NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Exterior Lighting complaints
17 reportsClear category filter166,000 miles · Nov 7, 2025
Exterior Lighting
The contact owns a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the headlights became inoperable. The contact stated that the fuses were in good condition. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic who was unable to determine the cause of the failure. The contact called the local dealer an…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the headlights became inoperable. The contact stated that the fuses were in good condition. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic who was unable to determine the cause of the failure. The contact called the local dealer and was informed that a diagnostic test was needed; however, the vehicle was not yet diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 166,000.
NHTSA ODI #11698219
Mileage unknown · Oct 14, 2025
Electrical SystemExterior LightingSeats
Parking lights are illuminated and not head lamps for daytime running lights. Was sold by Ford Certified Dealership. Also has no interior lighting for security. BCM replaced, and still has same issue, along with the 3rd row seats not functioning, interior overhead lights not functioning, trailer socket not functioning.
NHTSA ODI #11693317
192,260 miles · Oct 3, 2024
Back Over PreventionExterior LightingWheels
The vehicle was sold to me by “Buffalo Auto Sales 2 at 3012 Spencer Hwy Pasadena, TX 77504 on [XXX]. They violated the DTPA and all employees failed to disclose the vehicle had dozens of major safety issues with two open safety recalls. These safety issues include Major ABS issues and failures, Power Steering/drivetrain, front e…
Read full complaint
The vehicle was sold to me by “Buffalo Auto Sales 2 at 3012 Spencer Hwy Pasadena, TX 77504 on [XXX]. They violated the DTPA and all employees failed to disclose the vehicle had dozens of major safety issues with two open safety recalls. These safety issues include Major ABS issues and failures, Power Steering/drivetrain, front end passenger wheel & both rear end wheel failures within the mechanisms such as control arms, tie rods inner and outer & even one within the wheel component that was dangerously bent. The headlight pigtails are torched. These couldn’t even be fixed with even replacement OEM parts/Ford Dealership parts and Ford Dealership expertise. My safety, my children’s safety, family and passengers were all at risk multiple times over the past three weeks. Every time on the highway or local roads not being able to sustain maximum speeds over 20- 40 mph because touching the gas even after a red light would cause the engine to hesitate to turn or stutter. This caused me multiple trips back to Buffalo Auto Sales 2 and multiple mechanics even multiple Ford Dealerships. On September 12th 2024, I discussed these severe safety issues with Buffalo Auto Sales 2, my salesman originally offered to place me into another vehicle, give me back my large cash deposit, or “attempt to fix the vehicle”. The manager immediately refused to do the right thing and claim to “fix the vehicle himself”.. however when I asked if the manager Jeff has experience as a mechanic he replied he does not have mechanic experience. That day they claim to have “fixed” the ABS problem, and in turn the vehicle was still shaking while in motion at any speed. Even after I thought Ford Service could fix the tie rod recall, that still did not work because the rear was still shaking. I had Tire experts and mechanics even change front tires, and do an alignment on September 30th 2024.. The vehicle is still shaking dangerously while in motion. Warnings on are ABS, Chk Engine & Tire Pressure lights. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF IN
NHTSA ODI #11617997
Mileage unknown · Nov 22, 2021
Exterior Lighting
Halogen headlights (9005) are extremely dim which is a known safety issue. Customers are upgrading from halogen to led and xenon. I believe newer explorers upgraded headlights to led. I want Ford to recommend Led headlight alternative at my cost or fix this problem with recall. Drivers are flashing their headlights at n…
Read full complaint
Halogen headlights (9005) are extremely dim which is a known safety issue. Customers are upgrading from halogen to led and xenon. I believe newer explorers upgraded headlights to led. I want Ford to recommend Led headlight alternative at my cost or fix this problem with recall. Drivers are flashing their headlights at nighttime because they think my lights are not on? Many hits on the internet concerning Ford Suva/truck halogen headlight issues.
NHTSA ODI #11441282
54,000 miles · Nov 15, 2019
Electrical SystemExterior Lighting
WHILE DRIVING ON STREET OR HI WAY THE DASH LIGHT TURN OFF AND ON. THIS IS VERY DANGEROUS AT NIGHT.
NHTSA ODI #11280387
113,562 miles · Oct 26, 2019
EngineExterior LightingUnknown Or Other
IT'S POPPING UP LOW ENGINE POWER AND IT WILL SHUT DOWN EVERYTHING FROM LIGHTS TO BLIND SPOT DETECTION. IT JUST STARTED DOING THIS AFTER RUNNING THROUGH A SMALL WATER PUDDLE.
NHTSA ODI #11271190
Mileage unknown · Oct 6, 2019
Exterior Lighting
MY 2015 FORD EXPLORER HAS POOR LIGHTING. WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT YOU FEEL LIKE THE LIGHTS ARE OFF. VERY HARD TO SEE SOME ROADS. I HAVE MENTIONED THIS TO THE DEALER, THEY SAID THEY HAVE HEARD A FEW COMPLAINTS. I ALSO SAW AN ARTICLE ABOUT POOR LIGHTING IN SOME NEWER VEHICLES AND MY EXPLORER WAS LISTED IN THE ARTICLE. I ALSO HAVE A 2…
Read full complaint
MY 2015 FORD EXPLORER HAS POOR LIGHTING. WHEN DRIVING AT NIGHT YOU FEEL LIKE THE LIGHTS ARE OFF. VERY HARD TO SEE SOME ROADS. I HAVE MENTIONED THIS TO THE DEALER, THEY SAID THEY HAVE HEARD A FEW COMPLAINTS. I ALSO SAW AN ARTICLE ABOUT POOR LIGHTING IN SOME NEWER VEHICLES AND MY EXPLORER WAS LISTED IN THE ARTICLE. I ALSO HAVE A 2018 EXPLORER. SOME TIMES THE LIGHTS LOOK DIM. I LOVE THE CAR JUST THINK THIS IS DANGEROUS.
NHTSA ODI #11266639
26,100 miles · Aug 8, 2019
Exterior LightingSteering
STARTED CAR AND PUT IN REVERSE AND NOTICED THAT THE STEERING WAS NOT WORKING NORMALLY AND THEN NOTICED THE POWER STEERING FAULT ASSIST AND SERVICE ADVANCE TRAC NOTIFICATION. ALSO AT THE SAME TIME, THE TURN SIGNAL WOULD NOT STAY ENGAGED. I MANAGED TO DRIVE 100 MILES HOME WITH "MANUAL STEERING" ON THE HIGHWAY AND NEEDED TO USE ONE…
Read full complaint
STARTED CAR AND PUT IN REVERSE AND NOTICED THAT THE STEERING WAS NOT WORKING NORMALLY AND THEN NOTICED THE POWER STEERING FAULT ASSIST AND SERVICE ADVANCE TRAC NOTIFICATION. ALSO AT THE SAME TIME, THE TURN SIGNAL WOULD NOT STAY ENGAGED. I MANAGED TO DRIVE 100 MILES HOME WITH "MANUAL STEERING" ON THE HIGHWAY AND NEEDED TO USE ONE HAND TO CHANGE LANES. IF THIS PROBLEM HAPPENED GOING 60 MILES PER HOUR, AN ACCIDENT OR WORSE, LOSE OF LIFE, AS WHAT HAPPENED WAS UNEXPECTED AND STEERING WAS VERY DIFFICULT. THIS VEHICLE WAS BOUGHT 1/2/15 AND THIS PROBLEM HAPPENED AT 26,100 MILES AND THE REPAIR COST $2,147.25 AT THE FORD DEALER BY MY HOUSE. SINCE FORD WAS ABLE TO REPLACE THE ASSEMBLY THE SAME DAY LEADS ME TO BELIEVE THIS IS A VERY COMMON PROBLEM AND STOCK THE PARTS AND LOOKING AT OTHER COMPLAINTS ONLINE, AN ONGOING ISSUE WITH FORD VEHICLES IN GENERAL. FORD HAD A 1.1 MILLION RECALL FOR THIS ON THE 2011-2013 VEHICLES AND THEY NEVER FIXED THE ISSUE GOING FORWARD. A RECALL NEEDS TO BE DONE.
NHTSA ODI #11242676
52,000 miles · Mar 10, 2019
Electrical SystemExterior LightingSteering
DRIVING 55MPH ON I-94 LAST NIGHT IN A STEADY RAIN AND CHECK BATTERY MESSAGE CAME UP IN THE LEFT IP DISPLAY. WITHIN A FEW SECONDS I LOST THE POWER STEERING, THEN THE CENTER CONSOLE ENTERTAINMENT/INFO SCREEN, THEN THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER WENT BLACK WITH THE HEADLIGHTS AND WINDSHIELD WIPERS WHICH WERE ON HIGHEST SETTING SLOWED BUT C…
Read full complaint
DRIVING 55MPH ON I-94 LAST NIGHT IN A STEADY RAIN AND CHECK BATTERY MESSAGE CAME UP IN THE LEFT IP DISPLAY. WITHIN A FEW SECONDS I LOST THE POWER STEERING, THEN THE CENTER CONSOLE ENTERTAINMENT/INFO SCREEN, THEN THE INSTRUMENT CLUSTER WENT BLACK WITH THE HEADLIGHTS AND WINDSHIELD WIPERS WHICH WERE ON HIGHEST SETTING SLOWED BUT CONTINUED TO OPERATE ONLY WHILE IN THE HIGHEST SETTING. THIS SCENARIO CONTINUED OFF AND ON FOR THE NEXT 30 MILES WITH INTERMITTENT ELECTRONIC STEERING FAILURE, INTERNAL IP AND CONSOLE SCREEN FAILURE AND EXTERIOR LIGHTING FAILURES. WE PULLED OVER EACH TIME AND WITHIN A VARIED AMOUNT OF TIME FROM A FEW SECONDS TO A FEW MINUTES, A SOUND SIMILAR TO A SQUEALING BELT WOULD BE HEARD AND THE SYSTEM WOULD "REBOOT" AND ALL FUNCTIONING WOULD BE RESTORED FOR A LIMITED TIME. WE LIMPED THE VEHICLE HOME OVER THE COURSE OF THE NEXT HOUR AND A HALF FOR 35 MILES AS I WAS NOT LEAVING THE CAR ON THE SIDE OF THE FREEWAY OR IN DETROIT IF I COULD SAFELY AVOID IT. THIS MORNING (SUNDAY) I TESTED THE BATTERY AND HAD THE BATTERY AND ALTERNATOR TESTED UNDER LOAD AT AN AUTO PARTS STORE AND BOTH WERE WITHIN NORMAL PARAMETERS. BELT LOOKED GOOD WITH VISUAL INSPECTION AND 1 HOUR OF IDLE AND DRIVE TIME CLOSE TO HOME IN DAMP PUDDLING ROADS COULD NOT GET ANY ADVERSE SYMPTOMS TO REAPPEAR. IT WILL GO TO THE FORD SERVICE DEPARTMENT AT OUR LOCAL DEALER TOMORROW FOR A THOROUGH INSPECTION. THIS IS MY WIFE'S DAILY DRIVER AND IF NO ISSUE CAN BE FOUND WE WILL BE REPLACING THE CAR AS SHE WOULD HAVE BEEN IN EXTREME DANGER WITHOUT STEERING, LIGHTS AND IP, ESPECIALLY ON A SATURDAY NIGHT DRIVING THROUGH THE CITY OF DETROIT'S I-94 EXPRESSWAY.
NHTSA ODI #11185651
21,000 miles · Dec 26, 2017
Exterior Lighting
ONCOMING CARS ARE CONSTANTLY FLASHING THEIR LIGHTS AT ME BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT MY HEADLIGHTS ARE ON HIGH BEAM. I TOOK MY EXPLORER TO LANDMARK FORD IN TIGARD OREGON TO HAVE THEM VERIFY THAT THE LIGHTS WERE ADJUSTED PROPERLY. I WAS TOLD THAT EVERYTHING MEET SPECIFICATIONS. THE SERVICE MANAGER STATED THE HE AND THE TECHNICIAN H…
Read full complaint
ONCOMING CARS ARE CONSTANTLY FLASHING THEIR LIGHTS AT ME BECAUSE THEY THINK THAT MY HEADLIGHTS ARE ON HIGH BEAM. I TOOK MY EXPLORER TO LANDMARK FORD IN TIGARD OREGON TO HAVE THEM VERIFY THAT THE LIGHTS WERE ADJUSTED PROPERLY. I WAS TOLD THAT EVERYTHING MEET SPECIFICATIONS. THE SERVICE MANAGER STATED THE HE AND THE TECHNICIAN HAD THE SAME EXTRA BRIGHT LOW BEAM ISSUES WITH THEIR FORD PICKUPS. I ASKED IF THERE WAS ANOTHER TYPE OF LAMP THAT COULD BE USED, BUT THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO DO TO RESOLVE THE ISSUE. I PURCHASED THIS VEHICLE IN JULY 2017.
NHTSA ODI #11056375
Official recalls
8Oct 13, 2025
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2019 Flex, 2015 Explorer, Lincoln MKT, Lincoln MKZ, 2015-2016 C-Max, Escape, Taurus, 2016 Fusion, 2018-2019 Taurus, 2019 Lincoln MKT, Fiesta, and 2020 Mustang vehicles. The rearview camera may display a distorted, intermittent, or blank image when the vehicle is in reverse.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A rearview camera that fails to properly display an image can reduce the driver’s view behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace the rearview camera as necessary, free of charge. This will be a phased campaign, with the remedy becoming available in different phases based on model and model years. Interim letters notifying owners of the safety risk were mailed on October 25, 2025. Additional letters will be mailed once the final remedy is available on each phase. Mustang owner notification letters were mailed January 2, 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25SA9. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall became searchable on NHTSA.gov on October 14, 2025.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Jul 24, 2015
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2015 Ford Taurus, Ford Flex, and Lincoln MKS vehicles manufactured May 4, 2015, to May 23, 2015, Lincoln MKT vehicles manufactured May 4, 2015, to May 21, 2015, and 2015-2016 Ford Explorer vehicles manufactured May 4, 2015, to May 23, 2015. The affected vehicles have a parking brake that may not fully engage when applied. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 135, "Light Vehicle Brake Systems."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the parking brake does not fully engage and the transmission is left in a gear other than 'Park' while on a slope, the vehicle may roll away, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will test the operation of the parking brake system, and if necessary, replace the parking brake control assembly, free of charge. The recall began on September 4, 2015. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 15C07.
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
5PE23001 · 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.
PE15017 · Front Brake Hose Failure
Opened Apr 29, 2015 · Closed Sep 28, 2015
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 reports of low-mileage failures of front brake jounce hoses in model year (MY) 2015 Ford Explorer Police Interceptor vehicles operated as training vehicles by the City of Sacramento, California (ODI VOQ No. 10705832). To date, the Sacramento police fleet has reported a total of 7 front hose failures in 5 different Explorer Police Interceptor vehicles used for its Emergency Vehicle Operation Course (EVOC) training. Most of the failures occurred within the first few miles of service on a closed course used for the EVOC program, which includes evasive accident avoidance and pursuit maneuver training. The hose assemblies either leaked at, or pulled completely free from, the caliper-end attachment where the hose is crimped to the steel end fitting. Most of the failures resulted in a sudden loss of braking performance that caused the vehicle to run off the intended course. None of the failures resulted in any crashes, injuries or property damage.The subject MY 2015 hose assemblies are similar in design to hoses used on MY 2013 through 2014 Explorer Police Interceptor and civilian vehicles. The 5 vehicles used by Sacramento EVOC have all been repaired using MY 2016 front hose assemblies that have been changed to incorporate a short steel tube attached to the caliper end banjo block. No failures have been experienced by the Sacramento fleet to date in the other 37 MY 2014-2015 Explorer Police Interceptor vehicles (2 MY 2014 and 35 MY 2015) used by the fleet in regular law enforcement duty cycles unrelated to the EVOC training. In its response to ODI's information request letter for PE15-017, Ford provided information about 2 additional failures reported by other fleets, including 1 involving a Sacramento Regional Transit vehicle that occurred while being driven on the street.Based on its analysis of failed parts returned from the Sacramento fleet and the fleet's EVOC training duty cycle, Ford attributes the Sacramento fleet hose failures to excessive temperatures produced during hot-soak portions of the EVOC training duty cycle (when the vehicles are stationary after hard braking exercises, with no cooling air flow through the brake rotor vents and across the other brake components). During testing conducted to replicate the EVOC duty cycle, Ford measured temperatures at the subject crimp fittings that exceeded the design limits of the brake hose material after several successive training intervals and hot soaks. Ford has provided the Sacramento fleet with modified replacement hose assemblies for all of its MY 2014-15 Explorer Police Interceptor vehicles. The replacement hose assemblies were developed for use in MY 2016 Explorer vehicles and were modified slightly to accommodate the addition of a ride height sensor in those vehicles. The revised assemblies have an additional length of brake pipe between the caliper end connection and the subject crimp ferrule that results in additional heat dissipation and makes the assemblies more robust to the severe thermal effects experienced during the EVOC testing (the hose material is the same in both assemblies). Ford believes that the excessive temperatures experienced at the crimp fitting in the subject vehicles are unique to the EVOC duty cycle, have not been observed in the standard on-road severe duty cycle testing performed by Ford and police fleets who routinely conduct such testing and are not likely to occur in service usage for on-road Explorer Police Interceptor vehicles.This preliminary evaluation is closed, an Engineering Analysis (EA15-005) has been opened to conduct testing and further
Illustration