IllustrationTHE MOTOR BLOWER FAN SHORTED OUT, CAUSING DAMAGE TO THE FUSE BOX UNDER THE HOOD.
1996 Dodge RAM 1500
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 1996 Dodge RAM 1500 do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 520.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all RAM 1500 years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
All reported categories
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
50–25K
225–50K
450–75K
2075–100K
29100–150K
24150K+
84 reports with mileage · 214 unknown
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.
- Power Train. Review the 52 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 46 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 35 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
18 crash reports17 fire reports13 injury reports
What owners actually said
298 reportsTURNED ON AIR CONDITIONER AND IT BLEW HOT AIR. GOT IT RECHARGED. IT STILL WAS BLOWING HOT AIR. DEALER TOLD CONSUMER THE EVAPORATOR HAD FAILED. CONSUMER CONTACTED DEALER. *AK *YC
WAS SHIFTING INTO DRIVE & VEHICLE FAILED TO MOVE. ACTED LIKE IT WAS STILL IN PARK POSITION. HAD TO GUN MOTOR TO SHIFT & VEHICLE WOULD JERK FORWARD QUICKLY. WOULD HAVE TO KEEP FOOT ON BRAKES WHEN THIS HAPPENED. THE PROBLEM WAS INTERMITTENT. HAD TAKEN TO DEALER TO HAVE IT CHECKED & NOTHING COULD BE FOUND. *AK
VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED IN JULY OF 96. IN JULY OF 97 A POPPING NOISE STARTED COMING OUT OF THE STEERING COLUMN.. THE VEHICLE HAD 21,500 MILES ON IT. MY DEALER REPLACED THE STEERING COLUMN WITH A NEW ONE UNDER WARRANTY. JULY OF 99 THE STEERING COLUMN STARTED MAKING THE SAME NOISE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER AGAIN AND …
Read full complaint
VEHICLE WAS PURCHASED IN JULY OF 96. IN JULY OF 97 A POPPING NOISE STARTED COMING OUT OF THE STEERING COLUMN.. THE VEHICLE HAD 21,500 MILES ON IT. MY DEALER REPLACED THE STEERING COLUMN WITH A NEW ONE UNDER WARRANTY. JULY OF 99 THE STEERING COLUMN STARTED MAKING THE SAME NOISE. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN BACK TO THE DEALER AGAIN AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE CLOCK SPRING WAS BAD. I HAD A NEW CLOCK SPRING INSTALLED BUT THIS DIDNOT CORRECT THE PROBLEM. THE DEALER REFUNDED MY MONEY FOR THE CLOCK SPRING AND THE COST OF THE LABOR TO INSTALL IT. FRONT END OF VEHICLE WAS DISASSEMBLED TO FIND OUT WHERE THE NOISE WAS COMING FROM. I WAS TOLD THAT THE STEERING COLUMN HAD GONE BAD AGAIN. AT THIS TIME THE VEHICLE HAD 55984 MILES ON IT AND IT IS OUT OF WARRANTY. THE NEW STEERING COLUMN LASTED JUST A FEW DAYS SHY OF TWO YEARS AND A LITTLE OVER 30,000 MILES. THE DEALER SAID THAT SINCE THE VEHICLE IS OUT OF WARRANTY, I'LL HAVE TO PAY THE FULL REPAIR BILL TO HAVE THE VEHICLE REPAIRED. I CALLED CHRYSLERS HOT LINE NUMBER AND EXPLAINED TO THEM THAT THE NEW STEERING COLUMN SHOULDN'T HAVE GONE OUT IN ONLY TWO YEARS AND 30,000 MILES. THEY TOLD ME THAT AS A GOOD FAITH MESSURE THEY WOULD GO 50-50 WITH ME ON THE REPAIR. THIS ISN'T RIGHT! NO WAY SHOULD THAT PART GO OUT IN TWO YEARS. THAT MEANS, IF I KEEP THE VEHICLE, EVERY TWO YEARS I'LL BE SPENDING $500 FOR A NEW STEERING COLUMN. *AK
WHILE DRIVING STEERING SHAFT DISENGAGED FROM STEERING BOX, ALMOST CAUSING AN ACCIDENT. *AK
WHILE PLACING CHILD SAFETY SEAT IN VEHICLE. SEAT BELTS WILL NOT RETRACT. CSS CANNOT BE SECURED TIGHTLY TO VEHICLE SEAT; CSS STILL MOVES 6-12 INCHES FRONT TO BACK AND SIDE TO SIDE. *AK
MY TRUCK WOULD NOT START. FIRST I WAS TOLD IT NEEDED A NEW BATTERY, THEN A FUEL PUMP AND FINALLY A NEW ECU. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ALL OF THESE COMPONENTS TO FAIL SIMULTANEOUSLY WHILE THE VEHICLE IS PARKED AND SHUTDOWN. I WAS TOLD BY THE PARTS MAN AT DALLAS DODGE THAT THE ECUS ARE DESIGNED TO FAIL PRMATURELY. ANOTHER CUSTOMER …
Read full complaint
MY TRUCK WOULD NOT START. FIRST I WAS TOLD IT NEEDED A NEW BATTERY, THEN A FUEL PUMP AND FINALLY A NEW ECU. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR ALL OF THESE COMPONENTS TO FAIL SIMULTANEOUSLY WHILE THE VEHICLE IS PARKED AND SHUTDOWN. I WAS TOLD BY THE PARTS MAN AT DALLAS DODGE THAT THE ECUS ARE DESIGNED TO FAIL PRMATURELY. ANOTHER CUSTOMER ALSO STATED THAT THE SAME COMPUTER IN MY TURCK IS INSTALLED IN A NUMBER OF CHRYLSER PRODUCTS AND THAT IT FAILS WHEN OTHER COMPONENTS FAIL (IN HIS CASE WHEN THE ABS FAILED).
THROTTLE CABLE FRAYED/STUCK. ALSO FUEL LINE LEAK, AND REPLACED FRONT BRAKES.
THE PASSENGER'S WINDSHIELD WIPER ARM MOTOR BROKE, WHICH MAY CAUSE VISUAL DIFFICULTY. ALSO, THE STEERING SYSTEM IS VERY LOOSE, AND DEALER HAD TO REPLACE THE STEERING SHAFT. PROBLEM IS STILL OCCURRING. PRESENTLY, DEALER WANTS TO REPLACE THE STEERING COLUMN AND OTHER PARTS. IN ADDITION, THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH TRANSMISSION AND…
Read full complaint
THE PASSENGER'S WINDSHIELD WIPER ARM MOTOR BROKE, WHICH MAY CAUSE VISUAL DIFFICULTY. ALSO, THE STEERING SYSTEM IS VERY LOOSE, AND DEALER HAD TO REPLACE THE STEERING SHAFT. PROBLEM IS STILL OCCURRING. PRESENTLY, DEALER WANTS TO REPLACE THE STEERING COLUMN AND OTHER PARTS. IN ADDITION, THERE ARE PROBLEMS WITH TRANSMISSION AND TRANSFER CASE WHICH HAS BEEN REPLACE 3 TIMES. PLEASE PROVIDE FURTHER INFORMATION. *AK
HOOD LATCH FAILED CAUSING HOOD TO OPEN AND OBSCURE VISION RESULTING IN DAMAGE TO VEHICLE.
Official recalls
0No recalls in this snapshot.
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
1DP03006 · Seat Back Failure
Opened Sep 23, 2003 · Closed Apr 8, 2004
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seats; Seats:front Assembly:recliner
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 30 INCIDENTS WHERE IT IS ALLEGED THE SEAT BACK COLLAPSED IN A REAR IMPACT CRASH.THESE INCIDENTS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO 23 INJURIES AND TWO DEATHS.THE DATA PRESENTED TO ODI SHOW THAT THE SEAT BACK STRENGTH OF THE FRONT SEATS COMPLY WITH FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 207. SEATING SYSTEM.ACCORDING TO DAIMLERCHRYLSER THE FRONT SEATS WERE DESIGNED TO COLLAPSE REARWARD IN REAR IMPACT CRASHES AS PART OF THE ENERGY ABSORPTIONCAPABILITIES OF THE SEATING SYSTEM TO REDUCE THE CHANCE OF SERIOUS INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT.RATES OF OCCURANCE WERE COMPARED TO PEER VEHICLES, AND IT WAS SHOWN THAT THE PERFORMACE OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE WAS COMPARABLE TO THOSE VEHICLES.IN VIEW OF THE FORGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION REMEDY OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AS DEFINED BY THE PETITIONER AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THERFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE THE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.FOR FURTHER DETAILS, REFER TO ODI'S RESPONSE TO THE PETITION PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER VOL.69, NO. 60 , DATED MARCH 29, 2004.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Seats
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 30 INCIDENTS WHERE IT IS ALLEGED THE SEAT BACK COLLAPSED IN A REAR IMPACT CRASH.THESE INCIDENTS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO 23 INJURIES AND TWO DEATHS.THE DATA PRESENTED TO ODI SHOW THAT THE SEAT BACK STRENGTH OF THE FRONT SEATS COMPLY WITH FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 207. SEATING SYSTEM.ACCORDING TO DAIMLERCHRYLSER THE FRONT SEATS WERE DESIGNED TO COLLAPSE REARWARD IN REAR IMPACT CRASHES AS PART OF THE ENERGY ABSORPTIONCAPABILITIES OF THE SEATING SYSTEM TO REDUCE THE CHANCE OF SERIOUS INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT.RATES OF OCCURANCE WERE COMPARED TO PEER VEHICLES, AND IT WAS SHOWN THAT THE PERFORMACE OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE WAS COMPARABLE TO THOSE VEHICLES.IN VIEW OF THE FORGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION REMEDY OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AS DEFINED BY THE PETITIONER AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THERFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE THE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.FOR FURTHER DETAILS, REFER TO ODI'S RESPONSE TO THE PETITION PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER VOL.69, NO. 60 , DATED MARCH 29, 2004.
Seats:front Assembly:recliner
ODI HAS IDENTIFIED 30 INCIDENTS WHERE IT IS ALLEGED THE SEAT BACK COLLAPSED IN A REAR IMPACT CRASH.THESE INCIDENTS ARE ALLEGED TO HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO 23 INJURIES AND TWO DEATHS.THE DATA PRESENTED TO ODI SHOW THAT THE SEAT BACK STRENGTH OF THE FRONT SEATS COMPLY WITH FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 207. SEATING SYSTEM.ACCORDING TO DAIMLERCHRYLSER THE FRONT SEATS WERE DESIGNED TO COLLAPSE REARWARD IN REAR IMPACT CRASHES AS PART OF THE ENERGY ABSORPTIONCAPABILITIES OF THE SEATING SYSTEM TO REDUCE THE CHANCE OF SERIOUS INJURY TO THE OCCUPANT.RATES OF OCCURANCE WERE COMPARED TO PEER VEHICLES, AND IT WAS SHOWN THAT THE PERFORMACE OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE WAS COMPARABLE TO THOSE VEHICLES.IN VIEW OF THE FORGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION REMEDY OF A SAFETY DEFECT IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES AS DEFINED BY THE PETITIONER AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THERFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE THE NHTSA'S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY'S MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.FOR FURTHER DETAILS, REFER TO ODI'S RESPONSE TO THE PETITION PUBLISHED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER VOL.69, NO. 60 , DATED MARCH 29, 2004.