IllustrationABS MODULE failure. Dealer states this I s a known problem. 581 on backorder with Ford with no ETA of new stock. No sense of urgency to resolve known problem. Online sources state heavy wire harness breaks solar joint at positive and negative contacts in module.
2014 Ford Explorer
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Explorer years
Owner complaints for the 2014 Ford Explorer are substantially higher than 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
1890–25K
18125–50K
19650–75K
16275–100K
222100–150K
71150K+
1,021 reports with mileage · 654 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.
- Steering. Review the 496 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Structure. Review the 276 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine. Review the 196 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
32 crash reports6 fire reports29 injury reports
Service Brakes complaints
25 reportsWhen starting my vehicle the parking brake alarm is going off stating that my parking brake is engaged which it is not once I drive about a mile or 2 the alarm goes off but everytime I restart my vehicle he resets the process.
ABS module. Indicater lights on ,tracktion control not on, warning lights to check brakes ABS systems. Ford cannot get parts to repair. Ford dealer cannot repair Leaving no brake assistance
ABS module is bad with trouble code U3000-49 ABS MODULE internal problem. ABS system is disabled and also Traction Control Function is disabled. ABS module is on Nationwide back order. This is a safety concern as the ABS system is not functioning
The traction control sensor will come on out of nowhere making a loud noise and causing the vehicle to jerk to a stop. Yes it is available for inspection and has already been taken to a dealership. My safety is out at risk because the vehicle almost jerks to a stop when the traction control kicks in when not needed. The problem …
Read full complaint
The traction control sensor will come on out of nowhere making a loud noise and causing the vehicle to jerk to a stop. Yes it is available for inspection and has already been taken to a dealership. My safety is out at risk because the vehicle almost jerks to a stop when the traction control kicks in when not needed. The problem has been reproduced and confirmed by a Ford dealer. The component has been inspected and reset according to the work report from the dealership. There were no other warning lamps, messages or symptoms before this issue began. According to the dealership my vehicle was taken to they said they have seen this issue on several other vehicles and usually is fixed with the process they performed on my vehicle for $545.09. And if that didn’t fix it that I would have to spend approx $2,500 to get the ABS module replaced. This issue a a safety concern and I don’t feel like I should be liable to pay for these repairs especially when the dealership has said that they have seen this issue before on other vehicles. I feel this repair should be covered under a safety recall and that ford should reimburse me for the original repairs that did not fix the issue. They stated that they test drove my vehicle before and after the repairs but how is that when the mileage in and out of the shop on their repair order is the same mileage…???
The vehicle was placed in park with the engine running. No one was in the vehicle when, on it's own, it came out of park and rolled down our driveway, coming to a stop after hitting a tree. A person or cat could have easily been on the driveway and run and killed. It subsequently cost $10751.42 to repair the damage to the rea…
Read full complaint
The vehicle was placed in park with the engine running. No one was in the vehicle when, on it's own, it came out of park and rolled down our driveway, coming to a stop after hitting a tree. A person or cat could have easily been on the driveway and run and killed. It subsequently cost $10751.42 to repair the damage to the rear tailgate. No previous issues had been noted prior to this incident. This occurred in July 2001 and was submitted to our insurance company where we paid a$1000 deductible and caused our rates to go up. We have contacted Ford without any success.
I have several issues that I have had with the ford explore. This is my second ford explore. The passenger air was not assemble correctly and now is coming apart. The seat belt on the driver sit gets stuck. The car door panels have come undone which is not typical with any other vehicle expect explore. The brakes on the car are …
Read full complaint
I have several issues that I have had with the ford explore. This is my second ford explore. The passenger air was not assemble correctly and now is coming apart. The seat belt on the driver sit gets stuck. The car door panels have come undone which is not typical with any other vehicle expect explore. The brakes on the car are difficult to use to the suspension issue. When I have taken my car to the dealer they have not been helpful. They won’t provide a temporary vehicle while my car is getting fix and that not acceptable. I need someone to help me with these issues at no cost. This is my second explore and I love my car but I hate that it has issues that were not fix from the moment the car was sold.
Vehicle Electronic Power Steering stopped working. Power Steering Fault & Service Advanced Trac message. Also saw a day later another message that would come up with the Service Advanced Trac. It would be to Check Brake System. While researching I found that Ford had a recall for the Power Steering & Service Advance Trac for the…
Read full complaint
Vehicle Electronic Power Steering stopped working. Power Steering Fault & Service Advanced Trac message. Also saw a day later another message that would come up with the Service Advanced Trac. It would be to Check Brake System. While researching I found that Ford had a recall for the Power Steering & Service Advance Trac for the 2011 - 2013 model years. On the NHTSA there have been quite a few people complaining about the 2014 model for Power Steering & Service Advance Trac. I didn't get a picture of the Power Steering fault, but I did get a picture of the Service AdvanceTrac with the Check Brake message. Putting it in with this as well.
At one point the Explorer was always causing a rear wheel area to squeal really loud while driving. That finally got remedied but after 3 years of taking the vehicle in to 2 different shops. While yhe vehicle was still under warranty I was told there was nothing wrong and they can't reproduce the squeal. Once the warranty expire…
Read full complaint
At one point the Explorer was always causing a rear wheel area to squeal really loud while driving. That finally got remedied but after 3 years of taking the vehicle in to 2 different shops. While yhe vehicle was still under warranty I was told there was nothing wrong and they can't reproduce the squeal. Once the warranty expired they said it was due to a seized brake which I ended up paying for the replacement even though they said this was a known issue on the Explorers. Another issue with the 2014 Explorer is water leaking into the rear compartments and the spare tire area in the vehicle. From online sear he's, this is also a known issue with no recalls. More recently, I was trying to get all four of my tires changed, but was told by the tire shop that they can't change my tires due to swollen lug nuts,this is a known issue on Ford's and I have to take it to a mechanic. I called Ted Britt Ford and inquired about the service to replace the lugs with solid metal lug nuts instead of the OEM chrome plated. Parts department told me they are $10 a piece. I went ahead an ordered them through the parts department. When I picked up my vehicle, I was told they don't sell the solid metal lug nuts and only replaced with the chrome plated OEM lug nuts.
THE INTERMEDIATE SHIFT BRACKET SHEARED OFF/BROKE AT THE TRANSITION WHERE IT MOUNTS TO ENGINE. VEHICLE SHAKES VIOLENTLY WHILE BRAKING AT HIGHER SPEEDS... LESSER MOVEMENT AT SLOWER SPEEDS WHILE BRAKING. I HAD JUST REPLACED MY BRAKES AND DONE THEM SEVERAL TIME WITH ROTORS TRYING TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM, THINKING IT WAS SOMETHING I H…
Read full complaint
THE INTERMEDIATE SHIFT BRACKET SHEARED OFF/BROKE AT THE TRANSITION WHERE IT MOUNTS TO ENGINE. VEHICLE SHAKES VIOLENTLY WHILE BRAKING AT HIGHER SPEEDS... LESSER MOVEMENT AT SLOWER SPEEDS WHILE BRAKING. I HAD JUST REPLACED MY BRAKES AND DONE THEM SEVERAL TIME WITH ROTORS TRYING TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM, THINKING IT WAS SOMETHING I HAD DONE. FINALLY FOUND IT WHEN GREASING FRONT CALIPERS HOPING TO CURE THE PROBLEM YET AGAIN.
Official recalls
624V031000 · Structure:body:roof And Pillars
Jan 19, 2024
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2011-2019 Explorer vehicles. The A-pillar trim retention clips may not be properly engaged, allowing the trim to detach.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A detached trim piece can fall off the vehicle, becoming a road hazard and increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the A-pillar trim as necessary, free of charge. This will be a phased campaign, with the remedy becoming available in different phases based on model years. Owner notification letters were mailed between July 18, 2024 and December 16, 2025. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 24S02.
21V537000 · Suspension:rear
Jul 15, 2021
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2013-2017 Explorer vehicles originally sold, or ever registered, in Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. Exposure to road salt can cause the cross-axis ball joint to corrode and seize, resulting in a fracture of the outboard section of the rear suspension toe link.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A rear toe-link fracture can result in a loss of steering control, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace as necessary, the cross-axis ball joint (CABJ) knuckle, and replace the rear suspension toe links, free of charge. This recall is an expansion of previous NHTSA recall numbers 16V-245, 19V-435, and 20V-675. Certain vehicles previously repaired will need to return for the new remedy. An interim notification letter notifying owners of the safety risk were mailed on September 10, 2021. Owner notification letters were mailed on March 16, 2022. Owners may contact Ford's customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 21S32.
20V675000 · Suspension:rear
Mar 12, 2021
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2013-2017 Explorer vehicles originally sold, or currently registered in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin that were previously repaired under a prior recall numbers 16V-245 or 19V-435. The outboard section of a rear suspension toe link may fracture.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A rear toe link fracture can result in a loss of steering control, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the cross-axis ball joint (CABJ) knuckle attached to the rear suspension toe link and replace it as necessary, free of charge. The recall began November 27, 2020. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 20S62.
20V692000 · Power Train:axle Assembly:axle Shaft
Nov 10, 2020
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2014-2016 Explorer, 2014-2015 Taurus and 2014 Edge vehicles equipped with 2.0L or 2.3L engines and front wheel drive. The support bracket for the front drive axle halfshaft may fail.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: The failed bracket could result in a loss of park function which can cause unintended vehicle movement, and loss of motive power while driving which increases the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the link shaft bracket, free of charge. Parts are not currently available. Owners received an interim notification detailing safety risk December 8, 2020. A second letter will be mailed when parts become available in January 2021. The recall began February 2, 2021. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 20S63.
19V435000 · Suspension:rear
Jun 10, 2019
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2011-2017 Explorer vehicles. The rear suspension toe links may fracture due to stress on the rear suspension.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A fractured rear toe link will cause a sudden change in vehicle handling and increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the rear suspension toe links, and inspect both rear toe link ball joints, replacing the rear wheel knuckle(s), if necessary, free of charge. The recall began June 26, 2019. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 19S17.
16V245000 · Suspension:rear
Apr 26, 2016
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2014-2015 Ford Explorer vehicles manufactured January 17, 2014 to May 31, 2014. The affected vehicles may have improperly welded rear suspension toe links that may fracture.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A fracture of the rear suspension toe link may result in a loss of steering control, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the rear suspension toe links, free of charge. The recall began on November 18, 2016. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 16S18.
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
4PE23001 · Windshield Trim Molding Item Detachment
Opened Jan 27, 2023 · Closed Feb 8, 2024
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Structure:body:roof And Pillars
On January 27, 2023, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE23-001 to investigate allegations of A-pillar trim panel detachment on model year (MY) 2011-2019 Ford Explorer vehicles. At the time of opening, the office had received 164 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs) reporting this failure. ODI has received 671 VOQs regarding this failure, including 1 alleged crash and 2 alleged injuries. Some consumers have reported that the failure occurred while they were driving at highway speeds, with the detached trim panel entering the path of travel of the vehicle behind them, requiring the driver of the following vehicle to take evasive action. It is noteworthy that motorists who experience this type of road hazard are less likely to accurately identify the subject vehicle the item detached from and report the event to the NHTSA. In its April 17, 2023 response to ODI’s information request, Ford provided 175 consumer complaints (including field reports) and 14,162 warranty claims related to A-pillar trim panel detachment. Ford relayed that the subject vehicles utilize a plastic A-pillar bracket, which is bolted to the vehicle structure during assembly. The A-pillar trim panel is attached to the bracket utilizing 7 plastic clips. Contributory factors which have been identified by Ford as leading to the subject defect include incomplete installation at the assembly plant, inadequate part stack up, damage to fasteners during installation, and failure to follow proper repair procedure during windshield replacements or other services. On January 19, 2024, Ford filed safety recall 24V-031 for MY 2011-2019 Ford Explorer vehicles to address the subject defect. In the Part 573 Safety Recall Report, Ford identified that a detached A-pillar trim panel can create a road hazard for other road users, increasing the risk of a crash. The recall remedy includes an inspection of the existing A-pillar trim panel and, if necessary, the replacement of the component. The remedy A-pillar trim panels will be installed with an additional adhesive for robustness and utilize an inspection procedure to ensure full engagement of all the retention clips during installation. In view of the recall action being taken by Ford, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
EA17002 · Exhaust Odor In Passenger Cab
Opened Jul 27, 2017 · Closed Jan 17, 2023
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System:manifold/header/muffler/tail Pipe; Structure:body
During the EA17-002 investigation, the agency reviewed and analyzed reports of exhaust odors in the passenger cabins of Model Year 2011 to 2017 Ford Explorers. This investigation required an approach that incorporated knowledge and expertise from the automotive, medical, environmental health, and occupational safety fields. The agency conducted an in-depth investigation that encompassed the review of over 6,500 consumer complaints, conducting field inspections, and testing the relevant vehicles, both independently and in coordination with Ford and other entities. During the investigation, the evolution of Ford service bulletins intended to reduce the level of exhaust odors and carbon monoxide (CO) entering the occupant compartment was examined and independent tests to evaluate the effectiveness of the final Field Service Actions (FSA) for both consumer and police vehicles were conducted. As part of the investigation, the agency also examined the effects of cracked exhaust mani-cats on the measured CO levels in the vehicles and tested the FSA repairs to ensure they did not adversely impact occupant compartment CO levels due to cracked mani-cats.The investigation identified upfitting issues for Police Interceptor vehicles. Upfitting (sirens, lights, cages, auxiliary power, etc.) is typically performed by governmental fleet operations, independent repair facilities, or local Ford dealers after the sale of the new vehicle. Sealing issues caused by upfitting were responsible for the highest measured carbon monoxide levels in tested vehicles. The police FSA instructs how to inspect the quality of the vehicle upfits and how to properly seal any leaks caused by these upfits, at no cost to the police agency. Similarly, the highest CO levels measured in consumer vehicles were usually traced to sealing issues caused by rear crash damage where the repairs did not ensure sealing integrity. The most recent Ford FSA procedure for both the police (17B25) and consumer vehicles (17N03) includes an HVAC reprogramming operation. Tests by Ford and NHTSA have demonstrated a substantial reduction of CO levels due solely to the HVAC reprogramming. Other FSA repairs also demonstrated measurable contributions to CO level reductions during controlled tests.Throughout the investigation, vehicles accurately measured with higher levels of carbon monoxide were almost always affected by upfitter alterations, damage, or other causes compromising rear passenger cabin seals.NHTSA received thousands of reports alleging odors which triggered a variety of physiological responses, predominately nausea, headaches, and lightheadedness. NHTSA focused the investigation on accurately measuring vehicle CO levels, and accurately measuring carboxyhemoglobin (COHB) levels from properly administered blood tests. Using rigorous test methods to produce exhaust gas intrusion in vehicles with a properly performed FSA, occupant compartment CO levels remained below current environmental limits for CO in any environment (EPA ambient air quality standards). Furthermore, even without FSA repairs, no vehicles unaffected by upfitter issues or prior crash damage were identified with CO levels that exceed accepted occupational CO exposure levels. This investigation finds that the 2011-2017 Ford Explorer vehicles when accurately measured produce occupant compartment CO levels which fall below current accepted health standards, and could not identify COHB levels for vehicle drivers or other occupants, which exceeded thresholds for acute physiological effects. Therefore, the agency has not identified a defect that represents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.This inve
Additional source detail variants (2)
Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System:manifold/header/muffler/tail Pipe
During the EA17-002 investigation, the agency reviewed and analyzed reports of exhaust odors in the passenger cabins of Model Year 2011 to 2017 Ford Explorers. This investigation required an approach that incorporated knowledge and expertise from the automotive, medical, environmental health, and occupational safety fields. The agency conducted an in-depth investigation that encompassed the review of over 6,500 consumer complaints, conducting field inspections, and testing the relevant vehicles, both independently and in coordination with Ford and other entities. During the investigation, the evolution of Ford service bulletins intended to reduce the level of exhaust odors and carbon monoxide (CO) entering the occupant compartment was examined and independent tests to evaluate the effectiveness of the final Field Service Actions (FSA) for both consumer and police vehicles were conducted. As part of the investigation, the agency also examined the effects of cracked exhaust mani-cats on the measured CO levels in the vehicles and tested the FSA repairs to ensure they did not adversely impact occupant compartment CO levels due to cracked mani-cats.The investigation identified upfitting issues for Police Interceptor vehicles. Upfitting (sirens, lights, cages, auxiliary power, etc.) is typically performed by governmental fleet operations, independent repair facilities, or local Ford dealers after the sale of the new vehicle. Sealing issues caused by upfitting were responsible for the highest measured carbon monoxide levels in tested vehicles. The police FSA instructs how to inspect the quality of the vehicle upfits and how to properly seal any leaks caused by these upfits, at no cost to the police agency. Similarly, the highest CO levels measured in consumer vehicles were usually traced to sealing issues caused by rear crash damage where the repairs did not ensure sealing integrity. The most recent Ford FSA procedure for both the police (17B25) and consumer vehicles (17N03) includes an HVAC reprogramming operation. Tests by Ford and NHTSA have demonstrated a substantial reduction of CO levels due solely to the HVAC reprogramming. Other FSA repairs also demonstrated measurable contributions to CO level reductions during controlled tests.Throughout the investigation, vehicles accurately measured with higher levels of carbon monoxide were almost always affected by upfitter alterations, damage, or other causes compromising rear passenger cabin seals.NHTSA received thousands of reports alleging odors which triggered a variety of physiological responses, predominately nausea, headaches, and lightheadedness. NHTSA focused the investigation on accurately measuring vehicle CO levels, and accurately measuring carboxyhemoglobin (COHB) levels from properly administered blood tests. Using rigorous test methods to produce exhaust gas intrusion in vehicles with a properly performed FSA, occupant compartment CO levels remained below current environmental limits for CO in any environment (EPA ambient air quality standards). Furthermore, even without FSA repairs, no vehicles unaffected by upfitter issues or prior crash damage were identified with CO levels that exceed accepted occupational CO exposure levels. This investigation finds that the 2011-2017 Ford Explorer vehicles when accurately measured produce occupant compartment CO levels which fall below current accepted health standards, and could not identify COHB levels for vehicle drivers or other occupants, which exceeded thresholds for acute physiological effects. Therefore, the agency has not identified a defect that represents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.This inve
Structure:body
During the EA17-002 investigation, the agency reviewed and analyzed reports of exhaust odors in the passenger cabins of Model Year 2011 to 2017 Ford Explorers. This investigation required an approach that incorporated knowledge and expertise from the automotive, medical, environmental health, and occupational safety fields. The agency conducted an in-depth investigation that encompassed the review of over 6,500 consumer complaints, conducting field inspections, and testing the relevant vehicles, both independently and in coordination with Ford and other entities. During the investigation, the evolution of Ford service bulletins intended to reduce the level of exhaust odors and carbon monoxide (CO) entering the occupant compartment was examined and independent tests to evaluate the effectiveness of the final Field Service Actions (FSA) for both consumer and police vehicles were conducted. As part of the investigation, the agency also examined the effects of cracked exhaust mani-cats on the measured CO levels in the vehicles and tested the FSA repairs to ensure they did not adversely impact occupant compartment CO levels due to cracked mani-cats.The investigation identified upfitting issues for Police Interceptor vehicles. Upfitting (sirens, lights, cages, auxiliary power, etc.) is typically performed by governmental fleet operations, independent repair facilities, or local Ford dealers after the sale of the new vehicle. Sealing issues caused by upfitting were responsible for the highest measured carbon monoxide levels in tested vehicles. The police FSA instructs how to inspect the quality of the vehicle upfits and how to properly seal any leaks caused by these upfits, at no cost to the police agency. Similarly, the highest CO levels measured in consumer vehicles were usually traced to sealing issues caused by rear crash damage where the repairs did not ensure sealing integrity. The most recent Ford FSA procedure for both the police (17B25) and consumer vehicles (17N03) includes an HVAC reprogramming operation. Tests by Ford and NHTSA have demonstrated a substantial reduction of CO levels due solely to the HVAC reprogramming. Other FSA repairs also demonstrated measurable contributions to CO level reductions during controlled tests.Throughout the investigation, vehicles accurately measured with higher levels of carbon monoxide were almost always affected by upfitter alterations, damage, or other causes compromising rear passenger cabin seals.NHTSA received thousands of reports alleging odors which triggered a variety of physiological responses, predominately nausea, headaches, and lightheadedness. NHTSA focused the investigation on accurately measuring vehicle CO levels, and accurately measuring carboxyhemoglobin (COHB) levels from properly administered blood tests. Using rigorous test methods to produce exhaust gas intrusion in vehicles with a properly performed FSA, occupant compartment CO levels remained below current environmental limits for CO in any environment (EPA ambient air quality standards). Furthermore, even without FSA repairs, no vehicles unaffected by upfitter issues or prior crash damage were identified with CO levels that exceed accepted occupational CO exposure levels. This investigation finds that the 2011-2017 Ford Explorer vehicles when accurately measured produce occupant compartment CO levels which fall below current accepted health standards, and could not identify COHB levels for vehicle drivers or other occupants, which exceeded thresholds for acute physiological effects. Therefore, the agency has not identified a defect that represents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.This inve
PE16008 · Ford Explorer Exhaust Odor
Opened Jul 1, 2016 · Closed Sep 12, 2017
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System; Structure:body
During the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration?s (NHTSA?s) investigation into the Ford carbon monoxide allegations, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) identified additional Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) reports with similar exhaust odor claims.Presently, ODI has identified 791 VOQs for Model Year 2011-2017 Ford Explorers pertaining to exhaust odor claims.ODI has identified three crashes and 41 injuries potentially linked this issue.The reported injuries range from unspecified to loss of consciousness, with the majority being nausea, headaches, or dizziness ? all of which can be symptomatic of carbon monoxide exposure.Additionally, Ford provided 2,400 reports including owner complaints, warranty claims, dealer field reports, and legal claims, that involve 2,051 vehicles that may be connected to the exhaust odor issue.NHTSA's Vehicle Test and Research Center tested multiple vehicles, including complaint vehicles, during the investigation.ODI also conducted field inspections of complaint vehicles and crashes involving police units that occurred while the officers were on duty.When possible, data was collected to quantify carbon monoxide levels in the examined vehicles.Based on the information gathered to date, NHTSA upgraded this investigation to an Engineering Analysis (EA17-002).
Additional source detail variants (2)
Engine And Engine Cooling:exhaust System
During the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration?s (NHTSA?s) investigation into the Ford carbon monoxide allegations, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) identified additional Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) reports with similar exhaust odor claims.Presently, ODI has identified 791 VOQs for Model Year 2011-2017 Ford Explorers pertaining to exhaust odor claims.ODI has identified three crashes and 41 injuries potentially linked this issue.The reported injuries range from unspecified to loss of consciousness, with the majority being nausea, headaches, or dizziness ? all of which can be symptomatic of carbon monoxide exposure.Additionally, Ford provided 2,400 reports including owner complaints, warranty claims, dealer field reports, and legal claims, that involve 2,051 vehicles that may be connected to the exhaust odor issue.NHTSA's Vehicle Test and Research Center tested multiple vehicles, including complaint vehicles, during the investigation.ODI also conducted field inspections of complaint vehicles and crashes involving police units that occurred while the officers were on duty.When possible, data was collected to quantify carbon monoxide levels in the examined vehicles.Based on the information gathered to date, NHTSA upgraded this investigation to an Engineering Analysis (EA17-002).
Structure:body
During the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration?s (NHTSA?s) investigation into the Ford carbon monoxide allegations, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) identified additional Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) reports with similar exhaust odor claims.Presently, ODI has identified 791 VOQs for Model Year 2011-2017 Ford Explorers pertaining to exhaust odor claims.ODI has identified three crashes and 41 injuries potentially linked this issue.The reported injuries range from unspecified to loss of consciousness, with the majority being nausea, headaches, or dizziness ? all of which can be symptomatic of carbon monoxide exposure.Additionally, Ford provided 2,400 reports including owner complaints, warranty claims, dealer field reports, and legal claims, that involve 2,051 vehicles that may be connected to the exhaust odor issue.NHTSA's Vehicle Test and Research Center tested multiple vehicles, including complaint vehicles, during the investigation.ODI also conducted field inspections of complaint vehicles and crashes involving police units that occurred while the officers were on duty.When possible, data was collected to quantify carbon monoxide levels in the examined vehicles.Based on the information gathered to date, NHTSA upgraded this investigation to an Engineering Analysis (EA17-002).
EA15005 · Front Brake Hose Failure
Opened Sep 28, 2015 · Closed Nov 2, 2018
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic:foundation Components:hoses, Lines/piping, And Fittings
On April 29, 2015, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE15-017 to investigate a report alleging incidents of front brake hose failure in model year (MY) 2015 Ford Explorer Police Interceptor vehicles used by the Sacramento Police Department in its pursuit driving training program (VOQ 10705832).On September 28, 2015, ODI upgraded the investigation to an Engineering Analysis (EA15-005) to assess maximum front caliper crimp temperatures under various test conditions, test hose assemblies removed from police interceptor service for any signs of thermal degradation, and further assess field data for evidence of a defect trend related to the alleged defect.The alleged defect results from exposure to extremely high heat at the caliper-side hose crimp. NHTSA?s vehicle testing suggests that the conditions necessary to produce the critical temperatures in the subject components result from drive-soak intervals that can occur during the Sacramento training program.NHTSA's testing of hose assemblies returned from police interceptor service did not identify any evidence of thermal degradation.NHTSA has not confirmed any incidents of caliper crimp failures due to overheating in vehicles not subjected to the Sacramento training course driving.The low number of hose assembly failure reports and the absence of any verified incidents of heat related front brake hose crimp failures since 2015 suggests that the Sacramento PD incidents resulted from conditions unique to the training program.A safety related defect trend 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 the circumstances.For additional information, see the Closing Report in the document file for EA15-005 on www.nhtsa.gov.