The contact's brother-in-law owned a 2007 Ford Explorer. The contact stated that while her brother-in-law was driving 60-62 MPH, her husband was sitting in the front passenger's side seat, the contact was sitting in the rear passenger's side seat and her sister was sitting in the rear driver's side seat. The contact stated that …
Read full complaint
The contact's brother-in-law owned a 2007 Ford Explorer. The contact stated that while her brother-in-law was driving 60-62 MPH, her husband was sitting in the front passenger's side seat, the contact was sitting in the rear passenger's side seat and her sister was sitting in the rear driver's side seat. The contact stated that the front passenger's side end of the vehicle collapsed and hit the ground inadvertently. The driver lost control of the steering wheel, and the vehicle rolled over three times and landed on its wheels. The air bags failed to deploy. The contact was knocked unconscious temporarily. The contact's sister and brother-in-law were able to exit the vehicle. The contact was able to exit the vehicle and stood in front of the passenger's side door attempting to assist her husband out of the vehicle. The emergency units cut the front passenger's side seat belt and assisted the contact's husband out of the vehicle. The contact's husband was air lifted to the hospital, where it was diagnosed that he had sustained a broken neck and was paralyzed from the neck down. The contact's husband received medical assistance in the hospital for 5 months until he passed away. The contact, her sister and brother-in-law were transported to the hospital. The contact sustained a broken sternum and received medical assistance. The contact's sister sustained a fractured neck. Both the contact's sister and brother-in-law had undergone back surgery. A police report was filed. The vehicle was towed to tow yard, where it was totaled. The contact related the failure to NHTSA Campaign Number: 07V181000 (Steering). The dealer and the manufacturer were not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was unknown. The VIN was not available.
NHTSA ODI #11557466
81,457 miles · Jun 23, 2015
EngineSteeringSuspension
MULTIPLE PROBLEMS ENGINE LIGHT KEEPS COMING ON WITH DIFFERENT ISSUES ALL WITHIN THE LAST 6 MONTHS. I HAVE HAD TO HAVE THE THERMOSTAT HOUSING UNIT REPLACED BECAUSE IT CRACKED, THE TRANSMISSION SERVICED AND RE CALIBRATED, REPLACED THE SHIFT SOLENOID PACK BECAUSE TRUCK WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AND SHIFTED HARD. FELT LIKE IT WAS GOING …
Read full complaint
MULTIPLE PROBLEMS ENGINE LIGHT KEEPS COMING ON WITH DIFFERENT ISSUES ALL WITHIN THE LAST 6 MONTHS. I HAVE HAD TO HAVE THE THERMOSTAT HOUSING UNIT REPLACED BECAUSE IT CRACKED, THE TRANSMISSION SERVICED AND RE CALIBRATED, REPLACED THE SHIFT SOLENOID PACK BECAUSE TRUCK WOULD NOT ACCELERATE AND SHIFTED HARD. FELT LIKE IT WAS GOING TO STALL OUT. THE POWER STEERING PRESSURE SWITCH REPLACED DUE TO POWER STEERING LEAK AND THE SWAY BAR LINK REPAIRED BECAUSE IT CAME LOOSE. FUEL FILTER REPLACED DUE TO ENGINE LIGHT CODE INDICATED ISSUES. TRUCK ONLY HAS 81000 MILES AND NOW GETTING READY TO TAKE IT IN AGAIN BECAUSE IT IS MAKING A LOUD "CLUNKING" NOISE WHEN MAKING ONLY LEFT TURNS. ENGINE LIGHT REMAINS ON EVEN AFTER THEY RESET IT WITH EVERY REPAIR THAT HAS BEEN DONE.
NHTSA ODI #10726946
56,800 miles · Mar 22, 2011
Power TrainSuspensionWheels
CAR WAS PARKED AND UPON RETURNING TO VECHICLE ATTEMPTED TO SHIFT FROM PARK TO DRIVE. BRAKE WAS ENGAGED, BRAKE LIGHTS WERE ON HAD DIFFICULTY SHIFTING, COULD NOT GET THE VEHICLE IN DRIVE. AFTER ABOUT 3 ATTEMPTS, IT WORKED. CALLED DEALER ON THE FOLLOWING MONDAY SINCE THIS WAS A SAT. NITE. SCHEDULED DIAGNOSTICS FOR 3/17/11. KEP…
Read full complaint
CAR WAS PARKED AND UPON RETURNING TO VECHICLE ATTEMPTED TO SHIFT FROM PARK TO DRIVE. BRAKE WAS ENGAGED, BRAKE LIGHTS WERE ON HAD DIFFICULTY SHIFTING, COULD NOT GET THE VEHICLE IN DRIVE. AFTER ABOUT 3 ATTEMPTS, IT WORKED. CALLED DEALER ON THE FOLLOWING MONDAY SINCE THIS WAS A SAT. NITE. SCHEDULED DIAGNOSTICS FOR 3/17/11. KEPT HAVING THIS ISSUE INTERMITTENTLY (MORE OFTEN THEN NOT) UNTIL DROP OFF. VEHICLE AROUND 8:00 A.M. WAS NOTIFIED AROUND 2 P.M. THAT ALL DIAGNOSTICS POINT TO THE SHIFTING LEVER NEEDS TO BE REPLACED AND THAT THIS REPAIR ($435) WAS NOT COVERED UNDER THE EXTENDED WARRANTY THAT WAS PURCHASED AT THE TIME OF SALE. I WAS BASICALLY TOLD IT WAS "BUMPER TO BUMPER" COVERAGE. LEFT THE VEHICLE AT THE DEALER AS I WAS LEAVING FOR A BUS. TRIP ON 3/19/11. CALLED FORD CUSTOMER CARE (CALLED AT LEAST THREE TIMES BETWEEN THURSDAY AFTERNOON AND TUESDAY). FINALLY REACHED THE REP THAT MY ISSUE HAD BEEN ESCALATED TO ON 3/22/11. TOLD HIM THAT I WAS LOOKING FOR A "GOODWILL" REPAIR ON BEHALF OF FORD MOTOR CO. I FELT THAT THIS ISSUE SHOULD HAVE BEEN COVERED UNDER THE EXTENDED WARRANTY, OTHERWISE, WHY WOULD PEOPLE BUY THE EXTENDED WARRANTY IF THEY COULDN'T COUNT ON IT COVERING ANYTHING? FINAL RESOLUTION WAS THAT THEY WOULD CONTACT THE DEALERSHIP TO MAKE THE REPAIR, I WOULD PAY THE $50 DEDUCTIBLE THAT I WOULD HAVE HAD TO PAY HAD THE WARRANTY COVERED THE SERVICE. I WAS BASICALLY TOLD "DON'T EXPECT THAT THE NEXT TIME SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPENS THAT YOU CAN CALL FORD AND THEY WILL TAKE CARE OF IT." THE BOTTOM LINE IS I AM SATISFIED THAT IT IS BEING REPAIRED FOR THE $50 DEDUCT. HOWEVER, I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT I NEEDED TO "JUMP THROUGH HOOPS" TO GET THIS ACCOMPLISHED. I BELIEVE THAT THE DEALERSHIP SHOULD HAVE WORKED WITH FORD ON MY BEHALF TO GET THIS TAKEN CARE OF. ABOUT 6 MONTHS PRIOR TO THIS THERE WERE FRONT END AND WHEEL ISSUES WITH THIS VEHICLE.
NHTSA ODI #10393220
10,000 miles · Jan 3, 2011
SuspensionTires
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 FORD EXPLORER. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH WHEN THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE ROAD PERFORMANCE WAS EXTREMELY POOR. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THEY WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE DEALER REPLACED THE FOUR TIRES AT THE MANUFACTURES EXPE…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 FORD EXPLORER. THE CONTACT WAS DRIVING APPROXIMATELY 45 MPH WHEN THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE VEHICLE ROAD PERFORMANCE WAS EXTREMELY POOR. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO AN AUTHORIZED DEALER WHERE THEY WERE UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE CAUSE OF FAILURE. THE DEALER REPLACED THE FOUR TIRES AT THE MANUFACTURES EXPENSE. RECENTLY, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TIRES EXHIBITED PREMATURE WEAR AND STATED THAT THE TIRES WOULD NEED TO BE REPLACED AGAIN AFTER ONLY RIDING ON THEM FOR EIGHTEEN MONTHS. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS APPROXIMATELY 10,000. THE CONSUMER HAS PURCHASED THREE SETS OF TIRES. UPDATED 04/29/11
NHTSA ODI #10373977
52,000 miles · Oct 9, 2010
SuspensionWheels
WAS DRIVING FROM WORK TO PICK UP DAUGHTER FROM SOCCER APPROX 2 MILES AWAY. STARTED HEARING A NOISE THAT SOUNDED MAYBE LIKE SOMETHING WAS STUCK IN HUBCAP..NOISE SEEMED TO BE MORE NOTICEABLE WHEN VEHICLE WAS BRAKING OR SLOWING DOWN. DROVE APPROX. ANOTHER 10 MILES BEFORE PARKING THE VEHICLE FOR THE NIGHT. NEXT MORNING(SAT) CALLE…
Read full complaint
WAS DRIVING FROM WORK TO PICK UP DAUGHTER FROM SOCCER APPROX 2 MILES AWAY. STARTED HEARING A NOISE THAT SOUNDED MAYBE LIKE SOMETHING WAS STUCK IN HUBCAP..NOISE SEEMED TO BE MORE NOTICEABLE WHEN VEHICLE WAS BRAKING OR SLOWING DOWN. DROVE APPROX. ANOTHER 10 MILES BEFORE PARKING THE VEHICLE FOR THE NIGHT. NEXT MORNING(SAT) CALLED OUR LOCAL DEALER TO SEE IF THEY COULD GET IT IN TO LOOK AT IT. SERVICE STATES THAT THE SWAY BAR IS LOOSE AND THAT TWO OF THE 5 BOLTS THAT HOLD THE WHEEL IN PLACE ON THE DRIVER'S SIDE REAR WERE SHEARED OFF. CAR IS AT THE GARAGE NOW AND THEY GAVE ME A LOANER TO USE WHILE IT IIS BEING REPAIRED. IT WAS IN FOR SERVICE ABOUT A MONTH AGO AND THE U-JOINT WAS REPLACED AND A COUPLE OF OTHER ISSUES WERE FIXED ALL UNDER THE EXTENDED WARRANTY THAT WAS PURCHASED WHEN WE PURCHASED THE VEHICLE. THE ONLY OTHER TIME THAT I KNOW OF THAT THE DRIVER REAR TIRES WAS OFF WAS BACK IN MAY OF THIS YEAR WHEN IT HAD A COMPLETE BRAKE JOB AT ANOTHER LOCAL SERVICE PROVIDER. SO FAR THE SERVICE DEPT AT THE DEALER HAS BEEN GOOD AND THEY HAVE TREATED ME WELL AS FAR AS GETTING A LOANER VEHICLE ETC....BUT I AM CONCERNED THAT THIS COULD BE A SAFETY ISSUE FOR OTHERS. IF I HAD NOT BROUGHT THIS IN TO BE LOOKED AT, WE COULD HAVE VERY EASILY BEEN INVOLVED IN AN ACCIDENT HAD THE WHEEL SNAPPED OFF ON US. THAT IS SCARY TO THINK ABOUT. WE ARE VERY LUCKY TO NOT HAVE THAT HAPPEN TO US. *TR
NHTSA ODI #10359874
16,000 miles · Jan 18, 2008
SuspensionCrash
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING 15 MPH, THE VEHICLE VEERED TO THE RIGHT AND CRASHED INTO TWO PARKED VEHICLES. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THE BALL JOINT FAILED AND CAUSED THE WHEEL TO DETACH FROM THE VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO WARNINGS PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. …
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2007 FORD EXPLORER. WHILE DRIVING 15 MPH, THE VEHICLE VEERED TO THE RIGHT AND CRASHED INTO TWO PARKED VEHICLES. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED AND THE DEALER STATED THAT THE BALL JOINT FAILED AND CAUSED THE WHEEL TO DETACH FROM THE VEHICLE. THERE WERE NO WARNINGS PRIOR TO THE FAILURE. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT REPAIRED BECAUSE THE CONTACT WANTS FURTHER INSPECTION. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 16,000. UPDATED 02/12/08. *LJ THE CONSUMER STATED THE WHEEL FELL OFF PRIOR TO THE COLLISION, CAUSING IT TO VEER TO THE RIGHT AND CRASH INTO PARK CARS. STATE OF MICHIGAN TRAFFIC REPORT UPDATED 02/12/08 *TR
ON CERTAIN SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES, THE TWO BOLTS THAT ATTACH THE STEERING GEAR ASSEMBLY TO THE FRAME MAY HAVE BEEN OVER-TIGHTENED. THIS CONDITION COULD RESULT IN ONE OR BOTH OF THE BOLTS FRACTURING, CAUSING THE STEERING GEAR TO BECOME LOOSE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS CONDITION COULD CAUSE "CLUNKING" NOISE WHEN STEERING AS WELL AS DECREASED STEERING EFFECTIVENESS POTENTIALLY RESULTING IN A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE BOTH THE STEERING GEAR ASSEMBLY MOUNTING BOLTS AND NUTS FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 27, 2007. 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
1
PE08060 · Tire Valve Cracking
Opened Oct 14, 2008 · Closed Apr 9, 2009
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Tires:valve
ON OCTOBER 14, 2008, ODI OPENED PE08-060 TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF CRACKED AND LEAKING SNAP-IN TIRE VALVES IN MODEL YEAR (MY) 2007 VEHICLES MANUFACTURED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY.THE VALVES WERE SUPPLIED TO FORD BY TOPSEAL AUTO-PARTS, A SUBSIDIARY OF THE SHANGHAI BAOLONG AUTOMOTIVE CORPORATION IN CHINA.VALVES MADE BY TOPSEAL FOR AFTERMARKET SALE WERE THE SUBJECT OF TWO RECENT SAFETY RECALLS BY TECH INTERNATIONAL (08T-018) AND DILL AIR CONTROLS (08T-028), THE LATTER OF WHICH WAS INVESTIGATED BY ODI IN PE08-036 AND EA08-022.THE DEFECT CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY THE AFTERMARKET TIRE VALVE RECALLS BOTH INVOLVED INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING DUE TO ISSUES WITH THE SUPPLY OF ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS TO TOPSEAL FOR A PERIOD FROM JULY TO MID-NOVEMBER 2006.THE AFTERMARKET VALVES WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A BLEND OF EPDM AND NATURAL RUBBER, USING A RELATIVELY LOW PERCENTAGE OF EPDM (EPDM PROVIDES INHERENT RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING).HENCE, THE NEED FOR ANTI-OZONANT CHEMICALS AND THE PROBLEMS WITH CRACKING WHEN THOSE CHEMICALS WERE MISSING OR OUT OF SPECIFICATION IN SOME LOTS OF VALVES.BOTH RECALL CAMPAIGNS INVOLVED INSPECTION PROGRAMS TO IDENTIFY AND REPLACE VALVES WITH VISIBLE SURFACE CRACKING.ALTHOUGH THE TOPSEAL VALVES SUPPLIED TO FORD ALSO APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE ANTI-OZONANT SUPPLY ISSUES IN MID TO LATE-2006, FORD INDICATED THAT ITS VALVES WERE MADE AT A DIFFERENT TOPSEAL PRODUCTION LINE AND WERE COMPOUNDED WITH A HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF EPDM RUBBER TO MEET MORE STRINGENT SPECIFICATIONS FROM FORD.ODI'S ANALYSIS OF COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY DATA PROVIDED BY FORD SHOWED THAT PROBLEMS WITH CRACKED TIRE VALVES WERE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER FOR MY 2007 VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007.FORD RESPONDED BY IMPLEMENTING CHANGES IN ITS MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR SNAP-IN RUBBER TIRE VALVES AND ALSO INCREASING THE QUALITY AND ACCEPTANCE STANDARDS FOR VALVES IMPORTED FOR USE IN ITS VEHICLES.WHILE THE COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY CLAIM RATES ARE ELEVATED FOR SUBJECT VEHICLES PRODUCED FROM DECEMBER 2006 THROUGH MARCH 2007, THE RATES OF LEAKING VALVES ARE WELL BELOW ONE PERCENT OF PRODUCTION FOR EACH OF THE PEAK MONTHS FOR ALL OF THE AFFECTED MODELS.A SUBSTANTIAL MAJORITY OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EQUIPPED WITH TIRE PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEMS (TPMS) WHICH WARN THE DRIVER WHEN ANY TIRE PRESSURES DROPS BELOW 25 PERCENT OF RECOMMENDED INFLATION PRESSURE. AS OUTLINED IN A LETTER TO ODI DATED APRIL 6, 2009, FORD HAS AGREED TO SEND LETTERS TO OWNERS OF CERTAIN MY 2007 AND 2008 FORD, LINCOLN AND MERCURY VEHICLES TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CRACKING CONCERN. LETTERS WILL BE SENT TO OWNERS OF VEHICLES BUILT FROM NOVEMBER 2006 THROUGH MAY 2007.OWNERS CAN OPT FOR A FREE DEALER INSPECTION.VALVES EXHIBITING SURFACE CRACKS OR AIR LEAKAGE RELATED TO OZONE ATTACK WILL BE REPLACED BY FORD UNDER ITS NORMAL WARRANTY TERMS.FORD EXPECTS TO SEND THE LETTER BY APPROXIMATELY MID-MAY 2009. BASED ON THE USE OF TPMS IN THE MAJORITY OF SUBJECT VEHICLES AND THE RELATIVELY LOW RATES OF REPAIRS ASSOCIATED WITH LEAKING VALVES AND RESULTANT TIRE DAMAGE, ODI BELIEVES THAT THE ACTIONS FORD HAS AGREED TO TAKE WILL PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND EXPEDITIOUS RESOLUTION FOR VEHICLES THAT WERE BUILT DURING THE PERIOD WHEN VALVES WITH INADEQUATE RESISTANCE TO OZONE CRACKING WERE MOST LIKELY TO HAVE BEEN USED IN VEHICLE PRODUCTION.FURTHER INVESTIGATION OF THIS MATTER WOULD NOT BE AN EFFICIENT ALLOCATION OF AGENCY RESOURCES.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 CONTINUE TO