If this was Toyota with the tire cover up,I would be giving them hell, just like I am currently giving them hell for the grille on the new 2001 Tacoma.
No I didn't. But 31" is the largest I can go without a body lift. Some of the older explorer's ('91 thru '94) can only accept a 30" X 9.5" without a lift. it depends on the year and trim level.
I have a dislike for Ford and all their products, since all my experiences have been negative with Ford. I have had 3 Fords (Taurus, F150 4x4, and Ford Mark III van) and they were all shop ridden vehicles with low milage. On my 92 Ford van I had a near fatal accident when the tire peeled away and blew out back in 1996. I firmly believe that Ford has known about the problem for a few years and I hope GM gains in market share.
I just purchase a Tacoma 4x4 extended cab V6. I love it, first truck and I am never going back to cars. Now I need some knowledge in maintaining it. It is 98 model excellent condition with 43,000 miles on it. Any recommendations outside of the norm other than proper oil changes, alignments, and tune ups. Any information anyone can lend would be really appreciated, thank you.
You are a sucker for P.R. of companies, my friend.
Wednesday, August 30, 2000
Ken Rait - Oregon Live Op/Ed
It's almost a tragic comedy that timber industry officials and their political lackeys are using this year's fire season to call for increased logging in our national forests.
It's tragic that lives and homes are being threatened and lost. Comic because it is precisely the chain-saw therapy that the timber industry promotes as the fire remedy that caused this level of conflagrations in the first place.
While newspapers are aglow with stories about this year's fires, the acreage burned is well within the recent range of variability, according to the National Interagency Fire Center.
The difference this year, however, is the timber industry-induced hysteria designed to use the fires as the latest excuse to log our forests ("Forest managers must wake up and smell the smoke," Aug. 17; "Selective logging is the way to save our forests," Aug. 25).
To keep the federal forest gravy train chugging over the backs of unsuspecting taxpayers, the timber industry is attempting to politically capitalize on the fire season for which it is largely responsible. No matter what the ailment, the industry's prescription is always the same: more logging.
The fires across the northern Rockies have confirmed what fire ecologists have been saying for years. The most intense fires that are threatening lives and property were human-caused and in areas that were previously logged and had roads built across them.
Logging operations routinely clearcut large patches of forest or remove just the larger, more economically viable trees. The native forests are commonly replaced by denser stands of smaller trees surrounded by slash and other ground litter that is a byproduct of the logging operations. These conditions are exacerbated by a wrong-headed, timber industry-sponsored fire policy to snuff out all fires. Add to this mix intense heat and no rain, and conditions become ripe for the types of fires we are witnessing this summer.
Fire intensities have increased as a result of decades of logging and fire suppression across most of our forested landscape. The U.S. Department of Agriculture says more than 85 percent of the forests most at risk to fire are in the previously developed (roaded, logged) sections of our national forests.
The timber industry's alleged concern about the condition or health of our forests is transparent. When the industry speaks of "selective thinning," it is talking about removing the saleable, larger trees, which are precisely the ones that shouldn't be removed if they really are interested in improving forest health. Alternatively, the timber industry isn't the least bit interested in the type of understory thinning that may actually alleviate fire threats since such operations aren't profitable.
The timber industry has even gone so far as to irresponsibly point a finger at the Clinton administration for causing these fires. It is the industry that has removed the larger trees from the forest landscape because of their economic viability. It is the industry that has pushed this administration and others, Democrat and Republican, dating back more than 50 years to suppress fires. From their perspective, fire is not part of the ecological cycle, but a demon that threatens their inventory.
The timber industry's public relations strategy is terribly shortsighted. The last time the industry played this Chicken Little routine was the early 1990s, when it predicted doom for the economy of the Pacific Northwest due to reduced federal timber offerings. With their latest "log to stop the fire" salvo, the industry only risks losing what little credibility it has left with the public.
The industry and its lackeys ought to realize that if they want to play the blame game, they are playing with fire and will get burned.
Go to bottom of page, click on bitterroot fires, then bittierrot phots of next page.
Notice how the big old growth pines survuve the blaze? THESE are the trees that slow and cause smaler fires. THESE trees need to be in place.
But it's a shame that these are the very tress the timber industry seeks out.
Fires are caused by drought, lightning, and exhaust sparks, not by roadless wilderness.
For example, the Boundary WAters Canoe area wilderness in Minnesota is a 2.6 million acre roadless area(when combined withe the adjacent Quetico wilderness).
Last year, there was a storm that leveled 400,000 acres of trees. It was an epic storm.
But wait....why no fires? Because drought and lightning cause fires, NOT roadless wilderness.
Quit falling for the propganda of companies that have a financial interest in all of this. Geeze man, think for yourself.
I agree with eagle63. The firestone tire problem is firestone's problem. Ford took the initiative to recall the tires even though it is hurting their pocket book and the tires recall should be done by firestone. Ford did not have to pay for a single replacement tire, but they did. And those that say that it was the explorer design that caused the tires to blow, thats a bunch of bull. If the firestone tires were put on 4runners, it would have made no diffrence to the tires. They would have peeled apart anyways and with the low crash rating (i'm assuming because of the tacoma rating) on the 4runner, more deaths could have been caused. Regardless, firestone is at fault. Not Ford, or any other auto maker that might have used firestone tires.
I agree with eagle63. The firestone tire problem is firestone's problem. Ford took the initiative to recall the tires even though it is hurting their pocket book and the tires recall should be done by firestone. Ford did not have to pay for a single replacement tire, but they did. And those that say that it was the explorer design that caused the tires to blow, thats a bunch of bull. If the firestone tires were put on 4runners, it would have made no diffrence to the tires. They would have peeled apart anyways and with the low crash rating (i'm assuming because of the tacoma rating) on the 4runner, more deaths could have been caused. Regardless, firestone is at fault. Not Ford, or any other auto maker that might have used firestone tires.
I agree with eagle63. The firestone tire problem is firestone's problem. Ford took the initiative to recall the tires even though it is hurting their pocket book and the tires recall should be done by firestone. Ford did not have to pay for a single replacement tire, but they did. And those that say that it was the explorer design that caused the tires to blow, thats a bunch of bull. If the firestone tires were put on 4runners, it would have made no diffrence to the tires. They would have peeled apart anyways and with the low crash rating (i'm assuming because of the tacoma rating) on the 4runner, more deaths could have been caused. Regardless, firestone is at fault. Not Ford, or any other auto maker that might have used firestone tires.
Just routine maintenance to your truck is required. If yours is an automatic I would recommend a transmission flush and new trans fluid change every 26K. Ditto for the front & rear axles . . .
Raciot is backed by Bush Jr's campaign. Bush jr. is more right wing than moderate.
Texas has the worst air pollution in the nation. HOuston has the worst air quality in the U.S.A. The rivers in Texas are the nations worst.
Bush Jr. is an extremist because the emission laws in TExas are VOLUNTARY.
Myself, I am for the preservation of our last wild areas, and for a balanced, healthy economy. I am for selective logging on our national forests by local logging companies with vested long term interests in the local area.
This is also the view of most Americans today.
The roadless INitiative SET A RECORD for PUBLIC COMMENTS!
The vast majority supported the roadles initiative. That is hardly extreme.
Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican, and was the biggest "land grabber" of all time. If it want for him, we wouldnt have national forests:
Ban on U.S. forest roads draws record public outcry
July 12, 2000 Web posted at: 12:34 p.m. EDT (1634 GMT)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A Clinton administration plan to ban roads for mining, logging and other traffic in many U.S. Forests has sparked a record 500,000 comments from the public, with most either backing the proposal or saying it doesn't go far enough to protect the environment.
The administration announced a plan in May to safeguard 43 million acres of pristine national forests for hiking, bird watching, cross country skiing, horseback riding, hunting, fishing and other nature activities.
The U.S. Forest Service proposal would affect about one-fourth of the total 192 million acres in the national forest system
The proposal, which is expected to be finalized in December, drew an unprecedented number of letters, e-mails and faxes.
"A record number of citizens have participated in the public comment period for the Forest Service's roadless plan, expressing their overwhelming support for protecting the remaining roadless areas from roads and logging," Rep. Maurice Hinchey, a New York Democrat, told reporters on Tuesday.
The outpouring of letters surpassed other high-profile rulemakings by federal agencies, including U.S. Agriculture Department's plan for organic food labels last year and the Food and Drug Administration's regulation of cigarettes in 1996.
The road ban proposal is drawing criticisms from all sides.
The American Forest & Paper Association, a trade group, contends that roadbuilding is necessary to provide forest access for recreation and fire prevention. Also, some Americans need to reach their privately- owned land using roads.
Lawmakers in western states that are home to large forest areas have also criticized the proposal for failing to seek congressional input.
Meanwhile, some environmental advocates and even religious groups say that it does not go far enough to protect virgin U.S. land.
"The current plan is not acceptable, as it contains loopholes big enough to drive a logging truck through," said Gene Karpinski, executive director of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
Hinchey said that while the proposal aims to protect the forests, it is inadequate because it does not protect the Tongass National Forest in Alaska, the nation's largest national forest.
"By excluding the Tongass and allowing continued logging in the roadless areas, the president is passing up an historic opportunity to protect our national treasures," Hinchey said.
The Clinton administration proposal would allow continued logging in roadless areas by helicopters and cable systems. About 300 million board feet of timber sales planned for the next five years would be prevented by the road-building ban, according to the Wilderness Society.
The public comment period for the proposal ends on Monday.
More than 380,000 miles of roads already exist in American national forests and many of the roads are badly in need of repair, according to the Clinton administration. The proposed ban would apply to large parcels of forest land that do not have roads because of their rugged terrain or environmental sensitivity.
Are u supporting the closing of 4x4 roads??? If u are, u gotta be crazy. It's hard enough to find trails, we dont need more closure. Where i live, riding an irrigation ditch is about as close as u can get to 4-wheeling without being on private property. We dont even have mud. The once or twice a year that it rains, the dirt roads turn into a substance otherwise known as pottery clay. It's not very easy to 'wheel through clay. If u really want to go through it without a winch or tow strap, u better leave your toyota or ranger at home. U need something with a big block v8 and 37+ inch boggers. Even then, it doesn't take boggers very long to get boggers completely packed. Our mud races are almost funny. A Chevy K30 with a built 454 and 44" boggers only goes 15 ft into the clay before getting stuck and blowing the engine. Ok, sorry, off topic. Point is, we need more trails to be opened, not closed. Spoog, if i misunderstood u, then disregard everything above. And then explain what u meant. Remember,this is not a political debate. Get back to trucks.
Im not supporting roads to be CLOSED. But I am supporting that no more roads are built through what little roadless areas we have left.
The USFS chieif just finished the Roadless INitiative. It doesn't close roads, it makes sure no more roads are built inot our last tiny bit of wilderness. A Toyota Tacoma with 33's and a locker will get farther in that mud than that Chevy will.
The Congressional Research Service, an arm of Congress, just reported that there was no relationship between the recent decline in logging on federal lands and the severity of forest fires.
MORE DEATHS The announcement comes one day after the government said 26 more U.S. traffic deaths - for a total of 88 - are under investigation in connection with recalled Firestone tires. Meantime, Venezuelan authorities have recommended criminal prosecution of Ford Motor Co. and Bridgestone/Firestone for deaths there. Firestone tires are standard equipment on Explorers and other Ford vehicles. Congress prepared for hearings featuring testimony from the heads of both companies, while Firestone was trying to avoid a strike by 8,000 workers. Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater said Friday the Clinton administration will confer with Congress to determine whether manufacturers should be required to notify the U.S. government when they recall products abroad, as Ford did with Firestone tires a year ago. “As relates to the international recall, we were a bit concerned to learn that we found out about that much later,” Slater said on NBC’s “Today.” “It would have been good to have that information earlier. It could have prompted us to take action a bit earlier.” Advertisement
Quick Gifts Swimwear Books Music & Video Computing Electronics Toys & Games More . . .
NHTSA has received more than 1,400 complaints about the Firestone tires, including reports of 88 deaths and more than 250 injuries that reportedly were the result of blowouts, tread separation and other tire defects. NHTSA is examining all 47 million Wilderness AT, ATX and ATX II tires. Congress is holding a hearing on the matter next week, and Ford chief executive Jac Nasser announced Thursday that he would testify, reversing his earlier decision not to attend. Bridgestone/Firestone chief executive Masatoshi Ono also will appear at the Wednesday hearing before two House Commerce subcommittees.
Venezuela to investigate Ford, Firestone CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Venezuela's Congress on Friday moved to launch an investigation into fatal road accidents allegedly caused by faulty Bridgestone/Firestone tires mounted on Ford Explorers.
The action follows up on a report by Venezuela's consumer protection agency that holds both companies responsible for at least 46 deaths.
The congressional investigation, spearheaded by members of President Hugo's leftist political party, parallels a criminal probe by the country's attorney general's office that could result in felony charges against executives of the Venezuelan branches of Ford Motor Co. and Bridgestone/Firestone Inc.
The legal maneuverings in Venezuela also coincide with growing action against the two companies in the United States. On Friday, the Clinton administration issued a consumer warning saying about 1.4 million Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. tires are susceptible to tread separation problems. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a statement saying the decision to put out the ''consumer advisory'' came after Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. refused to expand its voluntary 3-week-old recall beyond 6.5 million tires.
Meanwhile, a lawyer and victim of a 1998 accident in a Ford Explorer said Friday he will seek an order from Venezuela's Supreme Court requiring both companies to alert the public about alleged defects in both Explorers and Firestone's Wilderness tires.
Legislator Ibrahim Velasquez, a member of Chavez's Fifth Republic Movement, said he would motion for Congress to appoint a special committee to investigate the consumer protection agency's allegations that Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone engaged in a cover-up when they became aware of the tire problems. Chavez's party controls 60% of Congress.
''There is a shared responsibility in the sense that both companies knew about the situation,'' Velasquez said on Friday after meeting with the president of the consumer protection agency, known as Indecu.
The Indecu report also said the design of the suspension on Ford Explorers contributed to the fatal accidents and accused Ford of recommending a pressure too low for the Wilderness tires.
Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone face a congressional probe in the United States, where government safety engineers suspect that the tire defects could have been responsible for 88 deaths and more than 250 injuries. Ford began replacing Bridgestone/Firestone tires for free in Venezuela in May.
Ford officials denied Indecu leader Samuel Ruh's allegation that they misled customers in Venezuela, insisting they addressed the problem appropriately and on time.
''I just want to emphasize that the accusation from the Venezuelan government official that Ford Venezuela lied is completely unfounded,'' Ford chief executive Jac Nasser said Thursday.
Franklin Hoetz, a Venezuelan victim of a Ford Explorer crash, said he would file a motion by Monday asking the Venezuelan Supreme Court to order both the car maker and tire company to warn the Venezuelan public about the suspected defects in both Explorers and Bridgestone/Firestone tires. On Friday, the Venezelan government's National Ombudsman said it would participate in soliciting the Supreme Court's action.
''It's a matter of preventing more deaths and new tragedies,'' Hoetz said on Friday.
Hoetz, a corporate lawyer who until months ago worked for Ford, was on his way to his ranch in 1998 when a tire blew out on his Explorer, causing the vehicle to turn over three times. Both his daughter and son-in-law were badly injured and their 20-year-old nanny died.
Hoetz at first attributed the accident to bad luck until he read about Ford's recall of Firestone tires on their Explorers in May. He has since dropped the car maker as a client and has filed a lawsuit against Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone in a Miami court on behalf of his family and the nanny's relatives.
The Indecu report says that Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone secretly agreed in 1999 to add a protective nylon layer to Wilderness tires after accidents in Venezuela related to those tires became more frequent. Meanwhile, unsuspecting costumers continued to drive with tires missing the layer.
Federal investigators said Thursday that they now have reports of 88 deaths linked to the failure of Firestone tires.
Also Thursday, Venezuela's consumer protection agency said defects in Firestone tires on Ford Motor vehicles are linked to at least 46 deaths in that country.
In the USA, complaints about the tires filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) almost doubled to 1,400 from 750 on Aug. 15. Injuries tied to the tires climbed to 250 from 100. When NHTSA began its investigation in early May, it had reports of four deaths.
On Aug. 9, Firestone recalled 6.5 million ATX, ATX II and Wilderness AT tires, most on Ford Explorers, because of problems with tread separation.
The NHTSA data include at least 58 complaints of problems and five injuries that occurred since the recall. Separately, police have reported at least three deaths since the recall.
"We take every accident and every injury very, very seriously," says Bridgestone/Firestone Executive Vice President John Lampe. But he added that some of the accidents likely involve road hazards or other factors not connected to tread separation.
Ford CEO Jacques Nasser said, "I'd like you to know we're sorry that these tires are on our vehicles, and I'm depressed about the resulting anxiety, injuries and deaths."
In Caracas, officials with Indecu, Venezuela's consumer protection agency, recommended that the country's attorney general file criminal charges against both Bridgestone/Firestone and Ford in connection with the tire problems on Explorers.
The agency also said Bridgestone should recall all the Wilderness AT tires in Venezuela, not just those on Explorers.
Ford, which also has said Bridgestone should recall all the tires, has replaced the Firestones on about 60% of the 30,000 Explorers in Venezuela.
The agency also recommended that Ford improve the suspension system on Explorers sold there since 1996.
Nasser said Ford will cooperate with the Venezuelan authorities, but it's "a tire issue, without question. It is not a vehicle issue."
Bridgestone said it, too, will cooperate, but it isn't planning a recall at this point.
Nasser also defended Ford's decision to replace tires abroad before taking action in the USA.
He said actions in the Middle East, Asia and South America were done before Ford fully understood the extent of the problem and based on information from Firestone that tires were not defective.
When your at the top its normal for anyone and everyone to take a swipe at you when somthing goes wrong. It has already been proven over and over the Explorer is not at fault, there are no design flaws. There are many, many Explorers old and new with all types of other brands of tires on them that have never had any problems, explain this please. Please, Please, stop the long posts and the cutting and pasting, links are much, much more friendly. The Explorer will have a slight downturn in sales but it won't hamper its number one standing for long. The 2002 looks very potent with its new all aluminum v8, new suspension, drivetrain and interior also. By the way, I saw two NEW Explorers on my way home tonight...
As a consumer, I would like to know where you got your information regarding your statement,
"It has already been proven over and over the Explorer is not at fault, there are no design flaws."
Could you post any links to this fact? I think the Venezuelan government would also be interested. In fact, even Ford since it would get them off the hook with Indecu.
was posted in topic #3044 in SUV's by meredith. I just thought you might be interested. BTW, I copied and pasted this one....
Front Porch Philosopher (meredith) Sun 03 Sep '00 (08:06 AM)
Posts are DELETED for VIOLATING the Participant's Agreement....
You may NOT post copyrighted material in this forum. Even if it is attributed and you use "quotations," you MAY be violating the "Fair Use" doctrine - which would subject you to legal liability - an issue which we would prefer NOT to be involved in. I may NOT be as paranoid in enforcing this as I should, but it IS Edmunds policy. You may post crosslinks to other material, but it is inappropriate, and possibly illegal for you to copy material and repost it here.
Edmunds does not care to find itself in the censor role generally speaking, but we will do what we must in self defense. Edmunds does not, and has not deleted material because a manufacturer found it objectionable. If we did THAT we have to delete half our topics!.... "Let's be careful out there!"
Front Porch Philosopher SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
oboyne, think, just for a minute. How many Explorers have been sold since its introduction? Thousands upon Thousands upon Thousands. The Explorer and Ford are being singled out because Ford uses Firestone Tires on a large percentage of its vehicles. The Explorer is being singled out because its outsells all other SUV's in its class. As much as everyone loves to take swipes at Ford, the Explorer is their bread and butter, why would they continue to manufacture a vehicle that is dangerous to the public? Also, there is a commercial out on TV showing the President of Ford saying the Explorer is not at fault. There are thousands upon Thousands of Ford Explorers on the road today with tires other than Firestones that have not had any problems..
Your statement was that the Explorer was proven not to be responsible. I've been reading along with everyone else who has Firestones. I just thought that you had evidence that supported your position that Explorer was proven over and over that it was not responsible for the deaths. The fact that the chairman of Ford says it's not responsible is debateable. I would leave it to congress and the Venezuelan government to sort through that one. Similarly to those tobacco companies...remember that one?
In your analysis, you stated that thousands upon thousands of Explorers without the Firestones have not had any problems. This is true. Also, we can look at it another way...there are thousands and thousands of Yukons, Tahoes, Expeditions, Excursions, Landcruisers, and Jimmys out there with Firestones and they have not had any problems. Doesn't that make you a little bit curious as to why? Maybe, just maybe, it has to do with the 26 psi that Ford recommends with the Explorers that have the Firestones as that combination was prone to rollovers with 30 psi in the tires....
Any statements that we make should be supported by facts to lend any credibility. What I have mentioned above is common knowledge that anyone following the Firestone/Ford issue would know about. Regardless of this, I'm sure Congress and the Venezuelan goverment will pursue it to hopefully everyones satisfaction.
Where do u get the idea that there are thousands and thousands of other suv's with firestone tires. Explorers are just about the only vehicles i have seen with the bad firestone tires, and there's not very many people that will chunk their old tires and go buy firestone tires. Ford is very close to being innocent. Victim of a bad buisness deal. 5$ says firestone wont stay in buisness very long. And they are trying to bring ford down with them. Spoog, a toytoa with 33's will not beat the chevy. Well, it will now, cause the chevy's busted, but it still wont make it. u see, clay is not like mud. Clay sticks, then builds up. The aforementioned (big word) chevy got his entire fender wells packed with clay, then since his tire's wouldn't turn, he tried using more power and succeeded in getting smoke to stream from under his hood. A winch is really the only way to go. Or in that case, they had a john deer tractor.
this banter about tire psi is ridiculous. a difference of 4 psi from what the manufacturer recommends will not cause tire failure. one would have to severely underinflate a tire to cause seperation. The young man who died in texas had his tires at around 17 psi. -that's severely underflated. 26 psi is not. BTW, if the explorer is at fault, then how come all the explorer's with goodyear tires don't have problems???
spoog- why would a tacoma with 33" tires fair better? those big tires would make an already underpowered truck even more sluggish.
Ok, I will search the net for links saying the Explorer is not built with flaws. Firestone is to blame here, Ford is just getting the raw deal of putting them on the number one selling SUV. Clay, I can tell you all about clay. Clay builds up, does not fly off like normal mud. After a while your tires turn into just mud slicks. And if you don't watch it it will build up enough in your fender wells to actually stop tires from rotating. I have seen it on even full size 4x4's with V8's. There are places that 4x4's just aren't meant to go. I haven't done this with my Ranger, but have had to get out in mud and scrap the clay out of the tread, not fun.... By the way, how about we transfer the Firestone/Explorer debate to the Explorer room?
Apparently, the combination of the Explorer with the Firestones are causing the mishaps. Ford went the route of 26 psi when Firestone is saying 30 psi. Why is that? Could it be due to the fact that the Explorers in test had a tendency to roll over with the Firestones at 30 psi? excuse me, let me rephrase that...the explorers had a better chance of rolling over at 30 psi than at 26. So the tire manufacturer says 30, Ford says 26 and people die. So who's to blame? Have you read any articles for any other vehicles rolling over with Firestones? I think both Firestone and Ford are to blame, obviously you do not. As I had stated earlier, our opinions doesn't really matter. Point is congress and the Venezuelan government will have their investigations underway...and I doubt that Ford will get away with this one.
guitardude
My statement that there are thousands of suv's out there with Firestones is a mute point. Regardless of how many there are...ask the next question...how many suvs other than the explorer have rolled over with thread seperation from their Firestones. I'm sure with the exposure the explorer is getting someone with an suv must have had thread seperation with the Firestones but I guess they just don't have the time to report it....or it wasn't a big deal since the suv didn't roll...
vince8
good luck on your quest to find a link that states the explorer is not at fault. In your post #519 you stated,
"It has already been proven over and over the Explorer is not at fault, there are no design flaws."
Your statement was the only reason that I posted in this topic. I just couldn't believe someone would make a statement and therefore had to question it. Obviously you have nothing to support it...so I'll accept that and move on... BTW, are you related to dodgeram7?
I understand being brand loyal....but blindly loyal? Now would be a good time to buy Ford stocks...well maybe not. They will hit an all time low when congress and Venezuela finish their investigations... just my opinion...
As far as Ford being at fault because of the Explorers design, I doubt that you can find supporting evidence except for the fact that it's an SUV and will roll much easier that a car and even most trucks. The reason that Ford is being implicated in the deaths, which Vince just ignores and the others may have missed, is the fact that Ford has allegedly known about the tire problems for years but chose to cover it up. We're seeing an average of about one tire related Explorer accident a week now. Do you really think that this just started? Ford paid off victims families to keep quit (I saw some of the lawyers on TV)and it's kind of hard for Ford to deny their previous tire recalls in 8 or so other countries way before CBS exposed the problem here. This has been going on for some time and no one has any real figure on how many tire failures there have really been. If the current trend is typical than the number is probably quite large.
ak "is the fact that Ford has allegedly known about the tire problems for years but chose to cover it up" ... not to defend but it was and still is a firestone issue. It would not be good buissness for Ford to rat out Firestone. There are some ethics in the buisiness world. What would have been proper is to switch brands when they learned that they were not using a quality product.
"Ford paid off victims families to keep quit (I saw some of the lawyers on TV)" I am quite sure "HUSH" clauses are standard in all legal contracts in which ANY product fails. For a hush clause to be used the case would have to be settled out of court. Ford Pays them a sum of money, and what ford gets for this money in NO bad publicity. With what is being said now (that it is a tire issue not a explorer issue) it is more than likely that ford would win any case brought against it. But they Settle OUT of court so there is absolutely NO publicity at all....
Any and all companies use "Hush" clauses in ANY liability settlement.. its common sense.
If you look at the number of accidents that have happened in Explorers in just the last few weeks, it's probably pretty safe to say that the problem is not suddenly getting worse. That means that there are most likely hundreds of accidents that Ford has covered up before CBS News exposed the situation. It's been going on for years and Ford should have, at the very least, started using a different tire on their new vehicles. Ford's doing their best to pass the entire buck but they definitely share some of the blame. Someone mentioned earlier that no one else used Firestone tires on their SUV's. Toyota does however, they use a larger tire (Wilderness AT -P265). That could also be an issue. Is the P235 tire a marginal size for that size of vehicle adding to the problem since we don't see the same problem on the Toyota? I'm sure lots more will come out as the investigation continues. Personally, Ford's attitude bothers me and that, added to my Mustang poor design and quality experiences, makes Ford off my list in the future.
There are people called federal regulaters,If any one is responsible for the ongoing of defective tires its them,You can't blame Ford for Firestone Tires.Firestone is a different company and they supplied a product to another company.BTW firestone is a Japanese owned company,its probably the slave labor thing that the Japanese like to do.Maybe because of hiroshima they thought they'd get us back by selling defective tires.
You are starting to sound like vince8. Maybe you can't blame Ford for Firestone tires, but you can blame them for continuing to use them. And also the fact that they started to replace them 2 years ago overseas but only recently here in the US. Funny thing is they are currently shipping new vehicles with recalled tires?
I think everyone is using Ford as a scapegoat.Funny thing why didn't Firestone stop making them if they were dangerous.The ford vehicles aren't the only ones that used them,other car manufacturers used them also.Just happens to be that Ford sells the most vehicles so they are made the scapegoat.Would if it was Toyota that had the problems and you can't say it wouldn't happen,because a Japanese company is what started it all by selling defected tires.
bought Firestone (American company). I think whoever was behind the buyout is knee deep in .... A good case of guilt by ownership. Sort of like MB buying Chrysler. The what if about Toyota is exactly that...no rollovers with the Firestones. Only ford explorers. Could it be coincidence? Don't think so...
be expanding the recall to include "other" sizes. They are informing people to keep their receipts. Apparently, they are not satisfied with Firestone's handling of the recall and that it should include other sizes that were made at the Illinois plant.
misfit- I really think it's irrelevant that firestone is japanese owned. stuff like this can happen to any corporation based in any country. As I've said before, even though i'm a ford fan, I think they probably are to blame for not doing something sooner. -and if so, I hope they are penalized. BUT, the reality is that ford will probably come away from all of this relatively unscathed. due to their constant TV ads with Jac Nasser and newspaper updates they are trying to keep a good PR with the public. firestone on the other hand hasn't done squat. I think stuff like that ends up making a difference in how these situations play out. oh well, just my observations.
Ford will take a hit though. Read this morning that foot traffic in Ford showrooms is down 12%. Ford has also said that if it hears complaints and concerns from its customers over not buying Ford trucks/SUV's because of Firestone tires, Ford will drop Firestone and go to another brand of tire. I personally believe this will happen anyway. I know I will not buy another Ford with Firestone tires. If I were to buy one I would negotiate a different brand of tire be put on the vehicle.
IMHO. First the infamous "Firestone 500" in the 70s and now this fiasco. I don't see how Firestone can possibly survive. I wonder if Bridgestone will get pulled into the slime along with Firestone. I guess we'll see over the next few months.
I think its irrevelant that firestone is japanese owned also.I do think Ford is being used somewhat as a scapegoat,for all the comlaints that have happened some one must have known either from Ford or Firestone.
WHAT'S THE TITLE OF THIS TOPIC? I scrolled through 60+ posts only to read useless (imho) info on Firestone tires. Yes, its tragic what's happened to these 80 odd people, no question.
But, geez, I thought I was going to get to read comparisons between TRUCKS!
Comments
The Washington Times is also owned by.....guess who?
Mr. Mooney himself. Bush senior speaks at fund raisers for MR. Mooney.
Wednesday, August 30, 2000
Ken Rait - Oregon Live Op/Ed
It's almost a tragic comedy that timber industry officials and their political
lackeys are using this year's fire season to call for increased logging in our
national forests.
It's tragic that lives and homes are being threatened and lost. Comic because
it is precisely the chain-saw therapy that the timber industry promotes as the
fire remedy that caused this level of conflagrations in the first place.
While newspapers are aglow with stories about this year's fires, the acreage
burned is well within the recent range of variability, according to the
National Interagency Fire Center.
The difference this year, however, is the timber industry-induced hysteria
designed to use the fires as the latest excuse to log our forests ("Forest
managers must wake up and smell the smoke," Aug. 17; "Selective logging is the
way to save our forests," Aug. 25).
To keep the federal forest gravy train chugging over the backs of unsuspecting
taxpayers, the timber industry is attempting to politically capitalize on the
fire season for which it is largely responsible. No matter what the ailment,
the industry's prescription is always the same: more logging.
The fires across the northern Rockies have confirmed what fire ecologists have
been saying for years. The most intense fires that are threatening lives and
property were human-caused and in areas that were previously logged and had
roads built across them.
Logging operations routinely clearcut large patches of forest or remove just
the larger, more economically viable trees. The native forests are commonly
replaced by denser stands of smaller trees surrounded by slash and other ground
litter that is a byproduct of the logging operations. These conditions are
exacerbated by a wrong-headed, timber industry-sponsored fire policy to snuff
out all fires. Add to this mix intense heat and no rain, and conditions become
ripe for the types of fires we are witnessing this summer.
Fire intensities have increased as a result of decades of logging and fire
suppression across most of our forested landscape. The U.S. Department of
Agriculture says more than 85 percent of the forests most at risk to fire are
in the previously developed (roaded, logged) sections of our national forests.
The timber industry's alleged concern about the condition or health of our
forests is transparent. When the industry speaks of "selective thinning," it is
talking about removing the saleable, larger trees, which are precisely the ones
that shouldn't be removed if they really are interested in improving forest
health. Alternatively, the timber industry isn't the least bit interested in
the type of understory thinning that may actually alleviate fire threats since
such operations aren't profitable.
The timber industry has even gone so far as to irresponsibly point a finger at
the Clinton administration for causing these fires. It is the industry that has
removed the larger trees from the forest landscape because of their economic
viability. It is the industry that has pushed this administration and others,
Democrat and Republican, dating back more than 50 years to suppress fires. From
their perspective, fire is not part of the ecological cycle, but a demon that
threatens their inventory.
The timber industry's public relations strategy is terribly shortsighted. The
last time the industry played this Chicken Little routine was the early 1990s,
when it predicted doom for the economy of the Pacific Northwest due to reduced
federal timber offerings. With their latest "log to stop the fire" salvo, the
industry only risks losing what little credibility it has left with the public.
The industry and its lackeys ought to realize that if they want to play the
blame game, they are playing with fire and will get burned.
<<A HREF="http://www.oregonlive.com/oped/index.ssf?/oped/00/08/ed_41rait30.frame">http://www.oregonlive.com/oped/index.ssf?/oped/00/08/ed_41rait30.frame>\\
Cspounser-
I also suggest you check out the photos of the Montana fire on this page:
http://wildmontana.org/
Go to bottom of page, click on bitterroot fires, then bittierrot phots of next page.
Notice how the big old growth pines survuve the blaze? THESE are the trees that slow and cause smaler fires. THESE trees need to be in place.
But it's a shame that these are the very tress the timber industry seeks out.
Fires are caused by drought, lightning, and exhaust sparks, not by roadless wilderness.
For example, the Boundary WAters Canoe area wilderness in Minnesota is a 2.6 million acre roadless area(when combined withe the adjacent Quetico wilderness).
Last year, there was a storm that leveled 400,000 acres of trees. It was an epic storm.
But wait....why no fires? Because drought and lightning cause fires, NOT roadless wilderness.
Quit falling for the propganda of companies that have a financial interest in all of this. Geeze man, think for yourself.
That is rich. . .made me laugh tonight. . .
An extremest as defined is:
"A supporter of extreme doctrine or practice."
Extremism is:
"a tendency to go to extremes or an instance of going to the extremes,. . ."
You checked the mirror lately. . .?
8^)
Texas has the worst air pollution in the nation.
HOuston has the worst air quality in the U.S.A.
The rivers in Texas are the nations worst.
Bush Jr. is an extremist because the emission laws in TExas are VOLUNTARY.
Myself, I am for the preservation of our last wild areas, and for a balanced, healthy economy. I am for selective logging on our national forests by local logging companies with vested long term interests in the local area.
This is also the view of most Americans today.
The roadless INitiative SET A RECORD for PUBLIC COMMENTS!
The vast majority supported the roadles initiative. That is hardly extreme.
Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican, and was the biggest "land grabber" of all time. If it want for him, we wouldnt have national forests:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/07/12/environment.forest.reut/
Ban on U.S. forest roads draws record public outcry
July 12, 2000
Web posted at: 12:34 p.m. EDT (1634 GMT)
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- A Clinton administration plan to ban roads for mining, logging and other traffic in many U.S. Forests has sparked a record 500,000 comments from the public, with most either backing the proposal or saying it doesn't go far enough to protect the environment.
The administration announced a plan in May to safeguard 43 million acres of pristine national forests for hiking, bird watching, cross country skiing, horseback riding, hunting, fishing and other nature activities.
The U.S. Forest Service proposal would affect about one-fourth of the total 192 million acres in the national forest system
The proposal, which is expected to be finalized in December, drew an unprecedented number of letters, e-mails and faxes.
"A record number of citizens have participated in the public comment period for the Forest Service's roadless plan, expressing their
overwhelming support for protecting the remaining roadless areas from roads and logging," Rep. Maurice Hinchey, a New York Democrat, told reporters on Tuesday.
The outpouring of letters surpassed other high-profile rulemakings by federal agencies, including U.S. Agriculture Department's plan for organic food labels last year and the Food and Drug Administration's regulation of cigarettes in 1996.
The road ban proposal is drawing criticisms from all sides.
The American Forest & Paper Association, a trade group, contends that roadbuilding is necessary to provide forest access for recreation and fire prevention. Also, some Americans need to reach their privately- owned land using roads.
Lawmakers in western states that are home to large forest areas have also criticized the proposal for failing to seek congressional input.
Meanwhile, some environmental advocates and even religious groups say that it does not go far enough to protect virgin U.S. land.
"The current plan is not acceptable, as it contains loopholes big enough to drive a logging truck through," said Gene Karpinski, executive director of the U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
Hinchey said that while the proposal aims to protect the forests, it is inadequate because it does not protect the Tongass National Forest in Alaska, the nation's largest national forest.
"By excluding the Tongass and allowing continued logging in the roadless areas, the president is passing up an historic opportunity to protect our national treasures," Hinchey said.
The Clinton administration proposal would allow continued logging in roadless areas by helicopters and cable systems. About 300 million board feet of timber sales planned for the next five years would be prevented by the road-building ban, according to the Wilderness
Society.
The public comment period for the proposal ends on Monday.
More than 380,000 miles of roads already exist in American national forests and many of the roads are badly in need of repair, according to the Clinton administration. The proposed ban would apply to large parcels of forest land that do not have roads because of their rugged terrain or environmental sensitivity.
The USFS chieif just finished the Roadless INitiative. It doesn't close roads, it makes sure no more roads are built inot our last tiny bit of wilderness.
A Toyota Tacoma with 33's and a locker will get farther in that mud than that Chevy will.
that there was no relationship between the recent decline in logging on
federal lands and the severity of forest fires.
<<A HREF="http://www.billingsgazette.com/200009breaking/20000901_fx55report.html">http://www.billingsgazette.com/200009breaking/20000901_fx55report.html>
I guess I can see how that article would lead someone to beleive it's a ban on existing roads. Thats bad wording on their part eh?
Here's the link to the Forest Service's Roadless Website explaning it.
MORE DEATHS
The announcement comes one day after the
government said 26 more U.S. traffic deaths - for a
total of 88 - are under investigation in
connection with recalled Firestone tires.
Meantime, Venezuelan authorities have
recommended criminal prosecution of Ford Motor Co.
and Bridgestone/Firestone for deaths there.
Firestone tires are standard equipment on Explorers
and other Ford vehicles.
Congress prepared for hearings featuring
testimony from the heads of both companies, while
Firestone was trying to avoid a strike by 8,000
workers.
Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater said
Friday the Clinton administration will confer with
Congress to determine whether manufacturers should
be required to notify the U.S. government when
they recall products abroad, as Ford did with
Firestone tires a year ago.
“As relates to the international recall, we
were a bit concerned to learn that we found out
about that much later,” Slater said on NBC’s
“Today.” “It would have been good to have that
information earlier. It could have prompted us to
take action a bit earlier.”
Advertisement
Quick Gifts Swimwear Books Music & Video
Computing Electronics Toys & Games More . . .
NHTSA has received more than 1,400
complaints about the Firestone tires, including
reports of 88 deaths and more than 250 injuries
that reportedly were the result of blowouts, tread
separation and other tire defects.
NHTSA is examining all 47 million
Wilderness AT, ATX and ATX II tires.
Congress is holding a hearing on the matter
next week, and Ford chief executive Jac Nasser
announced Thursday that he would testify, reversing
his earlier decision not to attend.
Bridgestone/Firestone chief executive Masatoshi Ono
also will appear at the Wednesday hearing before
two House Commerce subcommittees.
Venezuela to investigate Ford, Firestone
CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Venezuela's Congress on Friday moved to launch an investigation into fatal road accidents allegedly caused by faulty Bridgestone/Firestone tires mounted on Ford Explorers.
The action follows up on a report by Venezuela's consumer protection agency that holds both companies responsible for at least 46 deaths.
The congressional investigation, spearheaded by members of President Hugo's leftist political party, parallels a criminal probe by the country's attorney general's office that could result in felony charges against executives of the Venezuelan branches of Ford Motor Co. and Bridgestone/Firestone Inc.
The legal maneuverings in Venezuela also coincide with growing action against the two companies in the United States. On Friday, the Clinton administration issued a consumer warning saying about 1.4 million Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. tires are susceptible to tread separation problems. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a statement saying the decision to put out the ''consumer advisory'' came after Bridgestone/Firestone Inc. refused to expand its voluntary 3-week-old recall beyond 6.5 million tires.
Meanwhile, a lawyer and victim of a 1998 accident in a Ford Explorer said Friday he will seek an order from Venezuela's Supreme Court requiring both companies to alert the public about alleged defects in both Explorers and Firestone's Wilderness tires.
Legislator Ibrahim Velasquez, a member of Chavez's Fifth Republic Movement, said he would motion for Congress to appoint a special committee to investigate the consumer protection agency's allegations that Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone engaged in a cover-up when they became aware of the tire problems. Chavez's party controls 60% of Congress.
''There is a shared responsibility in the sense that both companies knew about the situation,'' Velasquez said on Friday after meeting with the president of the consumer protection agency, known as Indecu.
The Indecu report also said the design of the suspension on Ford Explorers contributed to the fatal accidents and accused Ford of recommending a pressure too low for the Wilderness tires.
Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone face a congressional probe in the United States, where government safety engineers suspect that the tire defects could have been responsible for 88 deaths and more than 250 injuries. Ford began replacing Bridgestone/Firestone tires for free in Venezuela in May.
Ford officials denied Indecu leader Samuel Ruh's allegation that they misled customers in Venezuela, insisting they addressed the problem appropriately and on time.
''I just want to emphasize that the accusation from the Venezuelan government official that Ford Venezuela lied is completely unfounded,'' Ford chief executive Jac Nasser said Thursday.
Franklin Hoetz, a Venezuelan victim of a Ford Explorer crash, said he would file a motion by Monday asking the Venezuelan Supreme Court to order both the car maker and tire company to warn the Venezuelan public about the suspected defects in both Explorers and Bridgestone/Firestone tires. On Friday, the Venezelan government's National Ombudsman said it would participate in soliciting the Supreme Court's action.
''It's a matter of preventing more deaths and new tragedies,'' Hoetz said on Friday.
Hoetz, a corporate lawyer who until months ago worked for Ford, was on his way to his ranch in 1998 when a tire blew out on his Explorer, causing the vehicle to turn over three times. Both his daughter and son-in-law were badly injured and their 20-year-old nanny died.
Hoetz at first attributed the accident to bad luck until he read about Ford's recall of Firestone tires on their Explorers in May. He has since dropped the car maker as a client and has filed a lawsuit against Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone in a Miami court on behalf of his family and the nanny's relatives.
The Indecu report says that Ford and Bridgestone/Firestone secretly agreed in 1999 to add a protective nylon layer to Wilderness tires after accidents in Venezuela related to those tires became more frequent. Meanwhile, unsuspecting costumers continued to drive with tires missing the layer.
http://usatoday.com/news/world/nwsfri03.htm
88 deaths linked to recalled tires
Venezuelan agency wants criminal charges
By Earle Eldridge and David Kiley, USA TODAY
Federal investigators said Thursday that they now have reports of 88 deaths linked to the failure of Firestone tires.
Also Thursday, Venezuela's consumer protection agency said defects in Firestone tires on Ford Motor vehicles are linked to at least 46 deaths in that country.
In the USA, complaints about the tires filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) almost doubled to 1,400 from 750 on Aug. 15. Injuries tied to the tires climbed to 250 from 100. When NHTSA began its investigation in early May, it had reports of four deaths.
On Aug. 9, Firestone recalled 6.5 million ATX, ATX II and Wilderness AT tires, most on Ford Explorers, because of problems with tread separation.
The NHTSA data include at least 58 complaints of problems and five injuries that occurred since the recall. Separately, police have reported at least three deaths since the recall.
"We take every accident and every injury very, very seriously," says Bridgestone/Firestone Executive Vice President John Lampe. But he added that some of the accidents likely involve road hazards or other factors not connected to tread separation.
Ford CEO Jacques Nasser said, "I'd like you to know we're sorry that these tires are on our vehicles, and I'm depressed about the resulting anxiety, injuries and deaths."
In Caracas, officials with Indecu, Venezuela's consumer protection agency, recommended that the country's attorney general file criminal charges against both Bridgestone/Firestone and Ford in connection with the tire problems on Explorers.
The agency also said Bridgestone should recall all the Wilderness AT tires in Venezuela, not just those on Explorers.
Ford, which also has said Bridgestone should recall all the tires, has replaced the Firestones on about 60% of the 30,000 Explorers in Venezuela.
The agency also recommended that Ford improve the suspension system on Explorers sold there since 1996.
Nasser said Ford will cooperate with the Venezuelan authorities, but it's "a tire issue, without question. It is not a vehicle issue."
Bridgestone said it, too, will cooperate, but it isn't planning a recall at this point.
Nasser also defended Ford's decision to replace tires abroad before taking action in the USA.
He said actions in the Middle East, Asia and South America were done before Ford fully understood the extent of the problem and based on information from Firestone that tires were not defective.
Contributing: Wire reports
Please, Please, stop the long posts and the cutting and pasting, links are much, much more friendly.
The Explorer will have a slight downturn in sales but it won't hamper its number one standing for long. The 2002 looks very potent with its new all aluminum v8, new suspension, drivetrain and interior also. By the way, I saw two NEW Explorers on my way home tonight...
"It has already been proven over and over
the Explorer is not at fault, there are no design
flaws."
Could you post any links to this fact? I think the Venezuelan government would also be interested. In fact, even Ford since it would get them off the hook with Indecu.
Front Porch Philosopher (meredith) Sun 03 Sep '00 (08:06 AM)
Posts are DELETED for VIOLATING the Participant's
Agreement....
You may NOT post copyrighted material in this
forum. Even if it is attributed and you use
"quotations," you MAY be violating the "Fair Use"
doctrine - which would subject you to legal
liability - an issue which we would prefer NOT to
be involved in. I may NOT be as paranoid in
enforcing this as I should, but it IS Edmunds
policy. You may post crosslinks to other material,
but it is inappropriate, and possibly illegal for
you to copy material and repost it here.
Edmunds does not care to find itself in the censor
role generally speaking, but we will do what we
must in self defense. Edmunds does not, and has
not deleted material because a manufacturer found
it objectionable. If we did THAT we have to delete
half our topics!.... "Let's be careful out there!"
Front Porch Philosopher
SUV, Pickups, & Aftermarket and Accessories Host
In your analysis, you stated that thousands upon thousands of Explorers without the Firestones have not had any problems. This is true. Also, we can look at it another way...there are thousands and thousands of Yukons, Tahoes, Expeditions, Excursions, Landcruisers, and Jimmys out there with Firestones and they have not had any problems. Doesn't that make you a little bit curious as to why? Maybe, just maybe, it has to do with the 26 psi that Ford recommends with the Explorers that have the Firestones as that combination was prone to rollovers with 30 psi in the tires....
Any statements that we make should be supported by facts to lend any credibility. What I have mentioned above is common knowledge that anyone following the Firestone/Ford issue would know about. Regardless of this, I'm sure Congress and the Venezuelan goverment will pursue it to hopefully everyones satisfaction.
spoog- why would a tacoma with 33" tires fair better? those big tires would make an already underpowered truck even more sluggish.
Clay, I can tell you all about clay. Clay builds up, does not fly off like normal mud. After a while your tires turn into just mud slicks. And if you don't watch it it will build up enough in your fender wells to actually stop tires from rotating. I have seen it on even full size 4x4's with V8's. There are places that 4x4's just aren't meant to go. I haven't done this with my Ranger, but have had to get out in mud and scrap the clay out of the tread, not fun....
By the way, how about we transfer the Firestone/Explorer debate to the Explorer room?
guitardude
My statement that there are thousands of suv's out there with Firestones is a mute point. Regardless of how many there are...ask the next question...how many suvs other than the explorer have rolled over with thread seperation from their Firestones. I'm sure with the exposure the explorer is getting someone with an suv must have had thread seperation with the Firestones but I guess they just don't have the time to report it....or it wasn't a big deal since the suv didn't roll...
vince8
good luck on your quest to find a link that states the explorer is not at fault. In your post #519 you stated,
"It has already been proven over and over the Explorer is not at fault, there are no design flaws."
Your statement was the only reason that I posted in this topic. I just couldn't believe someone would make a statement and therefore had to question it. Obviously you have nothing to support it...so I'll accept that and move on...
BTW, are you related to dodgeram7?
I understand being brand loyal....but blindly loyal? Now would be a good time to buy Ford stocks...well maybe not. They will hit an all time low when congress and Venezuela finish their investigations... just my opinion...
"Ford paid off victims families to keep quit (I saw some of the lawyers on TV)"
I am quite sure "HUSH" clauses are standard in all legal contracts in which ANY product fails. For a hush clause to be used the case would have to be settled out of court. Ford Pays them a sum of money, and what ford gets for this money in NO bad publicity. With what is being said now (that it is a tire issue not a explorer issue) it is more than likely that ford would win any case brought against it. But they Settle OUT of court so there is absolutely NO publicity at all....
Any and all companies use "Hush" clauses in ANY liability settlement.. its common sense.
Someone mentioned earlier that no one else used Firestone tires on their SUV's. Toyota does however, they use a larger tire (Wilderness AT -P265). That could also be an issue. Is the P235 tire a marginal size for that size of vehicle adding to the problem since we don't see the same problem on the Toyota? I'm sure lots more will come out as the investigation continues. Personally, Ford's attitude bothers me and that, added to my Mustang poor design and quality experiences, makes Ford off my list in the future.
A good case of guilt by ownership. Sort of like MB buying Chrysler. The what if about Toyota is exactly that...no rollovers with the Firestones. Only ford explorers. Could it be coincidence? Don't think so...
As I've said before, even though i'm a ford fan, I think they probably are to blame for not doing something sooner. -and if so, I hope they are penalized. BUT, the reality is that ford will probably come away from all of this relatively unscathed. due to their constant TV ads with Jac Nasser and newspaper updates they are trying to keep a good PR with the public. firestone on the other hand hasn't done squat. I think stuff like that ends up making a difference in how these situations play out. oh well, just my observations.
But, geez, I thought I was going to get to read comparisons between TRUCKS!
What's the title of this topic again?