Ford Transit USA Forum banner
261 - 280 of 382 Posts
It has occurred, on both new 2017 models, at approx 75 mph and increases in noise until approx 80 mph. At 80 mph, the droning/humming sound is very pronounced.

Once I either go above 80 mph or below 75 mph, the sound ceases.

I've asked a friend in the car business to provide me with the name and number of the owner(s) of San Tan Ford.

I am done dealing with the Fleet Services Repair team there. A Ford Transit engineer needs to be brought into the loop.

I will keep you posted.
 
I am going to be persistent with this issue until I receive a plausible explanation/solution to this droning/humming problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Firefightergmo
I just had my 2016 T350 Passenger Wagon with 2000 miles into the shop for the vibration drone coming from the driveshaft. The dealership ended up swapping out complete 3 piece driveshaft, with all u-joints (no rubber) from the transmission to the pinion. They were able to remove 90% of the drone and vibrations. Now when I drive either 40mph or 80mph I don’t see the rear seat headrests shaking anymore.

I did a trip today of about 300 miles and at any speed 40-80mph there was a minor vibration present, almost like a tire out .25ounces of weight. Not enough to complain, but enough to notice.

I was thinking of taking my complete driveshaft to a FleetPride here in Rochester,NY if the issue wasn’t resolved at my last (3rd time) to the dealer


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
It has occurred, on both new 2017 models, at approx 75 mph and increases in noise until approx 80 mph. At 80 mph, the droning/humming sound is very pronounced.

Once I either go above 80 mph or below 75 mph, the sound ceases. ...
Thank you. My working theory is the 130" WB will have a higher speed where this occurs versus the 148", and you seem to be confirming it. But that's only a single datum. My postulate at this point:

130" WB = drone/hum between 75-80 mph
148" WB = drone/hum between 50-55 mph, possibly 45-50

And both will primarily occur on 2017s, or earlier years where the giubo has been replaced with a universal. Knowing the engine and rear axle ratio will help nail this down, too. I will surmise that yours is the standard 3.7L/3.73.

I'll look back through the thread one more time and see if I can glean more data. More = better! :)
 
Here are a few pictures of the van plus the VIN # and the van conversion company that Valley Metro uses to outfit their new commuter vans.
 

Attachments

Can you tell what the WB is on this vehicle?
 
And I will be honest: I had no idea what a giubo (JOO-boh) was until I Googled it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MikeQBF
And I will be honest: I had no idea what a giubo (JOO-boh) was until I Googled it.
:laugh:

I didn't either until I joined here, so don't feel bad. They were always "flex couplings" to me! You have a 150 Wagon, which is the 130" wheelbase. The 350 Wagon has the 148". Since you're quasi-government and purchasing through a fleet program, I safely presumed it would be the standard 3.7L gasoline and 3.73 axle. But I'll double-check through the VIN.

Note that I have started another thread for data gathering. Your experience with the noise at a much higher speed than most others here report piqued my curiosity. After a few minutes with a spreadsheet, I'm getting a "soft" correlation already between wheelbase, rear drive ratio and speed range with the noise. I just need more data before drawing firmer conclusions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BrianK*1954
Thanks, MikeQBF. At this point, I told Enterprise Holdings Inc. (they purchased a company called vRide in June 2016, and vRide was in the vanpool business for over 40 years) that I wasn't going to do a thing for the time being.

EHI manages the vanpool program for Valley Metro here in AZ. Valley Metro owns all these commuter vans but EHI will run the program, i.e., ensure all commuter vans receive their proper maintenance, replace vans as they "age out" (I received my 1st new 2017 Ford Transit in late September 2017 because the 2011 Ford Econoline 350 commuter van I was driving had 105,000 miles on it), and provide a loaner van if the van you have needs work on it for more than 1 day.
 
Thank you. My working theory is the 130" WB will have a higher speed where this occurs versus the 148", and you seem to be confirming it. But that's only a single datum. My postulate at this point:

130" WB = drone/hum between 75-80 mph
148" WB = drone/hum between 50-55 mph, possibly 45-50

And both will primarily occur on 2017s, or earlier years where the giubo has been replaced with a universal. Knowing the engine and rear axle ratio will help nail this down, too. I will surmise that yours is the standard 3.7L/3.73.

I'll look back through the thread one more time and see if I can glean more data. More = better! :)
My Drone noise is at 49 and 69 MPH and ONLY in sixth gear. My wheel base is 130 feet so you will have to change your theory. I have the original wheels and tires and no engine or drive train modes.
 
it is obvious he has not read this whole thread yet, or any of the duplicate threads. in the past the majority of the people have reported it happening in the 60mph and up range.
 
My Drone noise is at 49 and 69 MPH and ONLY in sixth gear. My wheel base is 130 feet so you will have to change your theory. I have the original wheels and tires and no engine or drive train modes.
No, at this point your observations are what statisticians call "an outlier". The "6th gear only" may be indicative of other issues, and the 49 and 69 mph (not "from" and "to"?) doesn't disprove anything recorded so far and possibly points to multiple resonances.
 
it is obvious he has not read this whole thread yet, or any of the duplicate threads. in the past the majority of the people have reported it happening in the 60mph and up range.
Actually... I would prefer input from folks who are not trying to confirm what can become preconceived notions. It's like telling your doctor you have such-and-such side effect... and the truth is because you read it online and were "looking" for it.

"Majority"? No, not really, it's a mix. Discoveries from the reports lead me to observe that axle ratio and van size are important, as there is a distinct influence from these differences as seen so far.

I'm going wait for a few more contributions before summarizing the results. I have 17 good points and there are apparent trends. If I can get to 25 or 30 contributions in the pot it would be great. Granted, nothing done here will be anywhere near conclusive, but more along the lines of "Hey, this is interesting. Are you seeing what I'm seeing?" sort of material if Ford takes any interest in it.

Personally? I've made my peace with the noise in our Wagon, as noted previously in this thread. It's not all that bad, just noticeable to this musician's ear. If I notice the same problem in the new van, it's going to a performance tuner for a dynamic driveshaft balance. Not messin' with Ford about it.
 
Actually... I would prefer input from folks who are not trying to confirm what can become preconceived notions. It's like telling your doctor you have such-and-such side effect... and the truth is because you read it online and were "looking" for it.

"Majority"? No, not really, it's a mix. Discoveries from the reports lead me to observe that axle ratio and van size are important, as there is a distinct influence from these differences as seen so far.

I'm going wait for a few more contributions before summarizing the results. I have 17 good points and there are apparent trends. If I can get to 25 or 30 contributions in the pot it would be great. Granted, nothing done here will be anywhere near conclusive, but more along the lines of "Hey, this is interesting. Are you seeing what I'm seeing?" sort of material if Ford takes any interest in it.

Personally? I've made my peace with the noise in our Wagon, as noted previously in this thread. It's not all that bad, just noticeable to this musician's ear. If I notice the same problem in the new van, it's going to a performance tuner for a dynamic driveshaft balance. Not messin' with Ford about it.
i am sorry, i thought maybe you were going to make a decent effort of this instead of a summary of the 30 most recent complaints.

this has been an ongoing complaint for 3 years now and there is a wealth of information here on this forum if you take the time to find it.

understanding the whole picture is important, part of this picture is that the biggest part of the driveshaft recall was based on this droning noise, if you read all of the driveshaft threads they are full of people commenting on this droning noise.
as far as actual dropped driveshafts only 2 people reported it on this forum, both were high mileage commercial users.
(part of the recall was also from the mass hysteria the internet often seems to breed over the fear of something bad happening, both real or imagined)
but how ever you choose to look at it: the droning noise played a part in the driveshaft recall.

just one more piece to the puzzle...
 
understanding the whole picture is important, part of this picture is that the biggest part of the driveshaft recall was based on this droning noise
You see a different picture than I do. The common denominator of DRONE noise complaints I have seen, since initiating the issue in January 2016, relates to a predominant acoustic drone at or around 55 mph, and coincident with an engine RPM in the 1500-1600 range. The prevailing consensus of reports points away from driveline components because the 55mph drone disappears simply by dropping to 5th gear, which changes little behind the transmission, EXCEPT muffler resonance. That is the likely the most fruitful area of research for drone complaints, but has seldom been mentioned.
You appear to be confusing driveline vibration with drone reports. I would ask that you clarify what empirical evidence you have that suggests the drone issue was the "biggest part" of Ford's coupler safety recall?
I suspect you are confusing driveline vibration issues with drone issues. Not sure if any one of us really sees the whole picture.




Sent from my ASUS_Z00TD using Tapatalk
 
Conversely, the drone we experience in our Wagon occurs in either 5th or 6th, too fast to try 4th. I think the 6th-only observations are valid and useful, and could easily point to a torque converter issue. Let's see where we are after a little more data is collected and digested. Then we'll collectively have a winter exercise program of jumping to conclusions.

;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: asdrew
I can confirm this, if you look back through the thread one might find when I posted it.
If you manual take it out of sixth gear when hearing the sound it instantly goes away and when you put it back in sixth its instantly back.
Thanks, Batman. I will try this when using the Sport Shift/manual shifting this afternoon on our ride home.

I will post my results later this afternoon.
 
You see a different picture than I do. The common denominator of DRONE noise complaints I have seen, since initiating the issue in January 2016, relates to a predominant acoustic drone at or around 55 mph, and coincident with an engine RPM in the 1500-1600 range. The prevailing consensus of reports points away from driveline components because the 55mph drone disappears simply by dropping to 5th gear, which changes little behind the transmission, EXCEPT muffler resonance. That is the likely the most fruitful area of research for drone complaints, but has seldom been mentioned.
You appear to be confusing driveline vibration with drone reports. I would ask that you clarify what empirical evidence you have that suggests the drone issue was the "biggest part" of Ford's coupler safety recall?
I suspect you are confusing driveline vibration issues with drone issues. Not sure if any one of us really sees the whole picture.




Sent from my ASUS_Z00TD using Tapatalk
BINGO! I had written essentially the same reply- but deleted it before posting- figured why bother;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: jonsobi
261 - 280 of 382 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top