On Feb 5, 11:46=A0am, "C. E. White" wrote:
First, I was not talking about strut bushing but rather lower (right) control arm bushing. I did imply, however, that it takes ford to ignore a known defect for decades. Another example of a ford fast- reacting genius is 3.8 head gaskets. That defect was ONE OF THE reasons for high rollover rate. Low tire pressure was another one. Low explorer owners' IQ is quite likely the third reason. Not too good tires might have contributed as well. Second, I didn't say that exlorers had the above suspension defect from early 90's. I said from beginning of production up until they re- designed the suspension in the late 90's. OK, mid 90's. Third, rollover death rate and rollover rate are not quite the same thing. A mustang or firebird - especially covertible - is more likely to kill an idiot who had bought them in the first place than an SUV, even ford SUV. But even rollover rate is not a pure indication of suspension quality. You are what you drive, and this means that let's say an individual who drives a camaro could be more likely to drive wrecklessly than the one who drives a Lexus. In official stability testing, the worst ever was Isuzu Trooper also sold as Acura... don't remember model name. BTW, rollover also can be caused by an impact, not necessarily JUST driving. I can see how a geo metro could go belly up after being hit by an explorer... as a result of a "normal" explorer rollover. The broken knuckle case I mentioned was not typical, and I never claimed it was but I've never seen a Honda or Toyota in that or similar condition regardless of age or mileage. I have, however, seen, a chrysler masterpiece that lost its second ball joint at less than
600 miles. If interested, there are pictures of that thing on our site