3 ISSUES: 1) VEHICLE STOPPED AT RED LITE, FOOT ON THE BRAKE, ENGINE RPM SUDDENLY INCREASE, LAST TIME 3/4/10. 2) VEHICLE DIES, LAST TIME DIED 3 TIME ON 3/1/10, TOOK TO FORD DEALERSHIP, NTF 3) SUDDEN LOSS OF POWER, 3/1/10, NTF, REPEATED ON 3/2/10, VEHICLE GOES TO IDLE STATE. *TR
2004 Ford F-350 Sd
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2004 Ford F-350 Sd do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 73.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all F-350 Sd 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
114 reports with mileage · 16 unknown
NHTSA’s mileage field refers to the reported incident, not necessarily the filing date. This shows report counts, not the likelihood of a failure.
What to inspect
Issues worth paying extra attention to based on owner reports.
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 42 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Electrical System. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Tires. Review the 17 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
What owners actually said
130 reportsTOYOTA VEHICLES ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHICH EXHIBIT UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. I OWN A 2004 FORD F-350 HEAVY DUTY TRUCK WHICH HAS PERIODICALLY SURGED 500-1000 RPM SINCE ABOUT 5K ODOMETER MILES. THIS NOW OCCURS ABOUT ONE OUT OF TWO TIMES I DRIVE THE VEHICLE FOR AN HOUR OR SO. I HAVE HAD IT INTO THREE DIFFERENT DEALERSHIPS, NUMER…
Read full complaint
TOYOTA VEHICLES ARE NOT THE ONLY ONES WHICH EXHIBIT UNINTENDED ACCELERATION. I OWN A 2004 FORD F-350 HEAVY DUTY TRUCK WHICH HAS PERIODICALLY SURGED 500-1000 RPM SINCE ABOUT 5K ODOMETER MILES. THIS NOW OCCURS ABOUT ONE OUT OF TWO TIMES I DRIVE THE VEHICLE FOR AN HOUR OR SO. I HAVE HAD IT INTO THREE DIFFERENT DEALERSHIPS, NUMEROUS TIMES, AND THEY HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO IDENTIFY THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM. I HAVE BEEN TOLD THAT THEY 'CAN'T JUST THROW PARTS AT IT' IN ORDER TO FIX IT. UNFORTUNATELY, THE TIME (5 YEARS) PORTION OF THE WARRANTY HAS LAPSED, THOUGH THE TRUCK ONLY HAS 48K MILES, WITH WARRANTY BEING 100K MILES OR 5 YEARS. ON ANOTHER OCCASION, THE ENGINE DIED AFTER SURGING WHILE NAVIGATING THROUGH A TURN, CAUSING POWER STEERING FAILURE AND NEARLY RESULTED IN MY HITTING A TELEPHONE POLE. THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNT DESCRIBES ONLY ONE INCIDENT OF MANY I'VE EXPERIENCED IN THIS VEHICLE'I'D BE GLAD TO DETAIL OTHERS. ONE MONTH AGO, THE TRUCK SUDDENLY LURCHED FORWARD WHILE I WAS STOPPED AT A LIGHT, AND I WAS UNABLE TO HALT IT UNTIL I HAD REACHED THE OTHER SIDE OF THE INTERSECTION. THERE WAS A PEDESTRIAN WHO HAD ALREADY CROSSED IN FRONT OF THE TRUCK, WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN SERIOUSLY INJURED OR KILLED HAD THE TIMING BEEN DIFFERENT. HAD THERE BEEN A VEHICLE STOPPED IN FRONT OF ME, OR CROSS-TRAFFIC VEHICLES, THERE WOULD HAVE CERTAINLY BEEN A COLLISION. THIS INCIDENT TOOK PLACE ONE-HALF BLOCK FROM A SCHOOL ZONE FOR AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. AS A RETIRED EDUCATOR AND FORMER MARINE, I CONSIDER MYSELF ABLE TO RESPOND APPROPRIATELY IN PRECARIOUS SITUATIONS. YET I DRIVE THIS VEHICLE ONLY WHEN I MUST, AND NEVER WHEN WEATHER CONDITIONS ARE AT ALL QUESTIONABLE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S MY 4 X 4 FOR WINTER WEATHER'MY WIFE AND SON NO LONGER DRIVE IT, EVER. I WOULD LIKE YOUR HELP IN CONVINCING FORD THAT THIS ISSUE IS ONE OF SAFETY, AND SHOULD BE COVERED UNDER WARRANTY UNTIL IT IS RESOLVED. I UNDOUBTEDLY WAS NOT 'FORCEFUL AND DEMANDING' ENOUGH IN MY NUMEROUS PREVIOUS TRIPS TO THE DEALERSHIPS. *TR
MY 2004 FORD 350 SUPER DUTY BEGAN IRREGULAR FUEL FEEDING WHILE I WAS DRIVING DOWN RT 95 FROM VA TO GA. I PULLED OFF AT AN EXIT IN KINGSLAND, GA. AND GOT A ROOM AT THE DAYS INN. WHILE ATTEMPTING TO PARK IN THE MOTEL PARKING LOT...WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE...THE ENGINE SURGED AND THE TRUCK MOVED AT LEAST 15-20 FEET FORWARD BEC…
Read full complaint
MY 2004 FORD 350 SUPER DUTY BEGAN IRREGULAR FUEL FEEDING WHILE I WAS DRIVING DOWN RT 95 FROM VA TO GA. I PULLED OFF AT AN EXIT IN KINGSLAND, GA. AND GOT A ROOM AT THE DAYS INN. WHILE ATTEMPTING TO PARK IN THE MOTEL PARKING LOT...WITH MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE...THE ENGINE SURGED AND THE TRUCK MOVED AT LEAST 15-20 FEET FORWARD BECAUSE OF THE FUEL SURGING. I HAD MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND NEVER TOUCHED THE ACCELERATOR AND I COULD NOT STOP THE TRUCK FROM MOVING FORWARD. I HAD IT TOWED TO THE LOCAL FORD DEALERSHIP WHERE THEY DIAGNOSED A BAD "SENSOR." THEY CHARGED ME ABOUT $1,400 FOR REPAIRS AND IT HAS BEEN WORKING FINE SINCE. I AM REPORTING THIS TO NHTSA, IN PART, BECAUSE OF THE TOYOTA PUBLICITY RECENTLY. I'M NOT A TOYOTA FAN, I'M A FORD LOYALIST, BUT IT OCCURRED TO ME THAT A SURGE LIKE THE ONE I EXPERIENCED IN MY SUPER DUTY COULD HAVE RESULTED IN INJURY OR DEATH TO OTHERS IF IT HAD OCCURRED UNDER OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES. MY TRUCK IS THE 6.0 LITER MODEL AND ONLY HAD ABOUT 52,000 MILES ON IT AT THE TIME IT BEGAN SURGING. I CAN PROBABLY FIND THE RECEIPT FOR REPAIRS AND THE NAME/NUMBER OF THE FORD DEALERSHIP WHO REPAIRED THE TRUCK IF NEEDED. THANKS! *TR
I OWN A 2004 F350 SUPER DUTY FORD 6.0 TURBODIESEL. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE EGR COOLER THREE TIMES STARTING IN 2006. THE LAST PROBLEM I HAD STARTED OUT LIKE THE EGR COOLER THEN I DEVELOPED AND OIL LOSE THE WHEN I ASK THE DIESEL MECH. I WAS TOLD THE IT SOUNDED LIKE A HEAD GASKET. THAT SAME DIESEL MECH. INFORMED ME THAT IN THE LA…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2004 F350 SUPER DUTY FORD 6.0 TURBODIESEL. I HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THE EGR COOLER THREE TIMES STARTING IN 2006. THE LAST PROBLEM I HAD STARTED OUT LIKE THE EGR COOLER THEN I DEVELOPED AND OIL LOSE THE WHEN I ASK THE DIESEL MECH. I WAS TOLD THE IT SOUNDED LIKE A HEAD GASKET. THAT SAME DIESEL MECH. INFORMED ME THAT IN THE LAST 5 YEARS HE HIMSELF HAD TO REPAIR LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF 6.0 FORD DIESELS FOR THE SAME PROBLEM. MY PROBLEM IS THAT THE PROBLEMS I HAD STARTED AFTER THE WARRANTY WAS OUT AND I WAS UNABLE TO GET AN EXTENDED WARRANTY ON THE 6.0 ENGINE DUE TO WHAT THE WARRANTY AGENT DESCRIBED AS A MAJOR ENGINE DEVELOPMENT FLAW BY THE 6.0 DESIGNERS. LOOKING ON THE INTERNET I HAVE SEEN THOUSANDS OF COMPLAINTS FOR THE SAME THING. YET I HAVE SEEN NO HELP FROM FORD. *TR
2005 FORD F-350 CREW CAB DUALLY, 2 WHEEL DRIVE EXPERIENCED FRONT WHEEL OSCILLATION (AKA "DEATH WOBBLE") WHILE TRAVELING AT 65 MPH ON INTERSTATE 10 EASTBOUND NEAR BLYTHE, CA. THE TRUCK SHOOK SO BAD I NEARLY DROVE OFF THE HIGHWAY BEFORE I SLOWED DOWN ENOUGH FOR IT TO DAMP OUT AND STOP SHAKING. I HAD A SLIDE IN CAMPER ON THE TRUC…
Read full complaint
2005 FORD F-350 CREW CAB DUALLY, 2 WHEEL DRIVE EXPERIENCED FRONT WHEEL OSCILLATION (AKA "DEATH WOBBLE") WHILE TRAVELING AT 65 MPH ON INTERSTATE 10 EASTBOUND NEAR BLYTHE, CA. THE TRUCK SHOOK SO BAD I NEARLY DROVE OFF THE HIGHWAY BEFORE I SLOWED DOWN ENOUGH FOR IT TO DAMP OUT AND STOP SHAKING. I HAD A SLIDE IN CAMPER ON THE TRUCK AT THE TIME. I UNDERSTAND THIS IS AN ISSUE WITH THESE F-SERIES FORD PICK UP TRUCKS AND FORD HAS DONE LITTLE TO RESOLVE IT. THE TRUCK IS PURE STOCK WITH ONLY 35,600 MILES ON IT. MY EXAMINATION OF THE STEERING LINKAGE REVEALED NO LOOSE OR WORN BALL JOINTS OR TIE ROD ENDS. *TR
I OWN A 2004 FORD F-350 SUPER DUTY DIESEL TRUCK AND I PURCHASED IT BRAND FROM SHEEHY FORD DEALERSHIP IN MARLOW HEIGHTS. THIS TRUCK STALLS WHILE DRIVING AND HAS DONE SO SINCE I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE. I HAVE TAKEN IT IN TO BE REPAIRED AND THE DEALER SAID THEY FIXED THE PROBLEM, HOWEVER THE TRUCK CONTINUES TO STALL. PLEASE REFER…
Read full complaint
I OWN A 2004 FORD F-350 SUPER DUTY DIESEL TRUCK AND I PURCHASED IT BRAND FROM SHEEHY FORD DEALERSHIP IN MARLOW HEIGHTS. THIS TRUCK STALLS WHILE DRIVING AND HAS DONE SO SINCE I PURCHASED THE VEHICLE. I HAVE TAKEN IT IN TO BE REPAIRED AND THE DEALER SAID THEY FIXED THE PROBLEM, HOWEVER THE TRUCK CONTINUES TO STALL. PLEASE REFER TO CAMPAIGN NO. 05V270000. THE DEALERSHIP WOULD LIKE FOR US TO SHARE IN THE COST OF REPAIR, BUT WE DO NOT WANT TO PAY AGAIN FOR THIS VEHICLE TO BE FIXED, HAVE THIS PROBLEM HAPPEN AGAIN, AND THEN THE CAR NOT FALL UNDER WARRANTY AND WE ARE STUCK AGAIN WITH AN UNSAFE VEHICLE AND ANOTHER HIGH PRICED BILL TO PAY. *TR
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. SHORTLY AFTERWARDS WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH THE REAR BRAKES FAILED. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION HE NOTICED THAT THE REAR BRAKE LINE WAS CORRODED, AND THAT THE VALVE COVER GASKET HAD FAILED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE CO…
Read full complaint
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F350 SUPER DUTY. WHILE DRIVING 45 MPH THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT WARNING. SHORTLY AFTERWARDS WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH THE REAR BRAKES FAILED. UPON FURTHER INSPECTION HE NOTICED THAT THE REAR BRAKE LINE WAS CORRODED, AND THAT THE VALVE COVER GASKET HAD FAILED. THE DEALER AND MANUFACTURER WERE CONTACTED, BUT BECAUSE THE PARTS WERE UNAVAILABLE NO ASSISTANCE WAS PROVIDED. HE MADE THE REPLACEMENTS HIMSELF. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 67,000.
2004 F350 TRUCK WITH NEW TIRES PUT ON BY LANGDALE FORD DEALER ARE WRONG SIZE AND A DAMAGED WHEEL - I BOUGHT THIS TRUCK ON SEPT 2 2009, DURING TEST DRIVE I ADVISE SALESMAN CHRIS LANE ABOUT A ROUGH RIDE AND I THOUGH MAYBE A TIRE WAS OUT OF BALANCE. HE TOLD ME THAT IT WAS FLAT SPOTS FROM SITTING ON THE LOT AND IT WOULD SMOOTH OUT A…
Read full complaint
2004 F350 TRUCK WITH NEW TIRES PUT ON BY LANGDALE FORD DEALER ARE WRONG SIZE AND A DAMAGED WHEEL - I BOUGHT THIS TRUCK ON SEPT 2 2009, DURING TEST DRIVE I ADVISE SALESMAN CHRIS LANE ABOUT A ROUGH RIDE AND I THOUGH MAYBE A TIRE WAS OUT OF BALANCE. HE TOLD ME THAT IT WAS FLAT SPOTS FROM SITTING ON THE LOT AND IT WOULD SMOOTH OUT AS I DROVE IT. AFTER 1 & A HALF WEEKS I CALLED BACK AND WAS REFERRED TO A JACK SR. WHOM IS THE SERVICE MANAGER. HE ADVISED ME THEY WOULD FOR $80-85.00 HR. PUT IT ON A COMPUTER AND CHECK IT OUT. I TOLD HIM IT WAS A TIRE OR WHEEL PROBLEM AND NO COMPUTER WOULD BE NEEDED BUT HE REFUSED ANY FURTHER HELP AND WAS VERY RUDE. FORD MTR, CO. WAS CONTACTED AND THEY CONTACTED LANGDALE ON MY BEHALF BUT GOT BRUSHED OFF TOO. THE WHEEL WAS FOUND BY A LOCAL TIRE SHOP AND THEY SAID THAT I HAD A UNSAFE WHEEL, IT HAD BEEN HEATED UP BY A CUTTING TORCH AND MADE TO FIT THIS TRUCK. THEY ORDER ME ANOTHER TIRE AND PUT IT ON THE SPARE RIM THAT HAD THE CORRECT TIRE SIZE BUT WOULD NOT MATCH THE OTHER TIRES ON THE TRUCK. UPON MY VISIT TO THE TIRE SHOP I WAS TOLD THAT THE WRONG SIZE TIRES HAD BEEN PUT ON BY LANGDALE FORD. THEY HAD PUT SIZE- 245/75R16 WIDER TIRES ON THE TRUCK AND IT WAS SUPPOSE TO BE 235/85R16 NARROW TIRES AND THAT I COULD HAVE A PROBLEM WHEN WEIGHT WAS ADDED TO THESE TIRES IN THE REAR (DUEL TIRE TRUCK) CAUSING THE TIRES TO HEAT UP AND BLOW OUT. LUCKILY WE FOUND THESE PROBLEMS BEFORE TRAVELING WITH A LOAD AND THE BAD WHEEL DID NOT BRAKE THE STUDS. THESE WHEELS/TIRES ARE HEAVY AND COULD HAVE BEEN A BAD AND DEADLY MISSILE ON THE HIGHWAY. I HAD ALSO FOUND THE TAIL PIPE LOSE FROM THE BACK TWO HANGERS THE DAY I BROUGHT THE TRUCK HOME BUT I FIXED THESE. THE DEALERS NEED TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR SAFETY OF VEHICLES THEY PUT ON THE PUBLIC HIGHWAYS. *TR
PULLING MY 5TH WHEEL CAMPER WITH F350 DULLEY ONLY 23 MILES FROM HOME AT 60 MILES MPH DRIVERS SIDE OUTSIDE DUELL 3/4 OF TREAD SEPARATED FROM TIRE DOWN TO STEEL BELTS RIPPED DUELLEY FENDER OFF TRUCK DAMAGED TO CAMPER ALSO . THIS IS THE 2ED TIRE TO DO THIS THE 1ST TIRE WAS ON PASSENGER SIDE FRONT DRIVING 70 MPH DAMAGED 1/4 PANEL ,…
Read full complaint
PULLING MY 5TH WHEEL CAMPER WITH F350 DULLEY ONLY 23 MILES FROM HOME AT 60 MILES MPH DRIVERS SIDE OUTSIDE DUELL 3/4 OF TREAD SEPARATED FROM TIRE DOWN TO STEEL BELTS RIPPED DUELLEY FENDER OFF TRUCK DAMAGED TO CAMPER ALSO . THIS IS THE 2ED TIRE TO DO THIS THE 1ST TIRE WAS ON PASSENGER SIDE FRONT DRIVING 70 MPH DAMAGED 1/4 PANEL ,BUMPER ,RUNNING BOARD .THIS HAPPENED ON 12/29/08 BOTH TIRES HAD 78LBS PSI AFTER TREAD SEPARATION AND HELD AIR FOR 3 DAYS .LOOKING AT THE TWO TIRES AFTER THE TREAD SEPARATED YOU COULD NOT TELL THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO TIRES ALSO WEIGHED AXLES ON TRUCK AND WAS 4200LBS UNDER LOAD LIMIT OF TIRES . THE TIRE ARE GENERAL AMERITRAC TR 23585./16 1ST TIRE DID 2000$ IN DAMAGES .I HAVE NOT GOT EST. FOR DAMAGES ON TRUCK AND TRAILER FROM 2ED TIRE AS OF THIS TIME. *TR
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350 SD. WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH, WHITE SMOKE WAS EMITTED FROM THE TAIL PIPE. THE CONTACT UNHOOKED THE TRAILER, BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT MOVE REGARDLESS OF WHAT GEAR IT WAS PLACED IN AT THE TIME. THE VEHICLE REMAINED IN PARK FOR FOUR HOURS BEFORE IT WAS FINALLY ABLE TO BE MOVED. A FEW DAYS LATE…
Read full complaint
TL*THE CONTACT OWNS A 2004 FORD F-350 SD. WHILE DRIVING 20 MPH, WHITE SMOKE WAS EMITTED FROM THE TAIL PIPE. THE CONTACT UNHOOKED THE TRAILER, BUT THE VEHICLE WOULD NOT MOVE REGARDLESS OF WHAT GEAR IT WAS PLACED IN AT THE TIME. THE VEHICLE REMAINED IN PARK FOR FOUR HOURS BEFORE IT WAS FINALLY ABLE TO BE MOVED. A FEW DAYS LATER, THE VEHICLE WAS DRIVEN TO A NEARBY REPAIR SHOP AND THE MECHANIC STATED THAT THE EGR COOLER SYSTEM WAS DEFECTIVE AND COULD HAVE BLOWN A HEAD GASKET. THE DEALER WILL NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE REPAIRS. THE VEHICLE HAS NOT BEEN REPAIRED. THE CURRENT AND FAILURE MILEAGES WERE 125,000.
Official recalls
211V352000 · Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
Jul 13, 2011
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.
Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
FORD IS RECALLING CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 2011 RANGER TRUCKS BUILT FROM JANUARY 25, 2011, THROUGH APRIL 25, 2011 AT THE TWIN CITIES ASSEMBLY PLANT, AND SERVICE PARTS DISTRIBUTED TO DEALERS FOR CERTAIN 2004 THROUGH 2011 MODEL YEAR RANGER TRUCKS, 2002 THROUGH 2005 MODEL YEAR EXCURSION VEHICLES, AND 2002 THROUGH 2007 MODEL YEAR F-250, F-350, F-450, AND F-550 TRUCKS FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, "LAMPS, REFLECTIVE DEVICES, AND ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT." THE MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WAS SHIPPED WITH A SUBCOMPONENT (SLIDER) THAT MAY EXPERIENCE DEFORMATION. A MULTI-FUNCTION SWITCH WITH A DEFORMED SLIDER MAY MALFUNCTION CAUSING THE TURN SIGNAL, TAIL LIGHTS, HAZARD WARNING SIGNAL FLASHERS AND/OR BRAKE LIGHTS NOT TO ACTIVATE.
Consequence: NON-FUNCTIONING LIGHTS COULD INCREASE THE RISK OF A CRASH.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE SWITCHES FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON AUGUST 15, 2011. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD MOTOR COMPANY CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP CENTER AT 1-866-436-7332.
05V270000 · Electrical System:wiring
Jun 10, 2005
CERTAIN PICKUP TRUCKS, SPORT UTILITY VEHICLES AND VANS EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES MAY EXPERIENCE STALLING WITHOUT WARNING WHILE DRIVING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: SHOULD THE ENGINE STALL, A VEHICLE CRASH COULD OCCUR.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL UPGRADE THE FUEL INJECTION CONTROL MODULE (FICM) WIRE HARNESS OR REPLACED, AND/OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE (ICP)) SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED FREE OF CHARGE. THE RECALL BEGAN ON JULY 22, 2005. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-800-392-3673.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
2DP05005 · Spark Plug Ejection From Cylinder Head
Opened Sep 22, 2005 · Closed Jan 4, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:gasoline
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
Engine And Engine Cooling
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
EA05003 · Engine Stalling
Opened Feb 15, 2005 · Closed Nov 2, 2005
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Electrical System:wiring:front Underhood; Engine And Engine Cooling; Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel
IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Electrical System:wiring:front Underhood
IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Engine And Engine Cooling:engine:diesel
IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Engine And Engine Cooling
IN A JUNE 7, 2005 LETTER, FORD NOTIFIED ODI THAT IT WOULD BE CONDUCTING A SAFETY RECALL OF APPROXIMATELY 180,000 FORD F-SUPER DUTY, EXCURSION AND E-SERIES VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH 6.0L DIESEL ENGINES TO CORRECT TWO WIRING RELATED CONDITIONS THAT COULD RESULT IN ENGINE STALL (NHTSA RECALL NO. 05V-270, FORD NO. 05S34).THE AFFECTED VEHICLES WERE BUILT BETWEEN SEPTEMBER 29, 2003 AND MAY 31, 2004.ACCORDING TO FORD, VEHICLES WITH THE CONDITIONS MAY STALL WITHOUT WARNING AND MAY OR MAY NOT RESTART.FORD WILL INSTRUCT OWNERS OF VEHICLES INCLUDED IN THE RECALL TO TAKE THEIR VEHICLES TO A DEALER TO HAVE THE FUEL INJECTOR CONTROL MODULE WIRE HARNESS UPGRADED OR REPLACED AND OR HAVE A NEW INJECTION CONTROL PRESSURE SENSOR CONNECTOR INSTALLED.DURING A MAY 2005 PRESENTATION TO ODI, FORD IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL FAILURE MECHANISMS THAT COULD AFFECT ENGINE PERFORMANCE IN VARIOUS SEGMENTS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION, INCLUDING THE WIRING CONDITIONS ADDRESSED BY 05V-270.THE WIRING CONDITIONS, WHICH BOTH AFFECT ENGINE FUELING, WERE THE MOST LIKELY CONDITIONS TO RESULT IN ENGINE STALL.THE RECALLED VEHICLES COMPRISE APPROXIMATELY 43% OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLE POPULATION AND ACCOUNT FOR 75 OF THE 113 ODI REPORTS THAT HAVE A VALID VIN (66%).THE VOQ COMPLAINT RATE FOR THE RECALL POPULATION IS 45/100K WHILE THE RATE FOR VEHICLES OUTSIDE THE RECALL POPULATION IS 17/100K AND THEIR TREND (BY DATE OF RECEIPT) IS DECLINING.BASED ON THE ANALYSIS, ODI BELIEVES FORD?S ACTIONS ARE SUFFICIENT TO ADDRESS THE CURRENT SAFETY RISKS AND THE INVESTIGATION IS THUS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT A SAFETY RELATED DEFECT DOES NOT EXIST.FURTHER ACTION WILL BE TAKEN IF WARRANTED BY FUTURE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Illustration