8th Dec 2011, 02:08
I blame the over-complexities that govern the vehicle on the strict emission requirements placed on the manufacturer by the EPA. The only gasoline powered vehicle I would buy from Ford (diesel is another game) would be the 3.5 Ecoboost. Watch the F150 torture test, and you may be convinced to have Ford swap the V6 for the V8.
9th Dec 2011, 11:20
ECU controlled vehicles have been common since the late 70's. Don't blame electronics and emission controls in general for a particular vehicle's reliability. We have a few "newer" (90's) cars in our family with 250,000-300,000 miles respectively, and have not had any issues with them.
9th Dec 2011, 17:26
I couldn't agree more with comment 12:40. As a mechanic and car enthusiast, I am furious that modern cars are now basically handicapped by useless electronic gadgetry that basically does little beyond making money for shops and dealers. Our 1975 Ford went well over 300,000 miles with less than $500 in total repairs. Just getting a stupid "check engine" light reset on a newer car will cost that much.
In addition, areas that have required inspections have now joined forces with repair shops to further take advantage of the computer crap. Local news just featured a story about a man who had his car fail inspection here because his check engine light was on. The shop checked the car and told him there was nothing wrong, but turning off the light would cost him $3000. This is even worse than my friend in Virginia who had a shop fail his car for a burned out tail-light bulb, then charged him $275 to replace the bulb. The same shop failed his son's car because it needed a muffler and wanted $3000 to install a muffler. You can have a complete custom dual exhaust system put on for HALF that. At that point, my friend moved to another state where the car passed inspection easily.
Voters need to demand that local officials act to discourage such blatant graft. Hard-working car owners should not be held hostage by unscrupulous repair shops. When we lived in a northern state some years ago, the local body shops had persuaded inspection officials to fail cars that had any apparent rust on them. This in a state that pours billions of tons of corrosive salt on every street every time it snows!!
4th Mar 2012, 23:34
3000$ to reset your check engine light, are you kidding me! What really happens is a technician plugs a hand held computer into your car and presses a button to rest your ECU, and charges you a couple dollars for wasting a couple minutes of their time. Actually I've got it done for free from a parts store. So everyone that reads this, don't take that comment seriously.
6th Mar 2012, 09:46
These people need to buy better vehicles. Sounds like people just drive around with lights on for 100K miles. I never have lights on when I own the brands I stick with. Maybe it's a Ford thing?
7th Mar 2012, 08:41
500 bucks to reset? I have reset my O2 by simply disconnecting the battery, and once by a simple gas cap replacement. Some of you reset with the car off and reset with the ignition switch. My oil life on my GM, I do reset through the dash read buttons.
And I am not a mechanic. I don't do risky things like put black tape over a check engine light. Or drive with a bad O2 sensor, burning more fuel and clogging my cat. I went and bought an 8 dollar O2 socket, and bought a new O2 sensor and did it myself.
22nd Mar 2012, 21:04
Have a 2011 F150 with Ecoboost. Very poor gas mileage, and Ford will do nothing except insults when their so called customer service write to me. They say 17 MPG (Canadian) is good when driving 85 km/hr, on a no wind, +5 degree day, on a secondary paved highway.
Never another Ford for me. Had trouble with the last one 46 years ago, and no change; they still won't honour the warranty.
16th Jul 2012, 19:04
I just took a new 2012 F150 EcoBoost for a test ride. Yes, it's very impressive with the power and acceleration. The dealer gave me a price of $9500 off sticker, and a great trade in price on my current truck. I walked away to do research before I bought it. The reviews are 50/50; half have problems with bad gas mileage, and the other half had no problems with much better gas mileage. I am confused! That's why I came here to read these reviews.
Today the dealer called saying they will give me another discount, and other people were looking at the same truck. Told him I am still on the fence and I have issues with the EcoBoost. They are really desperate to sell, and in a strange way that has me worried, like if the truck is so wonderful, they shouldn't have a hard time to sell it, or kissing up to me to buy it.
26th Aug 2012, 07:44
The 3.5 Eco-boost has too many complaints about poor gas mileage, black soot from the exhaust pipe, and the twin turbos are not included on the major engine warranty. I don't want a repair bill of $3000 + when those turbos fail!
ALL turbo's fail; the question is when!
10th Sep 2013, 05:54
Not true; turbos should last the life of the engine, if they are looked after properly. That means allowing the engine to idle for 30 seconds or so after driving, to allow the turbo to stop spinning. It also means using synthetic oil, or very good quality semi-synthetic. I have owned ten Saab turbos, all bought second hand, and have never replaced a turbo on one of them.