IllustrationWHEN BRAKING VEHICLE PULLS TO LEFT OR RIGHT, AND IT IS VERY SERVERE AT TIMES.VEHICLE HAS BEEN INTO REPAIR SHOP OVER 14 TIMES FOR PULLING.*AK THE VEHICLE HAD DEFECT, BUT THE MANUFACTURER WAS UNWILLING TO RECTIFY THE PROBLEM. THIS VEHICLE WAS NOT SAFE TO DRIVE. *YH
1996 Dodge RAM 2500
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 1996 Dodge RAM 2500 do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 275.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all RAM 2500 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
00–25K
225–50K
1050–75K
975–100K
17100–150K
35150K+
73 reports with mileage · 218 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.
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 74 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Power Train. Review the 44 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
15 crash reports15 fire reports8 injury reports
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
74 reportsTHE VEHICLE PULLS/DRIFTS TO THE LEFT WHEN BRAKING URGENTLY AT ALL SPEEDS, THE ROTORS, DRUMS, AND TRACKING BAR HAVE BEEN REPLACED TWICE BUT THE PROBLEM STILL PERSISTS. NLM
WHILE DRIVING VEHICLE WOULD PULL TO RIGHT WHEN ABS BRAKES WERE APPLIED. HAD BRAKES REPAIRED AND PROBLEM HAD CONTINUED. HAD TAKEN VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP AT LEAST 15 TIMES FOR PROBLEM, BUT HAD NOT BEEN RESOLVED. THE WOULD NOT SLOW VEHICLE DOWN LIKE IT SHOULD. COMPLAINED TO DEALER AND MECHANIC SINCE BOUGHT IT NEW. LES SCHWARB …
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING VEHICLE WOULD PULL TO RIGHT WHEN ABS BRAKES WERE APPLIED. HAD BRAKES REPAIRED AND PROBLEM HAD CONTINUED. HAD TAKEN VEHICLE TO DEALERSHIP AT LEAST 15 TIMES FOR PROBLEM, BUT HAD NOT BEEN RESOLVED. THE WOULD NOT SLOW VEHICLE DOWN LIKE IT SHOULD. COMPLAINED TO DEALER AND MECHANIC SINCE BOUGHT IT NEW. LES SCHWARB WAS REFERRED BY MECHANIC, BUT PROBLEM STILL EXISTS. *AK
A NUMBER OF DODGE TRUCKS HAVE THIS SAME PROBLEM, MILD TO SEVERE PULLING WHEN BRAKING, MINE IS SO BAD THAT IT WILL CHANGE LANES UNLESS YOU COUNTER STEER JUST BEFORE HITTING THE BRAKES. *AK
ROTORS AND DISC CHANGED TWICE. BRAKES HAVE BEEN CHANGED EVERY 10-15,000 MILES. CONSUMER DOESN'T HAUL ANYTHNG TO WEAR BRAKES OUT. SERVICEMAN SAID BRAKING SYSTEM WAS INADEQUATE, CAUSING EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE, LIGHT CAME ON, AND BRAKES FAILED. *AK
WHILE COMING DOWN A HILL AND TURNING A LOAD, APPLIED THE BRAKES AND THE WHOLE FRONT END SHOOK VIOLENTLY. ALSO, STEERING WHEEL VIBRATED RIGHT AND LEFT. CONTACTED DEALER.*AK
CALIPERS ON PASSENGER'S SIDE GRAB TOO HARD, CAUSING THE STEERING WHEEL TO MOVE TO THE RIGHT. *AK
BRAKE SYSTEM STILL NOT FUNCTIONING CORRECTLY AS OF SEPT 12, 1999. IN MEDIATION WITH ONE DEALERSHIP, WAITING FOR REPONSE. HAVE BEEN TOLD BY MY MEDIATOR THAT THIS SEEMS LIKE A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT. IN 2 DEALERSHIPS 12 TIMES FOR BRAKES. NO ONE HAS FIXED THEM PROPERLY YET. I'VE BEEN TOLD BY MEDIATOR TO FIND OUT IF THE NEWER MODELS …
Read full complaint
BRAKE SYSTEM STILL NOT FUNCTIONING CORRECTLY AS OF SEPT 12, 1999. IN MEDIATION WITH ONE DEALERSHIP, WAITING FOR REPONSE. HAVE BEEN TOLD BY MY MEDIATOR THAT THIS SEEMS LIKE A MANUFACTURER'S DEFECT. IN 2 DEALERSHIPS 12 TIMES FOR BRAKES. NO ONE HAS FIXED THEM PROPERLY YET. I'VE BEEN TOLD BY MEDIATOR TO FIND OUT IF THE NEWER MODELS HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM. IF NOT, WHAT WAS DONE TO CORRECT PROBLEM. CAN THIS BE RETROFITTED TO MY VEHICLE. IF NOTHING CAN BE DONE TO REPAIR THIS VEHICLE I'M TAKING CHRYLSER TO COURT FOR A REPLACEMENT. PLEASE ADVISE OR COMMENT.*AK
BETWEEN JAN.1998 THROUGH OCT. 1999 VEHICLE HAS BEEN THROUGH EIGHT SETS OF BRAKES, FRONT ROTORS TURNED THREE TIMES, REAR DRUMS TURNED ONCE, EXCESSIVE WEAR OF THE BRAKE COMPONENTS. *MJS
ONGOING / INTERMITTENT PROBLEM WITH VEHICLE EXPERIENCING BRAKE FAILURE ON FIVE OCCASIONS WHEN SHIFTING IN REVERSE. DEALER NOTIFIED, AND INFORMED CONSUMER VACUUM SYSTEM NEEDED TO BE REPLACED, AND WAS UNABLE TO REPLACE IT DUE TO NATIONAL BACK ORDERS. *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
2DP03006 · 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.
PE00048 · Loss Of Throttle Control
Opened Dec 11, 2000 · Closed Mar 7, 2001
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Vehicle Speed Control:linkages
ALLEGED THAT THE THROTTLE CABLE CAN FRAY OR SEVER DURING NORMAL USE RESULTING IN THE THROTTLE NOT RETURNING TO IDLE OR AN INABILITY TO ACCELERATE.