IllustrationMileage unknown · May 5, 2016
Electrical SystemEngineSuspension
TAKATA RECALL
NHTSA ODI #10863320
2006 Ford Explorer
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2006 Ford Explorer do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 609.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Explorer 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
960–25K
13925–50K
13950–75K
8575–100K
67100–150K
21150K+
547 reports with mileage · 83 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.
- Power Train. Review the 296 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 164 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine. Review the 58 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
13 crash reports7 fire reports10 injury reports
Suspension complaints
5 reportsTAKATA RECALL
2006 FORD EXPLORER 60000 MILES. FRONT WHEEL BEARINGS NEED REPLACEMENT. NO OFFROAD, STREET DRIVING ONLY.
WHILE DRIVING THE ABS / CHECK ENGINE / RSC WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. THE TRUCK WAS ABLE TO BE DRIVEN FOR A COUPLE OF MILES, BUT THEN IT STARTED MAKING A NOISE FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE TRUCK WAS NOT ABLE TO BE DRIVEN TO A SAFE LOCATION AND WAS LEFT ON THE SIDE OF A ROAD IN A HIGH TRAFFIC AREA AND WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER.…
Read full complaint
WHILE DRIVING THE ABS / CHECK ENGINE / RSC WARNING LIGHTS CAME ON. THE TRUCK WAS ABLE TO BE DRIVEN FOR A COUPLE OF MILES, BUT THEN IT STARTED MAKING A NOISE FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE TRUCK WAS NOT ABLE TO BE DRIVEN TO A SAFE LOCATION AND WAS LEFT ON THE SIDE OF A ROAD IN A HIGH TRAFFIC AREA AND WAS TOWED TO THE DEALER. THE DEALER FOUND OUT THE REAR RIGHT TOOTHED RING KNOWN AS AN "EXCITER RING" WAS LOOSE ON THE AXLE. THEY REPORTED THE WHOLE AXLE PART NEEDS TO BE REPLACED BECAUSE OF HOW IT'S MADE AT A COST OF $630 INSTALLED. THEY INDICATED THEY HAD NO REQUIREMENT TO REPORT THIS PROBLEM AND I BELIEVE THIS IS A MAJOR DEFECT WITH UNFORESEEN SAFETY PROBLEMS THAT IS BEING UNDER REPORTED. MY TRUCK ONLY HAD 50K MILES AND I HAVE RESEARCHED MANY OTHER INDIVIDUALS REPORTING THE PROBLEM ON CAR AND TRUCK FORUMS. I HAVE INDICATED ON THE FORUMS TO REPORT THIS DEFECT TO YOUR WEB SITE AND INCLUDED THE LINKS. THE FORUMS ARE INDICATING FORD KNOWS OF THE PROBLEM AND MY DEALERSHIP SAID THEY HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM HAPPEN ONCE IN A WHILE. WE HAVE A LONG TRIP SCHEDULED SOON AND I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE VEHICLE WHILE DRIVING AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS WITH ANOTHER TOOTHED SENSOR RING FALLING OFF. I DO NOT FEEL SAFE LETTING MY WIFE AND KIDS DRIVE IN THIS VEHICLE KNOWING THAT THERE ARE THREE OTHER AXLES WITH POTENTIALLY THE SAME PROBLEM. THE COMPANY THAT MADE THIS PART SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR A DEFECTIVE PART THAT COULD CAUSE DIRECT OR INDIRECT DEATH AND/OR INJURIES. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD EXPLORER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT BOTH THE ANTILOCK BRAKE AND ANTI-ROLL LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. HE HEARD A NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE AND DISCOVERED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE REAR AXLE FAILED. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT NO RECALLS WERE AVAILABLE FOR THAT COM…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD EXPLORER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT BOTH THE ANTILOCK BRAKE AND ANTI-ROLL LIGHTS ILLUMINATED. HE HEARD A NOISE COMING FROM THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE AND DISCOVERED THAT THE PASSENGER SIDE REAR AXLE FAILED. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE DEALER AND THEY STATED THAT NO RECALLS WERE AVAILABLE FOR THAT COMPONENT. THE SPEED WAS UNKNOWN. THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 41,000 AND FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 40,000.
I HAVE HAD THE CONTROL ARMS BOLTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE VEHICLE NOW LOOSENED UP SUFFICIENTLY ENOUGH TO CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO SWERVE SUDDENLY WHEN BRAKING. FORTUNATELY WAS ABLE TO CONTROL VEHICLE. THE LEFT SIDE FAILED FIRST NOW THE RIGHT SIDE. EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND I WAS LUCKY I WAS ABLE TO REACT TO AVOID HITTING CARS NEXT TO …
Read full complaint
I HAVE HAD THE CONTROL ARMS BOLTS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE VEHICLE NOW LOOSENED UP SUFFICIENTLY ENOUGH TO CAUSE THE VEHICLE TO SWERVE SUDDENLY WHEN BRAKING. FORTUNATELY WAS ABLE TO CONTROL VEHICLE. THE LEFT SIDE FAILED FIRST NOW THE RIGHT SIDE. EXTREMELY DANGEROUS AND I WAS LUCKY I WAS ABLE TO REACT TO AVOID HITTING CARS NEXT TO ME.*AK
Official recalls
105V520000 · 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.
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
0No exact-year investigations in this snapshot.