← New search

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 →

When problems were reported

Mileage at the reported incident

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

Fuel System, Gasoline complaints

36 reports
Clear category filter
24,000 miles · Oct 10, 2008
Electrical SystemFuel System, GasolineInterior Lighting

I BOUGHT MY 2005 FORD EXPEDITION IN MARCH 2007 WITH 21K MILES ON IT. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE 2 DIFFERENT INJECTORS IN 16 MONTHS BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WILL START CUTTING BACK AND ACTING LIKE IT WANTS TO CUT OFF WHEN IT STOPS AT A LIGHT . THE MOST RECENT REPLACEMENT CAME WHEN I DROVE IT 5 MILES FROM HOME AND IT JERKED CONTINUOUSLY T…

Read full complaint

I BOUGHT MY 2005 FORD EXPEDITION IN MARCH 2007 WITH 21K MILES ON IT. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE 2 DIFFERENT INJECTORS IN 16 MONTHS BECAUSE THE VEHICLE WILL START CUTTING BACK AND ACTING LIKE IT WANTS TO CUT OFF WHEN IT STOPS AT A LIGHT . THE MOST RECENT REPLACEMENT CAME WHEN I DROVE IT 5 MILES FROM HOME AND IT JERKED CONTINUOUSLY THE ENTIRE INSIDE OF THE VEHICLE SMELLED LIKE GAS VERY STRONGLY AS WELL AS THE EXHAUST. THE TRUCK STAYS PARKED MOST OF THE TIME BECAUSE IM TOO SCARED TO DRIVE IT AND ITS A GAS HOG!!!!!! THE REPLACEMENT OF THE INJECTORS ARE NOT CHEAP!!!! THE INSIDE LIGHTS WILL COME ON AND GO OFF AT ANYTIME FOR NO REASON. I TAP THE BRAKES AND THEY COME ON, I ROLL THE WINDOW UP OR DOWN AND THEY COME ON. I HAVE ALSO HAD TO REPLACE THE BATTERY DUE TO THIS HAPPENING EVEN WHEN THE TRUCK HAS BEEN PARKED FOR HOURS. I HAVE REPLACED THE OXYGEN SENSOR AND A COLI PACK. ITS NEVER ENDING AND I FEEL LIKE I SHOULD NOT HAVE TO CONTINUE TO REPLACE THESE THINGS WHEN I AM OBVIOUSLY NOT THE ONLY ONE WITH THIS PROBLEM. FORD NEEDS TO STEP UP AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR CRAPPY PRODUCTS. I HAVE 5 MORE YEARS @ $515 PER MONTH TO PAY FOR THIS PIECE OF CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10245098

44,125 miles · May 8, 2008
Fuel System, Gasoline

OUR 2005 FORD EXPEDITION EDDIE BAUER WAS DRIVING EXTREMELY ROUGH, WAS DIFFICULT TO START, AND THERE WAS ALSO A STRONG SMELL OF FUEL IN THE CABIN. WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE NEAREST LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP. THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND INFORMED US THAT TWO OF OUR FUEL INJECTORS HAD GONE BAD, WHICH HAD ALSO DAMAGED TWO SPARK …

Read full complaint

OUR 2005 FORD EXPEDITION EDDIE BAUER WAS DRIVING EXTREMELY ROUGH, WAS DIFFICULT TO START, AND THERE WAS ALSO A STRONG SMELL OF FUEL IN THE CABIN. WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE IT TO THE NEAREST LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP. THEY INSPECTED THE VEHICLE AND INFORMED US THAT TWO OF OUR FUEL INJECTORS HAD GONE BAD, WHICH HAD ALSO DAMAGED TWO SPARK PLUGS. APPARENTLY THEY FROZE OPEN AND ALLOWED TOO MUCH FUEL INTO THE SYSTEM. SINCE FORD IS AWARE OF THIS PROBLEM THEY HAVE EXTENDED THE WARRANTY TO VEHICLE OWNERS FOR THE DEFECTIVE FUEL INJECTORS TO 120,000 MILES. LATE LAST YEAR THEY SENT OUT A LETTER TO IMPACTED VEHICLE OWNERS. HOWEVER, THEY ONLY REPLACE THE FUEL INJECTORS AS THEY GO BAD. WE NOW HAVE TWO NEW AND IMPROVED FUEL INJECTORS IN OUR VEHICLE AND SIX OF THE FAULTY ONES. WE ARE CONCERNED WITH THE SAFETY OF US CONTINUING TO DRIVE THIS VEHICLE. THE ENGINE COULD STOP AT ANY MOMENT LEAVING US IN A DANGEROUS SITUATION IN TRAFFIC OR IN A REMOTE AREA, AND WITH THE FLOODING OF FUEL INTO THE SYSTEM THERE IS AN INCREASED RISK OF FIRE. THERE SHOULD BE A RECALL ON THESE FAULTY FUEL INJECTORS FOR THE SAFETY OF THE VEHICLE OWNERS. I'M DISAPPOINTED THAT FORD HAS CHOSEN TO NOT STAND BY THEIR PRODUCT AND LEAVE THEIR CUSTOMER IN A POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS SITUATION. OTHERWISE, WE HAVE BEEN PLEASED WITH THIS VEHICLE. I RECOMMEND THAT THE NHTSA INVESTIGATE THIS ISSUE. THERE ARE BLOGS ONLINE WHERE OTHERS HAVE EXPERIENCED SIMILAR UNSAFE SITUATIONS RELATING TO THESE FAULTY FUEL INJECTORS. MANY HAVE HAD TO GO BACK TO FORD MULTIPLE TIMES ALREADY, AS AN INJECTOR GOES BAD. THIS SITUATION COULD BE REMEDIED IF FORD WOULD RECALL AND REPLACE ALL OF THESE INJECTORS WHETHER THEY HAVE FAILED YET OR NOT. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10227101

56,981 miles · Feb 25, 2008
Fuel System, Gasoline

IT TAKES 20 MINUTES TO FILL UP MY GAS TANK. FORD PUT SOME TIME OF RESTRICTION OR REROUTED THE FUMES AT THE GAS CAP. I HAVE TO ACTUALLY HOLD THE NOZZLE BACK AND INCH FROM THE OPENING AND SHOOT THE GAS AT THE TANK. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION AND I AM SURE MUCH MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE ORIGINAL PROBLEM THE ENGINEERS WERE …

Read full complaint

IT TAKES 20 MINUTES TO FILL UP MY GAS TANK. FORD PUT SOME TIME OF RESTRICTION OR REROUTED THE FUMES AT THE GAS CAP. I HAVE TO ACTUALLY HOLD THE NOZZLE BACK AND INCH FROM THE OPENING AND SHOOT THE GAS AT THE TANK. THIS IS A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION AND I AM SURE MUCH MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE ORIGINAL PROBLEM THE ENGINEERS WERE TRYING TO CORRECT (DUE TO A LAWSUIT). NOW FORD IS SAYING THAT THEY WILL NEED TO PUT THE CAR ON AN ENGINE ANALYZER ($160) THEN LOWER THE GAS TANK ($500 TO $600) IN ORDER TO SEE IF THE FUME VAPOR HOSE MAY BE FROZEN OR SUPPOSEDLY THERE IS A REPLACEABLE FILTER THAT THEY LOCATED ABOVE THE FUEL TANK. MY RESPONSE WAS ..."NO ENGINEER WOULD LOCATE A REPLACEABLE FILTER ABOVE THE FUEL TANK"! THEN THE SERVICE MANAGER BLAMED THE PROBLEM ON EPA...AS HE IS AWARE OF OTHER EXPEDITIONS WITH THIS PROBLEM...I SAID " I RETIRED FROM EPA..THEY MAY HAVE REQUIRED YOU TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE EMISSIONS....BUT THEY NEVER INSTRUCTED YOUR ENGINEERS TO LOCATE A FILTER ABOVE THE FUEL TANK"!!! I HAVE SPOKE WITH TWO DIFFERENT FORD GARAGES AND FILL THAT THEY ARE GIVING ME A RUN AROUND...MAYBE BECAUSE I AM A WOMEN AND THEY THINK I WILL PAY CLOSE TO $1,000 TO JUST GET FUEL IN THE VEHICLE! *TR

NHTSA ODI #10219128

60,000 miles · Feb 25, 2008
Fuel System, Gasoline

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT CANNOT INSERTED THE NOZZLE INTO THE FUEL TANK TO PLACE GAS IN THE VEHICLE ,BUT THE GAS BLEW BACK OUT AT HIM AND HE STATED THAT IT TOOK 25 MINUTES TO FILL UP THE VEHICLE. FORD STATED THAT THE REPAIR WOULD COST AT LEAST $500. THE DEALER WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE AND REINSTALL …

Read full complaint

TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION. THE CONTACT CANNOT INSERTED THE NOZZLE INTO THE FUEL TANK TO PLACE GAS IN THE VEHICLE ,BUT THE GAS BLEW BACK OUT AT HIM AND HE STATED THAT IT TOOK 25 MINUTES TO FILL UP THE VEHICLE. FORD STATED THAT THE REPAIR WOULD COST AT LEAST $500. THE DEALER WOULD HAVE TO REMOVE AND REINSTALL THE FUEL TANK. THE MANUFACTURER STATED THAT NOTHING COULD BE DONE AND ADVISED THE CONTACT TO CALL NHTSA AND FILE A COMPLAINT. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 60,000. UPDATED 04/02/08. *LJ THE CONSUMER WAS INFORMED THAT ENGINEERS HAD INSTALLED A HOSE ON THE FUEL SYSTEM THAT RELOCATED FUMES AWAY FROM THE FILL TUBE. THEIR EXPLANATION WAS THAT THE HOSE MAY HAVE BEEN FROZEN AND NOT ALLOWING THE TANK TO VENT. UPDATED

NHTSA ODI #10219118

49,511 miles · Dec 11, 2007
Electrical SystemFuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control

I HAVE A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION, EDDIE BAUER. MOST RECENTLY (2 WEEKS AGO), MY CHECK ELECTRONIC THROTTLE LIGHT CAME ON, I CALLED MY LOCAL DEALER AND PLANNED TO TAKE IT IN THE NEXT DAY. I WORK CLOSE TO HOME AND HAVE LIMITED DRIVING DISTANCE. ON THE WAY HOME, THE THROTTLE WENT COMPLETELY OUT AND THE VEHICLE CUT OFF ON THE SIDE OF …

Read full complaint

I HAVE A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION, EDDIE BAUER. MOST RECENTLY (2 WEEKS AGO), MY CHECK ELECTRONIC THROTTLE LIGHT CAME ON, I CALLED MY LOCAL DEALER AND PLANNED TO TAKE IT IN THE NEXT DAY. I WORK CLOSE TO HOME AND HAVE LIMITED DRIVING DISTANCE. ON THE WAY HOME, THE THROTTLE WENT COMPLETELY OUT AND THE VEHICLE CUT OFF ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND WAS UNABLE TO BE RESTARTED AND HAD TO BE TOWED. MY LOCAL DEALER DID FIX IT IN A TIMELY MANNER. HOWEVER...THIS IS NOT THE FIRST PROBLEM. WE BOUGHT IT BRAND NEW AND WITHIN A MONTH THE FUEL INJECTOR WENT OUT WHEN I WAS COMING BACK HOME FROM OUT OF TOWN, MY DRIVERS SIDE SEAT ADJUSTMENT WENT OUT TWICE AND HAD TO BE REPLACED. I AM SHORT AND HAD TO DRIVE WITH MY SEAT ALL THE WAY BACK. 2 CAM PHASERS HAD TO BE REPLACED BACK IN THE SUMMER AND THEN MOST RECENTLY THIS. I HAVE 2 SMALL CHILDREN AND WOULD PREFER A DEPENDABLE VEHICLE. I FILED A FORMAL COMPLAINT WITH FORD AND HEARD FROM THEM TODAY OF WHICH I WAS TOLD THAT HAVING 49,000 MILES ON MY VEHICLE IT WAS NOT UNUSUAL FOR PARTS TO GO BAD. I LIVE ON A HARD SURFACE ROAD AND DRIVE TO WORK, NORMAL DAY TO DAY ACTIVITIES AND OF COURSE VACATION. THE ONLY THING THEY WOULD DO WAS UPGRADE MY WARRANTY TO COVER THE TRANSMISSION. IT ALREADY HAS THE EXTENDED WARRANTY. I AM DISAPPOINTED THEY WOULD NOT STAND BY THEIR PRODUCT. I HAVE OWNED 2 TOYOYTA'S IN THE PAST AND PLAN TO GO BACK TO A TOYOTA AND A FORD COULD NOT BE GIVEN TO ME AGAIN. *TR

NHTSA ODI #10211478

Mileage unknown · Jan 2, 2007
Fuel System, GasolineVehicle Speed Control

I OWN A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION (LIMITED) ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS MY VEHICLES MOTOR HAS REVIVED UP AND I HAD TO PUT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE VERY HARD TO PREVENT CRASHING INTO VEHICLES IN FRONT OF ME... IT ALSO HAPPENED ONE TIME WHEN I WAS GOING ABOUT 50 MPH AND THE CAR FOR NOW APPARENT REASON ACCELERATED TO 60 VERY QUICKLY. I HAV…

Read full complaint

I OWN A 2005 FORD EXPEDITION (LIMITED) ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS MY VEHICLES MOTOR HAS REVIVED UP AND I HAD TO PUT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE VERY HARD TO PREVENT CRASHING INTO VEHICLES IN FRONT OF ME... IT ALSO HAPPENED ONE TIME WHEN I WAS GOING ABOUT 50 MPH AND THE CAR FOR NOW APPARENT REASON ACCELERATED TO 60 VERY QUICKLY. I HAVE REPORTED THIS TO THE DEALER ON THREE SEPARATE OCCASIONS AND THEY ADVISE THAT THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE VEHICLE. (MARONEY FORD, DELRAY BEACH, FL) *JB

NHTSA ODI #10177559

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

PE08070 · 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