Stock Front and Rear Suspension Changes Between Early/Late Production

[danbfree]

That's not how the OEM replacement parts are sold. You will see from the picture below about the rear axle beam.

So I know the rear includes a fatter rear beam too, but the build dates are quite clear from the other thread and the '16 supplemental manual mentions none of the upgrades at all, I don't get it, but does make more sense to do it all at once... Since that's what all the replacement part dates say then I guess consider the suspension both front and rear updated as of 2/16/16 and later builds, I just doubt there were many '16's made after that date, but certainly some...

 

[Ford ST]

So I know the rear includes a fatter rear beam too, but the build dates are quite clear and the '16 supplemental manual mentions none of the upgrades at all, I just don't get it...

I will personally believe the OEM parts replacement guide over anything but that is just me. This is what repair shops and body shops will use.


But you know as well as I do 90% will probably replace the shocks and struts with aftermarket parts anyway.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

Don't know what to tell you. That is how the OEM parts are being sold. I will personally believe the OEM parts replacement guide over anything but that is just me. This is what repair shops and body shops will use.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

Especially since you really don't want mismatched sides in replacing just one side like in an accident situation, you are probably right... but it's just messed up how Ford has given clear 4 month apart separate dates for the front and rear suspension updates only to find out they recommend the updated rear parts the same build date as the front... just like they had updated the cooling capacity spec in the manual for '18 only to find out it's the same radiator, and some people with '18's got the updated lower temp thermostat and others got the old one, and the few with '19's report a typical running cooling temp inline with the old spec, to me Ford obviously didn't pay attention to detail on this econobox and prob changed their mind about doing a bigger radiator and lower thermostat the final 2 years and never stopped the radiator spec from being printed... I'm just glad I have a '17 with original temp thermostat so at least I know what I'm dealing with, but those with late '16's and need rear suspension parts changed better get at least both sides of shocks so they match, to be safe... Thanks for the info, just sucks that it's hard to determine anything Ford has done with this car for sure!

 

[Ford ST]

Especially since you really don't want mismatched sides in replacing just one side like in an accident situation, you are probably right... but it's just messed up how Ford has given clear 4 month apart separate dates for the front and rear suspension updates only to find out they recommend the updated rear parts the same build date as the front... just like they had updated the cooling capacity spec in the manual for '18 only to find out it's the same radiator, and some people with '18's got the updated lower temp thermostat and others got the old one, and the few with '19's report a typical running cooling temp inline with the old spec, to me Ford obviously didn't pay attention to detail on this econobox and prob changed their mind about doing a bigger radiator and lower thermostat the final 2 years and never stopped the radiator spec from being printed... I'm just glad I have a '17 with original temp thermostat so at least I know what I'm dealing with, but those with late '16's and need rear suspension parts changed better get at least both sides of shocks so they match, to be safe... Thanks for the info, just sucks that it's hard to determine anything Ford has done with this car for sure!

This is off topic but I had a Ford escort, and I needed a replacement manual transmission it was a 96. In 97 the car was updated mine was a late build 96 model year. The transmission for my car was only made for like 6 months. I believe it had to do with a different shifting linkage connection or something like that. Anyway that replacement transmission from a junkyard cost me $800 the availability was very very limited. I could have used a transmission from the prior dates, but I would have had to change my shift linkage, and maybe some other things.

So long story short Ford has a history of this.

Sent from my LG-LS997 using Tapatalk

 

[danbfree]

This is off topic but I had a Ford escort, and I needed a replacement manual transmission it was a 96. In 97 the car was updated mine was a late build 96 model year. The transmission for my car was only made for like 6 months. I believe it had to do with a different shifting linkage connection or something like that. Anyway that replacement transmission from a junkyard cost me $800 the availability was very very limited. I could have used a transmission from the prior dates, but I would have had to change my shift linkage, and maybe some other things.

So long story short Ford has a history of this.

Ahh, yeah, that's indeed pretty bad, you would think they could at least make the dates more clear for everything, but I guess that how it goes with them!

 

[PunkST]

It might have to do with using up parts on the production line before implementing the changes.

 

[TyphoonFiST]

It was most likely a "Hey lets put the remainder of these parts into this first batch and them move onto the re-designed option next week. They Both will work just fine...and who cares its Friday and its time to go home from my assembly line job and I aint driving one home anyways.