Ford Transit 2.4 Di 2005 - Plastic filter housing fault #
Posted by Aidan Birley on December 15, 2011, 7:38 pm
Year of Manufacture *: 2005 ( Optional ) Engine Code or CC: 2.4 di
HI all
Having to do a bit of detective work on this for a fleet customer of mine.
He has a couple of 2.4 DI transits working away from home base and for convenience these have been looked after by the ford dealer near where they operate.
Yesterday we had on of these vehicle dropped off by the AA, reported total loss of oil. The cause was immediately obvious in as much as the plastic filter housing had failed. Unfortunately the engine suffered Major damage ( not helped I understand by recovery operator driving it onto the truck when specifically instructed not to ! ) This Vehicle was serviced by Ford dealer 2 weeks ago.
This is where the plot thickens, speaking to the owner, the other transit maintained by the same dealer failed in exactly the same way in November !
There explanation given by the dealer with that one was that the filter housing had suffered impact damage, that one was referred to owners insurance company who wrote the vehicle off and paid out under accidental damage claim.
even though these vehicles are not treated to well, I don't think the filter is that exposed and the chances of both failing due to Impact damage is unlikely.
That then leaves the question what was the cause in both cases ?
1) Impact damage 2) poor design by ford i.e weak part prone to failing 3) housing overtightened by mechanic causing damage 4) system over pressurising 5 ) other suggestions !
Has any one had experience with these failing on ford engine ?
I would welcome comments from members as to there thoughts and opinions reason for failure.
The photo attached is the one taken by the dealer from the first one to fail,(copy sent to me by the owner ) the one we have is here almost identical so have not posted that as well
Thanks Aidan
Re: transit DI
Posted by Mark Carter on December 15, 2011, 9:53 pm, in reply to "transit DI" Mark Carter
How long after servicing had this happened?
is there a pattern to the two "incidents"
Regards MarkModern cars, Its all wizardry and witchcraft
Re: transit DI
Posted by aidan birley on December 15, 2011, 10:20 pm, in reply to "Re: transit DI" Aidan Birley
Mark
I have not seen exact details, but understand both where serviced less than 3 weeks before failing by same garage.
cheers aidan
Re: transit DI
Posted by Ivor Jones on December 16, 2011, 8:25 am, in reply to "transit DI" Ivor Jones
Aidan. Looking at the picture and bearing in mind a 2.4Di Transit is RWD, there is no impact damage to the cross member or sump, the plastic housing does not protrude lower than these items and in actual fact is well protected on these vans. Looking at the damage and the fact that the plastic nut is 36mm my thoughts are that the housing has been either fractured releasing the filter with a badly fitting socket or over tightened when fitting. Regards Ivor
Re: transit DI
Posted by sean savage on December 16, 2011, 12:45 pm, in reply to "Re: transit DI" Sean Savage
i tend to agree with ivoron this issue. impact in the same place on two vehicles is extremely slim and as mentioned no signs of an other impact damage which rules out driving over very rough land etc. the failure is exactly where the plastic tightening nut is aswell which also indicated a failure of the plastic housing through removal or tightening. or your customer got wise and decided to break it to get an insurance pay out after the first one? either way it is going to be almost ompossible to put liability onto the ford garage and prove it was down to them. sean
Re: transit DI
Posted by aidan birly on December 18, 2011, 3:44 pm, in reply to "Re: transit DI"
Hi
Thank for the replies, the lack of reports of similar incidents would suggest it is a rare occurrence. ( good news for us all
The dealer in question has been instructed to inspect the vehicle at our premisis and give an explanation, we will wait and see what that throws up.
the second vehicle which we have hear also show no damage to sump or cross member, with that one we also have the broken center section which again shows no marks.
the owner would certainly not gain from an insurance claim, the problems with being without a vehicle far out way any marginal financial advantage i.e insurance value V trade in value.
Of course the driver might feel its time he had new vehicle to !
It's worth noting that if the owner did pursue a claim it would be a civil court issue. Which means that they would not have to Prove beyond all reasonable doubt (as in a criminal case} the garage was at fault, the case would be ruled on the balance of probabilities.
Lets hope it does not go that way, never good for the trade.