← New search

1997 Dodge RAM 2500

Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations

Similar to other model years

Owner complaints for the 1997 Dodge RAM 2500 do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 275.

About this comparison →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

60 reports with mileage · 153 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 36 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Power Train. Review the 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
  • Tires. 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.

9 crash reports14 fire reports6 injury reports

What owners actually said

213 reports
Mileage unknown · Jun 3, 2003
Tires

WHILE DRIVING AT 65 MPH THE LEFT REAR TIRE BLEW OUT (HANKOOK SPORT KING).*AK *NLM

NHTSA ODI #10022117

34,000 miles · May 21, 2003
Vehicle Speed Control

WHEN THE CRUISE CONTROL WAS ENGAGED THE VEHICLE CONTINUED TO INCREASE IN SPEED, MOSTLY IN COLD WEATHER. THIS WAS CAUSED BY OIL FROM THE VACUUM PUMP GOING INTO THE SERVO VACUUM LINES. *NLM

NHTSA ODI #10020267

20,000 miles · May 16, 2003
Unknown Or Other

THE CUP HOLDER IN MY 1997 DODGE RAM 3/4 TON PICKUP IS NOT PROPERLY DESIGNED. AS SUPPLIED THE CUP HOLDER HAS CUT OUTS ON THE SIDES. THE CUP HOLDER ALSO HAS A BASE PLATE THAT SUPPORTS THE BOTTOM OF THE CUP. THE BASE PLATE DOES NOT ALLOW CUPS TO FIT LOW ENOUGH INTO THE HOLDER TO ENABLE THE FRONT AND BACK PORTIONS OF THE CUP HOLD…

Read full complaint

THE CUP HOLDER IN MY 1997 DODGE RAM 3/4 TON PICKUP IS NOT PROPERLY DESIGNED. AS SUPPLIED THE CUP HOLDER HAS CUT OUTS ON THE SIDES. THE CUP HOLDER ALSO HAS A BASE PLATE THAT SUPPORTS THE BOTTOM OF THE CUP. THE BASE PLATE DOES NOT ALLOW CUPS TO FIT LOW ENOUGH INTO THE HOLDER TO ENABLE THE FRONT AND BACK PORTIONS OF THE CUP HOLDER TO MAKE GOOD CONTACT. TALLER CUPS LIKE THE TYPICAL FAST FOOD DRINK CUP IS ONLY SUPPORTED BY THE BOTTOM WITH NO SIDE SUPPORT OR JUST AROUND THE RING WHERE THE CUP CHANGES SIZES IN THE CASE OF THE LARGER CUPS. WITH THE MAJORITY OF COFFEE CUPS THE CUP HOLDER PROVIDES SUPPORT IN ONLY A COUPLE OF LOCATIONS. THE PROBLEM IS WHEN THE CUP HOLDER IS IN USE AS DESIGNED AND THE DRIVER MAKES A RIGHT OR LEFT TURN AT NORMAL DRIVING SPEEDS THE CUP WILL FLIP OUT OF THE CUP HOLDER SPILLING THE CONTENTS ON THE OCCUPANTS AND THE ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS OF THE VEHICLE. THIS HAS HAPPENED A NUMBER OF TIMES IN MY VEHICLE. I HAVE NOT HAD A MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENT INVOLVING OTHER VEHICLES BUT HAVE SUSTAINED COMPREHENSIVE DAMAGE DUE TO A SOFT DRINK BEING SPILLED IN THE RADIO/CD/TAPE PLAYER. I HAVE NOT MET ANYONE YET WHO OWNS OR OWNED A DODGE PICKUP OF THIS BODY STYLE THAT HAS NOT EXPERIENCED THIS SAME PROBLEM. AN EMPLOYEE AT THE DEALERSHIP I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE FROM IN 1998 AGREED THAT THE CUP HOLDER WAS UNSAFE AND POORLY DESIGNED WHEN I BROUGHT THE VEHICLE IN THE FIRST TIME THIS HAPPENED TO ME RESULTING IN THE DESTRUCTION OF THE SOUND SYSTEM. WHEN I TRIED TO INFORM PEOPLE ABOUT THE PROBLEM THE DEALER THREATENED TO SUE ME. THE DODGE CORPORATION COMPLAINT HOT LINE INDICATED THAT I WAS THE ONLY PERSON WHO HAD EVER CALLED AND COMPLAINED WHEN I CALLED IN THE SPRING OF 1999. *NLM

NHTSA ODI #10018787

Mileage unknown · May 14, 2003
Electrical SystemFire

WHEN THE CONSUMER PULLED OUT OF A GAS STATION, THERE WAS A SMELL OF PLASTIC BURNING. SUDDENLY FLAMES APPEARED UNDER THE HOOD. THE MECHANIC STATED THE MAIN BOLT FOR THE 120 AMP VIBRATED OFF, WHICH CAUSED THE WIRING TO HEAT UP AND CATCH FIRE. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10019826

90,000 miles · May 7, 2003
Suspension

THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN IN FOR AN INSPECTION, AND THE INSPECTOR SAID THAT ALL 4 BALL JOINTS WERE SHOT. THE BALL JOINTS FAILED WITHIN 90000 MILES. *NLM

NHTSA ODI #10019371

Mileage unknown · Mar 4, 2003
Power Train

THE TRANSMISSION FAILED DUE TO A LEAK. *NLM

NHTSA ODI #10009779

35,000 miles · Feb 24, 2003
Suspension

THE ENTIRE VEHICLE VIBRATED, WHICH ALMOST RESULTED IN LOSS OF CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE. THE DEALERSHIP REPLACED SEVERAL COMPONENTS, THE BRAKES, U JOINTS, AND BEARINGS, HOWEVER THE PROBLEM PERSISTED. *JB

NHTSA ODI #10009063

92,370 miles · Feb 10, 2003
Engine And Engine Cooling

1997 DODGE 2500 4X4 PICKUP WITH CUMMINS TURBO DIESEL. PURCHASED NEW NOV 1996. OWNED 6 YEARS WITH 92K MILES ON TRUCK AT TIME OF INCIDENT. WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, THE UPPER TIMING CASE HOUSING ALIGNMENT DOWEL PIN FELL INTO THE ROTATING TIMING GEARS. THE PIN JAMMED BETWEEN THE UPPER GEAR AND THE CASE CAUSING A 1" BY 3" HO…

Read full complaint

1997 DODGE 2500 4X4 PICKUP WITH CUMMINS TURBO DIESEL. PURCHASED NEW NOV 1996. OWNED 6 YEARS WITH 92K MILES ON TRUCK AT TIME OF INCIDENT. WHILE DRIVING ON THE HIGHWAY, THE UPPER TIMING CASE HOUSING ALIGNMENT DOWEL PIN FELL INTO THE ROTATING TIMING GEARS. THE PIN JAMMED BETWEEN THE UPPER GEAR AND THE CASE CAUSING A 1" BY 3" HOLE IN THE CASE. OIL SPLASHED OUT OF THIS HOLE (APPROX TWO QUARTS) UNTIL I COMPLETED MY RETURN FROM WORK. I NOTICED A BIG PUDDLE OF OIL UNDER THE TRUCK LATER THAT NIGHT AND UPON INSPECTION FOUND THE HOLE IN THE TIMING CASE. AFTER FURTHER INVESTIGATION, THIS TURNS OUT TO BE A WELL KNOWN ISSUE WITH THESE MOTORS (MODEL YEAR 1997 UNTIL MID 1998 WHEN THE DESIGN WAS CHANGED). IN FACT, THE INCIDENCE OF THIS FAILURE IS SO WIDESPREAD THAT OWNERS OF THESE MODEL TRUCKS HAVE DEVELOPED A KIT TO LOCATE AND DRILL A "BLOCKER BOLT" TO KEEP THE DOWEL PIN FROM FALLING OUT! DAMILER/CHRYSLER CLAIMS NO KNOWLEDGE OF THIS ISSUE (I OPENED TICKET #10864363 WITH THEIR CUSTOMER SERVICE CENTER). CUMMINS IS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM BUT SAYS IT'S STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT AND HAS NOT INITIATED ANY RECALL.

NHTSA ODI #10005604

65,000 miles · Jan 30, 2003
Fuel System, DieselFuel System, Other

FUEL GUAGE IS BROKEN FOR THE SECOND TIME. FIRST WAS UNDER WARRANTY IN 1999. THE SENDING UNIT WAS REPLACED. NOW IT IS BROKEN AGAIN BUT THE DEALER SAYS IT IS OUT OF WARRANTY AND WILL COST $$$. AFTER SPEAKING WITH OTHER OWNERS AND SOME MECHANICS I FOUND THIS TO BE A COMMON PROBLEM AND FEEL IT SOULD BE A RECALL ITEM.

NHTSA ODI #10004964

20,000 miles · Jan 13, 2003
Vehicle Speed Control

DURING COLD WEATHER, WHEN I SET THE CRUISE CONTOL, THE VEHICLE KEEPS ACCELERATING PAST THE SET POINT. IT DOEN'T STOP ACCELERATING AT ALL. I HAVE TO CANCEL THE CRUISE TO MAINTAIN A SPEED. AFTER THE TRUCK WARMS UP (QUITE A LONG TIME) IT FUNCTIONS BETTER, BUT STILL MAY GO FASTER THAN THE SET SPEED.

NHTSA ODI #10000994

Official recalls

0

No 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

1

DP03006 · 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.