madlock

I'm only going by the information received from two Ford body shops who stated that only one bumper exists for both options (with or without), and that such parts are pre-made to accommodate either scenario given their rather precise placement requirements. Both said there were existing locations in every bumper (described to me as "punchout slugs"). Whether they were speaking presumptively based upon past experience with Ford NA vehicles or empirically, I can't say with certaintly, but neither were unclear or gave any other impression. Sorry if that proved to be incorrect. You can, however, visit fordparts.com and locate the actual parts required for the OEM system, consisting of 4x sensors and mounting bezels and wiring harness. How that would otherwise integrate into the vehicle systems would have to be found from a shop manual. Ironically, it was the inordinate cost of repairing the reverse sensors to my wagon that helped make the economics of trading-in the vehicle with part of the insurance pay-off so sensible when it could be bought new for about $250 as an option rather than $800 in parts and labor (for the reverse sensing system alone), let alone the other costs to repair a 4 day old vehicle that would, from that day forward, always have been previously hit, no matter how pristine the repairs, which was a secondary problem given that NOBODY, not even Ford's own certified body shops, had yet to work on one. Combine that with a 2-month parts leadtime and other modifications I wanted to make and the decision became rather simple. Anyway, best of luck; and I'm sorry if I passed along bad information.

I have to confess to being a little stumped by the Nokia Bluetooth feature. My first TC had the FWS Computer which I thankfully (I think) abandoned by opting for the standard CD unit and Nokia Bluetooth option in TC #2. What I'm a little confused by is how the Nokia system integrates with the head unit. Rather than being a Bluetooth system that's integrated into the vehicle and connects to the head unit, all of the functionality (pairing/etc) seems to be a function of the head unit itself; and the only thing the Nokia system adds is the microphone and access to it and voice commands that are seem to be proprietary to the head unit, rather than part of the Nokia system itself. Given the fact that the Nokia system also adds the steering column radio controls, it would seem that logical that the Nokia system would be an adjunct that should be able to be used with other head units. As it stands, it seems that the head unit and bluetooth systems are tied together, and the bluetooth system is as useless without the stock CD unit as many of the head unit's features are without the bluetooth system. Am I correct in thinking that rather than marketing the system as a "Nokia Bluetooth System", it should simply be presented as two different audio options, one that supports Voice Control and integrated Bluetooth and one that doesn't?

A couple of weeks into ownership of TC #2, I've run into a problem with the cruise control. Like many, my vehicle was delivered with incorrect tire pressure. Rather than 36/49 front and rear, it had been inflated to a uniform 36, setting-off TPMS and, I had presumed, disabling cruise control. I hadn't driven it in over a week, so when I got around to visiting a local dealer, I had them inflate the rear tires to a proper 49 lbs and the TPMS alert expectedly returned to normal with the instrument cluster warning light turning (and staying) off. Step 1, Check. I then motored off, not being able to test the cruise control (as essential a feature for me as headlights or brakes) until I had entered traffic on a 55 mph road. I was surprised to note that the cruise control didn't work. I had the presence of mind to consider that the engine had been left running when the tires were being inflated, and the TPMS light turning-off may not have been enough to reset the cruise control disable, so I pulled-over, restarted the car, and was pleased to note that the cruise control would then engage. Shortly thereafter, after having encountered a traffic light or two, I again sought to re-engage the cruise control; but it wouldn't. No combination of pushing any of the steering wheel controls would get it to work. So, I then pulled-over again, restarted the vehicle, and the cruise worked again fine... for a while. A couple of stops later, the damn thing wouldn't function again. The only consistency seemed to be that it would work immediately after restarting the car and become flaky soon thereafter. Has anyone encountered something similar? Having encountered the same situation with my original TC, proper inflation fixed the TPMS once and for all and I never had any cruise control issue. I'm dreading the prospect of an intermittent problem with an electrical component that will undoubtedly result in more headaches to repair than I care to consider. Thanks in advance.

Thanks. That turned-out to be the case. Ironically, 3 dealers I contacted hadn't a clue, and 2 tried to tell me it was something I knew to be wrong.

I'm having a bugger of a time figuring-out the Accessories Hood Deflector. It would, at first blush, seem very straightforward; but there are a few items in the instructions diagram that I can't make sense of. The instructions are available here: http://www.fordaccessoriesstore.com/GfaWeb/getFileBlob.do?fileid=834 The specific steps I can't reconcile are 5 and 6. Step 5 depicts drilling-out the holes for the plastic mounting screws, but the second inset shows a second tool I just don't recognize. In step 6, there are two inset diagrams of either tools or hardware, one reading "PM-13-A", and another that seems to warn "no touch" for 5 minutes. I have no idea what either of these mean. If anyone could take a look and offer any suggestions, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

That's the plug covering the towing hook. The punchouts for the reverse sensors would be on the inside of the bumper rather than being always visible from the outside.

I'm hoping someone may have run across an interior technical drawing of the cargo area layout. I have the published 3-view drawings of the vehicle exterior, and some include a few cross section measurements; but I'm looking for a drawing of the cargo floor itself. I could swear that I once had one, but I can't, for the life of me, remember what I could have possibly done with it. Anyone who may happen to have would would be greatly appreciated for sharing. Thanks!

The Transit Connect bumper is no exception as far as being hard steel goes, but you're in luck as far as installing sensors go, as the punch-outs already exist whether the vehicle is equipped or not (or so I was told by the body shop that was to repair my previously-damaged wagon).

On the flip-side, you could always pick-up a TC now with the intent of trading it in on the Diesel if/when one becomes available. If the interim utility you receive from it offsets the tax benefit of the depreciation, not only will you be doing yourself a favor but also helping Ford out at a time when it seems to be the only maker who has to earn its funding. Too bad you didn't jump before the year-end while the tax incentives were still in effect that would have allowed you to all-but fully depreciate the whole darn thing and get paid half back during tax season. I'm in central NJ, not far from Staten Island at all. I couldn't interest you in a nice Adrian Steel upfit package, could I?

Well, they're not likely to state ANY further intention without any sense of how sales are likely to be, a 200-day supply on lots, and any indication they DO have being relatively poor. No matter what they decide, it won't be until stocks are at MOST 45 days. The only effect any Diesel annoucement would be without a market ready North American version would be to convert a bunch of interim sales into non-sales. Plus, the US isn't quite as diesel friendly as the EU and elswhere. Small vehicle economies just aren't at similar payback points yet, and in an era when Ford is weighing every cent it wagers, it's going to be conservative on such matters for QUITE a while.

I'm offering for sale the preinstalled Adrian Steel "Full Interior" upfit package that came preinstalled in my XLT Cargo Van. The "Full Interior" consists of a P2TCW combination steel and wire mesh bulkhead partition and two track-mounted AD32TC shelving units (curb and street side) with three adjustable shelves each and 18.66 square feet of shelving space. I uninstalled the fixtures with 125 miles on the odometer and before they experienced any use or wear. I completely removed the shelving units (4 attachment points each side) and partition (4 attachment points top and bottom) in less than thirty minutes and fully disassembled them within an hour using a standard SAE socket set, hex wrench, and #3 Phillips-head screwdriver. All nuts, bolts, washers, and retaining clips are categorically bagged for ease of reinstallation. Details and dimensions are also available on the Dejana web site here. The components disassemble nicely and could be shipped, but I'd ideally prefer a local transaction. I'd like to obtain $375 for the complete shelving and bulkhead set. Interested parties should please contact me by Private Message for a prompt reply. Thanks in advance.

The fact that you can't yet do this is a product of Transit Connect's "simplification" for the North American market. A fold-flat passenger seat, and even an OEM Accessory folding bulkhead that can fully compartmentalize the driver's seat and center console, are core to the European version. One solution I saw being implemented for Siemens was a custom modification of one of the standard bulkhead offerings in that a pass-through had been cut into the base directly behind the passenger seat to accommodate some longer items, albeit in limited fashion.

Nicely done. It looks like the Hyloft shelves I use across the ceiling of my garage.

During my recent visit to the Dejana Ship-trough Upfit Facility, I had a terrific discussion with the Dejana Manager for Transit Connect, including many of the idiosyncrasies that have resulted from Transit Connect having been pulled forward to market so quickly and some of the lessons learned by ramming 20,000 "one offs" through the pipe so quickly and the challenges that exist among North American owners with dealers and service representatives being so generally unfamiliar with a new product, and this one in particular that European owners take for granted given that Transit Connect is a mature, established product. One phenomenon discussed was the Transit Connect's "Sleep Mode". Apparently, if the vehicle isn't started for a month or more, the vehicle's OBC puts the vehicle "to sleep". The headlights, dome lights, and accessory power will continue to work as expected, but power to the ignition system is cut-off, making the vehicle impossible to start. The solution for this "feature" is to remove fuse number 5 for 2 minutes before reinserting. The vehicle will then "wake up" and once again function as normal. Given all the kinky combinations of ignition key programming sequences, under-dash button pushing, and other odd ways the vehicle is programmed (and until they can all be set by connecting the vehicle by a USB cable to a PC as God intended), I found it hilarious that they would let such an awkward solution stand. Nevertheless, if someone should happen to go on vacation or operate a seasonal business that could leave their Transit Connect unused for a month or more, perhaps this "trick" will save undue frustration or an unnecessary tow.

If anyone owns a TC equipped with rear windows but would prefer sold rear doors (with 255 cargo doors), I would be interested in perhaps exchanging the sold doors on my vehicle for the windowed doors on theirs.

In NYC stop-and-go, 9K miles wouldn't seem to be an altogether unusual service interval for a light duty truck's brakes. The TC has been around for about 9 years now, so just about every parts maker makes compatible pads. You may be best-served by choosing pads that are rated for severe duty fleet service. Best of luck.

As I try to ensure I "measure twice and cut once", I had the good fortune of being invited to and visiting the Dejana port-side facility where all of the Transit Connect ship-through upfits are performed in addition to all manner of other custom and specialty upfits Dejana performs. The folks at Dejana couldn't have been more welcoming or informative. Regrettably, integrating the installed upfits into Ford's standard production process like reflecting the specific vendor, fixture, and cost on a single window sticker, isn't likely to become any more homogeneous before production North American production begins and upfitting the Transit Connect doesn't have to occur as what is effectively a series of 20,000 individual "one offs", Dejana has a very slick facility and Ford seems to have chosen a business partner who really knows their stuff. Having the good fortune of living close enough to their port facility, I'll likely be taking my vehicle directly to them for complete fitment. Not only do they have inventory on-hand; but an even-more important aspect is the staff who could knock-out a complete upfit installation in less than an hour with factory-like precision. They even have a team of crack graphics application folks on-site; and I had the chance to see several Siemens fleet vehicles in various stages of being custom-fitted and branded. A Siemens TC is a 110A XLT Cargo Van (no side or rear windows) with DTRL, Nokia Bluetooth and Reverse Sensing System, but shame on them for not providing their drivers with RSC. One of the most useful tips I received was that any prospective customer who happens to be able to choose from a dealer's already-inbound but not-yet-landed vehicle can actually have the dealer add, modify, or delete any upfit right in the ship-through process without delaying or adding any additional lead-time to the vehicle. Unfortunately, dealers don't have access to each other's inbound inventory, so it only helps add a few vehicles to any given dealer's inventory to choose from. Even so, it's better than nothing; and it just may happen to include a suitable vehicle the dealer doesn't already have, especially if a particular dealer's inventory has already been upfitted using fixtures that aren't necessarily ideal for given buyer's needs. It was a fascinating way to spend the afternoon. And while I sensed they were in a bit of a lull at the moment, they tend to run in "spurts" that coincide with each cargo ship delivering a new batch for fitment; and unless I was mistaken, I happened to see the WWL cargo ship pulling into port with another batch.

Having now had the benefit of owning two differently-configured TC's both equipped with DTRL, and one with the FWS Computer and one without, I've noticed something that's very unusual indeed. In my first TC (with FWS Computer), I often found myself forgetting to turn-on my headlamps at nighttime because the DTRL feature would effectively turn them on for me and, reinforced by habit from my other vehicles with automatic headlamps, it took me a while to become accustomed to manually turning them on. I would also overlook that I had not turned them on because other headlamp-dependent features, like the instrument panel lighting, would also illuminate regardless of the headlamp switch position. One of the first differences I noticed with my second TC (without FWS Computer) is that the DTRL feature continues to provide headlamp illumination day or night, but the instrument panel now only illuminates when the headlamp switch position is not "OFF". After thinking about the matter, especially thinking-back to a time before I drove any vehicles with automatic headlamps, the my second TC behaves in the usual and customary way. While the difference itself is neither here nor there, and it's actually more helpful to have visible evidence when I don't remember to switch on the headlamps, it does help to further distinguish how differently the headlamp programming for DTRL-equipped TC's equipped with the FWS Computer happens to be, in addition to the rather inexplicable effect it seems to have upon the FWS Computer's "Auto" Day/Night brightness setting. Why Ford would have somehow chosen to not make the FWS Computer's auto brightness setting time or ambient light dependent, or that DTRL should affect its function one way or another, is as inexplicable as the reason why DTRL and instrument panel lighting would behave differently between FWS Computer equipped TC's and those without. I tried to think through the logic, but none of it reconciled. Both the FWS Computer and standard CD Unit have backlit controls which are equally necessary. And even if the FWS Computer's backlighting can't be controlled in the same manner as the standard CD unit's backlighting (i.e. it's binary rather than variable) it would still make sense that the FWS Computer buttons should be backlit any time the instrument panel requires illumination (i.e. whenever the headlamp switch is set to "On"), and not dependent upon the presence or absence of the DTRL feature itself. Combined with the disclaimer Ford slipped into the glovebox of FWS Computer-equipped TC's in the form of a strip of yellow paper stating the computer's "Auto" brightness is not DTRL compatible, it seems that Ford has really managed to make a convoluted mess out of what should be a very straightforward proposition. Does anyone else have any thoughts or observations on this and why it seems to be so ham-fisted?

Here's an interesting little tidbit I discovered. And of course, it's just LAYERED in irony. I too was struggling with the auto day/night brightness setting and had come to accept it after someone had noted it seems to have something to do with the headlamp switch position and conflicting with vehicles equipped with DTRL. Well, only upon cleaning-out the glove box after having traded-in my XLT wagon did I find a little yellow slip of paper that read to the effect: "This vehicle is equipped with DTRL which does not support the FWS Computer Auto Day/Night Brightness setting. See page 46 of the manual for more information". Well, there you have it. And JUST in the nick of time.

That raises several interesting points. First, if you have a Phone Bluetooth connected, (which I presume means the Nokia Bluetooth Option is head-unit specific), it will access your phone's Bluetooth features. (It would certainly be nice if it also allowed the playing of A2DP streaming from a BT connected iPhone, but that's another gripe for another day). I would just love to be able to explot the existing BT system with another head unit rather than having wasted another $280.00. Your harness is a great idea. The Aux jack below the lighter isn't an RCA, it's a "mini" line-in jack. In fact, I patch my iPhone and listen to Sirius/XM that way (in addition to all the other streaming radio broadcasts. it's bizarre to hear my favorite Chicago AM stations in better fidelity than I'm used to hearing them over broadcast air). The voice command feature of the standard would imply that the system is smart enough to handle multiple Aux inputs, given you need to speak "Audio", "Aux", and "Line In" for it to act. It would be terrific to have multiple options. As a side note, having now owned a TC both with the FWS Computer AND the stock CD head unit, I can make the following empirical observations. The stock CD unit has better audio fidelity than the FWS computer (albeit the FWS was pre-configured for Fade capability that the CD unit doesn't seem to recognize.) The Line-in jack for the FWS computer had a TERRIBLE hiss and interference to it that does NOT exist with the stock CD unit. If you haven't tried SYNC, you're really missing out. And anyone who likes today's SYNC is in for a whole new world coming later this year.... http://media.ford.com/mini_sites/10031/CES10/ All I can say is "Oh MY!" Finally, would you please post a part number or link to the pass-through harness you've bought? I plan to appeal to the site administrator to include a discrete forum area that details useful individual accessories specifically for the TC. I'm sure that each of us could have been saved a WHOLE lot of head banging had we the benefit of the collective experience and knowledge gained by others.

I'm sorry. I misread. Actually, I've found the front washers/wipers to be quite good.

Actually, the in-port conversions occur in Baltimore at a facility adjacent to the Dejana facility where the factory upfits are performed. It's to avoid an arcane import duty known as the "Chicken Tax" dating back to the first part of the last century. Side windows are removed and plugged and second seat rows are removed and sent for recycling as needed. As for whether or not Ford reads "this stuff", I'm sure they have folks who scan the 'net daily for hot topics of discussion; but they're not likely to start rushing to retrofit any of the 200-day TC supply (some 25,000 vehicles) currently sitting on dealer lots. Perhaps yours is an atypically bad example, and better visibility is always safer, but the generally-poor rear widow wipers/washers are hardly likely to become a life-and-death safety issue for anyone who wasn't already pretty far up Darwin's "short list" to begin with. Not that TC is necessarily the best method, but the herd today could probably benefit from a little culling anyway. I have noticed, however, that driving a windowless Cargo TC creates all manner of blind spots. While they're no worse than any other panel truck, it does accentuate the additional benefit multi-view European mirrors would provide, and the Reverse Sensing System becomes downright indispensable. Truth be told, I may have jumped the gun again. For as much as the windowless paneled cargo Van may better-suit my practical needs, I feel much safer driving the wagon with at least some visibility; and had I been thoughtful enough to test drive a 110A through a wide variety of situations, I'd probably have considered alternative arrangements like the OEM Rear Window Grilles and/or vinyl-covering for the side windows in addition to caging them more diligently. For the time being, however, I've already decided on a multi-view camera system to provide a continuous multi-perspective video feed in lieu of a windshield-mounted rear-view mirror that switches to a conventional backup camera when in reverse; and I'm already in contact with several EU Ford dealers working the logistics and cost of obtaining a set of multi-perspective side mirrors. Perhaps I'll be trading again before the year is through; but even so, I don't feel too bad given how I was able to "get out" of the Wagon and into an identically-equipped Cargo (absent the FWS computer) while managing to put a few dollars in my pocket in the process (not to mention the seats, seat belts, and seat mounting brackets from my original Wagon that are now sitting in my garage).

You're referring to A2DP Bluetooth streaming audio, something your iPhone supports (which works terrifically with SYNC), but not with either TC Bluetooth system (Nokia or FWS). When your phone detects a new Bluetooth device that reports certain audio capabilities, it automatically begins playing a track through it. The problem is both that the Ford Audio Bluetooth device both "over reports" its features and the iPhone has no way of disabling its own decision to automatically start playing the current iPod track through it. You don't hear audio because the head unit only forwards the stream to the speakers during a phone call, a different feature subset of the same Bluetooth pair. To hear your iPhone, you need to connect it the headphone jack to the Line In and play the stream though Aux/Line In. Part of the problem is that the iPhone offers SO many interaction possibilities that not every device capable of generically connecting with it is necessarily prepared to "dumb out" all of the superfluous functionality. Another part of the problem is the iPhone itself doesn't necessarily work and play well with every device either. Apple being Apple, they simple state "we are the standard", and anyone who wants certified compatibility will build their devices to Apple's interface spec. However, companies like generic head unit makers simply stick to their core "generic" feature set rather than bending over backward when they have absolutely no control over what may be compatible today, but could become incompatible with the next software release tomorrow. You may do yourself a favor by registering at syncmyride.com and reading-up on the many compatibility issues SYNC is also having with iPhone (and vice versa), and this is a product with a whole team of software developers behind it. You may also learn a lot about your iPhone too and how it works (or doesn't) under many different scenarios. It's been a Godsend of information for me, and I think you may find it equally beneficial.

Have you noticed that no TC's pictured in Ford's marketing materials are equipped with rear wipers? I too believe there's no reason why any vehicle's washer nozzles should be strong and consistent. Even $22K vehicles can be well made (Taurus SE is only $26K); and Ford's betting the Fiesta ranch on building an inexpensive vehicle with superior features, materials, and build and a top sticker price that barely cracks $23K. Maybe Ford is working on new turbocharged "EcoWiper" technology. Seriously though, TC's clearly built to a price-point. However, given the relatively limited number of configurations being offered in North America compared to the unlimited "as you like it" possibilities within Europe (including SWB/LWB variants, solid-sided "panel" trucks, etc.), I do feel it's currently overpriced. As a fleet-oriented vehicle, I think Ford would have done better to offer 2-3 identically-made "core" configurations, using the economies of scale to drive down cost and improve value. Ford could have then offered retail customers certain feature and finish upgrades to justify a higher price and better-suit retail customers' wants and needs. My solution to my "wiper dilemma" may have been a little extreme, but it worked perfectly... I traded-in my 510A XLT Wagon for a 110A Cargo Van that has no rear windows, period.

Sure. Either suspend them or carry them raised on an elevated shelf whereby they can extend between the driver and passenger above the center console, yet short of the center stack.