UPON REMOVAL OF THE FACTORY INSTALLED WINDSHIELD THE CONSUMER FOUND THE GLASS PRIMER DID NOT ADHERE TO THE WINDSHIELD BONDING FRIT. NLM
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.
Counts are not adjusted for sales, age, mileage exposure or reporting. A lower count does not establish that a car is problem-free.
About this comparison →Model-year median: 520
0Recall campaignsView recall details →
1InvestigationsView investigation details →
Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗ Model-level counts do not show whether a particular VIN is affected or repaired.
Inspection summary
1997 Dodge RAM 1500
NHTSA snapshot: September 18, 2026. 361 owner complaints · 0 recall campaigns · 1 investigations.
Counts are not failure probabilities and are not adjusted for sales, age, mileage exposure or reporting. One report may name several categories. Comparison method and limitations.
Top reported categories (up to 5)
- Structure: 70 reports
- Power Train: 56 reports
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic: 43 reports
- Fuel System, Gasoline: 26 reports
- Unknown Or Other: 26 reports
Full reported-category list and vehicle report
Recall links
No recall campaigns in this snapshot.
Check a VIN with NHTSA. Model-level history does not establish whether a particular VIN is affected or repaired.
Print the top reported categories, recall links, snapshot date and comparison limits.
How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all RAM 1500 years →Counts vary with age, sales, mileage exposure 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
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.
Visibility complaints
14 reportsTHE EXTERIOR MIRRORS FOLD BACK WITH WIND RESISTANCE.
THE FAILURE OF THE REAR VIEW MIRROR APPEARS TO BE A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT. THE MIRROR SUPPORT ARM BECAME LOOSE INTERNAL TO THE CONNECTION BRACKET ON THE VEHICLE AND THE MIRROR WOULD NOT REMAIN STABLE ONCE IT WAS SET AND THE VEHICLE PLACED IN MOTION. AS YOU DRIVE THE MIRROR WOULD JUST FLAP IN THE WIND. AFTER HAVING THE MIRROR REPL…
Read full complaint
THE FAILURE OF THE REAR VIEW MIRROR APPEARS TO BE A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT. THE MIRROR SUPPORT ARM BECAME LOOSE INTERNAL TO THE CONNECTION BRACKET ON THE VEHICLE AND THE MIRROR WOULD NOT REMAIN STABLE ONCE IT WAS SET AND THE VEHICLE PLACED IN MOTION. AS YOU DRIVE THE MIRROR WOULD JUST FLAP IN THE WIND. AFTER HAVING THE MIRROR REPLACED AND LOOKING AT THE MALFUNCTIONING MIRROR, MY INVESTIGATION CONCLUDED THAT THERE ARE FOUR(4) INTERNAL SCREWS AND A BRACKET THAT SECURES AND STABILIZES AND SECURES THE MIRROR SUPPORT ARM INTERNALLY. TWO(2) OF THE FOUR(4) SCREWS SECURING THE SUPPORT ARM WAS FOUND TO BE LOOSE AND BOUNCING AROUND INSIDE THE SUPPORT COVER. THE SCREWS OR HARDWARE SHOWS NO SIGNS OF BEING STRIPPED OR WORN, THEY WERE JUST LOOSE. WITH THIS MIRROR BEING A SAFETY ITEM, I FEEL THE MANUFACTURER SHOULD ABSORB THIS COSTLY REPAIR OF $379.32 WHEN THESE FAILURES OCCUR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR ANY INSIGHT OR GUIDANCE YOU MAY PROVIDE IN RESOLVING THIS ISSUE.
SIDE MIRRORS SHAKE AND VIBRATE AT ALL SPEEDS .
Recall campaigns
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 ↗
Defect 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.
An investigation is not a finding of a defect, and closure does not prove a vehicle is problem-free.
Illustration