IllustrationTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 40 MPH, THE VEHICLE STALLED AND THE ENGINE FAIL SAFE MODE WARNING MESSAGE ILLUMINATED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOT MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT INSPECTED OR REPAIRED. THE FAILURE AND CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 125,000. *TR
2005 Ford Expedition
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Expedition years
Owner complaints for the 2005 Ford Expedition are substantially higher than the model-year median of 155.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Expedition 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
250–25K
4025–50K
7950–75K
6275–100K
60100–150K
23150K+
289 reports with mileage · 26 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.
- Electrical System. Review the 76 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 66 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine. Review the 57 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
20 crash reports6 fire reports10 injury reports
Engine complaints
57 reportsTL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE ENGINE SHOOK. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND THEY STATED THAT THE VARIABLE CAM TIMING PHASER HAD FAILED AND THE ENGINE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAIL…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH, THE ENGINE SHOOK. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER FOR INSPECTION AND THEY STATED THAT THE VARIABLE CAM TIMING PHASER HAD FAILED AND THE ENGINE NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 130,000.
GETTING ON FREEWAY AN AUDIBLE BIP AND A WARNING CAME ON SCREEN INDICATING TO CHECK ELECTRIC THROTTLE AND A FEW SECONDS LATER THE ENGINE DIED. EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. HAD KIDS IN CAR. THIS SHOULD BE A MATTER FOR RECALL. *TR
FAILURE OF CAM SHAFT AND VALVE, LIFTER PARTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS 5.4L ENGINE. MOST LIKELY DUE TO VARIABLE CAM TIMING UNITS. 5.4 L ENGINE IN 2005 EXPEDITION, FIRST PLACED IN SERVICE IN DECEMBER 2004. RIGHT SIDE OF ENGINE BEGAN MAKING A TICKING NOISE WITHIN 30,000 MILES. DEALER SERVICE STATED TICKING NOISE…
Read full complaint
FAILURE OF CAM SHAFT AND VALVE, LIFTER PARTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS 5.4L ENGINE. MOST LIKELY DUE TO VARIABLE CAM TIMING UNITS. 5.4 L ENGINE IN 2005 EXPEDITION, FIRST PLACED IN SERVICE IN DECEMBER 2004. RIGHT SIDE OF ENGINE BEGAN MAKING A TICKING NOISE WITHIN 30,000 MILES. DEALER SERVICE STATED TICKING NOISE IS NORMAL, NO ISSUES. NOISE CONTINUED. NOISE RECENTLY BECAME WORSE. RIGHT SIDE OF ENGINE. MILEAGE FOR VEHICLE IS AT 142,000 MILES. INDEPENDENT MECHANIC STATES HYDRAULIC LIFTER ISSUE, CAM SHAFT IS BAD. $1,200+ REPAIR. DOING RESEARCH ON VARIOUS CAR SITES REVEALS MANY ISSUES SIMILAR TO THIS WITH THE 5.4L FORD ENGINE. ISSUES STATED DEALT WITH: DEFECTIVE CYLINDER HEADS, FAILING CAM PHASERS, CAMSHAFT BEARINGS FAILING, FAILED CAM SOLENOIDS, THRUST BEARING FAILURE, VARIABLE CAM TIMING (VCT) FAILURE AND CAM SHAFT FAILURE DUE TO OTHER PARTS. THIS DEFECT SEEMS TO BE COVERED IN A TB PUT OUT BY FORD (TSB 05-15-8), BUT DID NOT INVOLVE A RECALL. THIS ISSUE HAS AFFECTED 100'S IF NOT 10,000'S OF EXPEDITION OWNERS. INITIATE AN INVESTIGATION AND I BELIEVE THAT YOU WILL AGREE FORD SHOULD ISSUE A RECALL TO REPAIR OR REPLACE. *TR
WE HAVE HAD THREE INCIDENTS OF UNEXPECTED ACCELERATION ON OUR FORD EXPEDITION. ONCE WITH MY DAUGHTER AND THREE GRANDCHILDREN AND TWICE WITH MYSELF. I HAVE CONTACTED FORD AND THEY SAY THERE IS NO KNOWN VEHICLE PROBLEM AND ONLY OFFERED TO HAVE IT TOWED TO A FORD DEALER AND I WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF THE REPAIR. I…
Read full complaint
WE HAVE HAD THREE INCIDENTS OF UNEXPECTED ACCELERATION ON OUR FORD EXPEDITION. ONCE WITH MY DAUGHTER AND THREE GRANDCHILDREN AND TWICE WITH MYSELF. I HAVE CONTACTED FORD AND THEY SAY THERE IS NO KNOWN VEHICLE PROBLEM AND ONLY OFFERED TO HAVE IT TOWED TO A FORD DEALER AND I WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF THE REPAIR. IF FORD IS CORRECT AND THERE IS NO KNOWN PROBLEM, THEN WHY WOULD FORD BE WILLING TO PAY THE COST OF TOWING THE VEHICLE TO A DEALERSHIP? I SPOKE WITH FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE ON MARCH 5TH AND TODAY APRIL 1ST. [XXX] A FORD CUSTOMER SERVICE MANAGER STATED THE ABOVE. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6). *TR
THE ENGINE JUST STALLED AND THE MESSAGE "ENGINE FAIL SAFE MODE" APPEARED. LUCKILY WE WERE RIGHT AT A PARKING LOT THAT WE ROLLED INTO WITH MY HUSBAND STEERING. WE HAD JUST PULLED OFF THE INTERSTATE TRAVELING 65 MPH. IT COULD HAVE RESULTED IN INJURIES AND/OR DEATH. FORD SHOULD FIX THIS PROBLEM. *TR
WHILE DRIVING AT 40 MPH ENGINE STOPPED WORKING MAKING BRAKES AND STEERING FAIL. LIMPED OFF BUSY ROAD LUCKILY! ENGINE LIGHT SHOWED ELECTRONIC THROTTLE FAILURE. NOW CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON. GOING TO DEALERS FOR REPAIR TODAY-SINCE THIS IS AN OBVIOUS PROBLEM FOR FORD WHY HAVEN'T THEY ADDRESSED IT! COULD BE DEADLY IF FAILS IN HEA…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING AT 40 MPH ENGINE STOPPED WORKING MAKING BRAKES AND STEERING FAIL. LIMPED OFF BUSY ROAD LUCKILY! ENGINE LIGHT SHOWED ELECTRONIC THROTTLE FAILURE. NOW CHECK ENGINE LIGHT IS ON. GOING TO DEALERS FOR REPAIR TODAY-SINCE THIS IS AN OBVIOUS PROBLEM FOR FORD WHY HAVEN'T THEY ADDRESSED IT! COULD BE DEADLY IF FAILS IN HEAVY TRAFFIC CONDITIONS. *TR
ENGINE SHUTS OFF WHILE DRIVING. *TR
ENGINE FAILSAFE MODE CAME ON IN THE MIDDLE OF DRIVING AND THE TRUCK JUST SHUT OFF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD. I HAD TO TURN IT OFF AND RESTART IT...IT HAPPENED THREE TIMES IN ONE TRIP. *TR
WAS DRIVING AROUND 40 MILES PER HR AND ENGINE JUST QUIT. NO POWER STEERING. WARNING LIGHT CAME ON REGARDING THROTTLE. LUCKILY WE WERE NOT ON THE INTERSTATE AND COULD PULL OVER. MY SON WILL BE TURNING 16 IN A FEW MONTHS AND HE WAS GOING TO BE DRIVING THIS. NOW WE ARE WORRIED. THERE ARE SO MANY COMPLAINTS ON LINE. FORD NEED…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING AROUND 40 MILES PER HR AND ENGINE JUST QUIT. NO POWER STEERING. WARNING LIGHT CAME ON REGARDING THROTTLE. LUCKILY WE WERE NOT ON THE INTERSTATE AND COULD PULL OVER. MY SON WILL BE TURNING 16 IN A FEW MONTHS AND HE WAS GOING TO BE DRIVING THIS. NOW WE ARE WORRIED. THERE ARE SO MANY COMPLAINTS ON LINE. FORD NEEDS TO RECALL THIS. SOMEONE WILL END UP BEING HURT OVER THIS. I HAVE SEEN THAT REPLACING THROTTLE DOES NOT FIX IT. WE TURNED CAR OFF AND RESTARTED IT AND IT WORKED FINE. YOU DO NOT KNOW WHEN THIS WILL HAPPEN. *TR
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
1PE08070 · Steel Wheel Fracture
Opened Dec 9, 2008 · Closed Apr 15, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Wheels; Wheels:rim
FORD SPECIAL SERVICE VEHICLE (SSV) EXPEDITIONS USE A STEEL FULL FACE WHEEL DESIGN SIMILAR TO THAT INVESTIGATED IN PE03009, RQ04007, EA04034 (CROWN VICTORIA POLICE INTERCEPTOR) AND PE03026 (GM PICKUPS AND SUVS).A TOTAL OF 8,251 SSVS (2.2% OF TOTAL PRODUCTION) WERE PRODUCED WITHIN MODEL YEARS 2004-2006 AND SOLD PRIMARILY FOR USE BY STATE, FEDERAL, AND MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT (LE) AGENCIES.FORD STIPULATES THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR HIGH SPEED OR PURSUIT OPERATIONS AND ALSO IDENTIFIED A 2004 NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE VEHICLE EVALUATION REPORT WHICH ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THIS LIMITATION. THE FULL FACE WHEEL IS FABRICATED FROM TWO PIECES: A STAMPED OUTER WHEEL DISC AND A FORMED RIM.THE TWO PIECES, WHICH TOGETHER COMPRISE THE OUTER BEAD SEAT, ARE JOINED TOGETHER WITH A CIRCUMFERENTIAL WELD.A CYCLIC BENDING MOMENT OCCURS IN THE OUTER BEAD SEAT AREA AS THE WHEEL ROTATES, RESULTING IN FATIGUE STRESSES IN THE WELD'S HEAT AFFECTED ZONE THAT CAN LEAD TO FRACTURING (CRACKING) OF THE RIM MATERIAL.BECAUSE THE FAILURE OCCURS UNDER THE OUTBOARD TIRE BEAD, AIR LEAKAGE MAY NOT READILY OCCUR WHEN THE RIM CRACKS, DEPENDENT ON HOW WELL THE BEAD SEALS ON THE RIM.IF MULTIPLE CRACKS GROW UNDETECTED AND SUDDENLY JOIN INTO A SINGLE LARGE CRACK, THE WHEEL'S STRUCTURE CAN BECOME COMPROMISED LEADING TO RAPID AIR LOSS.A RAPID AIR LOSS, ESPECIALLY AT HIGHER SPEED, MAY LEAD TO A CRASH. FORD RESPONDED TO ODI'S JANUARY 5, 2009 INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) ON FEBRUARY 24.FORD'S RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGES A NUMBER OF WHEEL FRACTURES ON THE SSVS.HOWEVER, BASED ON ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE PERTINENT FACTORS, IT CONCLUDES THAT THE CONDITION DOES NOT REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO SAFETY.THE LACK OF REPORTS OF RAPID AIR LOSS, NO ALLEGED CRASHES, AND THEIR ASSESSMENT THAT A CRACKED WHEEL CAN BE DETECTED THROUGH SLOW, REPEATED AIR LOSS OR VIBRATION, WERE THE BASES FOR FORD'S CONCLUSION.FORD DISCUSSES THE RESULTS OF A STUDY IT PERFORMED ON WHEELS RETURNED FROM LE FIELD USE, DESIGN REVISIONS IT MADE TO THE SUBJECT WHEEL, AND THE OUTCOME OF DURABILITY TESTING IT CONDUCTED ON THE OLD AND NEW WHEEL DESIGNS. THE COUNTS SHOWN ABOVE INCLUDE A DUPLICATE ODI AND FORD REPORT; THE FORD COUNTS ARE UNIQUE VEHICLES ALLEGING WHEEL FRACTURE(S).SOME WARRANTY CLAIMS INVOLVED MORE THAN ONE WHEEL REPLACEMENT.ALTHOUGH THE SUBJECT VEHICLES HAVE BEEN IN SERVICE FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME THAN VEHICLES INVESTIGATED IN THE PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS OF TWO-PIECE WHEEL FRACTURE, ODI DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY ALLEGATIONS OF CRASHES, RAPID AIR LOSS EVENTS DUE TO WHEEL FRACTURES OR ALLEGATIONS OF EFFECTS ON VEHICLE CONTROL OR STABILITY, AS WERE THE CASES IN PAST INVESTIGATIONS WHERE SAFETY RECALLS WERE CONDUCTED TO REPLACE AFFECTED WHEELS.THE AGENCY AGREES THAT THE SSV IS NOT SUITABLE FOR PURSUIT OR HIGH SPEED USAGE, REDUCING THE POTENTIAL FOR CRASHES OR LOSS OF CONTROL INCIDENTS TO BE CAUSED BY THE ALLEGED DEFECT. FORD IMPLEMENTED A 'SHOT PEENING' PROCESS IN JUNE 2006 WHICH REDUCED THE WHEEL'S SURFACE STRESS AND SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED ITS DURABILITY, AND ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY FAILURES OF SHOT PEENED WHEELS (SERVICE PART NUMBER 7L1Z-1015-B).FORD'S TESTING SHOWED A SLIGHTLY REDUCED DURABILITY FOR THE NON-SHOT PEENED WHEELS WHEN 'LT' INSTEAD OF FORD APPROVED 'P' METRIC TYPE TIRES ARE USED. A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY FURTHER C
Additional source detail variants (2)
Wheels
FORD SPECIAL SERVICE VEHICLE (SSV) EXPEDITIONS USE A STEEL FULL FACE WHEEL DESIGN SIMILAR TO THAT INVESTIGATED IN PE03009, RQ04007, EA04034 (CROWN VICTORIA POLICE INTERCEPTOR) AND PE03026 (GM PICKUPS AND SUVS).A TOTAL OF 8,251 SSVS (2.2% OF TOTAL PRODUCTION) WERE PRODUCED WITHIN MODEL YEARS 2004-2006 AND SOLD PRIMARILY FOR USE BY STATE, FEDERAL, AND MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT (LE) AGENCIES.FORD STIPULATES THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR HIGH SPEED OR PURSUIT OPERATIONS AND ALSO IDENTIFIED A 2004 NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE VEHICLE EVALUATION REPORT WHICH ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THIS LIMITATION. THE FULL FACE WHEEL IS FABRICATED FROM TWO PIECES: A STAMPED OUTER WHEEL DISC AND A FORMED RIM.THE TWO PIECES, WHICH TOGETHER COMPRISE THE OUTER BEAD SEAT, ARE JOINED TOGETHER WITH A CIRCUMFERENTIAL WELD.A CYCLIC BENDING MOMENT OCCURS IN THE OUTER BEAD SEAT AREA AS THE WHEEL ROTATES, RESULTING IN FATIGUE STRESSES IN THE WELD'S HEAT AFFECTED ZONE THAT CAN LEAD TO FRACTURING (CRACKING) OF THE RIM MATERIAL.BECAUSE THE FAILURE OCCURS UNDER THE OUTBOARD TIRE BEAD, AIR LEAKAGE MAY NOT READILY OCCUR WHEN THE RIM CRACKS, DEPENDENT ON HOW WELL THE BEAD SEALS ON THE RIM.IF MULTIPLE CRACKS GROW UNDETECTED AND SUDDENLY JOIN INTO A SINGLE LARGE CRACK, THE WHEEL'S STRUCTURE CAN BECOME COMPROMISED LEADING TO RAPID AIR LOSS.A RAPID AIR LOSS, ESPECIALLY AT HIGHER SPEED, MAY LEAD TO A CRASH. FORD RESPONDED TO ODI'S JANUARY 5, 2009 INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) ON FEBRUARY 24.FORD'S RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGES A NUMBER OF WHEEL FRACTURES ON THE SSVS.HOWEVER, BASED ON ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE PERTINENT FACTORS, IT CONCLUDES THAT THE CONDITION DOES NOT REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO SAFETY.THE LACK OF REPORTS OF RAPID AIR LOSS, NO ALLEGED CRASHES, AND THEIR ASSESSMENT THAT A CRACKED WHEEL CAN BE DETECTED THROUGH SLOW, REPEATED AIR LOSS OR VIBRATION, WERE THE BASES FOR FORD'S CONCLUSION.FORD DISCUSSES THE RESULTS OF A STUDY IT PERFORMED ON WHEELS RETURNED FROM LE FIELD USE, DESIGN REVISIONS IT MADE TO THE SUBJECT WHEEL, AND THE OUTCOME OF DURABILITY TESTING IT CONDUCTED ON THE OLD AND NEW WHEEL DESIGNS. THE COUNTS SHOWN ABOVE INCLUDE A DUPLICATE ODI AND FORD REPORT; THE FORD COUNTS ARE UNIQUE VEHICLES ALLEGING WHEEL FRACTURE(S).SOME WARRANTY CLAIMS INVOLVED MORE THAN ONE WHEEL REPLACEMENT.ALTHOUGH THE SUBJECT VEHICLES HAVE BEEN IN SERVICE FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME THAN VEHICLES INVESTIGATED IN THE PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS OF TWO-PIECE WHEEL FRACTURE, ODI DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY ALLEGATIONS OF CRASHES, RAPID AIR LOSS EVENTS DUE TO WHEEL FRACTURES OR ALLEGATIONS OF EFFECTS ON VEHICLE CONTROL OR STABILITY, AS WERE THE CASES IN PAST INVESTIGATIONS WHERE SAFETY RECALLS WERE CONDUCTED TO REPLACE AFFECTED WHEELS.THE AGENCY AGREES THAT THE SSV IS NOT SUITABLE FOR PURSUIT OR HIGH SPEED USAGE, REDUCING THE POTENTIAL FOR CRASHES OR LOSS OF CONTROL INCIDENTS TO BE CAUSED BY THE ALLEGED DEFECT. FORD IMPLEMENTED A 'SHOT PEENING' PROCESS IN JUNE 2006 WHICH REDUCED THE WHEEL'S SURFACE STRESS AND SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED ITS DURABILITY, AND ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY FAILURES OF SHOT PEENED WHEELS (SERVICE PART NUMBER 7L1Z-1015-B).FORD'S TESTING SHOWED A SLIGHTLY REDUCED DURABILITY FOR THE NON-SHOT PEENED WHEELS WHEN 'LT' INSTEAD OF FORD APPROVED 'P' METRIC TYPE TIRES ARE USED. A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY FURTHER C
Wheels:rim
FORD SPECIAL SERVICE VEHICLE (SSV) EXPEDITIONS USE A STEEL FULL FACE WHEEL DESIGN SIMILAR TO THAT INVESTIGATED IN PE03009, RQ04007, EA04034 (CROWN VICTORIA POLICE INTERCEPTOR) AND PE03026 (GM PICKUPS AND SUVS).A TOTAL OF 8,251 SSVS (2.2% OF TOTAL PRODUCTION) WERE PRODUCED WITHIN MODEL YEARS 2004-2006 AND SOLD PRIMARILY FOR USE BY STATE, FEDERAL, AND MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT (LE) AGENCIES.FORD STIPULATES THAT THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE NOT SUITABLE FOR HIGH SPEED OR PURSUIT OPERATIONS AND ALSO IDENTIFIED A 2004 NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE VEHICLE EVALUATION REPORT WHICH ALSO ACKNOWLEDGES THIS LIMITATION. THE FULL FACE WHEEL IS FABRICATED FROM TWO PIECES: A STAMPED OUTER WHEEL DISC AND A FORMED RIM.THE TWO PIECES, WHICH TOGETHER COMPRISE THE OUTER BEAD SEAT, ARE JOINED TOGETHER WITH A CIRCUMFERENTIAL WELD.A CYCLIC BENDING MOMENT OCCURS IN THE OUTER BEAD SEAT AREA AS THE WHEEL ROTATES, RESULTING IN FATIGUE STRESSES IN THE WELD'S HEAT AFFECTED ZONE THAT CAN LEAD TO FRACTURING (CRACKING) OF THE RIM MATERIAL.BECAUSE THE FAILURE OCCURS UNDER THE OUTBOARD TIRE BEAD, AIR LEAKAGE MAY NOT READILY OCCUR WHEN THE RIM CRACKS, DEPENDENT ON HOW WELL THE BEAD SEALS ON THE RIM.IF MULTIPLE CRACKS GROW UNDETECTED AND SUDDENLY JOIN INTO A SINGLE LARGE CRACK, THE WHEEL'S STRUCTURE CAN BECOME COMPROMISED LEADING TO RAPID AIR LOSS.A RAPID AIR LOSS, ESPECIALLY AT HIGHER SPEED, MAY LEAD TO A CRASH. FORD RESPONDED TO ODI'S JANUARY 5, 2009 INFORMATION REQUEST (IR) ON FEBRUARY 24.FORD'S RESPONSE ACKNOWLEDGES A NUMBER OF WHEEL FRACTURES ON THE SSVS.HOWEVER, BASED ON ITS ASSESSMENT OF THE PERTINENT FACTORS, IT CONCLUDES THAT THE CONDITION DOES NOT REPRESENT AN UNREASONABLE RISK TO SAFETY.THE LACK OF REPORTS OF RAPID AIR LOSS, NO ALLEGED CRASHES, AND THEIR ASSESSMENT THAT A CRACKED WHEEL CAN BE DETECTED THROUGH SLOW, REPEATED AIR LOSS OR VIBRATION, WERE THE BASES FOR FORD'S CONCLUSION.FORD DISCUSSES THE RESULTS OF A STUDY IT PERFORMED ON WHEELS RETURNED FROM LE FIELD USE, DESIGN REVISIONS IT MADE TO THE SUBJECT WHEEL, AND THE OUTCOME OF DURABILITY TESTING IT CONDUCTED ON THE OLD AND NEW WHEEL DESIGNS. THE COUNTS SHOWN ABOVE INCLUDE A DUPLICATE ODI AND FORD REPORT; THE FORD COUNTS ARE UNIQUE VEHICLES ALLEGING WHEEL FRACTURE(S).SOME WARRANTY CLAIMS INVOLVED MORE THAN ONE WHEEL REPLACEMENT.ALTHOUGH THE SUBJECT VEHICLES HAVE BEEN IN SERVICE FOR A LONGER PERIOD OF TIME THAN VEHICLES INVESTIGATED IN THE PREVIOUS INVESTIGATIONS OF TWO-PIECE WHEEL FRACTURE, ODI DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY ALLEGATIONS OF CRASHES, RAPID AIR LOSS EVENTS DUE TO WHEEL FRACTURES OR ALLEGATIONS OF EFFECTS ON VEHICLE CONTROL OR STABILITY, AS WERE THE CASES IN PAST INVESTIGATIONS WHERE SAFETY RECALLS WERE CONDUCTED TO REPLACE AFFECTED WHEELS.THE AGENCY AGREES THAT THE SSV IS NOT SUITABLE FOR PURSUIT OR HIGH SPEED USAGE, REDUCING THE POTENTIAL FOR CRASHES OR LOSS OF CONTROL INCIDENTS TO BE CAUSED BY THE ALLEGED DEFECT. FORD IMPLEMENTED A 'SHOT PEENING' PROCESS IN JUNE 2006 WHICH REDUCED THE WHEEL'S SURFACE STRESS AND SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVED ITS DURABILITY, AND ODI IS UNAWARE OF ANY FAILURES OF SHOT PEENED WHEELS (SERVICE PART NUMBER 7L1Z-1015-B).FORD'S TESTING SHOWED A SLIGHTLY REDUCED DURABILITY FOR THE NON-SHOT PEENED WHEELS WHEN 'LT' INSTEAD OF FORD APPROVED 'P' METRIC TYPE TIRES ARE USED. A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.THE AGENCY WILL TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY FURTHER C