IllustrationTAIL GATE CORROSION ROOF CORROSION HOOD CORROSION 2006 EXPEDITION 26,000 MILES. *TR
2006 Ford Expedition
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2006 Ford Expedition do not stand out strongly from 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
220–25K
3425–50K
5750–75K
6875–100K
63100–150K
19150K+
263 reports with mileage · 36 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.
- Engine. Review the 87 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 75 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 32 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
19 crash reports6 fire reports18 injury reports
What owners actually said
299 reportsTHANKFULLY NO CRASH HAS HAPPENED YET. HOWEVER, MY COMPLAINT DEALS WITH MY 2006 LIMITED FORD EXPEDITION. IN THE BACK WHERE THE THIRD ROW SEATS ARE LOCATED, THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY FOR THOSE PASSENGERS TO ESCAPE IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH. THE BACK WINDOW DOES NOT HAVE A SWITCH/RELEASE TO OPEN ANY WINDOWS. THE DOOR DOES NOT HAVE ANY…
Read full complaint
THANKFULLY NO CRASH HAS HAPPENED YET. HOWEVER, MY COMPLAINT DEALS WITH MY 2006 LIMITED FORD EXPEDITION. IN THE BACK WHERE THE THIRD ROW SEATS ARE LOCATED, THERE IS NO POSSIBLE WAY FOR THOSE PASSENGERS TO ESCAPE IN THE EVENT OF A CRASH. THE BACK WINDOW DOES NOT HAVE A SWITCH/RELEASE TO OPEN ANY WINDOWS. THE DOOR DOES NOT HAVE ANY TYPE OF DEVICE TO OPEN THE TAIL GATE. *TR
MY TRUCK WENT INTO FAIL SAFE MODE WHILE ON THE HIGHWAY. THIS CAUSES THE TRUCK TO STOP SUDDENLY WITH NO POWER TO ACCELERATE BUT THE ENGINE STILL RUNS. THIS CAUSED ME TO ALMOST BE CRUSHED BY A TRACTOR TRAILER BEHIND ME. I HAD SEVERAL CHILDREN IN THE CAR TOO!! *TR
DRIVING ON HIGHWAY AND SUV JUST SHUTS DOWN, WITHOUT WARNING. THIS IS THE 2ND TIME THIS HAS HAPPENED. *TR
DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG FAILURE TO DEPLOY-WAS INVOLVED IN A SINGLE CAR ACCIDENT ON NOV. 24, 2008...HIT BLACK ICE PATCH, ENDED UP IN A DEEP DITCH AND CREEK BED. WAS TRAVELING APPROX 35 TO 40 MPH. FRONT END OF CAR EXPERIENCED HEAVY DAMAGE. DRIVER WAS WEARING SEAT BELT. PASSENGER AIRBAG DID DEPLOY, NO PASSENGER PRESENT IN VEHICLE. DRI…
Read full complaint
DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG FAILURE TO DEPLOY-WAS INVOLVED IN A SINGLE CAR ACCIDENT ON NOV. 24, 2008...HIT BLACK ICE PATCH, ENDED UP IN A DEEP DITCH AND CREEK BED. WAS TRAVELING APPROX 35 TO 40 MPH. FRONT END OF CAR EXPERIENCED HEAVY DAMAGE. DRIVER WAS WEARING SEAT BELT. PASSENGER AIRBAG DID DEPLOY, NO PASSENGER PRESENT IN VEHICLE. DRIVER SIDE AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY. THIS IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE!!!! VEHICLE SUSTAINED $13,000 IN ESTIMATED REPAIRS. MILEAGE ON VEHICLE WAS 53,000. DUE TO EXTENSIVE REPAIR ESTIMATE, VEHICLE WAS DEEMED TOTALED. WE ARE SEEING SEVERAL OTHERS IN THIS WEBSITE AND OTHERS ON THE INTERNET WHO HAVE EXPERIENCED FRONT END AND REAR END CRASHES WITH THIS MODEL AND YEAR AUTO AND OBVIOUSLY NO ONE AT FORD IS BOTHERING TO PHONE PEOPLE BACK, NOR INVESTIGATE THE PROBLEM OR DO A RECALL. HOW MANY LIVES WILL BE TAKEN BEFORE ANYONE DOES ANYTHING?? LUCKILY I WAS NOT INJURED IN THE CRASH OTHER THAN A SORE NECK FROM THE SEATBELT LASHING. WE PAY FOR THESE "SAFETY" ITEMS ON OUR VEHICLES BUT WHAT GOOD ARE THEY WHEN THEY DO NOT WORK????????? IT'S INSANE. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD EXPEDITION. ON FOUR SEPARATE OCCASIONS, WHILE DRIVING WITH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL DEPRESSED, THE VEHICLE SHUT OFF. A WRENCH SYMBOL APPEARED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE RESTARTED. THE DEALER COULD NOT DUPLICATE OR DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE SPEED WAS UNKNOWN. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD EXPEDITION. ON FOUR SEPARATE OCCASIONS, WHILE DRIVING WITH THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL DEPRESSED, THE VEHICLE SHUT OFF. A WRENCH SYMBOL APPEARED ON THE INSTRUMENT PANEL AND THE VEHICLE HAD TO BE RESTARTED. THE DEALER COULD NOT DUPLICATE OR DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE. THE SPEED WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 64,749 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 63,000.
A 17" TIRE RIM ON A 2006 FORD EXPEDITION HAS FAILED FOR THE SECOND TIME. THE FIRST FAILED RIM WAS REPLACED BY FORD MOTOR CO. WITH A NEW RIM AND NOW ONLY A COUPLE OF MONTHS LATER THIS SECOND RIM HAS FAILED. THE WELD HAS FAILED ON THE RIM CAUSING SEPARATION AND A SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD FOR ANY VEHICLE OCCUPANTS. *TR
I AM DRIVING A 2006 FORD EXPEDITION. THE OTHER MORNING, I PUT MY CHILD IN THE CAR SEAT BEHIND THE DRIVERS SEAT. I HALF ENTERED THE CAR TO TURN ON THE ENGINE, AS IT WAS CHILLY OUT. ABOUT 5-10 SECONDS AFTER TURNING THE CAR ON, I HEARD A HUGE EXPLOSION. SOUNDED AS IF A RIFLE HAD BEEN SHOT NEXT TO MY HEAD. THE BABY WENT NUTS. …
Read full complaint
I AM DRIVING A 2006 FORD EXPEDITION. THE OTHER MORNING, I PUT MY CHILD IN THE CAR SEAT BEHIND THE DRIVERS SEAT. I HALF ENTERED THE CAR TO TURN ON THE ENGINE, AS IT WAS CHILLY OUT. ABOUT 5-10 SECONDS AFTER TURNING THE CAR ON, I HEARD A HUGE EXPLOSION. SOUNDED AS IF A RIFLE HAD BEEN SHOT NEXT TO MY HEAD. THE BABY WENT NUTS. I LOOKED AROUND, AND THE SIDE AIRBAGS HAD DEPLOYED. THIS WAS THE FIRST TIME I HAD TURNED THE CAR ON THAT DAY. LUCKILY NO ONE WAS HURT. IF IT HAD HAPPENED ON MY SIDE, IT WOULD HAVE SLAMMED INTO ME PRETTY GOOD, AS WELL AS MY CHILD. THE DEALERSHIP I BOUGHT IT FROM MADE ME PAY TO HAVE IT DRIVEN TO THEM AND THE RENTAL CAR. THEY WOULD NOT DRIVE IT THEMSELVES FOR FEAR OF ANOTHER AIR BAG DEPLOYING WHILE THEY WERE DRIVING. THIS IS OF COURSE WHY I WOULDN'T DRIVE IT EITHER. MY CAR IS OUT OF WARRANTY. THEY ARE INSISTING I PAY FOR THE REPAIR. IT IS $2500. I THINK THIS IS A SERIOUS SITUATION AND AM CONCERNED IT COULD HAPPEN AGAIN, MAYBE WHILE I AM DRIVING. THE DEALERSHIP SAID SINCE NO ONE WAS HURT IN THIS INSTANCE IT WASN'T THERE PROBLEM. DO I HAVE ANY RECOURSE? SINCERELY, JENNIFER VESTAL *TR
MY BEST FRIEND FATHER AND GRANDMOTHER DIED INSIDE AN SUV ACCIDENT THAT EMERGED INTO A SWIMMING POOL. WINDOWS WERE CLOSED. THERE WAS NO WAY OUT OF THE SUV DUE TO POWER WINDOWS. THEY SAT THERE WAITING FOR DEATH. SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE TO ALL VEHICLES WHO ARE BUILT WITH POWER WINDOWS. THE SAME WAY THAT MOST MODERN VEHICLES NOW HA…
Read full complaint
MY BEST FRIEND FATHER AND GRANDMOTHER DIED INSIDE AN SUV ACCIDENT THAT EMERGED INTO A SWIMMING POOL. WINDOWS WERE CLOSED. THERE WAS NO WAY OUT OF THE SUV DUE TO POWER WINDOWS. THEY SAT THERE WAITING FOR DEATH. SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE TO ALL VEHICLES WHO ARE BUILT WITH POWER WINDOWS. THE SAME WAY THAT MOST MODERN VEHICLES NOW HAVE A WAY OF ESCAPING FROM THE TRUNK OF A CAR WHY ISN'T THERE SOMETHING WHERE THERE IS A WAY OF ESCAPING FROM A CAR WINDOW IF THE CAR GOES INTO A POOL OF DEEP WATER ABOVE 5 FEET. THESE AUTOMOBILE COMPANIES NEED TO CREATE AN EMERGENCY MECHANISM IN ALL POWER WINDOWS IN CASE OF THE CAR GOING INTO A LAKE, RIVER, POOL, ETC. ALL WINDOWS FRONT AND BACK WINDOWS SHOULD HAVE A MANUAL ROLL DOWN KNOB OR WHATEVER IT IS CALLED FOR SUCH ACCIDENTS. I'M PRETTY SURE THAT IF MY FRIENDS FATHER HAD SOME KIND OF TOOL TO BREAK THE WINDOWS HE WOULD OF BUT WHO IS TO SAY THAT THE RUSHING WATERS WOULD HAVE STILL KILLED THEM. THEY WERE SENIOR CITIZENS THAT DIED SO TRAGICALLY AND THEY ARE NOT THE ONLY ONE. I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS THE RIGHT DEPARTMENT FOR SUCH A COMPLAINT, BUT IF THIS IS THE WRONG DEPARTMENT CAN SOMEONE PLEASE DIRECT ME TO THE PROPER CHANNELS. THIS INCIDENT IS STILL UNDER INVESTIGATION BUT IT IS NOT KNOWN HOW THEY ENDED UP INSIDE A SWIMMING POOL. IF SUCH MECHANISM IS INVENTED, IT SHOULD NOT BE AN OPTIONAL IT SHOULD BE MANDATORY JUST LIKE SEATBELTS AND AIRBAGS AND SHOULD NOT BE COSTLY TO THE CONSUMER DUE TO THAT IT IS A LIFE SAVING TO HUMANS AND ANIMALS FOR THAT FACT. I HOPE I AM UNDERSTOOD AND THAT THIS COMPLAINT SHOULD BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY AS IT WILL SAVE A LOT OF LIVES. I ALSO HOPE THAT I HAVE MADE MY SELF CLEAR AND UNDERSTANDABLE. THANK YOU. *TR
AUGUST 21 ON THE WAY TO WORK (4 MILE DRIVE) THE TRUCK STARTED TO SHAKE AND LOST POWER,CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON, WE TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE DEALER,AND THEY CAN NOT FIGURE WHAT IS GOING ON,SO THEY SAID THE ENGINE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. THE CODES ARE P0022-P0305-P0307-P1184-P2198-P2273 MY FAMILY JUST CAME BACK FROM A 3000 TRIP ,I…
Read full complaint
AUGUST 21 ON THE WAY TO WORK (4 MILE DRIVE) THE TRUCK STARTED TO SHAKE AND LOST POWER,CHECK ENGINE LIGHT CAME ON, WE TOOK THE TRUCK TO THE DEALER,AND THEY CAN NOT FIGURE WHAT IS GOING ON,SO THEY SAID THE ENGINE NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. THE CODES ARE P0022-P0305-P0307-P1184-P2198-P2273 MY FAMILY JUST CAME BACK FROM A 3000 TRIP ,I CAN ONLY IMAGINE HAVING THIS HAPPENING TO US DURING THIS TIME. I BEEN LOOKING FOR THE SAME TYPE OF TROUBLE TO THIS TRUCKS AND FOUND THAT THERE IS A NUMBER OF SIMILAR COMPLAINTS ABOUT HAVING TO REPLACE ENGINES RANGING FROM 38,000 MILES TO ABOUT 60,000MILES. THE PRICE OF THIS CARS ARE WELL OVER $35,000 TO HAVING TO SPEND ANOTHER $7,000 WITH ALL THE PROBLEMS OF OUR ECONOMY RIGHT NOW A NORMAL PERSON LIKE ME CAN NOT AFFORD ANOTHER RIP OFF BY ONE OF THE BIG COMPANIES,LIKE FORD. ALL I'M ASKING IS THAT THEY TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS ENGINE TROUBLES AND REPAIR LIKE THEY SUPPOSED TO. *TR
Official recalls
205V520000 · Visibility:windshield Wiper/washer:motor
Nov 9, 2005
ON CERTAIN TRUCKS, PASSENGER CARS AND SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE WINDSHIELD WIPER MOTOR MAY HAVE BEEN PRODUCED WITHOUT GREASE BEING APPLIED TO THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: AFTER A PERIOD OF CONTINUOUS USE ON THE HIGH SPEED SETTING, LACK OF GREASE ON THE OUTPUT SHAFT GEAR MAY CAUSE THE GEAR TO DISTORT OR FRACTURE DURING OPERATION RESULTING IN A LOSS OF WIPER FUNCTION. INOPERATIVE WIPERS UNDER INCLEMENT WEATHER CONDITIONS COULD CAUSE A CRASH DUE TO IMPAIRED VISIBILITY.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT THE WIPER MOTOR FOR THE PRESENCE OF GREASE AND GREASE THE WIPER MOTOR GEARS IF NECESSARY. THE RECALL BEGAN ON NOVEMBER 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673 OR LINCOLN/MERCURY AT 1-800-521-4140.
05V310000 · Tires:tread/belt
Jul 6, 2005
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE FRONT AND REAR TIRES ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE OF AFFECTED VEHICLES MAY HAVE BEEN DAMAGED AT THE CENTER TREAD DURING PRODUCTION.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: OVER TIME, THE DAMAGE MAY BE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW BELT CORROSION ULTIMATELY LEADING TO A TREAD SEPARATION, WHICH COULD RESULT IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL INSPECT ALL FOUR TIRES (TO ENSURE INSPECTION OF THE LEFT HAND SIDE TIRES THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ROTATED TO THE OTHER SIDE OF THE VEHICLE) FOR TIRE TREAD DAMAGE AND, IF NECESSARY, REPLACE THE DAMAGED TIRE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 13, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
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