIRESTONE TIRE AND CAUSED DAMAGE TO MOTORHOME.

I WAS AWARE OF A PROBLEM WITH THE FORD BRAKE PRESSURE SWITCH STARTING FIRES IN EXPLORES AND RANGERS I BELIEVE. OUR COMPANY OWNS 17 ECONOLINE CHASSIS VEHICLES AT THIS DIVISION. I WAS JUST CONCERNED WHEN I FOUND A BLOWN FUSE IN THE 4-WAY FLASHER CIRCUIT OF OUR 97 E-SUPER DUTY VAN. WHICH THIS CIRCUIT ALSO CONTAINS THE BRAKE PRESSURE SWITCH. WHEN REINSTALLING THE FUSE THE BRAKE PRESSURE SWITCH STARTED TO SMOKE AND GET HOT ENOUGH TO GET THE BRAKE FLUID TO ITS FLASH POINT. THE BRAKE FLUID PROCEEDED TO SMOKE AND PUSH ITS WAY PAST THE SWITCH. NO DAMAGE WAS DONE OTHER THAN A NEW SWITCH. IWAS JUST CONCERNED THAT THE FUSE DID NOT BLOW AND IF I WAS NOT THE THE VEHICLE WOULD HAVE CAUGHT FIRE.

THIS FIRESTONE TIRES LT225/75R16 DOT:VD1L1XD227. TIRE WAS ON A MOTORHOME WHEN TREAD BEGAN TO SEPARATE. TREAD CAUSED DAMAGE TO THE MOTORHOME ITSELF. FIRESTONE HAS BEEN CONTACTED.*AK 3 OTHER TIRES HAD BULGES ON THEM. WHEN BRAKE PEDAL IS PUSHED, NOTHING HAPPENS. *SLC

This vehicle was made by Ford as a partially complete vehicle and converted to 4 wheel drive by Quigley Motor Company Inc. The Quigley torque arms installed appear to commonly fail from some of the earlier years and a design change has been made (from C-channel arms to tubular). The design and construction of the C-channel torque arm (connecting the front axle to the frame of the vehicle) is prone to failure from low cycle fatigue near the welds. Upon failure, the structural integrity of the vehicle is compromised which results could range from handling issues to loss of control of the vehicle (if more than one torque arm fails or failure of one leads to cascading failures in other components, the front axle could become disconnected from the vehicle while in motion leading to an accident.

WE PURCHASED A 1997 FORD E150 RAISED ROOF CONVERSION VAN FROM JIM O'NEAL FORD IN SELLERSBURG, INDIANA JUST ACROSS THE BORDER FROM LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. THE CONVERSION WAS BY SUPERIOR IN LOUISVILLE. WE PURCHASED THAT PARTICULAR VAN BECAUSE IT WAS HIGHLY RATED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AS A CONVERSION COMPANY. WE DROVE THE VAN FOR SIX YEARS AND JUST RECENTLY TRADED IT IN. IT HAS 97,000 MILES ON IT. THE MAJOR PROBLEM WE HAD WITH THE VAN WAS WITH THE FRONT END. BOTH FORD AND OUR LOCAL TIRE DEALER HAVE TOLD US THAT BECAUSE THE VAN IS RAISED ROOF AND HEAVIER THAN NORMAL, WE SHOULD EXPECT EXCESSIVE TIRE AND BRAKE WEAR. HOWEVER, WE OFTEN WOULD HAVE TO PUT BRAKES ON THE VAN MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR AND REPLACE ALL FOUR TIRES YEARLY. THE FRONT TIRES WOULD GET ABNORMAL WEAR (CUPPING) WHICH WOULD DESTROY ALL FOUR TIRES EVENTUALLY WITH NORMAL ROTATION. AT 60,000 MILES, A FORD REPAIR SHOP IN JOPLIN, MO TOLD US THE BALL JOINTS WERE BAD AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THEY FELT THAT WAS THE PROBLEM ALL ALONG. ONLY 30,000 MILES LATER, WE WERE ONCE AGAIN TOLD THE BALL JOINTS WERE DESTROYED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN. ANY TIME WE ASK IF THIS WAS NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR, WE WERE TOLD (WITH A SHOULDER SHRUG) THAT IT WAS DUE TO THE RAISED ROOF. I THINK FORD SHOULD WARN POTENTIAL BUYERS OF THEIR CONVERSION VANS THAT THEY WILL EXPERIENCE ABNORMAL BRAKE, TIRE AND FRONT END WEAR AND SHOULD EXPECT TO HAVE $6-800 DOLLARS IN REPAIRS YEARLY. IF THEY CANNOT MANUFACTURE A FRONT END CAPABLE OF HANDLING A HEAVIER LOAD FROM THE RAISED ROOF, THEY SHOULD NOT BE SELLING RAISED ROOF VANS.

WE PURCHASED A 1997 FORD E150 RAISED ROOF CONVERSION VAN FROM JIM O'NEAL FORD IN SELLERSBURG, INDIANA JUST ACROSS THE BORDER FROM LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. THE CONVERSION WAS BY SUPERIOR IN LOUISVILLE. WE PURCHASED THAT PARTICULAR VAN BECAUSE IT WAS HIGHLY RATED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AS A CONVERSION COMPANY. WE DROVE THE VAN FOR SIX YEARS AND JUST RECENTLY TRADED IT IN. IT HAS 97,000 MILES ON IT. THE MAJOR PROBLEM WE HAD WITH THE VAN WAS WITH THE FRONT END. BOTH FORD AND OUR LOCAL TIRE DEALER HAVE TOLD US THAT BECAUSE THE VAN IS RAISED ROOF AND HEAVIER THAN NORMAL, WE SHOULD EXPECT EXCESSIVE TIRE AND BRAKE WEAR. HOWEVER, WE OFTEN WOULD HAVE TO PUT BRAKES ON THE VAN MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR AND REPLACE ALL FOUR TIRES YEARLY. THE FRONT TIRES WOULD GET ABNORMAL WEAR (CUPPING) WHICH WOULD DESTROY ALL FOUR TIRES EVENTUALLY WITH NORMAL ROTATION. AT 60,000 MILES, A FORD REPAIR SHOP IN JOPLIN, MO TOLD US THE BALL JOINTS WERE BAD AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THEY FELT THAT WAS THE PROBLEM ALL ALONG. ONLY 30,000 MILES LATER, WE WERE ONCE AGAIN TOLD THE BALL JOINTS WERE DESTROYED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN. ANY TIME WE ASK IF THIS WAS NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR, WE WERE TOLD (WITH A SHOULDER SHRUG) THAT IT WAS DUE TO THE RAISED ROOF. I THINK FORD SHOULD WARN POTENTIAL BUYERS OF THEIR CONVERSION VANS THAT THEY WILL EXPERIENCE ABNORMAL BRAKE, TIRE AND FRONT END WEAR AND SHOULD EXPECT TO HAVE $6-800 DOLLARS IN REPAIRS YEARLY. IF THEY CANNOT MANUFACTURE A FRONT END CAPABLE OF HANDLING A HEAVIER LOAD FROM THE RAISED ROOF, THEY SHOULD NOT BE SELLING RAISED ROOF VANS.

WE PURCHASED A 1997 FORD E150 RAISED ROOF CONVERSION VAN FROM JIM O'NEAL FORD IN SELLERSBURG, INDIANA JUST ACROSS THE BORDER FROM LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY. THE CONVERSION WAS BY SUPERIOR IN LOUISVILLE. WE PURCHASED THAT PARTICULAR VAN BECAUSE IT WAS HIGHLY RATED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AS A CONVERSION COMPANY. WE DROVE THE VAN FOR SIX YEARS AND JUST RECENTLY TRADED IT IN. IT HAS 97,000 MILES ON IT. THE MAJOR PROBLEM WE HAD WITH THE VAN WAS WITH THE FRONT END. BOTH FORD AND OUR LOCAL TIRE DEALER HAVE TOLD US THAT BECAUSE THE VAN IS RAISED ROOF AND HEAVIER THAN NORMAL, WE SHOULD EXPECT EXCESSIVE TIRE AND BRAKE WEAR. HOWEVER, WE OFTEN WOULD HAVE TO PUT BRAKES ON THE VAN MORE THAN ONCE A YEAR AND REPLACE ALL FOUR TIRES YEARLY. THE FRONT TIRES WOULD GET ABNORMAL WEAR (CUPPING) WHICH WOULD DESTROY ALL FOUR TIRES EVENTUALLY WITH NORMAL ROTATION. AT 60,000 MILES, A FORD REPAIR SHOP IN JOPLIN, MO TOLD US THE BALL JOINTS WERE BAD AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THEY FELT THAT WAS THE PROBLEM ALL ALONG. ONLY 30,000 MILES LATER, WE WERE ONCE AGAIN TOLD THE BALL JOINTS WERE DESTROYED AND NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN. ANY TIME WE ASK IF THIS WAS NORMAL WEAR AND TEAR, WE WERE TOLD (WITH A SHOULDER SHRUG) THAT IT WAS DUE TO THE RAISED ROOF. I THINK FORD SHOULD WARN POTENTIAL BUYERS OF THEIR CONVERSION VANS THAT THEY WILL EXPERIENCE ABNORMAL BRAKE, TIRE AND FRONT END WEAR AND SHOULD EXPECT TO HAVE $6-800 DOLLARS IN REPAIRS YEARLY. IF THEY CANNOT MANUFACTURE A FRONT END CAPABLE OF HANDLING A HEAVIER LOAD FROM THE RAISED ROOF, THEY SHOULD NOT BE SELLING RAISED ROOF VANS.

DT: FORD EXPEDITION. NOTHING WAS APPARENT BEFORE THE FAILURE. TWO MINUTES AFTER ARRIVING HOME THERE WAS AN EXPLOSION IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT. CONTACTED FORD, THE POLICE, AND THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT PUT THE FIRE OUT, AND SAID IT WAS IN THE ENGINE AREA WITH ELECTRICAL ARCING. FORD SAID THEY WERE GOING TO SEND AN INSPECTOR ON 3 DIFFERENT OCCASIONS, BUT NOW SAID THE CASE WAS CLOSED AND WILL NOT BE SEND AN INSPECTOR. *AK

DT: THE CONTACT STATED WHILE PUTTING FUEL IN THE VEHICLE IT WAS LEAKING. THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED HE THOUGHT THE PUMP DID NOT CUT ITSELF OFF. THE NEXT TIME HE PUMPED FUEL IT CONTINUED TO LEAK. THE CONTACT TOOK THE VEHICLE TO A DEALERSHIP, AND THEY FOUND THE HOSE THAT CONNECTED TO THE TANK WAS DRY ROTTED. AT THAT TIME, HE HAD THE HOSE REPLACED.*AK UODATED 12/27/05. *JB