2020: Two Warranty Case Studies & Good Video

FordTechOne said:

It’s warranty fraud, plain and simple. The guy is a con artist. He modified the vehicle, abused it, and now he wants the manufacturer to be accountable for it. All so he can get YouTube views. These trucks don’t have steering oscillation nor steering issues as he claims, he is responsible for the damage.

Click to expand...

Just to add on to this, if he’s really trying to get Ford to cover his steering issues with his pretty extensively modified suspension and very public heavy use of the truck in that condition, and returning it to stock or otherwise trying to not own the problems, he’s costing all of us money too, because Ford will eventually pass all that cost on to all of us.

smurfslayer said:

Just to add on to this, if he’s really trying to get Ford to cover his steering issues with his pretty extensively modified suspension and very public heavy use of the truck in that condition, and returning it to stock or otherwise trying to not own the problems, he’s costing all of us money too, because Ford will eventually pass all that cost on to all of us.

Click to expand...

Is it not strange his service advisor can push all of this through so often? In one Youtube video it looks like he left a pair of 37's in the chase rack but put the 35's on for inspection and warranty, how is that not blatantly obvious?

Perhaps it's asking too much, but it would be nice if Ford, knowing that their customers are going to want to do aftermarket add on, would have some sort of certification program. By that I mean a program that states a particular aftermarket part will or will not void the warranty. Or will void part of the warranty as the case may be.

Going to the 37" tire scenario, it's not well known that it would void the warranty and why. I think the general perception that is the company will claim the warranty is void if at all possible to avoid paying, without providing a reason. If there was some sort of certification program that could be looked at, where each valid 35" tire, or other size is ok with the Raptor and a brief explanation of why, that could be a useful tool for all parties involved.

The only downside is cost, although I think that could be aftermarket vendor funded, since they benefit from certification. Of course, they would pass costs on to the customer.

As it stands for me personally, I am outside of warranty period. I would consider buying an extended warranty, but the main drawbacks is that I may do mods in the future that void the warranty so what's the point. Something that guides me better to what I can and can't do would be very useful. I don't like the idea that the decision essentially gets left up to the dealership to decide.

As a side note: I don't think it's up to the customer to incriminate himself when it comes to warranties. If he answers all questions honestly, and still gets warranty coverage, than I don't see an ethic s problem. From what I've seen, many companies don't want to mess with customer goodwill over what may be a relatively low cost. It doesn't apply to autos as often as costs are not typically that small, but covering the cost a couple hundred dollar repair could definitely mean I think of your dealership first next time I feel like upgrading.

smurfslayer said:

Just to add on to this, if he’s really trying to get Ford to cover his steering issues with his pretty extensively modified suspension and very public heavy use of the truck in that condition, and returning it to stock or otherwise trying to not own the problems, he’s costing all of us money too, because Ford will eventually pass all that cost on to all of us.

Click to expand...

I’m leading this off with I don’t watch many of his videos, so I may not be up to date.

I think this may be a matter of perspective/personal opinion but I’m not sure I would refer to his suspension as heavily modified given the last items I noticed he had were giesers/eibachs up front and maybe deavers with rpg bumps in the rear. I may be splitting hairs as heavily, in my eyes, would be a long travel front or at a dual shock setup and then taking it in for warranty on the single factory component remaining up front.

As far as his use case, do we have a reasonable standard to compare it to? I know this has been brought up before but what constitutes abuse when the truck is marketed for off road use?

In my eyes I guess it depends on what fails and why. I could see that you could make a case on the 37’s provided increases leverage (6%-7%) and probably (10%-15%) more mass quicker than the new springs on a steering issue.

The wrong situation off road with his documented use together with his mods could make a reasonable person say that could void a warranty on a steering component. As in mods and street driving would “maybe” still be covered and the offroad driving “should” be covered, but together I can make a strong case for no coverage.

Im not condoning sneaking one by the dealer, but then again if I am given a large drink in the drive thru but ordered a medium I would tell them too. So take that for what it is worth, probably nothing.

Also I do not have a warranty and am getting ready to bypass rack my truck so I probably have a much different lens than a daily driver.

Jakenbake said:

I’m leading this off with I don’t watch many of his videos, so I may not be up to date.

I think this may be a matter of perspective/personal opinion but I’m not sure I would refer to his suspension as heavily modified given the last items I noticed he had were giesers/eibachs up front and maybe deavers with rpg bumps in the rear. I may be splitting hairs as heavily, in my eyes, would be a long travel front or at a dual shock setup and then taking it in for warranty on the single factory component remaining up front.

As far as his use case, do we have a reasonable standard to compare it to? I know this has been brought up before but what constitutes abuse when the truck is marketed for off road use?

In my eyes I guess it depends on what fails and why. I could see that you could make a case on the 37’s provided increases leverage (6%-7%) and probably (10%-15%) more mass quicker than the new springs on a steering issue.

The wrong situation off road with his documented use together with his mods could make a reasonable person say that could void a warranty on a steering component. As in mods and street driving would “maybe” still be covered and the offroad driving “should” be covered, but together I can make a strong case for no coverage.

Im not condoning sneaking one by the dealer, but then again if I am given a large drink in the drive thru but ordered a medium I would tell them too. So take that for what it is worth, probably nothing.

Also I do not have a warranty and am getting ready to bypass rack my truck so I probably have a much different lens than a daily driver.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree entirely, my only comment would be, if he doesn't think running 37" tires is unreasonable, why take them off whenever he goes to Ford to have his truck diagnosed? How can they even make an accurate diagnoses when he's giving them incorrect operating parameters.

melvimbe said:

By that I mean a program that states a particular aftermarket part will or will not void the warranty. Or will void part of the warranty as the case may be.

Click to expand...

This is practically impossible. Think of all the stuff they have to certify for DOT, NHTSA and EPA already! There are not many folks on here who were clamoring “give me auto stop start!” but meeting CAFE standards got us that ... addition. I just can’t bring myself to call it a feature. Think of the overhead and delay to market this would entail. It’s just not feasible. I think the new Bronco somewhat addresses this want from the community and I’ll be curious to see if it expands to other models.

melvimbe said:

think the general perception that is the company will claim the warranty is void if at all possible to avoid paying, without providing a reason.

Click to expand...

That’s the point I was trying to make earlier. The presence of an aftermarket part on the truck, in and of itself cannot be grounds for a voided warranty, period. You may have to sue to enforce it, but that’s how it plays out. What’s supposed to happen is an actual analysis that concludes - not coincidental observation - conclusively determines the aftermarket part caused or contributed to the failure. Not some keyboard hero pointing out intricacies of force applied as a factor of increased lever or what have you, an actual engineer in the field.
Stealerships who arbitrarily do this are doing a disservice to all of us. OTOH, most of us know, or should know when a mod could cause an issue. At least for me, if a Tech can explain to me what happened and point to how something could really have caused it that I installed - I pay, period. I’ve gone in a few times and told the SA - I’ve modified this, not a warranty claim here, let me know the cost to fix, talk to you then and had them call me and say - all covered, no trouble here. I’ve had a tech lay out to me how they concluded one of my mods caused a failure and he legit convinced me - I paid no questions asked. I’ve only run into a few SA who were seriously offended by some parts I’d added, I just took the hint and went somewhere else.

melvimbe said:

If he answers all questions honestly, and still gets warranty coverage, than I don't see an ethic s problem. From what I've seen, many companies don't want to mess with customer goodwill over what may be a relatively low cost.

Click to expand...

yeah, mods are common, stealerships want your business most of the time.

DFS said:

I don't disagree entirely, my only comment would be, if he doesn't think running 37" tires is unreasonable, why take them off whenever he goes to Ford to have his truck diagnosed? How can they even make an accurate diagnoses when he's giving them incorrect operating parameters.

Click to expand...

I agree!

KAH24 said:

@FordTechOne

Bigger tires (37” vs. LT 305/70R-17fall far, far, outside of the design parameters for OEMs. Using math, the longer lever of a 37” tire

Heavier tires manufactured by reputable OEMs within reason, in stock OEM sizes (LT 305/70R-17) are well within design parameters—as the length of the lever does not change (the distance from hub to outside).

NOTE: This also impacts every, single, system in the drivetrain—engine/diffs/transfer case/CVs/u-joints/etc.)

Click to expand...

The person that brought this up specified the 37" tire and wheel combination as lighter than oem. For an example I have been looking at a set that is 10lb lighter than oem. I understand leverage but I also understand the affect weight has in a tire and wheel. The twisting forces involved are multiplied as well as unsprung weights overall affect is multiplied 6x I believe. I would argue a 10lb heavier oem diameter tire would be far harder on the drivetrain the 10lb lighter 37. That's a 20lb swing multiplied by? Only 1/2 the height difference will be seen as leverage so 1". Using math can you show the overall affect of each example? I haven't found much on the leverage aspect vs weight yet(looking)

OEM 100lb
Stock diameter +10lb at the tire. 110lb
37" 90lb

@MrT

There are many forces involved, but for simplicity I’ll walk through the “why” which physics/math explains readily.

These 3 formulae all apply to what impact larger rims/tires (wheel assemblies) have on various components of our drivetrain.

Torque= Length x Force (note: our stock 10R Ford Raptor transmission has nominal TQ rating of 590lb/ft)
Moment of Inertia (amount of torque required): Inertia=angular momentum/angular velocity
Rotational inertia (resistance to changing rotation)=mass x radius2

1. Increasing the length of the lever (ie the diameter), raises torque applied significantly.
2. Larger diameter tires also have more rotational inertia placed further from the hub (acceleration/deceleration). A larger diameter tire of the same/similar weight to a OEM diameter tire has more rotational inertia. This requires more work by drivetrain components.
3. Larger diameter tire increases amount of torque required by engine/transmission/drivetrain to turn the larger tires (and/or larger wheels).
4. This impacts the transmission by placing additional strain/load on the internal clutches. This increases internal heat, friction, wear from the increased load. Over time, this is not beneficial to a transmission—or any part of the drivetrain.

NOTE1: A heavier standard diameter tire does impact the suspension, but the larger diameter tire has a greater effect mathematically. This is why Jeep owners “regear” their differentials when going with a bigger rim and/or tire setup. Even after regearing, the problems aren’t fully solved—but it is a step in the correct direction.

NOTE2: Also remember that the further the weight is from the hub center—the greater the multiplication effect. This means—two wheels (and/or tires) can weigh the same, but if one wheel/tire has more weight further from the hub—the greater the forces impacting rotation, torque, etc.

NOTE3: I’m confident that Gen 3 Raptor w/37”s will take this factor into consideration using whatever proprietary approach the engineers choose to implement vs. the standard those on the Raptor running the standard 315/70R 17s.

NOTE4: OEM diameter for Gen 2 Raptor is 315/70R 17. As long as you go with the factory size, you are in safe harbor even if you are a few pounds heavier per tire (as that has far less impact than diameter). Of note—the OEM Ford forged beadlocks are heavier than the OEM Ford cast wheels—but the diameter is the same, thus minimal impact.

In closing, if your truck isn’t under warranty—no big deal. If your truck is under warranty and you don’t intend to keep it long enough for something to break—no big deal. If the transmission has an issue under warranty—I can state with 100% certainty—my OEM wouldn’t cover it at all (factory bumper to bumper, factory extended, or aftermarket warranty).

Ultimately, we are all adults and can do with our vehicles what we wish—while also accepting the consequences of our actions in an ethical manner.

I think a lot of us get sucked into “the mod bug” on assumptions that because Vendor A advertises it, then it’s safe to put on the truck, and that “it’s only a bolt on, what harm can it do?”. Particularly, those of us who ... I want to say ‘grew up on’ modding mustang GT’s and such in the 20th century. Grew up is obviously a misstatement, most of us have very little maturity beyond the mid teen years ;-) Back in those days, bolt ons weren’t that big of a deal and you did get some tangible gains in rwhp, 1/4 mile times but it wasn’t free back then either, just simpler, smaller changes, smaller gains. but we’re also talking about the Mustang - a v8 that was relatively low stressed in the 2-300 crank hp range, naturally aspirated.

The 3.5TT is way, way, way more sophisticated, orders of magnitude more closely controlled by the computer, throttle by wire, ~213 CI with literally 2x the hp of mid 90’s 5.0 GT.

A “tune” will easily eclipse the 10R80’s listed torque rating, particularly aggressive ones. We had users on here posting dyno graphs showing quite impressive numbers. All well and good, and that’s great, we’ve proven the mill and the drive train can handle that power.

At least it can 1-10 times, or the number of times it takes to complete the tune and put down a final 100% power dyno run.
But how safe is it to campaign that power level off road, under Raptor Assault like, hooligan-esque, or knucklehead type conditions?

Sure, you can do a low to mid 4 second sprint to 60 on pavement but how about coming off the apex of a mud/dirt terrain turn where your suspension has to articulate through the range really quickly? How long will the drive train live under those conditions?
Has any tuner done longevity / endurance testing?

All of that said and asked, it’s clear that exceeding the 10R80 rating limit won’t make the truck spontaneously combust. Ford knows that the “half ton limit” is like the pirate code; More like guidelines. Because if you have a pile of cinder blocks to move for a job and 1000 pounds leaves half the truck bed unoccupied, most owners aren’t using a scale, they’re saying ‘what the heck, they’ll fit, so it must be ok’.

KAH24 said:

3. Larger diameter tire increases amount of torque required by engine/transmission/drivetrain to turn the larger tires (and/or larger wheels).
4. This impacts the transmission by placing additional strain/load on the internal clutches. This increases internal heat, friction, wear from the increased load. Over time, this is not beneficial to a transmission—or any part of the drivetrain.

Click to expand...

I don’t disagree with the above quote. I would wonder aloud what parts have been updated in the gen 3 to accommodate the 37 package.

I’m good with 35’s honestly.