How widespread is the eCVT failure?

[WannaCMAX]

A 2014 CMAX SEL with 70K is at the top of my list, but I'm reading all the issues with the CVT and thinking "no way!"

 

Is this 10% of transmissions, or is it ALL of them?  What is the chance to make it to 200K without the issue?  I'm mechanically inclined, but it appears that getting the motor/cvt out requires a lift.  Which means WHEN it fails, I'll be spending a minimum of 3K and probably 2-3 weeks downtime.

 

If that is the case, I just. can't. do. it.

 

So frustrating because this is the perfect car in every other respect.  I don't want a miniSUV that gets 25mpg, I want a CMAX!

 

Also, is there a magnet in the transmission pan like a traditional transmission?  If a normal transmision is quietly grenading, you can drop the pan and check the magnet.  You will see all the metal fragments collected there and know something is wrong.

 

 

Edited January 14, 2020 by WannaCMAX

[plus 3 golfer]

First, there is no transmission pan.  I suppose you could get a magnetic drain plug.  But, you can easily drain the fluid out and check and then fill by the fill / Fluid level plug. IIRC, fluid change maintenance is 150k miles. 
 

I don’t recall if anyone has made it past 200k on the original transmission on early MY C-Maxes.  There’s likely early taxi fleet C-Maxes that may have made 200k miles.   So, my guess is that the likelihood of a transmission failure prior to 200k on early MYs may be as high as 10%. I would also guess that over 90% make it past 100k miles (8 yr. / 100k mile is warranty  in non CARB states).   I have 122k miles on my 2013 C-Max with no bearing issue “symptoms / sounds.” Unfortunately, only Ford knows the failure rates of the C-Max transmissions. Attached is a snip of CR reliability consumer survey results for the C-Max.  Yellow is average, light green with an one chevron is better than average, and dark green with two chevrons is excellent reliability.

, 

If I were to get a used one,  I’d get a late build 2016 MY or later MY as it appears Ford may have mitigated the bearing issue in those transmissions.  Of course you will pay more for a 2016 than a 2014 all other things being similar.  But, the 2016 likely has a better chance to make 200k miles on the original transmission.  

 

[fbov]

10/2012 build date here. Fully expect I have a hand grenade, so I'm trading it in before it blows, even at 66K miles. Absent the tranny issue, I'd be good for years more... but it's not absent, and mine's a likely candidate. I just missed the last of the new, 2018 C-Max, but this way, I get a block heater (2020 Escape hybrid).  

 

I highly recommend Plus 3's advice. 

Frank

[WannaCMAX]

9 hours ago, Plus 3 Golfer said:

First, there is no transmission pan.  I suppose you could get a magnetic drain plug.  But, you can easily drain the fluid out and check and then fill by the fill / Fluid level plug. IIRC, fluid change maintenance is 150k miles. 
 

I don’t recall if anyone has made it past 200k on the original transmission on early MY C-Maxes.  There’s likely early taxi fleet C-Maxes that may have made 200k miles.   So, my guess is that the likelihood of a transmission failure prior to 200k on early MYs may be as high as 10%. I would also guess that over 90% make it past 100k miles (8 yr. / 100k mile is warranty  in non CARB states).   I have 122k miles on my 2013 C-Max with no bearing issue “symptoms / sounds.” Unfortunately, only Ford knows the failure rates of the C-Max transmissions. Attached is a snip of CR reliability consumer survey results for the C-Max.  Yellow is average, light green with an one chevron is better than average, and dark green with two chevrons is excellent reliability.

, 

If I were to get a used one,  I’d get a late build 2016 MY or later MY as it appears Ford may have mitigated the bearing issue in those transmissions.  Of course you will pay more for a 2016 than a 2014 all other things being similar.  But, the 2016 likely has a better chance to make 200k miles on the original transmission.  

 

Was the transmission redesigned in 2016?  It may be that the newer cars just dont have as many miles.

 

I know there are original transmission in the 13 that have gotten close to 200K.  But there are also many on this forum that have grenaded.  The question for me, did these people seek out the forum *because* their CVT grenaded, or were they members here already who then had problems?

 

If the former, then it may just be a small but significant percentage.  If the latter, then the car is a ticking time bomb.

 

Are you sure the CVT is covered by 8/100K?  If so, that means a 2014 with 70K would have two more years and 30k miles.  Enough time to save 3K for a new cvt if needed.  If the problem is widespread, then the transmissions will be very expensive, but the used page I saw had them in the 1000-1500 range.

 

A 2016 costs about 4-5K more than a 2014.

 

Edited January 14, 2020 by WannaCMAX

[plus 3 golfer]

48 minutes ago, WannaCMAX said:

 

Was the transmission redesigned in 2016?  It may be that the newer cars just dont have as many miles.

 

I know there are original transmission in the 13 that have gotten close to 200K.  But there are also many on this forum that have grenaded.  The question for me, did these people seek out the forum *because* their CVT grenaded, or were they members here already who then had problems?

 

If the former, then it may just be a small but significant percentage.  If the latter, then the car is a ticking time bomb.

 

Are you sure the CVT is covered by 8/100K?  If so, that means a 2014 with 70K would have two more years and 30k miles.  Enough time to save 3K for a new cvt if needed.  If the problem is widespread, then the transmissions will be very expensive, but the used page I saw had them in the 1000-1500 range.

 

A 2016 costs about 4-5K more than a 2014.

 

I can relate the perceived failure rate of C-Max transmission with the issue of the HPFP failures on 2009+ VW TDIs.  The MSRP on parts to replace everything that was contaminated with metal in the fuel system was over $5k and labor was about another $1k.  There seemed to a lot of HPFP failures on the TDI forum on early model TDIs (mine failed at 44k miles but covered on warranty).  We documented over 200 failures on the forum (many past the 5 yr 60k mile warranty) but some under warranty and the rest not covered under warranty because of fuel contamination.  We believed that most owners whose pump failed and covered under warranty didn't participate in the forum. Some owners who paid for the HPFP repair likely sought out the forum to complain.  Many forum members believed the failure rate was extremely high like well north of 10% for MY 2009.  NHTSA investigated the issue because many failures happened will driving the car and left the owner powerless at highway speeds.

 

So, eventually VW had to supply lots of data on the failures to NHTSA. Long story short, here's a summary I prepared from the VW reports of the HPFP failures showing the failure rates which many thought would be at least 10% on 2009 MY.  As you can see the failure rate was actually less than 5% for MY 2009.  So, since the cost to repair a failure is very high (HPFP or transmission), I believe it's natural to assume the worst even though we really don't know how many transmission or HPFPs have actually failed.  We speculate on failure rates based on owners complaining about the high cost to repair.  Transmissions fail on all cars but the cost to replace is the salient point.  If one can replace a failed transmission for $3k, why spend $4k+ more for a 2016 when one really is only speculating on the failure rates and will suffer likely $1-2k in depreciation on a 2016 as soon as they walk out the door. 

 

If you won't be able to sleep at night because of a potential transmission failure, don't buy a C-Max even though it's a great car.

 

[plus 3 golfer]

WIth respect to whether Ford mitigated the transmission issue with MY 2015, refer to my previous linked post below.  I don't believe anyone knows but Ford whether the issue has been "fixed."

 

[fbov]

4 hours ago, WannaCMAX said:

Was the transmission redesigned in 2016? 

My understanding is that Ford used a bad batch of bearings, which fail by allowing the main shaft to shift laterally, causing severe gear wear and eventually wearing through the case. The bearing was too deep to replace economically. Ford took a software approach to minimize load on start-up. My car is 100% EV when started cold; no ICE torque for the first 20 seconds. I assume that's to allow oil pressure to build and fully lube the bearing before applying ICE torque. 

 

As to probability of failure... Once upon a time, Idaho National Laboratories was testing electric vehicles to 160K miles. 2013 model year C-Max Hybrid and Energi were among the 30 vehicles tested. 

https://avt.inl.gov/vehicle-type/all-powertrain-architecture

- 3 of 4 Hybrids replaced transmission at  90K, 110K, 116K. The fourth made 170K before end of test. It was one of two cars with consecutive VINs, implying that "good" trannys were being made alongside "bad" ones.  VINs range from 528xxx to 535xxx, implying a lot of suspect production. 

- 0 of 4 Energis replaced transmissions. 1 was removed at 30K, the other three made 150-160K without tranny failure. Energi has an extra circulation pump to make up for long stretches of ICE off. 

 

This is a small sample, but it's large enough to say that transmissions are a high failure rate item, >>10% in some 2013 Ford C-Max Hybrid production. With a 10/2012 build date, and a 506xxx VIN, I can understand why my trade-in value dropped 25% in 18 months. It reflects my lack of faith. 

 

Have fun,

Frank, who is thankful to have options. 

[WannaCMAX]

I just test drove a 2014 and it had weird drivetrain noise at 70K.  The other ones I drove were much quieter.  IDK if it was the start of bearing failure, but I've been scared off this car.

 

The ones in good condition are in the neighborhood price of a Prius V.  And we know they won't last as long.  

[ptjones]

1 hour ago, WannaCMAX said:

I just test drove a 2014 and it had weird drivetrain noise at 70K.  The other ones I drove were much quieter.  IDK if it was the start of bearing failure, but I've been scared off this car.

 

The ones in good condition are in the neighborhood price of a Prius V.  And we know they won't last as long.  

What are you talking about? My 2013 CMAX has 246K miles on it, How many miles do you think you are going to get out of a Prius V?

 

Paul

[fbov]

3 hours ago, ptjones said:

My 2013 CMAX has 246K miles on it,

Be fair, Paul, you got a warranty replacement around 100K as I recall!

The car is solid, and the IDL data shows excellent reliability. Service is a short list; the only "big ticket" item besides the tranny was tires.  

Frank

[plus 3 golfer]

I have never seen where Ford said there was a bad batch of bearings.  I believe a member may have had the dealer (not a reliable source, IMO) tell them that but I believe it’s a design issue based on Ford’s statements like: “The problem: The transfer shaft assembly bearing may fail prematurely“ and a statement I can’t readily find but that said something like “under certain conditions the bearings may fail prematurely.”  
 

Support of a design flaw rather than a batch of bad bearings comes from several additional TSBs on the issue which superseded the original TSB 14-0024 (issue date 01-31-2014).  The latest TSB 18-2328 (dated 10/30/2018) states: “Some 2013-2016 Fusion, MKZ and C-Max vehicles equipped with an HF35 transmission and built on or before 15-Aug-2015 may exhibit a thumping/rubbing or grinding noise coming from the transmission.”   The build date  of affected vehicles has not changed for several years.  If the issue was really a bad batch of bearings, I would expect all MY 2015 and 2016 to have “good” bearings since the issue was certainly known by Ford prior to 1/31/2014 when the first TSB was issued.

 

[ptjones]

8 hours ago, Plus 3 Golfer said:

I have never seen where Ford said there was a bad batch of bearings.  I believe a member may have had the dealer (not a reliable source, IMO) tell them that but I believe it’s a design issue based on Ford’s statements like: “The problem: The transfer shaft assembly bearing may fail prematurely“ and a statement I can’t readily find but that said something like “under certain conditions the bearings may fail prematurely.”  
 

Support of a design flaw rather than a batch of bad bearings comes from several additional TSBs on the issue which superseded the original TSB 14-0024 (issue date 01-31-2014).  The latest TSB 18-2328 (dated 10/30/2018) states: “Some 2013-2016 Fusion, MKZ and C-Max vehicles equipped with an HF35 transmission and built on or before 15-Aug-2015 may exhibit a thumping/rubbing or grinding noise coming from the transmission.”   The build date  of affected vehicles has not changed for several years.  If the issue was really a bad batch of bearings, I would expect all MY 2015 and 2016 to have “good” bearings since the issue was certainly known by Ford prior to 1/31/2014 when the first TSB was issued.

 

I think poorly heat threaded would make sense to me and would be an easy fix. It would also explain why there was a wide range of mileage differences. Mine lasted 98k miles and some only lasted 20k miles.

 

Paul

[ptjones]

12 hours ago, fbov said:

Be fair, Paul, you got a warranty replacement around 100K as I recall!

The car is solid, and the IDL data shows excellent reliability. Service is a short list; the only "big ticket" item besides the tranny was tires.  

Frank

This is true, but I don't see it as a real problem if it is covered under warranty.  I have 148k on my replacement trans and I feel it added value to the car.  The only problems not covered by warranty was ICE coolant hose connector and a CV shaft failure caused from boot getting torn.

 

Paul

[fbov]

11 hours ago, Plus 3 Golfer said:

I have never seen where Ford said there was a bad batch of bearings....

Nor are you likely to. It would be corporate suicide to admit you're selling cars with a known, major defect. 

Frank

 

[plus 3 golfer]

4 hours ago, fbov said:

Nor are you likely to. It would be corporate suicide to admit you're selling cars with a known, major defect. 

Frank

 

Exactly why I believe its a design issue and not a batch of bad bearings.  Since it doesn't appear to be a safety issue, environmental issue, or potential class action litigation, we likely will never know.  Ford (EPA FE fiasco), VW (HPFP issues, emissions cheating), Boeing (737 Max), and many others will never "admit" to a design flaw even though they knew or should have known prior to issue surfacing. 

 

It would be interesting to compare the internal parts diagram of the transmissions for the 2020 Escape Hybrid, 2017 C-Max and the 2013 C-Max.  Maybe Weber State will make a comparison video.?

 

[plus 3 golfer]

I finally found the reference about premature failures of the bearings under certain driving conditions.  Ford sent customers a note dated November 9, 2015 about CSP 14b07 clearly stating “under certain driving conditions, the transfer gear assembly bearing may fail prematurely.”   IMO, it is clear that the likelihood of failure is greater if the car is operated under certain driving conditions as opposed to other driving conditions.  Thus, the mileage at failure could very widely among vehicles.  

 

"REASON FOR THIS PROGRAM

Under certain driving conditions, the transfer shaft gear assembly bearing may fail prematurely. This can result in thumping, rubbing, or grinding noises from the transmission, and may be accompanied by the illumination of the powertrain fault indicator (wrench light) in the instrument cluster."

[bigqueue]

8 hours ago, Plus 3 Golfer said:

I finally found the reference about premature failures of the bearings under certain driving conditions.  Ford sent customers a note dated November 9, 2015 about CSP 14b07 clearly stating “under certain driving conditions, the transfer gear assembly bearing may fail prematurely.”   IMO, it is clear that the likelihood of failure is greater if the car is operated under certain driving conditions as opposed to other driving conditions.  Thus, the mileage at failure could very widely among vehicles.  

 

"REASON FOR THIS PROGRAM

Under certain driving conditions, the transfer shaft gear assembly bearing may fail prematurely. This can result in thumping, rubbing, or grinding noises from the transmission, and may be accompanied by the illumination of the powertrain fault indicator (wrench light) in the instrument cluster."

I believe this is the latest TSB on the transmission issue......it even includes some photos of torn up bearings.

      https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2018/MC-10148717-9999.pdf

 

Just a an FYI......this YOUTUBE video does a nice overview on the transmission and how it "evolved" from prior versions sold to Ford by an Japanese supplier:

-Quentin

 

[stolenmoment]

14 hours ago, Plus 3 Golfer said:

I finally found the reference about premature failures of the bearings under certain driving conditions.  Ford sent customers a note dated November 9, 2015 about CSP 14b07 clearly stating “under certain driving conditions, the transfer gear assembly bearing may fail prematurely.”   IMO, it is clear that the likelihood of failure is greater if the car is operated under certain driving conditions as opposed to other driving conditions.  Thus, the mileage at failure could very widely among vehicles.  

 

"REASON FOR THIS PROGRAM

Under certain driving conditions, the transfer shaft gear assembly bearing may fail prematurely. This can result in thumping, rubbing, or grinding noises from the transmission, and may be accompanied by the illumination of the powertrain fault indicator (wrench light) in the instrument cluster."

 

That smells like blame the victim, doesn't it?

[plus 3 golfer]

29 minutes ago, stolenmoment said:

 

That smells like blame the victim, doesn't it?

Exactly, deflect the “real” cause of failures back to owners.   Common practice, just like VW did on HPFP failures. Owners put some gas in tank instead of diesel fuel.  Just like Ford did as to why owners can’t get 47/47/47 mpg.  As least we got $$$ for the EPA FE ratings fiasco.

[Roger Eastman]

I vaguely remember an article about Escape Hybrids in NYC taxi service - It reported that as the Ford Hybrids reached 200,000 miles, Ford was buying them back to disassemble and inspect. The overall aspect of the article was that Ford could not find any  problems and they were happy with the results..

 

Not knowing ; just presuming - I thought that the Escape Hybrid system  was the forerunner of the C-Max Hybrid system, and therefore a " bulletproof " system.

 

Anyone else ever see the same information, and draw the same conclusion as Mine ?

[plus 3 golfer]

1 hour ago, Roger Eastman said:

I vaguely remember an article about Escape Hybrids in NYC taxi service - It reported that as the Ford Hybrids reached 200,000 miles, Ford was buying them back to disassemble and inspect. The overall aspect of the article was that Ford could not find any  problems and they were happy with the results..

 

Not knowing ; just presuming - I thought that the Escape Hybrid system  was the forerunner of the C-Max Hybrid system, and therefore a " bulletproof " system.

 

Anyone else ever see the same information, and draw the same conclusion as Mine ?

You have to remember that the first two generation hybrid eCVTs were designed and built by Aisin.  The third generation used in the C-Max was “designed” by Ford.  The three versions look virtually the same but the gear ratios are different and the traction motors have increased in HP with each generation.  IIRC, the maximum speed in EV operation has also increased in each version and is now up to 85 mph in the C-Max.  
 

So, torque has changed on the transfer shaft.  IMO, the bearing retainer on the transfer shaft on the damper side apparently is not holding as in failed transmissions, the transfer shaft / bearing  has moved which results in bearing damage, tearing up the gear teeth, and ultimately boring a hole in the damper housing.  Perhaps, the retainer on the latest version cannot handle a higher axial load under certain conditions.  
 

Bottom line, I don’t believe one can assume that because generation 1 was “ bulletproof”, that generation 3 is also. 

Edited January 21, 2020 by Plus 3 Golfer

[fbov]

Some of us are betting they got it right the second time (HF45). 

[bigqueue]

On 1/14/2020 at 10:02 AM, WannaCMAX said:

 

Was the transmission redesigned in 2016?  It may be that the newer cars just dont have as many miles.

 

 

 

 

Here is the TSB on the problem......the key date is that the car be built AFTER August 15th, 2015. My 2016 was built Jan 2016, so I hope to have slipped under the wire. Good luck....

 

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/tsbs/2018/MC-10148717-9999.pdf

 

-Quentin

[jestevens]

By the VIN I think mine was made in May 2012, just turned 102K miles and still going..  Really like this car, I will hold on to it until the transmission fails.  Maybe then a Prius or we'll see what type of other electric/hybrids are available within two years.  I used to like Hyundai Sonata Hybrid until the one we drive at work started having overheated HV power relay problems.

[Roger Eastman]

Does anyone have information on the 2020 Escape Hybrid ? One would presume  ( and hope !  ) that Ford put all their combined knowledge and experience into the   new model, and come up with a really "bulletproof" all - around result.

 

 I thought that the engine in my 2014 C-Max Hybrid was good, but I see that they have made some changes in the design of it.

 

Comments, Anyone ?