VEHICLE SWERVES EXCESSIVELY TO THE RIGHT UNDER MODERATE BRAKING, FRONT WHEEL LOCKS, AND FRONT BRAKES SQUEEL AFTER MODERATE USE. VEHICLE BRAKING IS UNPREDICTABLE WHEN TRAILER TOWING DESPITE AN ELECTRIC TRAILER BRAKE CONTROL.
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
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.
Service Brakes, Hydraulic complaints
74 reportsSTEERING AND BRAKING MALFUNCTIONS.
OWNER HAS ABS BRAKES, HE STATES THAT WHEN HE USES HIS BRAKES VEHICLE PULLS TO THE RIGHT, OWNER IS CONCERNED ABOUT THIS PROBLEM. *AK
WHEN APLYING THE BRAKES VEHICLE PULLED TO THE SIDE . *AK
UPON APPLYING FORCE TO THE BRAKE PEDAL THE VEHICLE PULLS TO THE RIGHT. CONSUMER HAS CONTACTED THE DEALER ON 4 OCCASIONS AND THE DEALER HAS YET TO REPLACE ANY PARTS. *AK
WHILE DRIVING AT VARIOUS SPEEDS AND APPLYING THE ABS BRAKES, REAR BRAKES DO NOT CATCH, FRONT BRAKES WORK ONLY, VEHICLE CONTINUES TO EXPERIENCE EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE BEFORE STOPPING FULLY. TAKEN TO DEALERSHIP AGAIN. *AK
APPLYING BRAKES VEHICLE WOULD SWERVE LEFT/RIGHT; ANOTHER VEHICLE STOPPED SUDDENLY, APPLIED BRAKES (ABS) HARD, BUT VEHICLE DIDN'T STOP; TURNED TO AVOID HITTING VEHICLE, INSTEAD HIT POLE, AIR BAG DIDN'T DEPLOY. TAKEN TO DEALERSHIP FOR REPAIRS. HAVE INVOICES. *AK
WHEN APPLYING THE ABS BRAKES IN A SUDDEN STOP SITUATION, THE VEHICLE BRAKES FAILED. PLEASE DESCRIBE. *AK
APPLIED THE ABS BRAKES TO COME TO A STOP AND THE PEDAL WENT TO THE FLOOR (NO BRAKES), RESULTING IN AN ACCIDENT. PLEASE GIVE MORE INFORMATION. *AK
WHEN FRONT BRAKES ARE APPLIED VEHICLE PULLS TO THE LEFT. *SD
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.
Illustration