This complaint is a formal notification of a Recall Remedy Failure regarding NHTSA Campaign 22V082000 / 25V572000 (Rearview Camera Wiring Harness / Camera Replacement). My vehicle was brought to an authorized Ford dealership on 07/22/2026 to complete the recall remedy. Following the service, the backup camera functionality has c…
Read full complaint
This complaint is a formal notification of a Recall Remedy Failure regarding NHTSA Campaign 22V082000 / 25V572000 (Rearview Camera Wiring Harness / Camera Replacement). My vehicle was brought to an authorized Ford dealership on 07/22/2026 to complete the recall remedy. Following the service, the backup camera functionality has completely degraded and is now worse than before the service. The screen is consistently displaying entirely black / distorted screen / Message Camera not available, presenting an ongoing, unmitigated back-over safety hazard. The manufacturer's remedy has failed to resolve the safety defect. Returned to the authorized Ford dealership on 08/21/2026 and was told this is a known issue and there is another "recall" fix for this issue, but parts are now available at this time. I need to follow up in a month or more.
NHTSA ODI #11758171
Mileage unknown · Jun 26, 2026
Electrical System
The rear view camera has a recall. I took the vehicle into a Ford dealership on 6/23/26 for this recall. This is a risk to myself and others because backup cameras are a federally required safety feature. This is my 2nd attempt for Ford to fix this recall at two separate dealerships. Ford does not care about their recalls an…
Read full complaint
The rear view camera has a recall. I took the vehicle into a Ford dealership on 6/23/26 for this recall. This is a risk to myself and others because backup cameras are a federally required safety feature. This is my 2nd attempt for Ford to fix this recall at two separate dealerships. Ford does not care about their recalls and the safety of Ford customers! I almost hit another car that was coming out due to the blind spots on that vehicle. My young daughter also drives the car and this is not the 1970’s as young drivers depend on that feature. Ford said that they could not find the problem with this issue and further diagnosing must be done on my part for $198. This is not fair to customers as this was a recall issue. If Ford is not properly training their technicians to diagnose this issue, it should not be the responsibility of the customer to pay for their error in producing this car. The problem has been reproduced and confirmed by a Ford dealership. There were no warning lights or issues that were displayed. Ford only sent out letters stating that a recall was issued on the problem. In May of 2026 my backup camera and trunk was not working. Ford inspected and replaced the parts on the vehicle that they assumed was part of the recall. For a 2016 Mustang, a common cause is not just the camera itself but also wiring/connectors in the trunk area or the APIM/radio module that displays the image. If the dealer simply performed the recall software update or replaced one component and the screen is still blank, the underlying problem may not have been fully diagnosed. This the 2nd attempt to have a recall fixed by Ford but to no avail (2 separate dealerships)
NHTSA ODI #11746775
Mileage unknown · Feb 4, 2026
Electrical SystemUnknown Or Other
There have been 3 instances within the last year and a half where the rear window of my vehicle (Ford mustang) and the rear window of family member ford mustang both have shattered during the extreme cold possibly due to the heating coils on the window over heating and burning. You can see a burn pattern in the window This is a …
Read full complaint
There have been 3 instances within the last year and a half where the rear window of my vehicle (Ford mustang) and the rear window of family member ford mustang both have shattered during the extreme cold possibly due to the heating coils on the window over heating and burning. You can see a burn pattern in the window This is a safety issue due to the window shattering, it sounded as if someone shot my window out the first time it happened my [XXX] son was in the back of the vehicle and I was driving home. The second instance, same vehicle, started the car using the remote starter and it did the same thing. This has not been inspected by my insurance representative, it has been reported in both instances through my insurance and pictures have been taken. There have been no warning signs or even issues, there wiring look like it had been burned, melted INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA ODI #11715694
Mileage unknown · Sep 10, 2025
Electrical System
Display screen went out after first back up, camera recall. Camera is fixed under the recall by the dealership shortly after the display screen was intermittently going out until the screen became completely black.
NHTSA ODI #11686301
Mileage unknown · Aug 20, 2025
Electrical System
Took car to dealership per recall. Touch screen flickering on and off. Can't depend on back up camera. According to dealer "Recall 22a06a was previously completed on TSB 19-2273. and no other repairs were neede at this time. Note, Sync MyTouch screen is blinking on and off at all times and recommend Diag." they replaced AP…
Read full complaint
Took car to dealership per recall. Touch screen flickering on and off. Can't depend on back up camera. According to dealer "Recall 22a06a was previously completed on TSB 19-2273. and no other repairs were neede at this time. Note, Sync MyTouch screen is blinking on and off at all times and recommend Diag." they replaced APIN and Screen. According to the repair bill. It was still flickering and replaced FDCIN. Screen no longer flickering. it seems to me this is a safety hazard as it affects the viewing of the back up camera with any accuracy and could cause an accident no matter how careful a person is. It also seems to me that Ford knew extra parts my be needed to rectify the situation they should have been included in the orginal recall
NHTSA ODI #11681790
Mileage unknown · Aug 11, 2025
Electrical SystemEngineUnknown Or Other
• What failed & is it available for inspection? Air-conditioning system failure. Loss of cabin cooling; dealer recommends compressor replacement (may include related components pending contamination check). Vehicle is at a Ford dealer now; no repairs performed yet. I requested the dealer retain failed parts for inspection. • Ho…
Read full complaint
• What failed & is it available for inspection? Air-conditioning system failure. Loss of cabin cooling; dealer recommends compressor replacement (may include related components pending contamination check). Vehicle is at a Ford dealer now; no repairs performed yet. I requested the dealer retain failed parts for inspection. • How was safety put at risk? I live in Las Vegas; ambient temps ~112°F-120 degrees. This is my primary vehicle for transporting my [XXX] and for my work schedule. With no A/C, cabin temps become dangerously high within minutes, creating a heat-related illness risk (child and driver), impaired concentration, and fatigue during necessary trips. • Has the problem been reproduced/confirmed? Yes. An independent shop first advised compressor replacement. A Ford dealer subsequently confirmed loss of cooling and produced an A/C repair estimate after diagnosis. • Inspected by manufacturer/police/insurance? Inspected/diagnosed by an authorized Ford dealer. I opened a Ford Customer Relationship Center case (XXX) and requested goodwill/after-warranty review. No police/insurance inspection. • Warning lamps/messages/symptoms & onset? No warning lights. Symptoms began with weak/intermittent cooling in early August 2025 and progressed to no cold air. Mileage at failure ~87,279. A/C clutch cycles but cabin air remains hot. (Owner context: original owner, [XXX] Vehicle: 2016 Ford Mustang GT 5.0.) INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
NHTSA ODI #11679927
33,000 miles · Feb 12, 2025
Electrical System
The contact owns a 2016 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the A/C unit became inoperative on the driver's side of the vehicle. No warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to a dealer where it was diagnosed that the evaporator core was leaking and needed to be replaced. The vehicl…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2016 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the A/C unit became inoperative on the driver's side of the vehicle. No warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to a dealer where it was diagnosed that the evaporator core was leaking and needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 33,000.
NHTSA ODI #11642232
Mileage unknown · Nov 30, 2024
Electrical SystemSeats
Smoke came up from under both seats within a few weeks of each other, found burned harness and plug at both heated/ cooled seat control modules mounted under seats. Researched and found a fix that will cost hundreds of $$ per seat but no recalls. I would think smoke and burning electrical in the interior of nearly ALL Ford pro…
Read full complaint
Smoke came up from under both seats within a few weeks of each other, found burned harness and plug at both heated/ cooled seat control modules mounted under seats. Researched and found a fix that will cost hundreds of $$ per seat but no recalls. I would think smoke and burning electrical in the interior of nearly ALL Ford products with heated/ cooled seats would be a safety recall?
NHTSA ODI #11628058
Mileage unknown · Nov 21, 2024
Electrical System
Back Up camera working intermittently. If I shake the wires in the trunk it will work. I purchased this car in November and immediately received a recall notice from Ford for the back up camera. I scheduled the car in for the recall and dropped it off to be repaired. I was notified from the dealer that the car was ready to go an…
Read full complaint
Back Up camera working intermittently. If I shake the wires in the trunk it will work. I purchased this car in November and immediately received a recall notice from Ford for the back up camera. I scheduled the car in for the recall and dropped it off to be repaired. I was notified from the dealer that the car was ready to go and picked it up. Immediately I noticed that the camera was still not working. The dealer said that the recall was to check and see if the recall was completed. (Does that really make any sense?). They said another dealer had completed the recall so their work was done. So I have a car that had a recall but now it does not as they say they have completed it but in reality, the original recall item is still not working.
NHTSA ODI #11626618
Mileage unknown · Nov 4, 2024
Electrical System
I had a back up camera recall done, and several months later, the exact same problems happened. Exactly the same symptoms and results. When shifting into reverse, the camera, in more than 50% of the time, the camera fails, just like before the first recall. The dealer says one fix per recall, and if I want it fixed now, it will …
Read full complaint
I had a back up camera recall done, and several months later, the exact same problems happened. Exactly the same symptoms and results. When shifting into reverse, the camera, in more than 50% of the time, the camera fails, just like before the first recall. The dealer says one fix per recall, and if I want it fixed now, it will be $400. It is a defect and should be fixed properly, not the sloppy fix done previously
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Mustang vehicles. Water and road salt may corrode the front seat belt anchor pretensioner cables.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A corroded cable can break, preventing the seat belt from properly restraining an occupant, and increasing the risk of injury during a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and replace both front seat belt anchor pretensioner assemblies, as necessary. In addition, dealers will remove sections of the carpet and underlayment that contact the cables. Dealers will also inspect the A-pillar sealing patches, and as necessary, install A-pillar body plugs, and/or inspect and replace the front outboard seat bolts. Repairs will be performed free of charge. Interim letters, notifying owners of the safety risk, were mailed October 20, 2025. Additional letters will be sent once the final remedy is available, anticipated December 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S92. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall became searchable on NHTSA.gov September 17, 2025.
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2019 Lincoln MKC, Mustang, F-350 SD, F-250 SD, F-450 SD, 2015-2017 Lincoln Navigator, Expedition, 2015-2018 Edge, Transit Connect, 2016-2019 F-550 SD, Transit, 2017-2019 Econoline, and 2019 Ranger vehicles. The rearview camera may display a distorted, inverted, or blank image when the vehicle is in reverse.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A rearview camera that displays an inverted, distorted, or blank 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. Owner notification letters were mailed January 13, 2026. Ford owners will receive letters in phases, beginning January 2026 and June 2026. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 25S89. This recall expands previous NHTSA recall number 25V270. Vehicle Identification Numbers (VINs) involved in this recall will be searchable on NHTSA.gov beginning September 8, 2025.
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2015-2017 Mustang vehicles. The rearview camera wiring may be loose or damaged, which can result in a blank or distorted image.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A rearview camera that displays a blank or distorted image can reduce the driver's rear view, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Dealers will inspect and repair the decklid wiring harness and/or replace the rearview camera, as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed December 23, 2022 and June 26, 2023. Remedy parts are expected to become available in the 4th Quarter of 2022. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 22S06.
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2015-2017 Mustang vehicles manufactured February 24, 2015, to August 30, 2016. A hose may separate from the engine oil cooler tube assembly causing an oil leak.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A sudden loss of engine oil may cause engine failure, increasing the risk of a crash. Additionally, an oil leak, in the presence of an ignition source, increases the risk of a fire.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the engine oil cooler tube assembly, free of charge. The recall began on March 23, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 16S40.
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2016 Ford Mustang vehicles manufactured September 26, 2015, to October 1, 2015. The front and rear seat belts and child seat tether anchors may have been damaged in shipping from the supplier to the vehicle assembly plant and may not adequately restrain the occupant in a crash. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard numbers 208, "Occupant Crash Protection," and 225, "Child restraint anchorage systems."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the restraint components do not function as intended, the occupants may not be properly restrained in the event of a crash, increasing their risk of injury.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the front and rear seat belt assemblies and the child seat tether anchors, free of charge. The recall began on December 18, 2015. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 15C13.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Child Seat:tether: Connector/clip
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2016 Ford Mustang vehicles manufactured September 26, 2015, to October 1, 2015. The front and rear seat belts and child seat tether anchors may have been damaged in shipping from the supplier to the vehicle assembly plant and may not adequately restrain the occupant in a crash. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard numbers 208, "Occupant Crash Protection," and 225, "Child restraint anchorage systems."
Consequence: If the restraint components do not function as intended, the occupants may not be properly restrained in the event of a crash, increasing their risk of injury.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the front and rear seat belt assemblies and the child seat tether anchors, free of charge. The recall began on December 18, 2015. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 15C13.
Seat Belts
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain model year 2016 Ford Mustang vehicles manufactured September 26, 2015, to October 1, 2015. The front and rear seat belts and child seat tether anchors may have been damaged in shipping from the supplier to the vehicle assembly plant and may not adequately restrain the occupant in a crash. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard numbers 208, "Occupant Crash Protection," and 225, "Child restraint anchorage systems."
Consequence: If the restraint components do not function as intended, the occupants may not be properly restrained in the event of a crash, increasing their risk of injury.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the front and rear seat belt assemblies and the child seat tether anchors, free of charge. The recall began on December 18, 2015. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 15C13.
Model-level recall history does not show whether a particular VIN is affected or has received a repair. Check a VIN with NHTSA ↗
NHTSA investigations
1
EA21002 · Desiccated Air Bag Inflator Rupture
Opened Sep 17, 2021 · No close date supplied
Status: open (inferred from source dates) · Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module; Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Additional source detail variants (2)
Air Bags:frontal:driver Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
Air Bags:frontal:passenger Side:inflator Module
From 2000 through 2017, Takata produced millions of air bag inflators using two types of phase-stabilized ammonium nitrate ("PSAN") propellant -- propellant 2004 and propellant 2004L. After prolonged exposure to high temperature cycles and humidity, inflators using propellant 2004 can degrade, causing the propellant to burn too quickly when ignited. The rapid burning can cause the inflator to rupture during deployment, potentially causing serious or even fatal injury to vehicle occupants. See 2016 Blomquist Report at www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/documents/expert_report-hrblomquist.pdf.Consequently, all frontal inflators using propellant 2004 that do not contain a "desiccant" (a substance that traps and holds moisture) in US vehicles are under recall. These "non-desiccated" inflators either have been or are required to be replaced.In some cases, the remedy part for these recalled inflators was, or will be, an inflator using either propellant 2004 or 2004L that does contain a desiccant. None of these "desiccated" remedy parts (which were installed in older model year vehicles) are currently under recall for a degradation concern. Certain subsets of desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004 for use as original equipment, however, have been recalled for a degradation concern. All Takata inflators produced with propellant 2004L contain desiccant, and none of these desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L are under recall for a degradation concern. There have been no reported field ruptures in any non-recalled desiccated PSAN inflators.It is understood that desiccants fully saturate at some threshold, at which point any additional moisture will not be captured. This means the degradation process observed in non-desiccated inflators using propellant 2004 may also occur in non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004, assuming additional moisture enters the inflator and high temperature cycling occurs. Based on available information, desiccant saturation can occur within the first five years in the worst environments, and the time required for full saturation is affected by multiple factors. While no present safety risk has been identified, further work is needed to evaluate the future risk of non-recalled desiccated inflators using propellant 2004.Three entities -- Takata (now known as TK Global), the Independent Testing Coalition, and Exponent -- have been studying the long-term behavior of Takata desiccated PSAN inflators using propellant 2004L (as well as 2004) in the presence of moisture and temperature cycling. The research efforts, which include development of predictive modeling techniques and field sample analysis, are ongoing. To date, none of the researchers have identified field evidence showing that propellant 2004L is undergoing a degradation process that leads to aggressive deployment and potential rupture. However, the time in service of such inflators remains short compared to that of the inflators using propellant 2004. Further study is needed to assess the long-term safety of desiccated inflators using propellant 2004L.The Office of Defects Investigation is opening this investigation to examine whether a safety defect related to propellant degradation exists in non-recalled desiccated PSAN frontal inflators manufactured by Takata. This investigation will require extensive information on Takata production processes and surveys of inflators in the field. Lists of recall actions that may have used desiccated PSAN inflators as remedy parts, as well as the makes and models originally manufactured with them, is available with the downloadable version of this document (see nhtsa.gov/recalls?nhtsaId=EA21002 -- note this information is subject to change/revision as the investigation proceeds). This investigation does not supersede EA15-001, which remains open.
2016 Ford Mustang Problems, Complaints & Recalls | Skip That Year
Illustration