Ford Problems

Ford Falcon headliner replacement cost will be somewhere between about $300 and $500, depending on a few details. Those prices are based on a modern Falcon, say, a BA Falcon or FG Falcon from this century, after Ford had switched to the one-piece, cardboard-backed headliner. However, the cost could be more if the vehicle is a station wagon or has a sunroof fitted, as both these things alter the amount of material used and the degree of difficulty in removing and refitting the headliner. 

Other variables include whether you take the vehicle to a motor trimmer to have the existing headliner recovered, or you call an onsite repairer to remove your old headliner and fit a reconditioned unit in your driveway or car-park at work.

You might be able to find a second-hand replacement headliner at an auto parts recycler, but the danger is that the headliner you buy might also fail in the not-too distant future. That’s because the modern one-piece headliner – including late-model Falcon headlining - is made from a structural backing board with a layer of foam sandwiched between the board and the vinyl or cloth that you see above your head. Over time and with heat, the foam layer breaks down into dusty fragments and the adhesion between the backing board and cloth or vinyl is lost. That’s when the cloth starts to hang down inside the car.

Overall, Falcon roof lining replacement is not a difficult job for an experienced trimmer, but it is a bit fiddly and will take some time. Many owners put up with a saggy headliner, but a fresh roof lining repair will make the car look and feel brand new again.

You can find more information here. 

The problem you have with this particular make and model is that it’s really not worth very much even in good working condition. Cars like yours with engines in good condition change hands for about $3000 (sometimes less) so replacing the engine would almost certainly cost more than the car is worth. That said, if you can find a cheap second-hand engine (that’s been tested so you know it works) and you can find a workshop who can do the changeover for the right price, you might squeeze a few more years out of the car without blowing your budget sky-high. And at least then you know what you’re working with; buying another cheap second-hand car could land you in the same spot in a few months or even weeks’ time.

That, of course, only applies if the problem with your engine is of the terminal mechanical kind. Has the engine been assessed by a mechanic? It could simply be that a new set of spark plugs will bring the car back to its old, four-cylinder self. Selling the car to a wrecking yard will only get you the vehicle’s scrap value – maybe $200 or $300 dollars. And a private buyer is unlikely to offer you any more than that on the basis of a cheap car with a blown-up engine. Meantime, the price of newer second-hand cars has gone up lately with limited supply the main problem, so maybe a quote on fixing what you have is the first step.

There’s a distinct line in the sand here. If the 2005 Ford Focus you’re referring to was a late Mark 1 Focus, then yes, the headlights should interchange with an earlier Focus as both cars were more or less the same. At the time, Ford was making use of what was called its `Edge’ styling philosophy which was all hard lines and sharp angles.

However, for the Mark 2 Focus which came along in May 2005, Ford had softened the styling considerably, and the headlights of an early Focus will definitely not fit the Mark 2 model as they are a totally different shape.

What puzzles me most is where you managed to obtain a 2000 Focus as the car was not introduced into Australia by Ford until late 2002. The car did exist prior to that, but not in this country. Perhaps you’re buying headlights online from an overseas seller. If that’s the case, make sure they’re for a right-hand-drive Focus as they’ll physically point the wrong way if they’re for a left-hand-drive car. They’ll also be technically unroadworthy if that’s the case.

I wouldn’t be concerned about the cylinder configuration of a particular engine. What’s more important is how much power and torque that engine makes, and how towing-friendly that power delivery is. By which we mean how smooth and flexible is the delivery. What you don’t want is a peaky engine that needs to be revved before it delivers the good as that puts a strain on everything and make the vehicle tricky and unpleasant to drive.

The good news is that all the vehicles you’ve nominated have good, solid powerplants that are well suited to towing a caravan. Modern turbo-diesels – especially with an automatic transmission – are ideal for this task.

What you should go for, however, is the vehicle with the highest towing rating. In this case, that’s any of the Grand Cherokee, MU-X or older Discovery, all of which have variants that can handle a towed load of 3.5 tonnes. The Everest is almost as good with 3.1 tonne, but only almost. The problem is that the van you’ve nominated can easily weigh between 2.2 and 2.8 tonnes which, with a 3.1-tonne limit, leaves you very little headroom for water tanks and camping gear. You’d be amazed at how much a fully loaded caravan weighs, so don’t rely on the brochure, load the van and take it to a weighbridge to make sure the vehicle you have can legally tow it.

It sounds very much like a seized bush in the rubber-donut assembly that joins the tailshaft to the back of the gearbox. Inside the rubber donut (also called the flex-joint) there’s a metal inner bush and these have been known to seize. Water gets into this bush and rusts the assembly solid. If that happens, it will feel like the thing will never come apart.

At that point, perhaps removing the slip-yoke from the back of the transmission will allow you to remove the whole assembly and get better access to it on a bench, rather than from under the car. The slip-yoke shouldn’t present any problems other than you might lose a little transmission fluid (so have some rags handy) but you do need to remember to mark the position of all the components relative to each other. That means marking where the tailshaft bolts were relative to the rear coupling, the coupling relative to the flange, the shaft relative to the yoke’s holes and so on. That’s so when the tailshaft is reassembled and refitted, it’s still in balance and won’t create any new driveline vibrations. This process even extends to marking which nuts and bolts attached to which mounting holes in the rear CV joint, as some of these bolts were individually weighted for balance.

The other thing to check is the actual centre bearing you’re trying to replace. For some reason there were two different part numbers for this series of Ford Falcon. One has a different bearing inner diameter and a different spacing for the mounting holes compared with the other. Make sure you buy the correct one.

Ford’s Powershift dual-clutch transmission is one of the most suspect pieces of engineering in recent history. When failures of the transmission first started being noticed, Ford, rather than fix the problem, took the view that owners were driving the car incorrectly and laying blame there. It didn’t end there, though, as the high failure rate of the gearbox soon had the ACCC involved and Ford was subsequently fined and accused of `unconscionable conduct’ by the consumer watchdog.

Fundamentally, the transmission itself was junk. It suffered failures of the electronics and sensors as well as the control module and, in some cases, failure of the mechanical parts including clutch-packs. Symptoms include harsh shifting, a loss of drive, noises and, as you’ve noted, failure to select some gears.

Even worse was the dry-clutch unit fitted to Ford Focus, Fiesta and Ecosport models which would fail even more spectacularly. These were so bad, Ford ended up offering owners of those vehicles a very cheap trade-up deal to the newer model which used a conventional torque converter automatic rather than the dreaded dual-clutch. Unfortunately, the wet-clutch unit in your car wasn’t included in that offer, but the failures are still well documented.

You’re right that the car is well out of warranty now, but I still think you’d be wise to have a chat with Ford’s customer service division to see if there’s anything that can be done to help you out financially. Throwing away a modern car with just over 100,000km on board just doesn’t seem right in 2021. Nor does a transmission that costs almost $10,000 to replace. But I can see your point about throwing good money after bad; on today’s figures, your car is worth about $10,000, roughly the same as the gearbox it requires.

There is, indeed, an all-wheel-drive version of the current-model Ford Transit in some parts of the world, but sadly for those with a specific set of needs, it isn’t coming to Australia. Fundamentally, the sales volumes wouldn’t justify Ford’s investment in technical training and spare parts required to get the AWD Transit into showrooms here.

On the face of it, Australian buyers looking for an all-wheel-drive commercial vehicle are vastly more attracted to vehicles like Ford’s own Ranger dual-cab utility. And that shouldn’t really come as a surprise, either; local buyers have always been more drawn to conventional utilities than they have vans. That’s the complete reversal of how the European market sees things, but that’s cultural difference for you.

Meantime, I can see why some people would like an AWD Transit. For towing a tradie trailer while keeping your other gear safe and having the ability to get on and off greasy building sites, a van like a Transit with four-wheel-drive would take some beating. But for now, for Australia, it’s officially a no from Ford.

This is a bit of a perennial question when it comes to older second-hand cars that suddenly need expensive repairs. On current values, your Escape is probably worth almost exactly the same as the new transmission will cost you. The problem is that even if you do have the new transmission fitted, you won’t have doubled the value of the car. In fact, you’ll have done nothing for its resale value compared with any other working Escape. And right now, your Escape with a broken transmission is worth – roughly - $300 which is what a scrap merchant will pay for it to be crushed and turned into microwave ovens.

However, balancing all that is the question of, if you do scrap the car, how much will you need to spend to get into something that will be reliable and safe? And the answer to that is probably more than $5000. At this point, you also need to assess the condition of the rest of your car. At 170,000km on the clock, it could well be ready for maintenance in other expensive areas.

But assuming the rest of your car is in good condition and still works properly, here’s another option: Rather than a brand-new transmission, why not track down a good, second-hand unit from a vehicle recycler. Specialist recyclers have a range of components like these, and you should be able to find one that’s been tested and perhaps even carries a short warranty. It will still cost money to buy the transmission and have it fitted, but it shouldn’t be anything like $5000 and if it keeps your car on the road for another few years, then it’s recycling at its best. The greenest car is the one that’s already been built.

The `smart’ alternator fitted to the Ford Ranger was designed to cap the amount of charge being fed back into the vehicle’s battery. In effect, it meant that the battery was usually charged to a lower voltage that it would have bene with a conventional alternator.

The reason for this was to extend battery life by never over-charging (and stressing) the battery, but many owners have found that the lower charge rate left them with a battery more likely to go flat when they most needed it. Many Rangers are also used for camping and therefore have a second battery fitted. That could also cause problems as the extra battery and electrical accessories often fitted to such vehicles weren’t recognised by the vehicle’s computer, leading to more low-voltage problems.

For many Ranger owners, the solution was a trip to a Ford dealer where the computer could be re-programmed to make the alternator perform in a traditional (non-smart) way and keep everything purring along. Having this performed at a dealership will not affect your warranty, but having a non-Ford technician fiddle with the charging system may not be so warranty-friendly.

I’m also informed that driving everywhere with the car’s headlights switched on causes the alternator to acknowledge the current draw and switch to a higher charging output.

With the official combined fuel consumption figure for your Ranger being 8.9 litres per 100km, having 50km of range remaining should, theoretically, suggest you have slightly less than five litres of fuel in the tank. Which further suggests you should be able to add something like 75 litres of fuel at that point. But car-makers tend to set up these warnings on remaining fuel range fairly pessimistically, giving you a bigger margin before running out. And that’s what I’d imagine is happening here. They do so because most cars will never match their official fuel number in the real world, as well as giving you a bit of lee-way in case a service station doesn’t magically appear over the next hill. The upshot is that you won’t be able to pump as much fuel into the tank as you thought it would take; that is, you had more fuel remaining in the tank than you thought.

As far as your distance per tank goes, that sounds about bang on the money to me. To get 700km from the Ranger’s 80-litre tank gives you an overall fuel consumption number of 11.4 litres per 100km which I would say is just what you should expect from this vehicle in normal use.