Firestone tire recall: Are mine a problem?

24

Comments

  • butch11butch11 Member Posts: 153
    I think you should hang to the old Deathstone tires till you get your refund-also check out their web site for details. Check out www.tirerack.com for potential replacement tires. I hope you will not buy new Deathstones.
  • gonzo7gonzo7 Member Posts: 259
    The Gravestones were the Original tires.
    The guy at the F-stone 800 number said the dealer should replace the tire.
    The major league you know what at the f-stone dealer told me that it was my fault that the tread came off.
    I called NHTSA they are sending me a prepaid shipping label so they can analyze the tire.

    Michelins are on sale at Sam's Club this month.
  • fomilfomil Member Posts: 1
    I replaced my Wildnerness AT's that are not (yet) being recalled yesterday. Now mom and wife are happy. Wondering if anyone out there knows if there's a class action suit in N.Carolina yet. I dont like lawsuits, but it seems like its the only way to get Ford/Firestone's attention.
  • jdumasjdumas Member Posts: 3
    I replaced five ATX tires on my 91 Sport about two weeks ago at a Bridgestone dealer with Bridgestone tires. The dealer took the casings and I sent in the appropriate paperwork to F-stone for reimbursement. Any experience about the time frame for reimbursement? Thanks.
  • floridianfloridian Member Posts: 219
    One of the largest Firestone tire (stores) dealers in Florida has just CHANGED THEIR ENTIRE NAME ,no more Don Olson Firestone, just Don Olson ! Boy, everybody is running for cover. Also on TV (local) a guy was showing a BRAND NEW Firestone "mini spare" that he took out of his trunk, never used. Guess what ? The tread was COMING OFF !!What is wrong with this picture ? Also AM call-in local radio show 95 % of callers said they would not ever buy Firestones again due to the sleezy way they have handled this thing. Most DID NOT blame Ford too much for the problems on the Explorers either.

    Floridian
  • joelisjoelis Member Posts: 315
    Same thing in my area. The "FIRESTONE" part of the sign is gone, just the local outlet name left on it.
  • mazman1mazman1 Member Posts: 229
    Here is an article that appeared in the Friday
    Sept 8 issue of the NY Times about the Ford-Firestone Tire fiasco. Decide for yourself if Ford and Firestone are hiding anything from us!
    www.nytimes.com/2000/09/08/business/08SAFE.html
  • lxownrlxownr Member Posts: 16
    I have had only ...Michelins on my vehicles for the past 15 years.. No flats , no problems, and always a smooth ride. My advice, if you have a family either sell the Ford, or buy Michelins NOW..before it's to late.!!!
  • tapdtapd Member Posts: 19
    You ask if anyone has been affected by this recall. Well I wrote post #5 in this topic. To date my distribution center has turned in 2000 tires to BFS. I have seen everyone of these tires. Many are 5 years and older with more than 50% tread. TWO tires were separated, ONE had peeled the tread. These tires all had little or no tread or a repair to the tire, ie patch.
    Do I believe BFS is partially responsible, you bet, they knew the tire on the Explorer was going out UNDER INFLATED. They should have pulled the tires from OE, on that vehicle, at that air pressure.
    Is it the tire or Explorer killing people. It is the Explorer rolling over. Now I'm sure with all the scrutiny of the press we will find every Explorer that has rolled over to have Firestones. This has not and will not be the case. However with this massive recall and change in air pressure recommendation the tire failures will be greatly reduced. You Michelin fans, I've run them and sold them, they have failures too. Generals I would not have on a Ford Explorer but I speak from experience of selling those 4 years ago, maybe they are better now.
    What this all boils down to is AIR PRESSURE recommended by Ford, a tire built to Ford specifications, and a vehicle that has a inherent handling defect. Look at the new 2001 Explores suspension, I understand there has been many changes.
    I'll ride on Firestones or Michelins Or BFG's before I'll ride in a Ford Explorer.
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    The 2002 Explorers have an independent rear suepension system, vs. the rather archaic leaf spring/live rear axle system right now.
  • floridianfloridian Member Posts: 219
    It had to happen. The lawyers are in a feeding frenzy ( what else do sharks do) It has been only a matter of hours and already every ambulance chaser in the state is running "screamer ads" on TV and full page newspaper ads begging people that even HAVE F/B tires to contact them to get their "share" of any supposed compensation that will be coming their way. Ah yes,the American way, sue their sox off just for the heck of it.


    Floridian
  • butch11butch11 Member Posts: 153
    Last weekend while walking to the local library, saw a fairly new ford explorer sitting in front of the library. Just looked down at the tires and all 4 had a hairline crack going around the full circumference of the tire just where the tread attaches to the sidewall. Left a note on the windshield strongly suggesting this person check their tires which appeared to be delaminating.

    Saw the same cracks on a friends ancient blazer firestone tires. These tires are really old and are on the recall list.

    I wonder how dangerous it is to drive a vehicle with what looks to be the beginning of tread seperation. Have heard just before the tread seperates you get a thumping noise. Are there any other indications of tread seperation.

    Maybe the sharks will do us a favor and eliminate this product from the road.
  • tapdtapd Member Posts: 19
    Goodyears OE position on Ford Explorers has been a very small percentage. Yes there are Explorers upside down with Goodyears. One of Firestones problems was that the ATX lasted for 50,000 plus miles. Goodyears OE tire was lucky to make it to 35,000 miles. I have customers that are pulling off many ATX and AT with 80k. Ask yourself how many years old that tire is? Goodyears just didn't have as many tires and didn't get to age past 2 years
    At Fords low 26psi, 50K is a lot of miles of heat degradation.
    Now you who call them Deathstones and Gravestones, tell me how long you have been in the tire business, suspension business, or built cars. I may be biased, but I am also talking about something I know.
    Ask any Explorer owner before this media and attorney fiasco, what tires they had on, how many miles they got and why did they replace them with Firestone again.
  • tapdtapd Member Posts: 19
    Those ancient tires shouldn't even be on the road. Shame on my industry of not educating the public that a tire 5 years or older should be replaced. Most (maybe all) manufactures void workmanship, materials defects warranty 5 years date manufacture and 6 yrs date of purchase.
  • floridianfloridian Member Posts: 219
    tapd: What has put B/F in such a bad light is not the fact that they have turned out a bunch of crummy tires (could happen to any mfg.)but the deceptive, slimey and irresponsible way they have handled the whole thing. If they would have stepped up to the plate at the onset of this problem and taken their licks they would not be in the mess that they are in now. This will probably be no less than the end of their market for a long time to come, if they EVEN survive. Ford does not have totally clean hands in the matter either. With them being such a big player in this game they could have told Firestone to fess up OR else. The else being NO MORE TIRES form Firestone. That's what's going to happen now anyway, Ford will be dropping them asap, just watch.

    The legal fall-out from this will go on for the next ten years and untold millions if not billions will be paid by Firestone and probably Ford too before it's over. This is a lawyer's dream come true. The screamer ads for representation in liability cases are going full blast in the papers and on TV. A Firestone ad cannot be found in ANY of the local Sunday papers by any of the local tire dealers and all the local Firestone Service Centers have taken down the Firestone sign and parked it out in the alley ! Firestone and Ford deservive whatever they get out of this maby this is a long overdue wake-up call for ALL the big boys in the auto business.

    Floridian
  • pocahontaspocahontas Member Posts: 802
    from Edmund's News:

    1. Link Between Explorers'Crashes and Firestone Tires Found

    2. Firestone, Ford, Finger Pointing; Did NHTSA Wait Too Long to Open an Investigation?

    Pocahontas,
    Town Hall Roving Host
  • darthpeckerdarthpecker Member Posts: 8
    First, I got 45,000 trouble free miles out of my Wilderness AT's. I had them inspected at my dealer, they were not recalled, and I had 25% tread left. (I was going to get the AT's again this before the winter.) I went across the street and bought 4 Michelin LTX AT's in fear that there would be a shortage. I was smart and lucky.

    BUT- I called Firestone's Hotline prior to my dealer visit. They "did not know" if the tires made at my tires' plant had any reported separations. That was not comforting as a father of a 3 year old and who has an expecting wife driving an Explorer. I suspect Firestone is not being honest about the other plants. I then called Ford and they told me to call Firestone.

    The fact that Ford was adamant in defending the quality of the Wilderness tires from other plants is not comforting. RELEASE THE DATA FOR ALL PLANTS MAKING WILDERNESS TIRES!!!! Ford dropped the ball in not demanding the release of data from other plants! Hear that Jacques, that's why I will not buy another Explorer. You are not doing right by your customers.

    Three further observations:

    1. The Wilderness AT tires were an optional tire ($230). Ford deserves to be liable since they profited from these tires.

    2. Anybody notice? When the strike at B/F was averted on the Sunday night before Labor day, B/F workers were angry that there was no company picnic on Labor Day (CNN). They still had the day off. So much for trying to save the company (and their jobs) by working 24/7 getting new tires out. Remember union guys, you made these crap tires, not the executives.

    3. Number 2 maybe mute anyway, because who wants new replacement Wilderness AT's now?
  • floridianfloridian Member Posts: 219
    darthpecker: I agree with most of waht you say " A pox on BOTH their houses" but to blame the workers totally for the "crap" tires is not being fair to the workers, union or not, as MANAGEMENT has the FINAL word as to what comes out of any given plant. It's real easy to sit back and say "well they should have refused to ship such junk". All well and good but the record of what happens to "whistle blowers" in American industry is a sad one for sure. Most "joe sixpacks" cannot risk their jobs by doing so and the union leadership is too busy lining their own pockets to care one way or another. Sad but true.

    Floridian
  • edchenedchen Member Posts: 31
    Heard this weekend that a Toyota 4Runner in California with Wilderness AT tires had tread separation and rolled over. This is just amazing as I had thought Ford Explorers were the only SUV that rolled over. Silly me to imagine that.
  • gpm5gpm5 Member Posts: 785
    I recall about 20 years ago Firestone had tire blow-out problems and that was all over the news. This is a reiteration of that in some sense. I had never purchased Firestone tires since that time, but unfortunately I have Bidgestone 684s on a '99 trooper that I just purchased. The question I bring up is does Firestone simply make an inferior product--and does replacing a Firestone tire with a Firestone tire result in any difference. Is it possible that if Firestone replaces all their tires, that the will go for their intended wear life without blowing out?
  • gpm5gpm5 Member Posts: 785
    Or should I say, if everyone uses Firestone tires for only half of their intended wear life--i.e. via a replacement scenario, will we be better off.
  • bnormannbnormann Member Posts: 335
    #85 was scribbled for copyright violations....

    Your host, Bruce
  • gpm5gpm5 Member Posts: 785
    Its interesting that stunt drivers were able to get a Isuzu trooper on two wheels without blowing tires but tires on explorers blow out so easily.
  • floridianfloridian Member Posts: 219
    F/B should consider hiring Joe Camel to promo their products. Since he was booted out of the tobacco/cigarette business he has been looking for a new job promoting defective, dangerious products. It'll be a uphill battle tho. As far as I know tires are not addictive.

    Floridian
  • gpm5gpm5 Member Posts: 785
    Firestone knows how long their tires will run, and on what type of heated surface before blowing up. They know how much air pressure Ford recommends for Explorers. Now, knowing that drivers will drive 80 when the speed limit is 70 and knowing that the roads are buckling under heat stress, and knowing that Ford recommends 26 psi, why make tires that won't take it?
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    Did anyone watch that Dateline NBC report on the Ford/Firestone issue? The internal video files of the Explorers on two wheels is rather alarming! In one of their driver training programs for their own Ford engineers, they rolled an Explorer!
  • floridianfloridian Member Posts: 219
    aling: This just the EXACT thing that anybody that knows anything about cars was saying about ALL the SUV sucker mobiles since they were introduced. In the SUV postings that's all you saw on there, rollover disasters, long before the tire thing came along. The biggest disservice Ford did was to try to sell these TRUCKS ( and that's what they are)on the premise that they were big ,rugged,macho machines that you could put your wife and family in and be perfectly safe. SHAME, SHAME Ford et al. The American public will buy ANYTHING if the ad guys can convince them that it is the NEXT BIG THING. How else can you explain such nonsense as the PT Cruiser selling for up to 10k over sticker.

    I wonder if the relationship between Ford and F/B will survive this mess. When all the dust settles I don't see how Ford will be able to sell vehicles with those tires as OEM equipment. My bet is Ford will tell Firestone to take a hike. Firestone NEEDS Ford. Ford does NOT need F/B. When the ceo's of both companies will not even set at the same table during the congressional hearings and engage in finger pointing I think the rift will not be closed. The fact that Firestone is foreign owned does not set well with all the "good ole boys" either.

    Floridian
  • pocahontaspocahontas Member Posts: 802
    Hi aling- Yes I also saw the Dateline story. I think people also need to realize that SUV's were not designed for doing high speed curves at 55+ mph.

    A real off road vehicles will have a higher center of gravity than other vehicle types, which will increase the likely hood of rollover. Of course this fact certainly doesn't give Ford and Bridgestone the right to hide information from it's customers.

    Anyway, back to the topic of the Firestone tires.
    For those that aren't aware, there are also 8 other firestone tires on the governments investigative list: more Wilderness AT tires and Wilderness HT tires, ATX VD and HY tires, Firehawk ATX, ATX 23 degree, Widetrack Radial Baja and Widetrack Radial Baja AS tires.

    These are not currently under recall, but according to dateline: "Firestone will replace them if they match the serial numbers on the government list." Btw, here's more consumer information from Dateline.

    Talk to everyone later. Drive safely.

    Pocahontas,
    Edmund.com/Roving Host
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    I agree that people shouldn't treat SUVs as regular cars, but the fact (unfortunately) is that they do. For many (most?) people, the SUVs are replacements for sedans, so they're probably driven the same way.

    Floridan, well, some people like trucks, as Pocahontas said, they should be treated accordingly.
  • butch11butch11 Member Posts: 153
    An article in yesterday's NY Times and also on network news had some very interesting info. Apparently congress had enacted legislation authorizing NHTSA to develop roll over/stability standards for the purpose of letting consumers know how the various vehicles rated. Well some yahoo senator/congress person attached a rider to a piece of appropriations legislation to prohibit NHTSA from developing the standard and testing/publishing the results. Johnny McCain said he would get the roll over testing reinstated.

    Yeah B/F and ford are pretty bad for what they have done. How do you feel about one of more of your elected representatives in the midst of this controversy attaching this no testing rider to a piece of appropriations legislation.

    I will send an email to Senator McCain requesting he identify the culprits. Wonder how much it cost to buy that little piece of work.
  • bcobco Member Posts: 756
    "The biggest disservice Ford did was to try
    to sell these TRUCKS ( and that's what they are)on
    the premise that they were big ,rugged,macho
    machines that you could put your wife and family in and be perfectly safe. SHAME, SHAME Ford et al."

    i currently own and drive a full sized chevy pickup and my wife drives a gmc jimmy (similar to the chevy blazer). i would rather endure 100 comparable accidents in either of those vehicles than virtually any 4 door passenger sedan any day of the week and twice on sundays. if you ask me, they're safer.

    not to get off subject and start a political debate, but you cannot hold a piece of machinery liable for the actions of the person controlling it. guns don't kill people, people kill people. cars don't roll over, people roll them by driving carelessly.

    the most poignant thing i heard on the dateline special last night was a woman in the opening segments who said (paraphrasal), "the american government needs to send a message to big business that human lives come BEFORE profits do." and that's the truth. i have all the faith in the world that heroes like john mccain will do this for us...

    bco
  • floridianfloridian Member Posts: 219
    bco: i agree with what you say for the most part. I drive a pick-up myself ( by necessity rather than choice) tho i really don't feel all that much safer due to the way they handle as a class. I have in the past raced in SCCA events so what i expect out of a vehicle may be a lot more than the average driver.

    What i fault Ford (and all the SUV mfgs) for is that in their zeal to sell these things to the public they lured all the "soccer moms" out of their Bimmers, Saabs and Volvos and did NOT educate them as to the totally different type vehicle they were dealing with. They pretty much tried to promote the big rugged machine image and never really told them that in any given situation that the things would swap ends or roll over in the blink of an eye. Regardless, most of the new to the SUV class would be horrified if they really thought for one second that they werein reality driving a lowly "truck". Especially those poor misguided souls that bought into the insanity of the Caddy Escalade.

    John McCain will try to do his best but it will be like a Salmon swimming up stream i fear.

    Floridian
  • mazman1mazman1 Member Posts: 229
    Can anyone tell me how I can find out what plant the codes "VN" and "W2" were produced. Ihave Wilderness AT's and I know that these codes are unot YET recalled, but I'd be interested in finding out about these codes. Thanks. --
  • tjwtjw Member Posts: 14
    W2 is Wilson, N.C.--------VN is Quebec.
  • pocahontaspocahontas Member Posts: 802
    Also, from Edmund's Editorial Features: A Summarization of the Bridgestone/Firestone Debacle, by Erin Mahoney.

    Pocahontas,
    Edmunds.com/Roving Host
  • dwsarchdwsarch Member Posts: 1
    Tire recall, I just had my tires replaced with a replacement tire at a ford dealer, Good year Wrangler RT/S. I feel the replacement tire is of a lesser quality in ride, noise and proformance then the Firestone Wilderness AT. Has any one else had this problem? What is the same quality type tire as the Firestone Wilderness AT tire?
    ----
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    I don't believe that the Wranglers are very highly rated. Try the Consumer Reports top rated BFGoodrich Long Trail Radial T/A or the Michelin LTX M/S.

    Hope this helps!
  • lando622lando622 Member Posts: 51
    Nice answer to mazman... where can we find out what plants equate to what tire plant codes? My tires are "8X" (whole code 8XHL 1PY 389).
  • tjwtjw Member Posts: 14
    You need to scroll about half way through this for the codes:www.gglotus.org/ggtech/tirerat.htm
  • tjwtjw Member Posts: 14
    The way I interpret this article is that this is just Mercedes PR rhetoric, unsubstantiated by any NHTSA testing. "Mercedes, for it's part, TRUMPETS the strength of it's roof in ADVERTISEMENTS". Not that different from same rhetoric put forth by Ford. Don't be so prejudiced. -------Enough said about this.
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    Uh, the NHTSA doesn't even bother (or have to capability) to test something like this. For years, they tried unsuccessfully to develop a static rollover test. Ford doesn't do any dynamic rollover tests to gauge roof strength, unlike other manufacturers. THAT was the point of the article.
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    Thanks for the link to the Edmunds article. It gives a useful chronologicical account of this whole Explorer/Firestone issue, similar to the Dateline NBC special report.
  • ghtrapghtrap Member Posts: 26
    I replaced the Wilderness AT's on my '98 Explorer last February with only 16,000 miles on them. This is my second Explorer and the second time I've bailed on the Firestones. I replaced them with Michelin LTX M/S's - on my own dollar - and feel it was well worth it.

    This time, the Firestones had begun to 'thump'. I just thought it was out of balance. Rebalancing them did nothing to get rid of the problem, so I bailed imediatley. This was, of course, before we heard of this current problem.

    My spare is still original, and IS coded with the dangerous 'VD' plant code. I will replace it in a week or so. Were the inner bands starting to seperate on my tires? Who knows. Now that this has all come out, the money I spent on top of the line Michelins was unquestionably well worth it.

    It is more hassle, but I would advise people to consider buying Michelin's instead of the Goodyear's that Firestone is replacing the bad tires with. You have to fill out more paperwork, put up your own money up front, surrender your tires to a Firestone dealer, then hope that Firestone doesn't file bankruptcy before they can refund your money.

    Michelin is just the best, and you can't place a value on your family's safety. I feel I got lucky when I sensed something wrong with my Firestones and bailed out early.

    I will never consider a new vehicle that has Firestones mounted on it. I simply will never be able to trust them again.
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    The Firestone Wilderness AT tires lacked any nylon piles, which are typically used as a secondary backup. It could be that your steel belts or radial piles were starting to disintegrate, but this is all just my speculation based on what you have written. Fortunately though, you replaced the tires before anything happened. Have a look at this: http://www.whnet.com/4x4/tips.html#roadtires

    One can simply buy the tires from another non-Firestone tirestore, and bring your Firestone tire + the form to the Firestone store. They'll refund you the money in 1-2 weeks.
  • alingaling Member Posts: 598
    uncovered by KIRO TV in Washington state: Click here to read the report.
  • lando622lando622 Member Posts: 51
    Thanks for the info!
  • reneleblancreneleblanc Member Posts: 144
    Your words express my thoughts exactly. The macho advertising for SUVs ALWAYS shows these vehicles blasting along at warp speed through every kind of terrain. No wonder the people who swallow these ads think they are buying some kind of performance vehicle. I think that millions of sheep follow each other to buy into the SUV fad to satisfy some sort of fantasy image. Only a very small minority of SUV owners use them regularly off road and take advantage of their specialized capabilities.

    The rest are copycats trying to fulfill a macho image and want to sit high up so they can see over normal automobiles. No doubt they can, but there are so many of THEM it doesn't matter. They can't see over each other!

    Most SUV drivers don't appear to realize that with their vaulted position they also give up a lot of stability and need to drive accordingly, but many of them don't. Here in the Southwest, tire separations are not a new thing, but we hardly ever hear of normal automobiles losing control and rolling over when it occurs. This became a big deal because of the inherent instability of the SUV type of vehicle.
  • njdevilsrnnjdevilsrn Member Posts: 185
    MY 2 CENTS: I think this Firestone thing is getting a bit out of hand. How many Explorers are on the road? How many of these accidents were caused by people driving the Explorer at 80+ mph loaded down with people and luggage? I read in the paper that the fatal accident last week there were SEVEN people in the Explorer. HELLO??? The truck is meant to carry 5 passengers!!!

    I believe a lot of the intelligent posters on here who write about how people drive SUVs like they are invincible. How many "soccer moms" and yuppie commuters have you seen blazing down a highway at speeds in excess of the speed limit with barely 10 feet between them and the car in front?

    Come on people! These are TRUCKS! For those of you who dont know, the Explorer is a 4 door, closed cab, 4x4 built on a RANGER platform!

    Have some common sense! Drive carefully, maintain your vehicle, and use common sense.

    A QUESTION...Anyone out there with Michelin All Terrains and/or Mud/Snow tires? I ask, because I too am not a routine off roader, but an EMS provider from NJ. Need a truck with good traction in snow. Which do you think is a better tire? My tire dealer is pushing the Mud/Snow (even though he won't be able to get it until who knows when), claiming the All Terrain is a "harsh" tire (costs 20 bucks less than M/S too).
  • normalguynormalguy Member Posts: 1
    My Dad drove a Jeep Overland during the 50's for his job and did much real off-road driving over real jeep tails in the jungles here in Hawaii, it was a top heavy beast and he and the others who drove under those conditions crawled around the mountains, even then there were some accidents and roll-overs... I had assumed the center of gravity and safety issues had been fixed until I heard about a prominent Business Lady from here who died white driving a Toyota Four Runner while in New Mexico or somewhere up there. She was going skiing and had just left home when the roll-over accident occurred... Roof crushed; her passenger survived with bad injuries. Though tires may not have been to blame, the high center of gravity would cause these vehicles to flip very easily in a situation where an automobile wouldn't. I saw the Dateline show and it didn't surprise me a bit, but then who the heck drives like that, oh sorry, I guess a lot of folks do...At work I drive an old Trooper'89 I think, and am very careful whenever I drive the mountain roads (I regularly drive up and down Haleakala; sea level to 10,000 ft within 60 or so miles; and have a great time doing it... I am never in a hurry though.)
  • trenttrent Member Posts: 86
    Michelin MS and AT tires use the same carcass. Michelin calls the MS tires 80% hwy and 20% off road. For the AT it's the reverse. I recently replaced my trucks tires with the ATs and they seem quiet and smooth on the hyw. I was concerned the MS would not do as well in mud as the AT even though my demand for that use is low. I do not believe the AT's would be anymore "harsh" than the MS. As for price, the difference could be in white letter vs. black.
This discussion has been closed.