GM had a recall on their Epsilon extended platform that didn’t fix the problem either. Wires would corrode due to no seals and proximity to HVAC. Safety systems would go off line, brake lights would get stuck on. A Colorado woman actually drove off a mountain because of this defect.
Still not fixed to this day, as the correct fix would involve replacing a computer module in millions of cars with one that has a weathertight interface. US automakers always get the laziest of passes.
GDI engines that need to run the fuel to the injectors at over 2,000 psi is just stupid. Using that much pressure for such a marginal gain in efficiency from other engines that only need like 50 psi.
2,000 psi is like a guarantee that at some point in that vehicles life there’s going to be fuel leaks and problems. Ever see a firetruck shooting that giant stream of water from the end of its ladder? That’s only 80 psi.
Direct injected cars are nothing new. Diesels run their injectors much higher than 2000psi for hundreds of thousands kilometers. Ford is just shit at engineering.
Don’t try and bring diesel into this. They’re pretty different. It also doesn’t cause nearly the fire risk when they leak some fuel.
Also, they absolutely leak fuel. I’ve seen loads of diesels with fuel leaks (I drive a lot of diesels for work). But like I said, them leaking a bit isn’t really a cause to sound the alarm bells for a fire, cause diesel fuel isn’t a risk like that.
Right, and on newer emissions systems the engines use the high pressure to help with more complete combustion allowing for lower soot, meaning less DPF issues. While this does cause higher NOx , we are able to clean it up with SCR and flowing more DEF. Ford is being lazy on this, but the issue is not high pressure. I also understand the differences between gasoline and diesel, and again, Ford could develope a system that does not fail, and then dumps gasoline on the ground hahaha. I’m saying this as a master diesel engine tech with 12 years of experience. I’m not rooting my own horn, but just letting people know I do have industry experience.
Just because it’s not nearly as flammable doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have the exam inherent risks especially when you end up having it come out under high pressure it’s going to try an atomize into a fine spray it most certainly can be a fire risk.
Yes. There are huge risks. I have seen several diesel powered class 8 trucks burn and catch fire due to fuel leaks. It’s not very common at all, but it does happen. Ford is not fixing the issue when they could. The fuel system probably needs to be re engineered, but high pressure is not the issue
“Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do one.
Woman on plane: Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Narrator: You wouldn’t believe.
Woman on plane: Which car company do you work for?
Me (while reading about the “fix” in the article): That’s just a Band-aid!
The article:
Michael Brooks, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Auto Safety, called Ford’s remedy for the fuel leaks a “Band-aid type recall” and said the company is trying to avoid the cost of repairing the fuel injectors.
The article says that this is an extension of a recall from 2022 for the same problem, and that Ford says replacement parts are available, but its odd to me that they wouldn't just replace them. I guess we're still on risk calculation vs people freaking over a known reason that their car could catch on fire
They’re not fixing the leaks, they’re making the car detect when it starts spraying gasoline inside the engine compartment so it will enter limp mode before a fire starts.
The driver can then push their disabled car to the side of the road, and assuming they weren’t killed in traffic, then Ford will replace the faulty injector.
Most car fires I’ve put out are due to electrical shorts. Not a fuel leak. The last fuel caused one I put out (and I haven’t extinguished many over the years. Maybe 5 fuel related ones in the past 15 years) was a classic muscle car that the owner had just recently put a new engine into. He didn’t tighten the fuel line down enough and it popped off.
Proportionally because all the evs are essentially less than 10 years old, while even just the average ice vehicle is well over that?
You’re right about one thing. There are other ways ice vehicles catch fire besides leaky fuel systems. Like the electrical system that short out. Hmmm…I wonder if EV’s have much of an electrical system?
Seriously, though. That’s pretty much all vehicle caused fires. Electrical short or fuel leak in the engine compartment. You can get brake systems that cause it on trailers and commercial vehicles, but that doesn’t really happen on passenger vehicles very often at all, and could happen on an ev just the same anyhow.
A gasoline fire can be put out with about a thousand gallons of water. A lithium battery in an electric car can take 3,000-5,000 gallons of water to put out. There have been cases of wrecked Teslas reigniting at scrap yards weeks after they were destroyed.
That’s kinda true, in a sense that all batteries use a chemical reaction to generate electricity and a damaged battery can short and thus ignite arbitrarily. But there’s lithium-based batteries like LiFePo₄ that burn significantly less intensely if at all; and there’s lab-only chemistries that are non-flammable. So it’s not really because of the lithium specifically that they burn so well.
they gotta start taking the batteries out of them before scrapping them, probably with mandatory recycling. also hot take all cars should have a public transit and protected bike lane tax applied to them
I think it already is supposed to be mandatory before crushing them.
Most wrecked cars generally get parted out before recycled/crushed and shredded. Taking the battery out is also a huge pita. That’s what shouldn’t be allowed. Batteries need to be much more easily replaceable than they are.