P0B24:21 Code Bad Battery Module 9 2023 ER

[AntJohn73]

Hey guys! I bought my 2023 Lariat in April of 2024. It now has 18,000 miles on it and has been a great truck with no issues. Towards the end of last month I got the above code. The state of charge on the truck was about 63%. I was able to erase the code and it came right back. I was still able to operate the truck but the power was cut to about 57%. I returned home, erased the code again, and charged to 80%. The truck was flawless until it hit around 63%. My friend has access to FDRS. Cell #95 in battery module 9 is lower than all of the other cells. Cell #95 read 56.894%. The other cells were all around 64.5%. I took it to the local dealer. They did some updates and did confirm that module 9 has the bad cell. They ordered the new battery module and allowed me to take possession of the truck. They have been great to me so far. I just wanted to post this because I did not realize that the actual state of charge affects the internal tests that the car does to itself. I will post a follow up once the truck it totally repaired. The new module should arrive in about another week.

Sponsored

 

[TaxmanHog]

See related thread

Powertrain Malfunction/ Reduced Power

 

[MaintGrl]

See related thread

Powertrain Malfunction/ Reduced Power

Wow, 1200+ Posts on that thread, THAT is a worm hole....but if you have a broke truck . . .

 

[ZSC100]

Most people don't know that if you clear all your DTCs you can drive the truck for most conditions that render the truck "stop safely now with not enough power to drive". I have personally done this on two trucks. Both mine and a friends have had two battery modules replaced on two different occasions to date. This is why I keep FORScan with me at all times. It's an absolute shame on Ford that owners need to keep a (affordable) Russian hack of FDRS with them to be covered if they have an issue on the road

 

[AntJohn73]

Yeah, it stinks. Hopefully this is the only time that it happens. Apparently, module 9 is the most accessible module in the battery. I would rather clear the codes and drive it instead of keeping it on the dealership lot. I will keep you guys posted with an update.

 

[The Weatherman]

That tread with 1200 comments and probably another 300-400 sitting in other treads. So 1600 (maybe).

Wonder how that 4% estimate is holding up, Jim?

 

[ZSC100]

Yea, it's way more than 4%, I estimate close to 10% with lots of 2 or more modules bad on the same trucks at different times, like me and 2 people I know personally in tiny market of Tulsa, OK.

the 10% isn't the problem at all though, it's the way Ford has handled it. Not having a module of each size SR and ER sitting on the shelf at every E-Certified dealer in the US is a major, MAJOR F up. If a Lightning could roll into any dealer certified to work on them, get diagnosed a bad module, and fixed in 1-2 days (which is totally possible) There would be no issues whatsoever with customer confidence or prospective customer skepticism over the batteries. To put this in perspective, there are around 2000 dealers this would've needed to happen at,, and there are 9 modules in each lightning. So, at the sacrifice of a few hundred trucks, they could've done over 100,000 customers right and probably moved inventory a noticeable amount faster. It really is sad the way it continues to play out. Shame on Ford

 

[Gimme_my_MME]

Yea, it's way more than 4%, I estimate close to 10% with lots of 2 or more modules bad on the same trucks at different times, like me and 2 people I know personally in tiny market of Tulsa, OK.

the 10% isn't the problem at all though, it's the way Ford has handled it. Not having a module of each size SR and ER sitting on the shelf at every E-Certified dealer in the US is a major, MAJOR F up. If a Lightning could roll into any dealer certified to work on them, get diagnosed a bad module, and fixed in 1-2 days (which is totally possible) There would be no issues whatsoever with customer confidence or prospective customer skepticism over the batteries. To put this in perspective, there are around 2000 dealers this would've needed to happen at,, and there are 9 modules in each lightning. So, at the sacrifice of a few hundred trucks, they could've done over 100,000 customers right and probably moved inventory a noticeable amount faster. It really is sad the way it continues to play out. Shame on Ford

Arrays are in fact stored in regional warehouse around the country and can be at any dealer within 2 days from order. The issue is the dealers. They don't prioritize the work, order the parts, realize when said parts arrive, follow directions, etc. There are plenty of reports of trucks in and out in a matter of days at good dealers

 

[NW Ontario Ford Lightning]

is there a correlation between early-build-battery packs and module replacements?
ie, did the battery manufacturing side have more issues with 2022-2023 builds than 2024-2025 ?

(correcting for age/mileage differences, I wonder if the battery fabrication and QC measures have shown improvement with time)

 

[RLXXI]

is there a correlation between early-build-battery packs and module replacements?
ie, did the battery manufacturing side have more issues with 2022-2023 builds than 2024-2025 ?

(correcting for age/mileage differences, I wonder if the battery fabrication and QC measures have shown improvement with time)

That's a very good question and to add a little more complexity to it, did they change from CATL cells to SK cells some time in the mix?

 

[ZSC100]

I think the only correlation is older/higher mileage vehicles have a statically higher probability of having had bad modules b/c of time. Unless manufacturer/process/chemistry was changed. I also don't think it's a manufacturer defect anyone can point a finger at (otherwise there would be recall/correction data out there). The electrochemical complexities of Li pouch batteries are complex to say the least. Perhaps more rigorous testing of the modules at the factory is in order to sus out the under-performing modules before they can be assembled into a pack. Bad cells as a % yield is extremely low, remember modules are removed for ONE bad cell. And bad is a VERY gray #. I drove my truck by resetting the DTC's for 2 weeks with a bad module and the only symptom being my truck was limited to around 25% when I'd start it. Once the code was reset the truck drove perfectly fine. I suspect the BMS just couldn't balance a particular cell quite the way it expected and some threshold was making it gripe. To say Ford's algorithms are too conservative is probably an understatement. This has happened for years with emissions SES lights across all manufacturers. I also wouldn't be surprised if Ford has loosened these (bad module) thresholds since 2022 to stop the battery warranty $ bleed.

By the time my 2nd module went bad my dealer in Tulsa had performed over 100 module replacements in Lightnings. My truck had 90kmi and it still took them 2 weeks. As I understand it the process is that the dealer must seek approval from Ford's BEV battery team/engineers and wait on "approval" to even order the module from a secretive/exclusive hotline. The whole process is ridiculous and I witnessed the physical work it only took about 4hrs of work to replace the module, total from battery pack being removed to being off the lift and driving. Regardless if modules are warehoused regionally, the entire process is I just described is shit. Part of the E-certified tech training should've been battery module diagnosis and replacement. And they should've proudly advertised their breakneck speed and capability to replace battery modules in 1 day. It would've completely changed the EV hater dynamic which is a major factor in EV adoption in the US.

 

[GoodSam]

That's a very good question and to add a little more complexity to it, did they change from CATL cells to SK cells some time in the mix?

No, always SK On batteries since the beginning for the Lightnings.

 

[GoodSam]

I think the only correlation is older/higher mileage vehicles have a statically higher probability of having had bad modules b/c of time. Unless manufacturer/process/chemistry was changed. I also don't think it's a manufacturer defect anyone can point a finger at (otherwise there would be recall/correction data out there). The electrochemical complexities of Li pouch batteries are complex to say the least. Perhaps more rigorous testing of the modules at the factory is in order to sus out the under-performing modules before they can be assembled into a pack. Bad cells as a % yield is extremely low, remember modules are removed for ONE bad cell. And bad is a VERY gray #. I drove my truck by resetting the DTC's for 2 weeks with a bad module and the only symptom being my truck was limited to around 25% when I'd start it. Once the code was reset the truck drove perfectly fine. I suspect the BMS just couldn't balance a particular cell quite the way it expected and some threshold was making it gripe. To say Ford's algorithms are too conservative is probably an understatement. This has happened for years with emissions SES lights across all manufacturers. I also wouldn't be surprised if Ford has loosened these (bad module) thresholds since 2022 to stop the battery warranty $ bleed.

By the time my 2nd module went bad my dealer in Tulsa had performed over 100 module replacements in Lightnings. My truck had 90kmi and it still took them 2 weeks. As I understand it the process is that the dealer must seek approval from Ford's BEV battery team/engineers and wait on "approval" to even order the module from a secretive/exclusive hotline. The whole process is ridiculous and I witnessed the physical work it only took about 4hrs of work to replace the module, total from battery pack being removed to being off the lift and driving. Regardless if modules are warehoused regionally, the entire process is I just described is shit. Part of the E-certified tech training should've been battery module diagnosis and replacement. And they should've proudly advertised their breakneck speed and capability to replace battery modules in 1 day. It would've completely changed the EV hater dynamic which is a major factor in EV adoption in the US.

See the spreadsheet in my signature trying to track the failure threads here and some at Reddit and Facebook groups.

Ford predicted 4% of 2022-2023 Lightnings would have one or more bad cells. Then I was one of 950 that had the safety recall 25S18 due to possibly bad modules (mine was 3 of the 9) due to SK On manufacturing equipment that was traced to not aligning cell pouches properly, which when expanding could short and cause a fire, so charging was to be limited to 80%. Someone already had one of their modules replaced before the recall that they had received this year. I think most of the bad, groups of 4 or 5 pouches, cells, requiring whole modules (also called "arrays") to be replaced, were not related to the safety recall, just other types of defects, such as their chemistry or other materials they are made from. Disappointing overall, especially with the dealer repair delays due to minimal tech staffing and poor scheduling. @Ford Motor Company

 

[RLXXI]

No, always SK On batteries since the beginning for the Lightnings.

Must be that article about the CATL cells for the new platform that is suppose to use LFP batteries I was thinking of.

 

[NW Ontario Ford Lightning]

I also wouldn't be surprised if Ford has loosened these (bad module) thresholds since 2022 to stop the battery warranty $ bleed.

not Ford doing that $ bleeding - SK ON has the warranty on the battery packs.

Sponsored