Limp Mode on the Track

[stanglife]

I like your points, though many of them don't seem well founded.


You say, for instance, that "Everyone claims deception." But then you say, "Common sense dictates that if they needed coolers for track models to run all day, tech models likely would NOT run all day." (knowing from above you meant something less than all day--but more than 10-20 minutes now stated by FP)

Regarding common sense, if everyone (or even a lot of people) feel deceived, then the "common sense" says they were deceived. That's the definition of common sense, that which is expected by the majority of the people, at least the majority who are affected by this situation.

The divide seems to be between many of those who bought either the Base model or Tech Pkg (the majority) and many of those who bought the Track Pkg or the R (there is also a very vocal group who bought nothing). Perhaps the track and R buyers are blessed to have something greater than common sense--or are simply hard core track enthusiasts who never considered a base or tech anyway. Don't know. What is for sure though is that they are the minority--the least common among us. Also clear is that the track and R buyers have nothing at stake. Zero.

Speaking only for myself, the only person I am qualified to speak for, I do not expect anything extra for free. Nor, however, do I expect to pay extra for what Ford led me (and it seems many others) to believe. I should not be expected to dig down to page 25 of an owners manual to find out a car won't do what it was marketed to do. Add to that the date that the owners manual was published and my position is reinforced.

I don't expect the car to compete on the track with a Track Pkg or R. The ability to complete a full day on the track should be my burden, hopefully with Ford's R&D support since they recommended an aftermarket add-on. I simply expect Ford to provide a vehicle that can handle more than 10-20 minutes on the track and sustained high speeds, just as ANY base competitor vehicle can do. In fact, base versions of cars well below this class can out perform the base and tech GT350 on the track--time wise. So, Ford fell short, and needs to fix it--that's where integrity comes in. There are lies of commission and lies of omission. This car's shortcomings were omitted from any and all marketing. The car, as a whole, was advertised as very track capable, to include a suspension upgrade being added to the tech pack.

Does that make the whole car a bad deal? No. It simply makes it something less than what it was marketed to be.

Finally, while I understand your interpretation of the situation, I don't understand the basis of it. As an R buyer, what is your stake in this? Are you affiliated with Ford or do you simply believe that I (and others in the same position) was stupid for believing what Ford advertised (outside of a later printed owners manual) and should now pay the price for my stupidity and inability to apply "common sense"? If the latter, I obviously disagree, but am interested in understanding your dog in this fight. Thanks.

Just an enthusiast posting on a forum. It sounds like you only welcome opinions from people who share you're same beliefs and agenda; wouldn't that be nice? I'll agree to disagree and not read the entire novel above. Asking for options is one thing but insisting to get something for free that would effectively give you more for less money than the upcoming new model doesn't seem reasonable. People love free stuff, though, do what you like.

I still suggest comming up with a reasonable request based on the new options being offered is the best chance of getting something done.

Sponsored

 

[Caballus]

Just an enthusiast posting on a forum. It sounds like you only welcome opinions from people who share you're same beliefs and agenda; wouldn't that be nice? I'll agree to disagree and not read the entire novel above. Asking for options is one thing but insisting to get something for free that would effectively give you more for less money than the upcoming new model doesn't seem reasonable. People love free stuff, though, do what you like.

I still suggest comming up with a reasonable request based on the new options being offered is the best chance of getting something done.

Having not read 'the novel' it's hard to take your advice. Thanks anyway for trying.

 

[lemers]

So if driving the car using the 526hp and stopping the car using the giant cross drilled brakes and using the the transmission to transfer that power to the wheels causes this car to overheat in less than 20 mins, that sounds like a design flaw to me.


2016 GT350 Magnetic w/Black Stripes / Black Roof /Tech Package Build January, ETA March (US Port), Germany Apr, under MSRP

 

[Caballus]

So if driving the car using the 526hp and stopping the car using the giant cross drilled brakes and using the the transmission to transfer that power to the wheels causes this car to overheat in less than 20 mins, that sounds like a design flaw to me.


2016 GT350 Magnetic w/Black Stripes / Black Roof /Tech Package Build January, ETA March (US Port), Germany Apr, under MSRP

Spot on and well said with a tweet vice a novel!

 

[zombiekiller]

So in theory, if the cats are what's making the transmission so hot, I have cat delete pipes sitting in my garage and could put them on and see if it makes a material difference on runtime. Would I require a tune to put them on (another thing I have but haven't installed due to reliability concerns) or would I just have to deal with a CEL? I want to avoid making any permanently warranty altering modifications at this time.

But I could make another attempt on 3/4-5, NASA is at a track 7 miles away from me then.

my initial thought would be that the after cat sensor would see a fault and throw a code without a tune. Perhaps it is worth it to call lethal and ask them what happened in their case?

 

[stanglife]

Having not read 'the novel' it's hard to take your advice. Thanks anyway for trying.

I read that it was full of fluff and you saying the same thing over and over. It's clear you have an agenda and aren't open to advice to begin with. I'll continue on for anyone else open to logic and reason.

My suggestion stays the same - Keep it realistic and stop sounding like you're returning a DVD player at Walmart - then you might have a chance at getting heard.

I keep hearing this 20 minute mark where all hell breaks loose and now people are making up additional scenarios where this "design flaw" MIGHT occur. Right now, we have just a couple of actual examples but most people sound like they are just irritated by the new options offered on the 17 (I think this is maybe the most valid gripe, actually). I'm just throwing out what I think would get the best chance at a happy resolution.

-Get some additional, actual data.
-Accept some of the fault for buying the "tech" version when the "track" version was available.
-Come up with a reasonable argument as to why you expected it to perform like the track version.
-Create a petition with a reasonable resolution (read: don't expect it for free but leave that in Fords court because you never know!) and present it to FP.

Has anyone been to a negotiating class? Each single person going to their dealer about this is going to see varying results and explanations. Skip that mess and create a petition.

Good luck all.

Oh - I think I mentioned - I wonder if they can lower the teperature sensitivity at which the car goes to limp mode. Actually, I'm certain this can be done - I guess I wonder if they will consider their built in margin and a reflash could potentially put all of this to rest?

 

[stanglife]

So if driving the car using the 526hp and stopping the car using the giant cross drilled brakes and using the the transmission to transfer that power to the wheels causes this car to overheat in less than 20 mins, that sounds like a design flaw to me.


2016 GT350 Magnetic w/Black Stripes / Black Roof /Tech Package Build January, ETA March (US Port), Germany Apr, under MSRP

Which one are you using to slow down? The brakes or the transmission? Sounds like a driver flaw to me.

 

[wimend]

So if driving the car using the 526hp and stopping the car using the giant cross drilled brakes and using the the transmission to transfer that power to the wheels causes this car to overheat in less than 20 mins, that sounds like a design flaw to me.


2016 GT350 Magnetic w/Black Stripes / Black Roof /Tech Package Build January, ETA March (US Port), Germany Apr, under MSRP

Spot on comment! I've had GTIs, Golf Rs, S4s and the CLA 45 AMG I just sold to get the GT350 do 20 minute sessions no problem. If the Mustang GT PP, or any other newer Mustang for that matter can do a 20 minute session and not have the transmission overheat, then it's definitely a design flaw.

Us Tech guys are not talking 24hr Le Mans sessions, is 20 mins too much to ask for?

 

[stanglife]

Spot on comment! I've had GTIs, Golf Rs, S4s and the CLA 45 AMG I just sold to get the GT350 do 20 minute sessions no problem. If the Mustang GT PP, or any other newer Mustang for that matter can do a 20 minute session and not have the transmission overheat, then it's definitely a design flaw.

Us Tech guys are not talking 24hr Le Mans sessions, is 20 mins too much to ask for?

Again - maybe it's a problem with the limit setting on that sensor? A little too aggressive? Just because we have cars that have been able to do it in the past doesn't mean that the fluids were not degrading faster than we realized.

 

[stanglife]

Spot on comment! I've had GTIs, Golf Rs, S4s and the CLA 45 AMG I just sold to get the GT350 do 20 minute sessions no problem. If the Mustang GT PP, or any other newer Mustang for that matter can do a 20 minute session and not have the transmission overheat, then it's definitely a design flaw.

Us Tech guys are not talking 24hr Le Mans sessions, is 20 mins too much to ask for?

PS - I'm not sure about all of them, but at least a few of your old cars had transmission coolers.

 

[zombiekiller]

Again - maybe it's a problem with the limit setting on that sensor? A little too aggressive? Just because we have cars that have been able to do it in the past doesn't mean that the fluids were not degrading faster than we realized.

trans temps of 280 to trigger shutdown is conservative? Seriously?

I'll say this.. it is mildly annoying that you insist on having an opinion on an issue which bears no relevance to you or your '93. What's more annoying is that you insist on sharing it.

 

[Caballus]

Despite all the other good recommendations--data collection, petitions, etc--the following two points are flawed and at the center of your argument.

-Accept some of the fault for buying the "tech" version when the "track" version was available.
-Come up with a reasonable argument as to why you expected it to perform like the track version.

1. There should be no fault to be accepted for buying tech tech or base version if the intent is not to use them primarily for the track.

2. So far, I haven't read anyone saying they expected it to perform like the track version. I've read the opposite. No one expected it to perform like the track version. They simply expect it to perform better than 10-20 minutes on the track and to sustain high speed.

Where does the magic 10-20 minutes come from? In my case, it came from a discussion with FP. The sustained high speed comes from the owner's manual.

A flaw in a $6 CD cannot be fixed so must be returned. A flaw in a $60K car should be fixed--if you think it is a flaw, which it seems is the rub. A 60K sports car with this unadvertised limitation is flawed and should be fixed.

Agenda, yes: fix the flaw so the 60K sports car can sustain high speeds and more than 10-20 minutes on the track.

Regarding negotiation, that gets personal, but yes, lots, hence the phrase "never negotiate against yourself" and the repetition of the core issue and objective...

 

[stanglife]

trans temps of 280 to trigger shutdown is conservative? Seriously?

I'll say this.. it is mildly annoying that you insist on having an opinion on an issue which bears no relevance to you or your '93. What's more annoying is that you insist on sharing it.

See, I admit - I don't know what the temperature is. I'm simply putting an idea out there.

Again, another person who is annoyed that I'd share an opinion. Isn't that what you guys are doing? Laughable.

 

[stanglife]

Despite all the other good recommendations--data collection, petitions, etc--the following two points are flawed and at the center of your argument.





1. There should be no fault to be accepted for buying tech tech or base version if the intent is not to use them primarily for the track.

2. So far, I haven't read anyone saying they expected it to perform like the track version. I've read the opposite. No one expected it to perform like the track version. They simply expect it to perform better than 10-20 minutes on the track and to sustain high speed.

Where does the magic 10-20 minutes come from? In my case, it came from a discussion with FP. The sustained high speed comes from the owner's manual.

A flaw in a $6 CD cannot be fixed so must be returned. A flaw in a $60K car should be fixed--if you think it is a flaw, which it seems is the rub. A 60K sports car with this unadvertised limitation is flawed and should be fixed.

Agenda, yes: fix the flaw so the 60K sports car can sustain high speeds and more than 10-20 minutes on the track.

Regarding negotiation, that gets personal, but yes, lots, hence the phrase "never negotiate against yourself" and the repetition of the core issue and objective...

Well you can disagree but that certainly doesn't make it flawed. An opinion can not be flawed.

 

[mattlqx]

trans temps of 280 to trigger shutdown is conservative? Seriously?

I don't know. What point does the oil start to break down? 300? I have no basis for comparison.

I do know that without the cooler, the trans stabilizes at around 210F degrees in 70-80F ambient. I did some spirited driving through some twisties for around 10 minutes with the revs around 4-5k and it crept up to 225-230F. More data for everyone.

Sponsored