Ford’s lawyers argued against making the documents public early this year, saying, in part, "In fact, the 72 documents that … Plaintiffs propose to file highlight the fundamental deficiency in their Complaint: like the Complaint, these documents merely show that Ford — both before and after Plaintiffs purchased their vehicles — identified and addressed various issues of varying significance with the transmission."
The documents show that Ford lawyers told engineers in 2008 they were worried about the safety of the dual-clutch technology, which had encountered problems during early use by Volkswagen in Europe.
Ford would be putting this transmission into low-priced, high-volume vehicles for the first time. Corporate lawyers maintained, as noted repeatedly in emails by engineers obtained by the Free Press, that the transmissions’ tendency to slip out of gear, if combined with other conditions, would result in a “Severity 10” rating. That’s the worst possible rating under global engineering protocols designed to minimize risk and comply with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards set by the U.S. government.
...
Responding to lawyers’ concerns as the transmission was being developed, Ford quality supervisor Johann Kirchhoffer wrote in an email on June 27, 2008, that stalling “alone is not hazardous.”
“We have evidence that VW had a recall of a number of transmissions with a potential ‘Unintended Neutral’ occurring with low volumes,” he continued. “We are pursuing any effort to reduce the occurrence of an ‘Unintended Neutral’ event to a so-called ‘Broadly Acceptable level.’”
“Unintended neutral” refers to the transmission slipping out of gear.
...
Ford’s 2012 review showed that things went south from the start. The transmission architecture was selected 12 months later than normal — “limiting up-front engineering development time, resulting in ‘open’ deliverables at key program milestones,” the report said, citing compression of program approval, prototype verification, launch readiness and mass production.
“At each early checkpoint, it became more apparent” that the transmission systems for the 2011 Fiesta program “were not capable to meet customer expectations,” the review said.
A page was devoted to milestone failures with 23 “red” alert issues related to calibration and “115 software changes required before launch” for the 2011 Fiesta.
The memo noted that as the project headed toward launch, “issues increased rather than declined.”
The 2012 report also said upgrades to the dual-clutch system “will not be pursued,” because of an agreement to change technology made that October.
However, the report says alternatives would delay launch of future model years, add production and factory costs and reduce fuel economy, creating the risk Ford could run afoul of federal mpg requirements.
The change was not made, and Ford for years continued tweaking the DPS6, adjusting calibration, clutch materials and fixing a seal leak. Documents show that parts ran in short supply in late 2016 for the latest fix at that time.
...
Internal emails show growing distress and urgency in early 2013.
“I’m tired of looking like the bad guy for repairing all these DPS6 transmissions, when truthfully Ford’s the bad guy here,” said an email sent Feb. 22, 2013, from a Jacksonville, Florida, dealership. “Let’s be honest. Ford produces a horrible product and we trans guys get the wrath of it. My warranty clerk thinks I’m insane and it’s like pulling teeth to get paid for all the work we have to do on these things. The input shaft seals are only good for about 10K miles at best. And by replacing them as well as the clutch, the car’s only going to return again and again and again. I do 4 or 5 a week on average. ... I would love to know how Ford intends to fix this.”