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.  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.