Well excuse me for breathing Mr White

I guess if you bought a house that the Brochure said had 3 bathrooms and 4 bedrooms, but found out the day you moved in it was really one bathroom with 3 bowls in it, and 1 bedroom with 4 hanging beads dividing the area's,
that would be ok hu ???

I aint worrying about my crank AT ALL, but I do have a problem with Ford if they seem to have forgot to mention this, 3 yrs in a row
It was one of the main reasons I bought this truck, I figured it had a bullet proof lower end and I could throw a 150 shot on it with no problem (like I have done on stock motors before)
BOY WAS I WRONG.

 

It is kind of sad when people have been exposed to so much lying that some begin to think that lying is ok. When you advertise "Forged" and you instal "Cast" you are a liar and liable for false advertising. A falsehood has been told. Period.

 

Thanks for backing me alphadoggy and tzrider, the above posted picture is worth more than a million words...my cast crank may still sit at REM, but it will never be used in a built motor.......you will get exactly what you pay for at REM, unlike Ford.......

 

Here's the resident business litgator's (unsolicited) perspective:

1. False advertising: Depending upon the state or federal law applied, there may or may not be a materiality requirement. If there is such a requirement, Ford might get off the hook by saying that it makes no difference -- no harm, no foul. Ford might argue that if the crank is good enough, what does it matter?

BUT, as was pointed out above, Ford itself charges three times as much for the forged piece. That would seem to be at least some evidence of materiality. Plus, Ford repeatedly makes a big deal out of the fact. Why would it keep crowing about forged this and that if it did not matter?

Plus, think about the logical conclusion of this rumor -- people on the Chevy boards will start blabbing about how L's have random parts installed. The resale value of the trucks may then be depressed.

I don't think that Ford's little "your mileage may vary" disclaimer gets them out of anything. Doesn't pass the stink test (sorry for the technical legal jargon ).

2. Breach of contract: A breach must be material. See above.

3. Unfair business practices: If your state has a law anything like California Business and Professions Code section 17200, there would appear to be a good claim. "Damages," however, are not available under the statute -- remedies are limited to an injunction and restitution. Therefore, to get any money, one would be required to prove that Ford has some money which belongs to you. There again, there would seem to be a need for some proof that the substitution of parts was material in order to actually get money from Ford's pocket into yours.

One potential obstacle to a class action might be a court requiring YOU to prove that YOUR crank is cast. Well, hell, that would cost more than the crank just to figure out (unless Sal's parts lookup would do the trick). This test has been sporadically applied to class action product defect cases, but I don't recall it ever being successfully brought in a false advertising case.

But, let there be no doubt about it, my opinion is that Ford has some kind of liability if the rumor is proven true. Whether that liability actually translates to money in anyone's pocket (other than the lawyers' ) is another issue altogether. Class actions are notorious for being more beneficial to the lawyers that bring them than to the actual plaintiff class. Doesn't bother me any, but I suspect that many may have a problem with that.

If more evidence comes in, it may be worth further consideration.

 

That wasn't exactly my agenda, promo, but I have no reason to doubt your integrity, unlike a certain automobile mfgr. I could mention. And I have never seen anyone here bum rap Paul or Tim. I am thankful that Sal brought this problem to our attention. My motor was finished and ready to go back in the truck when he launched the post about breaking his crank. The timing was fortuitous; we were able to abort the project and yank the cast crank out and obtain a forged one, which arrived today. My builder says that the old one is a "piece of junk" compared to the new one. I be a happy camper now, I have a lot more confidence that my motor is going to hang together under the boost I will be running, and even more so considering that ultimately my builder will not be happy until we see 1000+ h.p. So thanks to all you folks who contributed information and helped me avoid a big mistake.

 

If a cast crank held up to almost 1100 ftlb torque in sals truck, a steel version should more than hold up in your quest for 1000 HP, alphadoggy.......I found that racing can be a sport of compromise...the parts that we may compromise on are usually the first ones to break.....at least in my experience....

 

For what its worh, in the Mach 1, the 4.6 DOHC uses a Cast Crank when mated behind an automatic and a steel crank when mated behind the 5 speed.

 

I said it before... I doubt that I will ever require a forged crank. But when I bought my L (my second one at that), I was led to believe that certain parts were included in the vehicle. If those parts are not there, then I deserve to be compensated for what I did not receive.

At this point, I would almost consider tearing my motor down to find out for sure.

It would not be pretty if I were to find a cast crank in my L...

 

I somehow missed your post. I'm not calling you or Tim or Paul a liar.

I stand corrected.

 

Didn't Ford have to replace all of the radiators or credit the owners $500 for the older F150 when they installed the wrong radiator?

 

Finally, the simple truth..............

 

Alls good Coldie..............I wonder what Ford would do I I mailed them my cast crank and demanded compensation for what I didnt get????

 

If there is solid evidence here, I wonder if magazines like MMFF would print a letter to Ford regarding this, and other design/quality debacles surrounding the plug launchings, warranty issues, etc.?

 

MM&FF's editorial position is strongly pro-Ford, which is understandable considering their revenue sources. I think you are more likely to get a sympathetic ear from Blue Oval News.
http://www.blueovalnews.com/

 

Thanks for the picture TZRider. As they say, a picture is worth a thousand words.

But let me quote from the bottom of the table of contents from my owners manual..........

"All rights reserved. Reproduction by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system or translation in whole or part is nor permitted without written authorization from Ford Motor Company. Ford may change the contents without notice and without incurring obligation"