[avdhesh15]

Originally Posted by GTO

End of the day, it's the customer who pays 10 lakhs to Ford. This is the least that Ford can do. Ford NEEDS to provide answers to the owner. Ford is ANSWERABLE to the owner.

Bang on - Ford has to conduct an analysis and inform the customer as to what went wrong backed up with sufficient evidence (if possible by Ford themselves and an independent organization).

This is what customer service is all about and that's the least we can expect after paying hard earned money to buy products.

[anachronix]

Well, I never mentioned the onus is on the owner to fix it, only want to know the full story and looking for hints from the pictures on what could have caused the failure. The tire burst on the outside wall indicates something more than a suspension failure. My 2 cents!

Is there a way we could get the full email transcript of what the owner has communicated to Ford? If there was such a colossal failure in my car, I would definitely talk about it when I write an email to the manufacturer.

I still think, we don't have full information on the incident!

Originally Posted by GTO

Why is the onus on the owner? It should be on FORD. Who do you think is more capable of a full expert analysis on what actually happened here?

The vehicle is in Ford's possession (its dealers)
Ford has ample technical talent at its disposal (unlike the owner)
Ford has thousands of engineers on its payroll (unlike the owner)
Ford has the necessary workshop equipment & tools (unlike a layman car owner)
Ford has the required industry contacts with labs and the like (unlike a regular car owner).

Why the heck can't Ford do a proper analysis on what exactly caused this failure and tell the owner? What have they got to hide?

End of the day, it's the customer who pays 10 lakhs to Ford. This is the least that Ford can do. Ford NEEDS to provide answers to the owner. Ford is ANSWERABLE to the owner.

[DRIV3R]

Let me play the devil's advocate here.

As I see it, the LHS front wheel has hit the culvert (bruises on bumper), and then the damage has happened.

There is no way an alloy wheel would fracture like that without any external impact.

And what are the odds of both the alloy wheel and the axle/lower arm, all giving up at the same time?

Just my thoughts, though I sympathize with the owner for his brand new car is damaged!

[rselva]

The last image shows skid mark stretching back to the culvert. My guess is when turning near the culvert, the tyre caught something at speed, which turned the LHS tyre almost 90 degree, causing all the subsequent damage.

[Doge]

There is no onus on the owner,just that the OP could clear a few things out and provide a little more clarity so that discussions are relevant.
A few more pictures wouldn't exactly be traumatising. Some people have presented some excellent theories as to what could've happened( both in favour of ford and against) and throwing a little more light may be of further help here.

[Jeroen]

Glad to see some good well balanced posts around this topic, rather then only Ford-bashing. A few more photographs of the shattered rim and the damage to the tyre would go a long way of providing better insights as to what happened here.

I dont think we can reach any firm conclussion on this yet, although as per my previous posts, I suspect this car hit something first and subsequently the damage to the front end was caused; it remains to be seen if there were any defect products installed.

If Ford believes all damages is due to the car hitting an object at high speed, and the way the respond by reffering to the GY report, certainly seems to indicate that, they should simple say so.

I do believe in just making simple statements. If Ford thinks this is what happens I think they should communicate as such, just so the owner knows where he/she stands.

Jeroen

[kiranvakati]

Originally Posted by Bh.P

If the above is true, then Ford is in the right and their handling of situation is acceptable, or even good considering they are offering to bear the differential costs over insurance.

Some may still say the axle should not break in case of tyre burst and companies should have a factor of safety built in to the design of such critical parts to handle such situations. But that is a different discussion. What is possible to factor in during design for such extraneous circumstances.

I can't accept tyre burst as a "extraneous circumstance".
Tyre burst on a clean tarmac leading to such damage ?
If Ford says tyre burst lead to such damage then they are accepting the fact that either this vehicle has manufacture defect or there is a fundamental design flaw.

[Olympal]

Originally Posted by kiranvakati

I can't accept tyre burst as a "extraneous circumstance".
Tyre burst on a clean tarmac leading to such damage ?
If Ford says tyre burst lead to such damage then they are accepting the fact that either this vehicle has manufacture defect or there is a fundamental design flaw.

I had a Ford Fiesta S and the front right alloy wheel cracked after hitting a pothole at a speed of 60 KMPH. The tyre was under-inflated and the alloy rim took the full impact. The alloy wheel simply split open down the middle. It looked like a tyre burst (with a loud noise). But there was no visible cut on the tyre.

There was no damage to the connecting rod or suspension, maybe as the speed was low. Ford replaced the wheel under warranty after I sent pictures to the dealership (Harpreet Ford, Delhi).

In your case, it looks as if the alloy cracked before the rest of the damage occurred. Maybe you should send the pictures to Ford India directly since in your case the damage is extensive.

[KomS_CarLog]

This is freaky indeed! Thank God, no one was injured.

For the tens of minutes it took me to read each post in this thread, I just had one thought - should I go for an EcoSport? Well, I guess this question can only be answered satisfactorily and logically, once we have an investigation done (with material tests, etc.) on the damaged parts - and test all the theories put forth in this thread.

Do you think http://siamindia.com/ could help the owner here?

[GTO]

Based on the requests, Poornima shares these two pictures.

[akash_m]

The car in question was under warranty. Usually, as in other products in the market, the quality and workmanship defect is covered under warranty. Then why is ford shying away from addressing a quality issue which has almost resulted in a catastrophe!

[KiloAlpha]

Firstly, to be able to judge Ford's response, we would all need to know what issue was communicated to them. And how.

Even if the OP had hit the culvert at 100kmph, I have the following questions:
What was the relative angle between the car and the culvert at the point of impact?
What was the position of the steering - or steering angle - at the point of impact?

On a road like this, by habit, we all tend to go to the middle of the road when faced with a culvert like we see in the picture. There is also a left handed curve just before the culvert. If the OP had taken the curve too fast and hit the culvert, the vehicle would have to be pulling left, or oversteering. On a FWD Ecosport - not sure if that actually happened. If the OP had steered a bit too far to the left and hit the culvert, then in order to be in the position that the car is in, the car-culvert impact would have to be just a glancing impact. Else, the car would have perished right there at the culvert.

Either case, I would expect much much more than a few scratches (as is seen in the pictures) on the front bumper - given the height of the culvert.

Something else has happened, and we don't know what. I wish Ford would do a more thorough analysis.

A little , during my younger (and wilder) days, I remember hitting my grandfather's ambassador to a concrete road divider at about 15 degrees angle, at 70kmph. A few metres down the road, due to the resultant "bounce" and partial loss of control, I drove the right front wheel directly over a large paving stone (carelessly left behind). There was no damage to the suspension components, but I had to replace the wheel and tyre.

[Jaggu]

Originally Posted by anachronix

I think some important pieces of the puzzle are missing, in case of a axle/CV joint failure why did the tire burst with so much impact on the outside of the wheel.

Originally Posted by anachronix

have caused the failure. The tire burst on the outside wall indicates something more than a suspension failure. My 2 cents!

Tyre could have burst after the impact on the wheel, after it went 90 degrees from the direction of travel, alloy breakage also might be due to this friction. This is quite natural if the vehicle was moving at 40-50 kmph and the wheels went perpendicular.

[rusticnomad]

Originally Posted by nitheeshsreeram

But Quality checks are done on samples of every batch of parts received so its just surprising that such a catastrophe failure happened.

While statistical sampling (to avoid each and every item from the batch being tested) for testing is true for less critical nuts and bolts for example, but for critical parts each one of them goes through non destructive tests like ultrasound, dye penetration tests etc to ensure that no defective part goes through to make it to the vehicle.

Also, parts like axle and shaft etc go (should go) through a robotic/automated testing too -- not sure if they went in this case.

http://dynaspede.net/Mechatronics_AxleShaftTestRigs.htm

http://www.testrigs.com/news-1129.html

So, as i said, a fracture analysis -- a material science lab with scanning electron microscope with an expert on physical metallurgy would be the ones who can do justice -- will reveal facts if the parties involved do not make an attempt to just prove the other wrong.

As noted in my intro post, my Astra 1.6 had taken a severe hit at 140 kmph in middle of nowhere before a railway crossing and fork arm was bent, wheel alignment so badly out that it couldn't be driven at more than 20 kmph without making a huge screeching sound. Yet, in that state it drove for 30 odd km to the nearest destination where the fork arm was straightened and alignment done by a truck mechanic for 160 bucks back then to a drive-able condition. I shudder at the thought of meeting the same fate as the Ecosport in the current discussion.

[arunphilip]

Originally Posted by Jeroen

There isn’t much of the road to be seen in the pictures. See my earlier comments. Why should the driver get the benefit of doubt to the driver when there is such clear evidence, the shattered rim, that points to a very different cause?

I give the benefit of the doubt to the customer because I've personally experienced how tough these alloys are, as I stated in my first response in this thread:

Originally Posted by arunphilip

This is the strange part. Those alloys are tough. Really tough. Courtesy of Bangalore roads, I've put them through a lot (e.g. coming off a flyover at ~70 km/h and hitting a large pothole), and they were absolutely fine. So I'm puzzled at what happened to cracked it, and at the same time, it also points to the forces involved.

A slightly contrived example: if you went to a doctor complaining of a persistent cough, but the doctor saw you coughing due to a dusty sweater you wore just that day, would you accept his response of "Oh, its due to the dust on your sweater, now move along"?

There is a tendency in Indian ASCs to do a lot of hand-waving and blame the customer, since its easier, cheaper and saves them work. I'm pretty sure the number of clutches and suspensions replaced under warranty would be minuscule, since these tend to often be blamed on driving practices (in reality its probably a mixed bag). And that's the reason I'm suspicious of the company first.

I'd just say Ford needs to release some evidence to support their stance which will then shift the burden of proof onto the customer. Until then, I'd side with the customer.

Having said that, I believe the OP does have to give us some more detail of what communication he/she initiated with Ford in the first place, since we've only seen the response. There are valid questions being asked about whether the OP's mail to Ford was itself titled tyre burst (which puts a different complexion on things, and ties in with your statements), or if they reported the axle failure (which is what was communicated to GTO).

Originally Posted by Jeroen

I do believe Ford’s answer could have been formulated in a much better way.

Absolutely yes, Ford haven't helped themselves by saying they'll cover the non-insurance costs of the repair - is this a tacit admission of guilt, or just being nice and playing it safe due to social media? (On a side note, they're damned if they do, damned if they don't!)

Originally Posted by autospeaker

I am bit circumspect about the Ford's quality now. On top of it, Ford's cold response to the whole issue is not encouraging at all. Do I really need to worry about this incident? Do I need to rethink on my decision?

Originally Posted by Doge

If I were in your shoes, I wouldn't be worried as such. It is quite difficult to gauge what has actually happened and how from here.

I think Doge summed it up perfectly in his broader response - don't worry. I'd also add, its unlikely you'll get significantly better responses from any another manufacturer. So pick any known devil, but be prepared to fight them if they try and hoodwink you!

Originally Posted by GTO

Why is the onus on the owner? It should be on FORD.

Agreed. We also have to look at who stands to gain/lose, as exemplified by the lovely phrase 'Cui bono?'.

• A customer has little to gain by complaining about a manufacturer, since all they want is a working car that they paid for.
• The exception will be the case of a customer who has made a driving error, but is trying to pass the cost of that back to the manufacturer.
• A manufacturer has a lot to lose if it is proven that a failure has caused an accident.

Originally Posted by black_rider

The onus is definitely on the manufacturer, no doubts about that. He who has great power, also has great responsibility.

Bear in mind that the bit about 'power/responsibility' also applies to us just as well - we should not be misled by selective presentation of facts from either party, which results in us supporting the wrong party.

Originally Posted by Doge

just that the OP could clear a few things out and provide a little more clarity so that discussions are relevant. A few more pictures wouldn't exactly be traumatising.

Priceless, this made me laugh out loud!