← New search

2014 Autocar Acx

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Limited comparison data

There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.

About this comparison →

How this year compares

Owner complaints by model year

Other model years Selected year
Compare all Acx years →

Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.

What owners reported most

Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

Limited mileage data: 1 of 1 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.

NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.

What to inspect

Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.

  • Tires. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Wheels. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →

NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.

0 crash reports0 fire reports0 injury reports

Tires complaints

1 reports
Clear category filter
320 miles · Aug 6, 2014
TiresWheels

THE REAR TIRES CAME LOOSE AFTER BEING TORQUED AT 42 MILE ON THE PDI AND THERE MUST BE A PROBLEM, I HAVE 13 TRUCK LIKE THIS ALL NEW AND ALL HAD LOOSE WHEELS. ON THIS TRUCK ONLY 4 LUG NUT WHERE LEFT HOLDING THE WHEEL ON TRUCK RAN THREE DAYS AND HAD 231 MILE ON IT AFTER WE PUT IT IN SERVICE. ALL THE TRUCK SHOW HAVING THE WHEELS TOR…

Read full complaint

THE REAR TIRES CAME LOOSE AFTER BEING TORQUED AT 42 MILE ON THE PDI AND THERE MUST BE A PROBLEM, I HAVE 13 TRUCK LIKE THIS ALL NEW AND ALL HAD LOOSE WHEELS. ON THIS TRUCK ONLY 4 LUG NUT WHERE LEFT HOLDING THE WHEEL ON TRUCK RAN THREE DAYS AND HAD 231 MILE ON IT AFTER WE PUT IT IN SERVICE. ALL THE TRUCK SHOW HAVING THE WHEELS TORQUED ON THE PDI AND IN THREE DAY WHERE LOOSE. AUTO CAR IS DENYING THE WARRANTY SAY THE WHEELS USED HAVE BEEN RE-TORQUED AFTER THEY WHERE ALREADY TORQUED TWICE. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10619241

Official recalls

2

15V204000 · Structure

Apr 6, 2015

Autocar, LLC (Autocar) is recalling certain model year 2013-2015 Autocar ACX front-end loader garbage trucks manufactured March 8, 2013, to September 24, 2014. The mounting brackets of the first cross member behind the engine may fail and cause the cross member to detach from the frame rails.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: Other components that are supported by the cross member may separate from the vehicle if the cross member detaches, becoming road hazards and increasing the risk of a crash.

Remedy: Autocar will notify owners, and dealers will replace the aluminum mounting brackets with a high tensile steel brackets, free of charge. The recall began on June 2, 2015. Owners may contact Autocar customer service at 1-888-218-3611. Autocar's number for this recall is ACX-1501.

14V132000 · Engine And Engine Cooling:engine

Mar 19, 2014

Autocar, LLC (Autocar) is recalling certain model year 2008-2014 ACX, WX, and WXLL vehicles manufactured July 30, 2007, through February 10, 2014, and equipped with certain Cummins Westport Model ISL G or ISX12 G engines. Condensation in the intake manifold may freeze during cold weather conditions and interfere with the proper operation of the intake manifold pressure sensor.

Consequence & remedy

Consequence: The improper operation of the sensor could induce elevated exhaust temperatures or flames from the exhaust pipe, increasing the risk of a vehicle fire or burn injury to a person near the exhaust pipe.

Remedy: Cummins Inc. and Cummins Wesport Inc. will notify owners, and authorized Cummins service facilities will upload a new ECM calibration, free of charge. The recall began on April 12, 2014. Owners may contact Autocar at 1-765-489-5499 or Cummins Inc. at 1-800-343-7357. Autocar's number for this recall is A-1402.

Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗

NHTSA investigations

1

PE15006 · Cng Fuel Container Burst During A Fire

Opened Feb 27, 2015 · Closed Jan 8, 2016

Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Fuel System, Other; Fuel System, Other:storage; Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly; Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly:pressure Relief Devices

On January 27, 2015 in Indianapolis, Indiana, a model year 2014 Autocar ACX / Heil Half/Pack Freedom refuse collection truck caught fire and experienced a catastrophic CNG fuel container burst. Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) personnel conducted a field examination of the incident vehicle, an exemplar vehicle and the incident scene, and subsequently sent information request letters to Autocar LLC, The Heil Company, Agility Fuel Systems Inc. and Hexagon Lincoln Inc.After a review of all available information, it appears that this was an isolated incident. The vehicle fire originated in the refuse storage bay and was caused by a hot load, which is a quantity of solid waste that catches fire, smolders or spontaneously combusts as a result of incompatible waste materials mixing together. Drivers are trained to eject the hot load in an empty lot, when feasible. In this instance, the driver did not eject the hot load. After expending a hand-held fire extinguisher into the hopper area of the refuse storage bay, the driver retreated from the vehicle. Fire fighters arrived at the incident scene within minutes. During firefighting efforts, two CNG fuel containers burst, sending materials into the air and across a large debris field.One fire fighter was struck in the head and shoulder area by falling debris and sustained minor injury. He was examined at the scene and did not require transport but was later transported post-incident to a medical clinic where he was diagnosed with a muscle strain to his left shoulder. Multiple structures suffered property damage and the subject vehicle was a total loss. The fire was brought under control and was extinguished 1 hour and 38 minutes after fire fighters first arrived.Post-incident analysis, including a review of the fire department?s after action report, identified several contributing factors. The truck driver was unable or unwilling to eject the hot load. Fire fighters initially misidentified the subject fuel system as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and believed cooling was necessary to prevent a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVE). Fire fighters were unfamiliar with natural gas vehicle fires, associated risks and best practices for firefighting techniques and tactics. The CNG fuel containers were located directly above the origin of the fire and were impinged by flame, thus weakening their structural integrity. The CNG fuel containers were mounted transversely with thermally-activated pressure relief devices (PRDs) mounted in each end, away from where the fire was localized. The CNG fuel containers were of Type 4 construction and thus were not good conductors of heat away from where the fire was localized and towards the PRDs. The CNG fuel containers were covered by a steel enclosure with small, circular openings providing access to the manual fuel container isolation valves equipped with integrated PRDs. Water applied to the fire likely cooled the PRDs but did not reach the area of the fuel containers where the fire was localized, thus keeping the PRDs below the activation temperature threshold as the fire progressed.ODI is aware of at least one other incident in which a substantially similar CNG refuse truck caught fire due to a hot load. In that case, the PRDs activated as intended. There was no fire suppression effort prior to the PRDs activating.The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Safety Training project (http://www.evsafetytraining.org) provides training for first responders who face emergency situations involving motor vehicles.NFPA training advises that attempts to extinguish a significant CNG fire could prevent

Additional source detail variants (4)

Fuel System, Other

On January 27, 2015 in Indianapolis, Indiana, a model year 2014 Autocar ACX / Heil Half/Pack Freedom refuse collection truck caught fire and experienced a catastrophic CNG fuel container burst. Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) personnel conducted a field examination of the incident vehicle, an exemplar vehicle and the incident scene, and subsequently sent information request letters to Autocar LLC, The Heil Company, Agility Fuel Systems Inc. and Hexagon Lincoln Inc.After a review of all available information, it appears that this was an isolated incident. The vehicle fire originated in the refuse storage bay and was caused by a hot load, which is a quantity of solid waste that catches fire, smolders or spontaneously combusts as a result of incompatible waste materials mixing together. Drivers are trained to eject the hot load in an empty lot, when feasible. In this instance, the driver did not eject the hot load. After expending a hand-held fire extinguisher into the hopper area of the refuse storage bay, the driver retreated from the vehicle. Fire fighters arrived at the incident scene within minutes. During firefighting efforts, two CNG fuel containers burst, sending materials into the air and across a large debris field.One fire fighter was struck in the head and shoulder area by falling debris and sustained minor injury. He was examined at the scene and did not require transport but was later transported post-incident to a medical clinic where he was diagnosed with a muscle strain to his left shoulder. Multiple structures suffered property damage and the subject vehicle was a total loss. The fire was brought under control and was extinguished 1 hour and 38 minutes after fire fighters first arrived.Post-incident analysis, including a review of the fire department?s after action report, identified several contributing factors. The truck driver was unable or unwilling to eject the hot load. Fire fighters initially misidentified the subject fuel system as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and believed cooling was necessary to prevent a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVE). Fire fighters were unfamiliar with natural gas vehicle fires, associated risks and best practices for firefighting techniques and tactics. The CNG fuel containers were located directly above the origin of the fire and were impinged by flame, thus weakening their structural integrity. The CNG fuel containers were mounted transversely with thermally-activated pressure relief devices (PRDs) mounted in each end, away from where the fire was localized. The CNG fuel containers were of Type 4 construction and thus were not good conductors of heat away from where the fire was localized and towards the PRDs. The CNG fuel containers were covered by a steel enclosure with small, circular openings providing access to the manual fuel container isolation valves equipped with integrated PRDs. Water applied to the fire likely cooled the PRDs but did not reach the area of the fuel containers where the fire was localized, thus keeping the PRDs below the activation temperature threshold as the fire progressed.ODI is aware of at least one other incident in which a substantially similar CNG refuse truck caught fire due to a hot load. In that case, the PRDs activated as intended. There was no fire suppression effort prior to the PRDs activating.The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Safety Training project (http://www.evsafetytraining.org) provides training for first responders who face emergency situations involving motor vehicles.NFPA training advises that attempts to extinguish a significant CNG fire could prevent

Fuel System, Other:storage

On January 27, 2015 in Indianapolis, Indiana, a model year 2014 Autocar ACX / Heil Half/Pack Freedom refuse collection truck caught fire and experienced a catastrophic CNG fuel container burst. Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) personnel conducted a field examination of the incident vehicle, an exemplar vehicle and the incident scene, and subsequently sent information request letters to Autocar LLC, The Heil Company, Agility Fuel Systems Inc. and Hexagon Lincoln Inc.After a review of all available information, it appears that this was an isolated incident. The vehicle fire originated in the refuse storage bay and was caused by a hot load, which is a quantity of solid waste that catches fire, smolders or spontaneously combusts as a result of incompatible waste materials mixing together. Drivers are trained to eject the hot load in an empty lot, when feasible. In this instance, the driver did not eject the hot load. After expending a hand-held fire extinguisher into the hopper area of the refuse storage bay, the driver retreated from the vehicle. Fire fighters arrived at the incident scene within minutes. During firefighting efforts, two CNG fuel containers burst, sending materials into the air and across a large debris field.One fire fighter was struck in the head and shoulder area by falling debris and sustained minor injury. He was examined at the scene and did not require transport but was later transported post-incident to a medical clinic where he was diagnosed with a muscle strain to his left shoulder. Multiple structures suffered property damage and the subject vehicle was a total loss. The fire was brought under control and was extinguished 1 hour and 38 minutes after fire fighters first arrived.Post-incident analysis, including a review of the fire department?s after action report, identified several contributing factors. The truck driver was unable or unwilling to eject the hot load. Fire fighters initially misidentified the subject fuel system as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and believed cooling was necessary to prevent a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVE). Fire fighters were unfamiliar with natural gas vehicle fires, associated risks and best practices for firefighting techniques and tactics. The CNG fuel containers were located directly above the origin of the fire and were impinged by flame, thus weakening their structural integrity. The CNG fuel containers were mounted transversely with thermally-activated pressure relief devices (PRDs) mounted in each end, away from where the fire was localized. The CNG fuel containers were of Type 4 construction and thus were not good conductors of heat away from where the fire was localized and towards the PRDs. The CNG fuel containers were covered by a steel enclosure with small, circular openings providing access to the manual fuel container isolation valves equipped with integrated PRDs. Water applied to the fire likely cooled the PRDs but did not reach the area of the fuel containers where the fire was localized, thus keeping the PRDs below the activation temperature threshold as the fire progressed.ODI is aware of at least one other incident in which a substantially similar CNG refuse truck caught fire due to a hot load. In that case, the PRDs activated as intended. There was no fire suppression effort prior to the PRDs activating.The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Safety Training project (http://www.evsafetytraining.org) provides training for first responders who face emergency situations involving motor vehicles.NFPA training advises that attempts to extinguish a significant CNG fire could prevent

Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly

On January 27, 2015 in Indianapolis, Indiana, a model year 2014 Autocar ACX / Heil Half/Pack Freedom refuse collection truck caught fire and experienced a catastrophic CNG fuel container burst. Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) personnel conducted a field examination of the incident vehicle, an exemplar vehicle and the incident scene, and subsequently sent information request letters to Autocar LLC, The Heil Company, Agility Fuel Systems Inc. and Hexagon Lincoln Inc.After a review of all available information, it appears that this was an isolated incident. The vehicle fire originated in the refuse storage bay and was caused by a hot load, which is a quantity of solid waste that catches fire, smolders or spontaneously combusts as a result of incompatible waste materials mixing together. Drivers are trained to eject the hot load in an empty lot, when feasible. In this instance, the driver did not eject the hot load. After expending a hand-held fire extinguisher into the hopper area of the refuse storage bay, the driver retreated from the vehicle. Fire fighters arrived at the incident scene within minutes. During firefighting efforts, two CNG fuel containers burst, sending materials into the air and across a large debris field.One fire fighter was struck in the head and shoulder area by falling debris and sustained minor injury. He was examined at the scene and did not require transport but was later transported post-incident to a medical clinic where he was diagnosed with a muscle strain to his left shoulder. Multiple structures suffered property damage and the subject vehicle was a total loss. The fire was brought under control and was extinguished 1 hour and 38 minutes after fire fighters first arrived.Post-incident analysis, including a review of the fire department?s after action report, identified several contributing factors. The truck driver was unable or unwilling to eject the hot load. Fire fighters initially misidentified the subject fuel system as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and believed cooling was necessary to prevent a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVE). Fire fighters were unfamiliar with natural gas vehicle fires, associated risks and best practices for firefighting techniques and tactics. The CNG fuel containers were located directly above the origin of the fire and were impinged by flame, thus weakening their structural integrity. The CNG fuel containers were mounted transversely with thermally-activated pressure relief devices (PRDs) mounted in each end, away from where the fire was localized. The CNG fuel containers were of Type 4 construction and thus were not good conductors of heat away from where the fire was localized and towards the PRDs. The CNG fuel containers were covered by a steel enclosure with small, circular openings providing access to the manual fuel container isolation valves equipped with integrated PRDs. Water applied to the fire likely cooled the PRDs but did not reach the area of the fuel containers where the fire was localized, thus keeping the PRDs below the activation temperature threshold as the fire progressed.ODI is aware of at least one other incident in which a substantially similar CNG refuse truck caught fire due to a hot load. In that case, the PRDs activated as intended. There was no fire suppression effort prior to the PRDs activating.The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Safety Training project (http://www.evsafetytraining.org) provides training for first responders who face emergency situations involving motor vehicles.NFPA training advises that attempts to extinguish a significant CNG fire could prevent

Fuel System, Other:storage:tank Assembly:pressure Relief Devices

On January 27, 2015 in Indianapolis, Indiana, a model year 2014 Autocar ACX / Heil Half/Pack Freedom refuse collection truck caught fire and experienced a catastrophic CNG fuel container burst. Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) personnel conducted a field examination of the incident vehicle, an exemplar vehicle and the incident scene, and subsequently sent information request letters to Autocar LLC, The Heil Company, Agility Fuel Systems Inc. and Hexagon Lincoln Inc.After a review of all available information, it appears that this was an isolated incident. The vehicle fire originated in the refuse storage bay and was caused by a hot load, which is a quantity of solid waste that catches fire, smolders or spontaneously combusts as a result of incompatible waste materials mixing together. Drivers are trained to eject the hot load in an empty lot, when feasible. In this instance, the driver did not eject the hot load. After expending a hand-held fire extinguisher into the hopper area of the refuse storage bay, the driver retreated from the vehicle. Fire fighters arrived at the incident scene within minutes. During firefighting efforts, two CNG fuel containers burst, sending materials into the air and across a large debris field.One fire fighter was struck in the head and shoulder area by falling debris and sustained minor injury. He was examined at the scene and did not require transport but was later transported post-incident to a medical clinic where he was diagnosed with a muscle strain to his left shoulder. Multiple structures suffered property damage and the subject vehicle was a total loss. The fire was brought under control and was extinguished 1 hour and 38 minutes after fire fighters first arrived.Post-incident analysis, including a review of the fire department?s after action report, identified several contributing factors. The truck driver was unable or unwilling to eject the hot load. Fire fighters initially misidentified the subject fuel system as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) and believed cooling was necessary to prevent a boiling liquid expanding vapor explosion (BLEVE). Fire fighters were unfamiliar with natural gas vehicle fires, associated risks and best practices for firefighting techniques and tactics. The CNG fuel containers were located directly above the origin of the fire and were impinged by flame, thus weakening their structural integrity. The CNG fuel containers were mounted transversely with thermally-activated pressure relief devices (PRDs) mounted in each end, away from where the fire was localized. The CNG fuel containers were of Type 4 construction and thus were not good conductors of heat away from where the fire was localized and towards the PRDs. The CNG fuel containers were covered by a steel enclosure with small, circular openings providing access to the manual fuel container isolation valves equipped with integrated PRDs. Water applied to the fire likely cooled the PRDs but did not reach the area of the fuel containers where the fire was localized, thus keeping the PRDs below the activation temperature threshold as the fire progressed.ODI is aware of at least one other incident in which a substantially similar CNG refuse truck caught fire due to a hot load. In that case, the PRDs activated as intended. There was no fire suppression effort prior to the PRDs activating.The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Alternative Fuel Vehicle (AFV) Safety Training project (http://www.evsafetytraining.org) provides training for first responders who face emergency situations involving motor vehicles.NFPA training advises that attempts to extinguish a significant CNG fire could prevent