Is this a pretty common occurrence with Ford? I've called 3 different dealerships just to verify. They all tell me that the engines are on backorder with no ETA. Anyone have any idea why?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
Modern OE's are doing MUCH less stocking of any and all parts even full engines and are getting closer and closer to on-demand building. No longer are there warehouses with 100s or 1000s of crate engines waiting to be used. This is also why they can more aggressively revise designs even between jobs.
In this case, I think they also underestimated the number of engines that would be required by the individual owner post newcarsale. Not sure they make more profit from a new car than an engine tho :)
Correct - can't keep these engines in stock anywhere. They are being replaced at an alarming rate.
I keep hearing about failures but am not seeing complaints about them that seem to exceed any other engines. Engines fail, it happens. Would be curious to know the actual failure percentage as opposed to simple statements. Which sizes seem to be the worst?
Despite these engines having been out for what, 7 years now? there is still a learning curve associated with the owner involvement required. I am sure that a campaign to increase owner awareness would serve to minimize engine failure incidents. But it may not be beneficial from a marketing point of view, no one wants to admit to a design that is indeed NOT "set and forget".
Quote from: 93Cobra on August 21, 2016, 06:49:47 PM
Correct - can't keep these engines in stock anywhere. They are being replaced at an alarming rate.
Easy to make such claims...... factual data always preferred around these parts.
I agree with Fusion.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Agree with AGF & BPD. It's becoming common, and we have training on it at my company, to utilize a "lean manufacturing" model, which is derived from the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Production_System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Production_System). TPS was developed by Taiichi Ohno & Eiiji Toyoda, and it revolutionized modern manufacturing processes. Parts on shelves cost money, so you want to keep as little on hand as is feasible. For the business-minded folks among us, the concepts behind TPS & lean manufacturing are worth a read.
Just in time manfacturing is great when your original design is solid. But look at how long it took Ford to tool up for the fuel tank recall on the Edge. And ask the many people whose vehicles got impounded for months after failing inspection. When something fails, it fails big.
I don't know anything about the recall you reference. But looking at it from Ford's perspective, would it have been better for them to have a bunch of non-conforming parts on the shelves (wasted money)? Tooling takes time, no doubt, but I would think if you need to manufacture new parts, you don't want a bunch of old parts that won't work.
I agree. But no practice comes without a downside, which should be taken into consideration by whoever chooses said practice. And since the automobile is such a large and obvious part of people's lives here in America, the impact of a faulty (and critical) part is just as obvious and deeply felt. If the manufacturer steps up and takes responsibility to help the customer transition through the waiting period, then the practice has worked. If they leave the customer hanging, it brings into question their practice, justifiably or not.
You can ask my customers about the difference. The company I represent used to have millions of dollars of inventory. A smooth talking IT company convinced the owner of the HUGE savings of JIT inventory. We used to produce to replenish inventory. We now produce to fill orders. We are supposed to have a 3-5 day lead time with the "new" system.
MAJOR problem is that even with countless suppliers they run out of "input" to feed the system. Needless to say that the "input" comes from overseas. Net result is that we either have the item ready to ship in 3-5 days or it's out for over 60 days.
Our average fill time has tanked over the past few years and tons of retailers have dropped the product line entirely. I have an MBA and am very familiar with all types of inventory/production management. When I was in school they heavily promoted JIT and similar systems. I hope that it is a passing fad that goes away quickly. I have friends in other industries and they report the same problems. It simply only works when everything operates perfectly and that is NEVER possible.
Been watching this for years since the days we started seeing publications about Toyota putting the pull handles on the line that a worker could pull to stop the whole thing (sometime in the 90s IIRC).
I highly doubt its a passing fad, what is more likely is that every industry will feel the pain and fight with it until the process is working well. Traditional stock based manufacturing was not perfect in the beginning and still is not. It took decades for the initial processes to be hammered out though we forget that as it was nearly 100 years ago at this point.
It simply makes no sense to invest in inventory but like other modern agile/on-demand processes its painful to get started and may be more expensive in the short run until supply chains are managed properly. IMO part of the re-shoring of labor and factories is in part due to the fact that getting parts from the east on a regular basis to fill a JIT supply chain is difficult. Its cheaper to pay western wages with a heavy amount of automation and be properly JIT than it is to stock a warehouse.
Still curious about the claim made in regards to the 3.5 EB allegedly being replaced "at an alarming rate".
That almost makes me chuckle just typing that farce out.
The 3.5 EB has been a very stout design for FMC. Nowhere near the amount of failures as being so haphazardly alleged.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Quote from: bpd1151 on August 22, 2016, 11:55:53 AM
Still curious about the claim made in regards to the 3.5 EB allegedly being replaced "at an alarming rate".
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Please don't hold your breath waiting for any sort of documentation to back up said claim.
I'm sure it has nothing to do with JIT manufacturing or the fact that the platform is simply 9 years old and succumbing to end of intended life failures. /sarc.
The company I represent has purchased 4 new factories and runs 2 in China in an attempt to fix the JIT problems. They have been battling the change for about 10 years and still have not succeeded in my opinion.
The thing that many don't realize about JIT systems is that you need to have a system that is able to produce at a considerably higher volume than if you are stocking inventory to account for the spikes.
If producing to inventory, your system only needs to be able to produce at the average sales rate. It can just plug along and keep working on stock. With JIT, the system needs to be able to produce at a rate to meet your absolute PEAK demand. That demand can also increase at any time. Once a JIT system gets behind, it's basically screwed for days or weeks.
Did that inventory actually cost more than having to double the production capability? Not to mention the need for tons of part time/seasonal/temp workers to cover peak times? What about the cost of unhappy customers?
I am NOT a fan of JIT. IMHO, there needs to be a crossbreed system where inventory is kept on a limited basis to help pad the system and even the flow of production.
Sorry, back to the original topic...
I would suspect that Ford, like other manufacture's, just underestimate the need for all parts. It took weeks before I was able to get a simple fuel pump gasket when they replaced the valve cover gaskets. That was with help from Lincoln.
We know that production have 3.5 EB vehicles hasn't ceased. I suspect that, like my gasket issue, it's just that all production is going to meet the demand for new vehicles. It is probably more a sign of the popularity of the vehicles than the need for replacement motors.
https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6007-35T (Click on chat )IDK. Z
Is that the transverse or the longitudinal (F150) version? The throttle body appears to be oriented incorrectly for the transverse.
That's the F150/longitudinal version. Look at the hp/tq ratings. I saw this page and immediately thought too, HEY, we got transverse crates available, but sadly, no.
Here are a couple of articles for ya'll and it looks like there doing pretty well especially the PI Interceptor,supply and demand maybe!!!.1) Chicago assembly plant.http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id=5384 (http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id=5384) 2)PI Interceptor http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id=5475 (http://www.hendonpub.com/resources/article_archive/results/details?id=5475)
Whatever the case may be, it really sucks. At this point, there isn't even an ETA on getting one, at least according to the 3 dealerships I've spoken with and a zone rep. I understand supply and demand, though probably not to the degree that some of you do. Even if they'd be able to tell me that they are 60 days out from being able to ship them, that would be acceptable. I would at least be able to have a plan of action on what to do. I guess I just don't understand.
On a side note, a customer of our's bought a 2012 Mustang GT with a hurt engine. It had a lower end knock. Upon teardown, he found it had spun a rod bearing. He called Ford first to see about just ordering a new crank. He was told they are on backorder with no ETA. What gives?
I'm not blaming the ecoboost platform for being weak. If it was, Ford probably wouldn't be putting it in basically everything. But I would have to think that with as long as Ford has been around, they have collected years upon years of data. And one of those data being the average warranty rate/replacement rate on an engine. If their average warranty rate is, say, 1%, would it not make sense to produce an additional .5-.75%....or even 1%...over and above the engines just going into new cars?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk
The challenge is ending up holding the bag on a bunch of inventory that you can't move, esp if you are using JIT to change things job to job and year to year like they seem to be heading too. Ford has done better than I think even they have expected, sure the pundits wrote some articles about slower sales last quarter but in comparison to the rest of american automakers a slow quarter for ford would be an amazing quarter for GM.
One of the biggest issues with JIT at this time is it does not handle large equilibrium shifts very well. It may take a few years but I expect they will scale with demand in time (further automation will help here IMO). It's just a pain for the time being. As for why you can't get any lead times on parts...I have not been using Ford stuff for long but I get the impression that communication could be a lot better between corporate both internally and between the regional and sales chain folks.