IllustrationHEATER CORE REPLACEMENT NEEDS DONE AND WORRIED ABOUT THE DASH CRACKING WHEN PUT BACK IN, IT WAS A PROBLEM WITH A PRIOR 97' RAM I OWNED AND KNOW IT'S A CHRYSLER PROBLEM AND CONCERNED ABOUT MY DASH ON THE 01' I NOW OWN. *TR
1997 Dodge RAM 1500
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 1997 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
80–25K
1325–50K
2750–75K
2475–100K
44100–150K
28150K+
144 reports with mileage · 217 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.
- Structure. Review the 70 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 56 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 43 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
31 crash reports14 fire reports24 injury reports
Visibility complaints
14 reportsA LONG LIST IS AVAILABLE AT HUMES OF WATERFORD,PA. THE MOST AMAZING FAILURE OF THE VEHICHLE WAS WHEN THE DRIVER'S DOOR FLEW OPEN WHILE DRIVING AROUND THE BEND AND I WAS LUCKY THAAT NO ONCOMING TRAFFIC WAS COMING. HUMES(DEALER) FIXED IT BY A HORRIBLE WELD ON THE LATCH.*AK
THE FAILURE OF THE DRIVER'S SIDE REAR VIEW MIRROR APPEARS TO BE A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT. THE MIRROR WOULD NOT REMAIN STABLE ONCE THE VEHICLE WAS PLACED IN MOTION. AS YOU DRIVE THE MIRROR WOULD BE PUSHED TOWARDS THE DRIVER'S SIDE WINDOW. AFTER HAVING THE MIRROR REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE ($359.41), THE INVOICE IS RECEIVED STATED "MI…
Read full complaint
THE FAILURE OF THE DRIVER'S SIDE REAR VIEW MIRROR APPEARS TO BE A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT. THE MIRROR WOULD NOT REMAIN STABLE ONCE THE VEHICLE WAS PLACED IN MOTION. AS YOU DRIVE THE MIRROR WOULD BE PUSHED TOWARDS THE DRIVER'S SIDE WINDOW. AFTER HAVING THE MIRROR REPLACED AT MY EXPENSE ($359.41), THE INVOICE IS RECEIVED STATED "MIRROR CLIPS BROKEN, REPLACED MIRROR WITH HOUSING". THE MANUFACTURER SHOULD ABSORB THESE COSTLY REPAIRS BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE INSTABILITY OF THE MIRRORS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. *LA
THE VEHICLES DRIVER SIDE REAR VIEW MIRROR FAILED TO STAY IN PLACE WHICH RESULTED IN POOR VISIBILITY. *NLM
THE TWO REAR VIEW MIRRORS HAVE FALLEN. THE DEALER WAS NOTIFIED. *NLM DE LOS ESPEJOS LATERALES SE ESTAN DESPRENDIENDO.
BOTH EXTERIOR MIRRORS ARE DEFECTIVE. THEY WILL NOT REMAIN STATIONARY AND MOVE AROUND IN THE WIND. I HAVE SEEN OTHER SIMILAR VEHICLES WITH THE SAME DEFECT. I CONTACTED THE DODGE CUSTOMER DEPARTMENT BUT THEY CLAIMED NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROBLEM. I HAVE TRIED TO REPAIR THE DEFECT BUT IT WAS ONLY TEMPORARY. THEY BROKE ONCE AGAIN IN…
Read full complaint
BOTH EXTERIOR MIRRORS ARE DEFECTIVE. THEY WILL NOT REMAIN STATIONARY AND MOVE AROUND IN THE WIND. I HAVE SEEN OTHER SIMILAR VEHICLES WITH THE SAME DEFECT. I CONTACTED THE DODGE CUSTOMER DEPARTMENT BUT THEY CLAIMED NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE PROBLEM. I HAVE TRIED TO REPAIR THE DEFECT BUT IT WAS ONLY TEMPORARY. THEY BROKE ONCE AGAIN IN SEVERAL MONTHS. *NLM
BOTH EXTERIOR MIRRORS TURN IN WHILE DRIVING MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE. THIS IS THE SAME PROBLEM THAT OTHERS HAVE BEEN HAVING SUCH AS COMPLAINT #'S 724822, 9001529, 890575, 882388, 747014. I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE USED FROM A DODGE DEALERSHIP AND AFTER ONE DAY TOOK IT TO THEM AND DISCUSSED THE PROBLEM WITH THEM AND WAS TOLD BY …
Read full complaint
BOTH EXTERIOR MIRRORS TURN IN WHILE DRIVING MAKING IT IMPOSSIBLE TO SEE. THIS IS THE SAME PROBLEM THAT OTHERS HAVE BEEN HAVING SUCH AS COMPLAINT #'S 724822, 9001529, 890575, 882388, 747014. I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE USED FROM A DODGE DEALERSHIP AND AFTER ONE DAY TOOK IT TO THEM AND DISCUSSED THE PROBLEM WITH THEM AND WAS TOLD BY SOME IN THE SERVICE DEPT. THAT THEY WERE NOT ORIGINAL MIRRORS. I KNOW THAT THESE ARE THE ORIGIANL MIRRORS BY SEEING OVER 100 TRUCKS ON THE ROAD WITH THE SAME ONES ON THEM. I FOUND THAT A SORRY WAY TO GET BY WITHOUT DISCUSSING THE PROBLEM WITH ME, I WAS NOT ASKING THEM TO FIX THEM JUST IF THERE WAS A WAY TO DO IT. REGENT DODGE IN NASHVILLE IS A SORRY EXCUSE FOR A DODGE DEALERSHIP AND NO ONE SHOULD BUY ANYTHING FROM THEM, AND ESPECIALLY TAKE ANYTHING TO THEM TO BE WORKED ON. I WOULD APPRECIATE ANY HELP ON GETTING THIS PROBLEM TAKEN CARE OF SINCE IT IS A MAJOR PROBLEM WITH BEING ABLE TO SEE OTHER DRIVERS WHILE DRIVING.
BOTH SIDE MIRRORS MOVE BACK AND FORTH AS YOU DRIVE OR WHEN WIND CHANGES, DEALER INSPECTED SAID YES THEY ARE BAD, NEW ONES, $600.00, AT ONLY 15,000 MILES AT TIME OF FAILURE.TALKED TO THREE OTHERS ,SAME TYPE TRUCK, WHO HAVE THIS PROBLEM. *AK
EXTERIOR MIRRORS ON BOTH DOORS OF THE VEHICLE FAILED TO REMAIN IN PLACE BY "MOVING IN THE WIND". DEALERSHIP HAS EXAMINED VEHICLE, AND DETERMINED THAT MIRRORS NEEDED TO BE REPLACED AT CONSUMER'S COST. *AK *SLC
BOTH EXTERIOR MIRRORS WOULD FOLD IN WHILE DRIVING, CAUSING BLIND SPOT AND ALMOST A VEHICLE CRASH. DEALER WAS NOTIFIED, AND REPLACE MIRRORS, BUT PROBLEM STILL REOCCURRING. DEALER REFUSES ANY MORE ASSISTANCE. FEEL FREE TO PROVIDE ANY FURTHER DETAILS ON THIS MATTER. *AK
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.