I don’t think ‘grenading’ is a feature many would opt for in a new car, but then again I haven’t been in the market for a while so who knows?

Its crazy how brainwashed people are with modern cars. “Whats the big deal? You’re brand new cars engine blew up? Well it probably didn’t light on fire and kill your whole family so I don't even see the problem"

The first gen 2.7 nano engines were built at the Lima plant - I’m guessing the current/second gen 2.7 nano are built there too. I thought that maybe there were 2 plants building the current nano, but it looks like it’s just the Lima plant in Ohio.

That’s sure what it seems like, early mile failures are usually out of spec parts.  But would Ford build a batch of 2.7's that only go into the Bronco?  Given the amount of other Ford vehicles that use the 2.7 it’s odd that it has only been happening to the Bronco so far.

I’m sure they care. But they’ve been as rare as hen’s teeth, so you just go along with it. 

Bronco is that rare unicorn where it’s been a total shit show and absolutely nobody with the ability to buy one cares. 

I mean, Ford wanted a Wrangler competitor. Significant recalls really give you that FCA experience.

Such a great time to buy a vehicle what with plentiful parts, manufactures not rushing product out the door, etc.

I wonder if any of them had to already go through the roof recall. 

I’m betting these are all related to a batch of bad/out of spec valves. All I hear about seized 2.7's are dropped valves, and only recently. Suppliers get shit wrong sometimes, then you gotta recall all the engines that have that supplier’s parts. I thought they ID’d the batch of valves that were bad already.

Imagine if these sat in a lot for ages waiting for computer chips only to have the engine that had been sitting there the whole time be junk. Brutal.

Or its about slight performance increases on high end, performance cars. This existing doesn’t mean it will suddenly show up on Camrys. 

it’s not about “I have to throw my car in the garbage because my plastic coil springs are worn (or broken?) it’s death by 1,000 cuts. when the car gets to 80k miles and you are taking it to the dealership once quarter and dropping several hundred dollars in the shop doing “maintenance” you will decide it’s not “worth…

Engineer here. Not going to say I know what I am talking about for this application, but I do know a few things about it.

It’s not that they’re lying about the benefits, it’s that they’re omitting key details. Lying by omission, one might say. One big advantage with C4-C6 Corvette suspension is it deforms both ways almost equally, under compression and extension. Because it’s a stack of leaf bars hanging down instead of holding up.

Giving how fragile and brittle plastic car parts get after being exposed to weather overtime, I have ZERO faith in this idea. Sounds like something designed to fail sooner than what it’s replacing. They may not rust, but they might get so brittle that they just turn to dust one day going over a pothole.

“metal coil springs are not heavy”

Exactly, plastic degrades over time, which will be a MUCH larger problem than rusting springs ever have been. After a few years, these things will crack and need to be replaced. This is NOT an innovation that’s meant to be good for consumers.

While it may not become the norm, FRP is already used in suspensions, such as the Corvette’s leaf springs as mentioned, and I can’t believe Rheinmetall isn’t aware of the benefits of steel and is just lying about this.

Sounds good, doesn’t work. While the idea of lightweight springs is a good one, there are a few reasons why steel is still the standard.