Transmission Failure at speed.

[Sun5176]

My 2005 Freestar would not go into gear, forward or reverse, after driving from Michigan to Minnesota and half way back. We stopped for the night and couldn't go the next morning. No idiot lights on. No warning this was coming. We had two small children in the car and were still 5 hours from home. Thankfully this happened in the parking lot of the hotel we stayed at and not on the highway.

The van was towed to a dealership and we had to replace the transmission. The van had 92,000 on it and is otherwise well maintained and in great shape.

Prior to the transmission failure (that is according to the dealership) I experienced random slipping while doing highway driving. Three days after the new transmission was installed, I took the van to my local dealership because it is now slipping again. They couldn't reproduce the problem and sent me packing. It still does it once or twice during my 60 mile commute each day.

I love my van, but now consider my van unreliable. Not a great place to be in when I just dumped $3,200 into my "new" van.

[MonsoonMike]

This "slipping" you speak of sounds similar to a problem I had about a year and some months ago, unrelated to my transmission failure, and they originally thought I was crazy too and couldn't reproduce it. But I was persistent. My symptoms were as I was driving, every so often, it would feel like I slipped on ice and then catch again. I thought it was the transmission. But it wasn't. It was a "cam sensor" which cost me 400 dollars to have fixed. Your problem sounds more like that than the transmission. 99.99% of these Freestar/Monterey transmissions don't slip or do anything fancy. They just go and that's all she wrote. So I think your current problem is unrelated to the transmission. Yeah I know. These Freestars/Montereys are great machines, huh. Transmission and electrical problems galore. That seems to be their two week spots, and unfortunately, some of the most expensive parts of a vehicle.

[Zumkopf]

Originally Posted by crazy96863

Actually, the tranny failure doesn't sound much worse than the vehicle simply stalling and losing all power. Not to make light of the situation but a failed transmission isn't going to force the tires to lock up resulting in someone ramming you; the driver freaking out and slamming on the breaks will do this though.

If anyone wants to practice simulate the experience.... Just put it in neutral going 70; then you will know what to expect.

Go ahead.... Hate me.

The problem isn't with YOUR car; sure, you can glide to a stop. The problem is that you are stuck whereever you happen to be. If where you happen to be is on a narrow highway bridge with no shoulders and a 55MPH speed limit, you're a sitting duck. Ditto in a highway tunnel. That's a safety hazard. And you're likely to be on a highway, because from what I understand the failure mostly occurs at highway speeds.

[MonsoonMike]

Guess what kind of vehicle I just saw get towed into my local transmission shop today. Enough said.

[crazy96863]

Naive huh? Not the one who can't let my car coast to somewhere safe. Not possible? Must be a pretty long bridge or tunnel; miles long.

[Zumkopf]

Originally Posted by crazy96863

Naive huh? Not the one who can't let my car coast to somewhere safe. Not possible? Must be a pretty long bridge or tunnel; miles long.

Try the Outerbridge Crossing, between New Jersey and Staten Island. No shoulders, an upward-grade leftward curve where the bridge approach is, and a 55 MPH speed limit (routinely exceeded).

Oh, and a four-car pileup caused when a disabled Ford Freestar blocked the right lane. With the entire family of the Ford Freestar owner in the car. With two people taken to the hospital.

OK, you're not naive. Just arrogant. And flat wrong.

[balogne_t]

You won't crash into anyone in front of you........That would be your fault..... Its the guy behind you that's at fault for a rear ender, I'm sure many vehicles stall for other reasons than transmissions, on highways with no shoulder. Call a tow company and let the other drivers worry about the traffic....

[crazy96863]

Its not a freaking safety issue unless it makes you hit someone. You can slam on your brakes and someone can rearend you and everytime it is the guy behind you at fault. A tranny failure is not a safety issue but people driving way to close together at a high rate of speed is.

So it is perfectly reasonable to assume that if you end up coasting to a stop and someone hits you, it is because the person who hit you is an idiot driving recklessly. That is the safety issue and not the tranny failure.

Perhaps arrogant and even a few stronger adjectives but not wrong.

[Zumkopf]

Originally Posted by crazy96863

Its not a freaking safety issue unless it makes you hit someone. You can slam on your brakes and someone can rearend you and everytime it is the guy behind you at fault. A tranny failure is not a safety issue but people driving way to close together at a high rate of speed is.

So it is perfectly reasonable to assume that if you end up coasting to a stop and someone hits you, it is because the person who hit you is an idiot driving recklessly. That is the safety issue and not the tranny failure.

Perhaps arrogant and even a few stronger adjectives but not wrong.

No, you're wrong. Because you confuse safety with fault. They're not the same thing.

When the failure of MY car renders my car immobile in a dangerous spot, that's a safety issue. I'm not "freakin" concerned that technically the fellow who plowed into me is legally obligated to pay the insurance bill. I'm freakin concerned that my family's life and limb is imperiled.

By your logic, side impact protection would be irrelevant. So would airbags. So would seatbelts. Because, by your logic, as long as *I'm* driving carefully, whatever bad happens to my car is someone else's fault, so the absence of safety equipment isn't a safety issue. I regret to disagree. Safety equipment is there to protect your life and health against the mistakes of other drivers, "fault" be damned. So is the ability to move your car out of the path of danger. The ability of my car to prevent me from being stranded in a hazardous spot is no less vital than any other piece of safety equipment, and its absence is an acute danger.

Or, to put it another way, if I was walking on the same highway without shoulder or sidewalk, and got hit by a car, LEGALLY it would be the fault of the car that hit me, because pedestrians always have the right of way. BFD. I'd still be just as crushed and dead.

[crazy96863]

There are no dangerous spots. There are spots that people make dangerous by being wreckless. All these spots are perfectly negotiated by the majority of people traveling through them but a few are not paying attention or are being irresponsible.

Lets take a different approach... Lets say a car runs out of gas while out on the road. Is this now a safety issue since it is not a mechanical failure? No. People not driving safely and reacting accordingly to a situation involving a disabled vehicle is the safety issue.

Why do you think they give citations out to people for speeding or other moving violations? Its not safe. Never heard of someone with a breakdown getting a ticket except maybe a parking ticket.

I am not suggesting anyone jump in front of a bus and personally I am bugged that drivers are held liable in virtually all cases involving pedestrians and bicycles. But unless you crossed into oncoming traffic or pulled out in front of someone, you did nothing wrong.

Additionally, I think good drivers are in a defensive mode to avoid impacts even though they wouldn't be responsible for them. I also don't think we should play in traffic.

You can be upset if you wish but I am not convinced and so far at least neither is the govt that this is a safety issue or they would have forced a fix. Considering what they are doing to those wonderful Toyota's, they don't seem to have issue with exercising their authority to do so.