IllustrationSEAT BELT BUCKLE RECALL WORK NOT DONE DUE TO DEALERSHIP HAVING NO KNOWLEDGE OF RECALL.
1987 Dodge RAM 50
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Limited comparison data
There is not enough comparable history to draw a useful model-year comparison.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all RAM 50 years →Counts vary with age, sales and reporting. They are not failure rates.
What owners reported most
Tap a category to read its complaints. One report may name several components.
When problems were reported
Mileage at the reported incident
Limited mileage data: 0 of 9 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.
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.
- Seat Belts. Review the 9 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Fuel System, Gasoline. Review the 1 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
0 crash reports0 fire reports0 injury reports
What owners actually said
9 reportsTHE RECALL WAS TAKING CARE OF AUGUST 12. THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE TAKEN BACK ON THE 14TH BECAUSE THE BELT BUCKLE WOULD NOT BUCKLE. RECALL- 95V103003. *AK
RECALL 95V-103003 ; DEALERS HAVE NOT SERVICED VEHICLE FOR RECALL ON SEATBELT BUCKLES FOR 3 YEARS BECAUSE OF PARTS. *AK
OWNER STATES THAT SHE RECEIVED A RECALL NOTICE FOR SEAT BELT BUCKLES AND WAS TOLD BY THE DEALERS THAT THE WORK WAS REPAIRED WHEN IT REALLY WASN'T. OWNER ALSO NOTES THAT DEALERS THEN TOLD HER THAT PARTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE. *AK
MR. BENTTI CALLED DODGE AND DODGE SAID THAT THERE ISN'T A RECALL ON THE SEAT BELTS. *AK
THE DRIVER'S SEATBELT BUCKLE IS BROKEN AND WILL NOT LATCH.PLEASE DESCRIBE. *AK
THE MIDDLE SEAT BELT BUCKLE NEVER LOCKED AT 68,66O MILES. TT
TWO REPLACEMENTS OF PASSENGER SIDE SEAT BELT BECAUSE OF LATCHING DEFICIENCY. TT
TWO OF THREE SEAT BELTS WILL NOT LATCH, TWO HAVE BROKEN PIECES INSIDE. TT
Official recalls
195V103003 · Seat Belts:front:buckle Assembly
May 24, 1995
THE FRONT SAFETY BELT BUCKLE RELEASE BUTTONS CAN BREAK. THESE RED PLASTIC RELEASE BUTTONS ARE MARKED "PRESS." IF A BUTTON BREAKS, PIECES CAN FALL INTO THE BUCKLE ASSEMBLY CAUSING THE BUCKLE TO OPERATE IMPROPERLY.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THE SAFETY BELTS WOULD NOT PROVIDE ADEQUATE PROTECTION TO AN OCCUPANT IN A VEHICLE CRASH.
Remedy: OWNERS SHOULD PROMPTLY CHECK THE CONDITION AND OPERATION OF BOTH FRONT SAFETY BELT BUCKLES AND CAREFULLY INSPECT THE RED RELEASE BUTTON FOR ANY BREAKS OR CRACKS. THEY SHOULD ENSURE THAT BOTH BUCKLES ARE OPERATING PROPERLY BY INSERTING EACH LATCH PLATE INTO ITS BUCKLE, TUGGING ON THE BELT TO MAKE SURE THE LATCH IS SECURELY LOCKED, AND THEN PRESSING THE RELEASE BUTTON. THE LATCH PLATE SHOULD POP OUT OF THE BUCKLE WHEN THE BUTTON IS PRESSED. IF EITHER RELEASE BUTTON SHOWS A SIGN OF BREAKING OR CRACKING OR IF EITHER BUCKLE FAILS TO OPERATE PROPERLY, OWNERS SHOULD PROMPTLY CONTACT THEIR AUTHORIZED DEALER TO SCHEDULE AN APPOINTMENT TO HAVE THE BUCKLE REPLACED OR REPAIRED, FREE OF CHARGE. THE MANUFACTURER IS DEVELOPING A REMEDY DESIGNED TO PREVENT FAILURE OF THE BUTTONS THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY BROKEN.
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
1PE87037 · Pitman Arm Failure
Opened Jul 1, 1987 · Closed Nov 3, 1987
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Steering
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION FROM MANUFACTURER:BOTH CHRYSLER AND MITSUBISHIINDEPENDENTLY CONCLUDED THAT THE FAILURES WERE DUE TO SEVERE IMPACT LOADINGTRANSMITTED TO THE SHAFT BY THE STEERING LINKAGE SYSTEM -- IN OTHER WORDSSHAFT FAILURE IS THE RESULT, NOT THE CAUSE, OF THE ALLEGED COLLISIONCIRCUMSTANCES.MITSUBISHI DID STRENGTHEN THE SHAFT DURING THE 1984 MODELYEAR BY INCREASING THE SPLINE AND BEARING JOURNAL DIAMETERS.ANALYSIS:FAILING COMPONENT IS THE STEERING BOX CROSS SHAFT (OUTPUT SHAFT)WHICH BREAKS BETWEEN THE BOTTOM BEARING IN THE STEERING BOX AND THE PITMANARM.KNOWN FAILURES INVOLVE 4 WHEEL DRIVE UNITS EQUIPPED WITH POWERSTEERING.CROSS SHAFT AND PITMAN ARM SALES ARE CONSIDERABLY HIGHER ON 4WHEEL DRIVE UNITS THAN 2 WHEEL DRIVE UNITS.CHRYSLER REPORTS THE CROSSSHAFT DIAMETER WAS INCREASED IN APRIL, 1984, FOR INCREASED SHAFT STRENGTHTO IMPROVE ITS CAPABILITY TO WITHSTAND SEVERE IMPACT LOADS.PROPOSED ACTION:UPGRADE THIS PE TO AN EA.CONTACT MITSUBISHI FORINFORMATION ON COMPARABLE VEHICLES.===