NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
Engine complaints
26 reportsClear category filter50,000 miles · May 26, 2026
Engine
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer for a routine timing cover replacement. The contact believed the engine was damaged while being serviced. Upon retrieval, the check engine light was illuminated. There was an abnormal ticking noise detected. The vehicle had misfired. The vehicle had …
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer for a routine timing cover replacement. The contact believed the engine was damaged while being serviced. Upon retrieval, the check engine light was illuminated. There was an abnormal ticking noise detected. The vehicle had misfired. The vehicle had not been diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified. The failure mileage was approximately 50,000.
NHTSA ODI #11739997
Mileage unknown · May 14, 2026
Engine
Head gasket failure, specifically corrosion of the engine block. One day the car just did not start at all, with no clear indication of head gasket failure until compression test was ran. Symptoms include coolant levels getting lower each week, with constant refills needed. Random misfires. Smoke randomly emitting from the exh…
Read full complaint
Head gasket failure, specifically corrosion of the engine block. One day the car just did not start at all, with no clear indication of head gasket failure until compression test was ran. Symptoms include coolant levels getting lower each week, with constant refills needed. Random misfires. Smoke randomly emitting from the exhaust when idle. Has not been inspected by the manufacturer, police or insurance.
NHTSA ODI #11737770
25,000 miles · Mar 3, 2025
Engine
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, there was white smoke coming from under the hood. No warning light was illuminated. Upon further investigation, the contact related the failure to TSB: 19-2260; however, the vehicle was not included. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaire…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at various speeds, there was white smoke coming from under the hood. No warning light was illuminated. Upon further investigation, the contact related the failure to TSB: 19-2260; however, the vehicle was not included. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 25,000.
NHTSA ODI #11645918
31,000 miles · Oct 31, 2024
EngineEngine And Engine Cooling
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving 30 MPH, the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to a dealer where it was diagnosed with coolant intrusion into the engine. The contact was informed that the head gasket needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufac…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving 30 MPH, the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to a dealer where it was diagnosed with coolant intrusion into the engine. The contact was informed that the head gasket needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 31,000.
NHTSA ODI #11622906
Mileage unknown · Jul 23, 2024
Engine
To provide some context, I purchased my Mustang new in 2018, and it currently has 40,000 miles on it. Approximately four weeks ago, I began experiencing a "shaking" issue when cold-starting the engine, accompanied by the check-engine light turning on. I brought my vehicle into your service department, where I was informed by the…
Read full complaint
To provide some context, I purchased my Mustang new in 2018, and it currently has 40,000 miles on it. Approximately four weeks ago, I began experiencing a "shaking" issue when cold-starting the engine, accompanied by the check-engine light turning on. I brought my vehicle into your service department, where I was informed by the service representative that the problem was related to the spark plugs. After paying $600 for what was purported to be a fix, I retrieved my car, which drove fine for about a week before the same issue recurred. The engine began shaking again, and the check-engine light reappeared. I promptly scheduled another appointment, explicitly mentioning that the problem was identical to the previous one. Upon dropping off my car, I was told that the mechanic couldn't determine the issue from the initial diagnostic. After three days without any updates, I reached out to my service representative, Jack, who then informed me that my car required an engine replacement due to a coolant leak—a problem he described as a common issue with EcoBoost engines. The cost quoted for this repair was $9,000, an amount I find exorbitant given that my car's total value is around $12,000-$13,000. My primary concern now is the nature of the engine issue. Given that this problem is apparently common with EcoBoost engines, I believe it is a manufacturing defect that should not be my financial responsibility to fix. Furthermore, during my research, I discovered recalls and class action lawsuits related to this exact issue—information that was never communicated to me by your team or at the time of purchase. Unfortunately, my vehicle is not included in these recalls. Coolant leaking into the engine will eventually make my engine overheat and potentially crack the engine. This is a manufacturing issue, and should not be my financial responsibility.
NHTSA ODI #11604065
Mileage unknown · Jul 9, 2024
Engine
The overheat light came on in the car a 2017 Mustang Ecoboost with only 82,000 miles. Had the car towed to the Greenway Ford dealership in Orlando and they said that there was evidence of coolant in one of the cylinders and the engine needed to be replaced. The Service Advisor at the dealership said that this was a known issue…
Read full complaint
The overheat light came on in the car a 2017 Mustang Ecoboost with only 82,000 miles. Had the car towed to the Greenway Ford dealership in Orlando and they said that there was evidence of coolant in one of the cylinders and the engine needed to be replaced. The Service Advisor at the dealership said that this was a known issue with the 2.3 liter Ecoboost engine and premature engine failures. An engine overheat could be a safety hazard or create an issue if the engine failed in traffic or on the highway.
NHTSA ODI #11600629
Mileage unknown · Apr 6, 2024
EngineUnknown Or Other
UNKNOWN, suddenly needs a new transmission. very upsetting
NHTSA ODI #11581462
Mileage unknown · Mar 21, 2024
Engine
I was driving and the vehicle jerked, the check engine came on and I immediately pulled over. The car was towed to a local mechanic who said take it to ford because this is a known issue with 6 cylinder engines. Today, ford called and said it’s a catastrophic engine failure and nothing I did. The cost to replace the engine is $1…
Read full complaint
I was driving and the vehicle jerked, the check engine came on and I immediately pulled over. The car was towed to a local mechanic who said take it to ford because this is a known issue with 6 cylinder engines. Today, ford called and said it’s a catastrophic engine failure and nothing I did. The cost to replace the engine is $10,000. My car had 97,000 miles and was always well cared for. If ford knows this is an issue, it should be a recall.
NHTSA ODI #11578774
88,000 miles · Feb 13, 2024
Engine
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle was jerking with the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed and determined that cylinder #1 had misfired and that the long block needed to be replaced. The vehic…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle was jerking with the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed and determined that cylinder #1 had misfired and that the long block needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The contact stated that the spark plugs, and ignition coils had previously been replaced. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and advised the contact to file a complaint with the NHTSA Hotline. The failure mileage was approximately 88,000.
NHTSA ODI #11571674
101,000 miles · Nov 1, 2023
EnginePower Train
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle lost motive power while driving sluggishly. The check engine warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who determined an increased bore size for cylinder #2, which was allowing an abnormal am…
Read full complaint
The contact owns a 2017 Ford Mustang. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle lost motive power while driving sluggishly. The check engine warning light was illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, who determined an increased bore size for cylinder #2, which was allowing an abnormal amount of coolant to flow into the engine. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure but referred the contact to the NHTSA Hotline for assistance. The failure mileage was 101,000.
NHTSA ODI #11553104
Official recalls
6Sep 12, 2025
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.
Sep 3, 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.
Feb 16, 2022
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.
Aug 28, 2017
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2017 F-150 and Mustang vehicles. The air bag inflator within the passenger frontal air bag module may rupture in the event of a crash.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: An inflator rupture may result in metal fragments striking the vehicle occupants resulting in serious injury or death.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will replace the passenger frontal air bag module, free of charge. The recall began October 11, 2017. Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for this recall is 17S26.
Mar 13, 2017
Ford Motor Company (Ford) is recalling certain 2017 Ford Mustang vehicles. The return spring for the driver side interior door handle may come loose, allowing the driver's door to unlatch in a side impact crash. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 206, "Door Locks and Door Retention Components."
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: If the door unlatches in a crash it can increase the risk of injury.
Remedy: Ford will notify owners, and dealers will inspect the driver-side interior door handle and repair the return spring, as necessary, free of charge. The recall began April 14, 2017. Owners may contact Ford at 1-866-436-7332. Ford's number for the recall is 17C04.
Oct 26, 2016
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.
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
1EA21002 · 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.