Focus Fanatics Forum banner

81 - 84 of 84 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
335 Posts
However it sounds to me (from your tone) like you get the idea that I think a manual is inferior to a DCT. Not at all how I feel.
I felt like you were saying that a true manual was, if nothing else, equivalent to the DPS6 in terms of expected wear, longevity, and reliability because they, too, have clutches.

If that's not what you meant, then you have my apologies. I believe it's important to point out to anyone (not necessarily you, but anyone who reads this) that the DCT is not simply and "automated manual" as it was (and still is) commonly referred to. It's the differences that make a true manual more reliable and robust. And because of this, it's why I can reasonably say that the DPS6 is inherently flawed (in terms of hardware) since it simply cannot operate without destroying itself quickly.

So say I tune it early, and I don't have shudder for 30k or more miles, then it comes back around 100k like you say. Then what, we say there's a hardware issue, right? I mean something has to explain it other than chanting "design flaw/poor design". My issue with this is it doesn't tell us what it is about the design that leads to the issue. Heat? Possible. Failing TCM ruining the clutch? Also possible.
All I can say is that if it were in fact a good design, it wouldn't exhibit shudder until we could reasonably expect the hardware to have worn out. Sure, 100k sounds somewhat arbitrary, but that's (loosely) based on decades of data from various platforms and types of transmissions (and variations on each of those).

5y/60k miles on the drivetrain is pathetic (though we all knew what we were buying, so that's on us). Heck, that's what the likes of Kia, Mitsubishi, and Hyundia offer on the entire car, with 10y/100k on the drivetrain. Statistically, they're going to gain more in customer base and brand loyalty than they'll lose on drivetrain warranty repairs, because any modern transmission simply shouldn't have trouble - let alone recurring trouble - before then.

The problem is that this isn't a proper experiment. There is no control. Your next clutch pack might make it 10k or 100k, and the only thing you can say for sure is that if it only makes 10k with Tom's tune, Tom's tune didn't fix it. You could draw a huge range of conclusions from any other outcome and even if one of them is right, we won't really know. So everything is anecdotal and anecdotal is not fact, even though it seems like a fact to the person with the experience.

Please don't get me wrong, I agree 100% that software is a contributing factor. I think you and I disagree on how much of a contributing factor it is. I maintain that the software is like patching a hole with duct tape: the hole might not leak for a while - and better tape will last longer - but the hole is still there. The DPS6 has a hole and Tom claims to have better tape. We won't know how good his tape is until it starts leaking again.

I don't know man, but I'm certainly not saying this trans is the best thing since sliced bread, because it's not. I just wonder how things might be different had they not tried so hard to make this thing like a TC box.
Possibly better, though the argument still is that Tom's tune works because it's specific to each car. The default Ford programming simply can't cover the variation between transmissions. It clearly works just fine for some, but for others - whether it's just variation inherent to the transmission or the driver's particular commute or a combination of both - it's not good enough. I don't know what Tom's success rate is, but I'm sure it's decent and even better when applied to a fresh clutch pack.

I wish you the best of luck, truly. I just got a new pack (my 3rd) at 58k miles and the warranty on my 2014 was set to expire this month...now I get another 42k miles and 2 years to abuse these while I wait for the NHTSA to come back with their determination and for a proper lawsuit to punish Ford for being liars. I probably would have gotten Tom's tune later this month, but now I can't think of a reason to bother. I'll let Ford keep replacing my clutch pack. If I had Tom's tune already, though, I'd absolutely use it with a fresh set.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
440 Posts
Ford extended the warranty out for wet shudder. That's what 14M01 is for to begin with.

Dry shudder isn't even an issue to Ford. Why? Them give me a lifetime warranty since it keeps coming back.

Read between the lines friend. They don't even think it's a problem.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using FF Mobile
You're an exception and not the rule then with the lifetime warranty. This is a modern day Ford Pinto issue, executives know there's an issue and push out the car anyways regardless to put the burden on the consumer. They don't think it's a problem but it's not like car companies are politics-free and do things for the better of their customers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
You're an exception and not the rule then with the lifetime warranty. This is a modern day Ford Pinto issue, executives know there's an issue and push out the car anyways regardless to put the burden on the consumer. They don't think it's a problem but it's not like car companies are politics-free and do things for the better of their customers.
I was saying they might as well give me a lifetime warranty, but that will never happen, as we all know. Way too expensive.

No multi billion dollar business truly cares about you. That is correct.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
159 Posts
I felt like you were saying that a true manual was, if nothing else, equivalent to the DPS6 in terms of expected wear, longevity, and reliability because they, too, have clutches.

If that's not what you meant, then you have my apologies. I believe it's important to point out to anyone (not necessarily you, but anyone who reads this) that the DCT is not simply and "automated manual" as it was (and still is) commonly referred to. It's the differences that make a true manual more reliable and robust. And because of this, it's why I can reasonably say that the DPS6 is inherently flawed (in terms of hardware) since it simply cannot operate without destroying itself quickly.


All I can say is that if it were in fact a good design, it wouldn't exhibit shudder until we could reasonably expect the hardware to have worn out. Sure, 100k sounds somewhat arbitrary, but that's (loosely) based on decades of data from various platforms and types of transmissions (and variations on each of those).

5y/60k miles on the drivetrain is pathetic (though we all knew what we were buying, so that's on us). Heck, that's what the likes of Kia, Mitsubishi, and Hyundia offer on the entire car, with 10y/100k on the drivetrain. Statistically, they're going to gain more in customer base and brand loyalty than they'll lose on drivetrain warranty repairs, because any modern transmission simply shouldn't have trouble - let alone recurring trouble - before then.

The problem is that this isn't a proper experiment. There is no control. Your next clutch pack might make it 10k or 100k, and the only thing you can say for sure is that if it only makes 10k with Tom's tune, Tom's tune didn't fix it. You could draw a huge range of conclusions from any other outcome and even if one of them is right, we won't really know. So everything is anecdotal and anecdotal is not fact, even though it seems like a fact to the person with the experience.

Please don't get me wrong, I agree 100% that software is a contributing factor. I think you and I disagree on how much of a contributing factor it is. I maintain that the software is like patching a hole with duct tape: the hole might not leak for a while - and better tape will last longer - but the hole is still there. The DPS6 has a hole and Tom claims to have better tape. We won't know how good his tape is until it starts leaking again.


Possibly better, though the argument still is that Tom's tune works because it's specific to each car. The default Ford programming simply can't cover the variation between transmissions. It clearly works just fine for some, but for others - whether it's just variation inherent to the transmission or the driver's particular commute or a combination of both - it's not good enough. I don't know what Tom's success rate is, but I'm sure it's decent and even better when applied to a fresh clutch pack.

I wish you the best of luck, truly. I just got a new pack (my 3rd) at 58k miles and the warranty on my 2014 was set to expire this month...now I get another 42k miles and 2 years to abuse these while I wait for the NHTSA to come back with their determination and for a proper lawsuit to punish Ford for being liars. I probably would have gotten Tom's tune later this month, but now I can't think of a reason to bother. I'll let Ford keep replacing my clutch pack. If I had Tom's tune already, though, I'd absolutely use it with a fresh set.
Yeah, not quite equivalent, just that there is a chance to get similar (but maybe not the same) mileage from clutches on a DCT. I'm kinda amazed some people put even up to 100k and the clutches don't go out entirely (because of shudder, programmed slip, and then slipping as the clutches wear). It's also amazing how quickly shudder gets worse and worse. That said, I stopped with the stock software at 31k on the clutches and flashed the car with Tom, so I can only imagine how bad my shudder would be right now otherwise.

I agree on the 5 year/60k. It wasn't until after I got the tune that I realized the 100k coverage had only been for early models at that point. I was misled and told I had coverage until then (by someone online). The plan was to get new clutches before it expired, then reflash the tune. Frankly, I totally agree that getting new clutches then tune is the best bet. However I was already well over 60k on my 16. It was a rental that had 45k when I got it. Then new clutches at 47. Read about the tune and set the plan in motion. Couldn't afford it for a long time.

This new set that I should be doing, and a reflash of Tom's tune asap, is largely gonna determine my final opinion on this trans. I'm excited at the prospect, but obviously kinda nervous, because it's uncharted territory. Those whose shudder is fully eliminated by the tune must be in better shape than my clutches. The car though, is a much better driving experience under the tune, than it ever was stock.

However I'm more concerned to see if my TCM will make 100k + miles. I asked the service department guy from my local dealer and he wouldn't give me a straight answer on the newer TCMs. Just said he's seen 2014's and down get a lot of clutches and TCMs. Was also told if the tech felt I needed a new TCM, they'd replace it, no questions asked.

I understand not having a great opinion about this trans, and being skeptical about the design; I totally get it. I just personally feel that if a tune helps that much, it's not really as bad as people make it out to be. However the early models were straight dumpster fires no doubt about it. Being my own guinea pig for fresh clutches and new tune is something I'm excited about, and the timing couldn't be better, as I've been hoping the extension to 100k would happen. It's hard to justify spending $1000 + when you're below 100k miles.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
81 - 84 of 84 Posts
Top