IllustrationHOWLING NOISE FROM CLUTCH. WAS TOLD BY DEALER THAT THE CLUTCH WAS NO GOOD, AND THAT THEY CONTACTED FORD AND WAS ADVISED THAT PARTS FOR REPAIR ARE CURRENTLY BEING MANUFACTURED?????????????? THE DEALER ADVISED ME THAT I WOULD HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL MID JANUARY FOR MY TRUCK TO BE REPARED.
2003 Ford Ranger
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
Similar to other model years
Owner complaints for the 2003 Ford Ranger do not stand out strongly from the model-year median of 144.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Ranger 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
630–25K
2225–50K
3050–75K
2075–100K
35100–150K
15150K+
185 reports with mileage · 58 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.
- Structure. Review the 43 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Vehicle Speed Control. Review the 40 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Service Brakes, Hydraulic. Review the 29 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
37 crash reports11 fire reports20 injury reports
What owners actually said
243 reportsWHILE COMING TO A STOP CONSUMER NOTICED BRAKES BECAME SPONGY. ON DECEMBER 6, 2003 WHEN THE OWNER APPLIED THE BRAKES TO MAKE A STOP, THE BRAKES PERFORMED ERRATICALLY. EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE WAS NECESSARY FOR THE BRAKES TO PERFORM EFFICIENTLY.*AK VEHICLE WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN WITH THE DRIVER'S FOOT DEPRESSING THE PEDAL…
Read full complaint
WHILE COMING TO A STOP CONSUMER NOTICED BRAKES BECAME SPONGY. ON DECEMBER 6, 2003 WHEN THE OWNER APPLIED THE BRAKES TO MAKE A STOP, THE BRAKES PERFORMED ERRATICALLY. EXTENDED STOPPING DISTANCE WAS NECESSARY FOR THE BRAKES TO PERFORM EFFICIENTLY.*AK VEHICLE WAS STOPPED AT A STOP SIGN WITH THE DRIVER'S FOOT DEPRESSING THE PEDAL. THE BRAKE PEDALWENT ALL THE WAY TO THE FLOOR BOARD AND THE VEHICLE ROLLED INTO THE INTERSECTION. VEHICLE COLLIDED WITH ANOTHER VEHICLE. 2003 FORD RANGER IS IN THE SHOP AND THE MECHANICS ARE AWARE THAT THE BRAKES NEED TO BE CHECKED OUT.*MR
NON INJURY MOMENTARY LOSS OF ENGINE CONTROL WHILE DRIVING UP A MODERATE INCLINE WITH MY NEW FORD RANGER IN CRUISE CONTROL & OVER DRIVE ON AT ABOUT 65 MPH & 2500 RPM'S. THE ENGINE KICKED DOWN TWICE IN IMMEDIATE SUCCESSION AND THE ENGINE RAN AWAY TO 6000 RPM'S+ AND STAYED THERE. ENGINE TACH LIMIT IS 6000RPM'S SO I DO NOT KNOW THE…
Read full complaint
NON INJURY MOMENTARY LOSS OF ENGINE CONTROL WHILE DRIVING UP A MODERATE INCLINE WITH MY NEW FORD RANGER IN CRUISE CONTROL & OVER DRIVE ON AT ABOUT 65 MPH & 2500 RPM'S. THE ENGINE KICKED DOWN TWICE IN IMMEDIATE SUCCESSION AND THE ENGINE RAN AWAY TO 6000 RPM'S+ AND STAYED THERE. ENGINE TACH LIMIT IS 6000RPM'S SO I DO NOT KNOW THE EXTENT OF THE OVER REV. I TOOK IMMEDIATE ACTION TO DISENGAGE CRUISE CONTROL WHICH LOWERED THE RPM'S AND TURNED THE OVER DRIVE OFF WHICH RESULTED IN A NORMAL RPM OF ABOUT 3000 @ 65 MPH. I HAVE TRAVELED THE SAME AREA BEFORE WITHOUT ANY SUCH OCCURRANCE. ALSO THE ENGINE HAS A ERRATIC TYPE MISFIRE AT IDLE WHICH MAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEM. THIS SITUATION WAS VERY UNSAFE AS WHEN THE ENGINE "RANAWAY" I ONLY GLANCED AT THE TACK TWICE AND DO NOT KNOW HOW FAST IT ENDED UP BEFORE I DISENGAGED THE CRUISE CONTROL.*AK
A BURNING ODOR SMELL WAS COMING IN THROUGH THE VENTS. THE DRIVER TOOK THE VEHICLE TO THE DEALER FOR ANALYSIS. THE MECHANIC COULD NOT DUPLICATE THE PROBLEM. *NLM
SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD: VEHICLE THROTTLE ACTUATES INDEPENDENTLY WHEN BRAKE IS APPLIED. I PURCHASED A USED 2003 FORD RANGER 2 WHEEL DRIVE EXTENDED CAB 4 DOOR MODEL WITH A 3.0 L ENGINE WITH 21123 MILES 3 WEEKS AGO. THREE TIMES I HAVE COME TO A STOP, APPLIED THE BRAKES AND THE THROTTLE HAS INDEPENDENTLY ACTUATED. THIS DEFECT OCCUR…
Read full complaint
SERIOUS SAFETY HAZARD: VEHICLE THROTTLE ACTUATES INDEPENDENTLY WHEN BRAKE IS APPLIED. I PURCHASED A USED 2003 FORD RANGER 2 WHEEL DRIVE EXTENDED CAB 4 DOOR MODEL WITH A 3.0 L ENGINE WITH 21123 MILES 3 WEEKS AGO. THREE TIMES I HAVE COME TO A STOP, APPLIED THE BRAKES AND THE THROTTLE HAS INDEPENDENTLY ACTUATED. THIS DEFECT OCCURS WHEN I APPLY THE BRAKE TO MAKE A COMPLETE STOP. SPECIFICALLY AT THE EXACT TIME MY FOOT DEPRESSES THE BRAKE PEDAL THE THROTTLE ACTUATES BY ITSELF TO INCREASE THE ENGINE RPM. ( I DID NOT HAVE MY FOOT ON THE THROTTLE PEDAL) YESTERDAY, THE THIRD TIME THIS HAS OCCURRED. I KEPT MY FOOT ON THE BRAKE AND THE RPM INCREASED TO APPROXIMATELY 3000. SMOKE EMITTED FROM THE RIGHT WHEEL BRAKE BECAUSE OF THE ROTATION OF THE TIRE IN OPPOSITION TO MY APPLICATION OF THE BRAKE. I HAD NOT BEEN USING THE CRUISE CONTROL AND WAS STOPPING FROM A RELATIVELY LOW SPEED OF 5 MPH EITHER AT A STOP SIGN OR IN FRONT OF MY OFFICE IN ALL THREE INCIDENTS. YESTERDAY WHEN PARKING IN FRONT OF MY OFFICE THE ENGINE RPM STAYED CONSTANT AND DID NOT DROP TO IDLE.( DURING THE PREVIOUS TWO TIMES THE ENGINE RPM SURGED AND THEN RETURNED TO IDLE WITHIN 1 SECOND.) HOWEVER YESTERDAY AFTER APPROXIMATELY 5 SECONDS OF CONSTANT HIGH ENGINE RPM I MOVED THE GEAR SHIFT LEVER OF THE AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION FROM THE DRIVE POSITION TO THE NEUTRAL POSITION. THE RPM THEN RETURNED TO IDLE SPEED AND THE TRANSMISSION NO LONGER ATTEMPTED TO INVOLUNTARILY PROPEL THE VEHICLE IN THE FORWARD POSITION. I THEN IMMEDIATELY DROVE THE TRUCK TO THE CONWAY-HEATON FORD DEALER IN BARDSTOWN KENTUCKY FOR A WARRANTY REPAIR. *LA
WHILE PROCEEDING TO LEAVE THE DRIVEWAY THE OWNER PRESSED THE BRAKE PEDAL AND WITHOUT WARNING THE VEHICLE SURGED FORWARD BEFORE STOPPING. *AK IT WAS LATER DETERMINED THAT THIS OCCURRED BECAUSE THE ACCELERATOR PEDAL AND BRAKE PEDAL ARE TOO CLOSE TOGETHER. *NLM
THE SILVER COATING ON THE DASH BOARD AROUND THE RADIO AND AC UNIT IS RUBBING OFF. *LA
CONSUMER STATED DEALERSHIP DIDN'T INFORM HIM ABOUT THE TRUCKS' INEFFICIENCY TO EXCEED THE SPEED OF 80 MPH. IF THE TRUCK WAS DRIVEN AT THAT SPEED IT EXPERIENCED A SEVERE VIBRATION AND WOULD NOT GO ANY FASTER. THE SPEEDOMETER WOULD REGISTER 120 MPH. *AK. THE CONSUMER WAS TOLD THAT 4-WHEEL DRIVE VEHICLES SHOULD NOT BE DRIVEN O…
Read full complaint
CONSUMER STATED DEALERSHIP DIDN'T INFORM HIM ABOUT THE TRUCKS' INEFFICIENCY TO EXCEED THE SPEED OF 80 MPH. IF THE TRUCK WAS DRIVEN AT THAT SPEED IT EXPERIENCED A SEVERE VIBRATION AND WOULD NOT GO ANY FASTER. THE SPEEDOMETER WOULD REGISTER 120 MPH. *AK. THE CONSUMER WAS TOLD THAT 4-WHEEL DRIVE VEHICLES SHOULD NOT BE DRIVEN ON DRY ROADS. *JB *NLM
WHILE DRIVING VEHICLE INTERMITTENTLY STALLED. THE CAUSE OF THE PROBLEM HAD NOT BEEN DETERMINED. *AK
2003 FORD RANGER XLT DOES NOT EXCEED 80 MPH.*MR (TRANSFERRED TO RULE MAKING). *CB
Official recalls
109V399000 · Vehicle Speed Control
Oct 13, 2009
FORD IS RECALLING MODEL YEARS 1995-2003 WINDSTAR, 2000-2003 EXCURSION DIESEL, 1993-1997 AND 1999-2003 F-250 SD THROUGH F-550 SD DIESEL, 1992-2003 E-150 THROUGH E-550, 1995-2002 EXPLORER, 1997 AND 2002 MERCURY MOUNTAINEER, 1995-1997 AND 2001-2003 RANGER, AND 1994 F53 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH THE TEXAS INSTRUMENTS SPEED CONTROL DEACTIVATION SWITCH (SCDS). THE SCDS MAY LEAK INTERNALLY AND THEN OVERHEAT, SMOKE, OR BURN.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: A VEHICLE FIRE COULD OCCUR WITH OR WITHOUT THE ENGINE RUNNING.
Remedy: FORD WILL NOTIFY OWNERS THAT DEALERS WILL INSTALL A FUSED WIRING HARNESS IN LINE WITH THE SCDS. ON 1999-2003 WINDSTAR VEHICLES WITH A LEAKING SCDS, DEALERS WILL ALSO INSPECT THE ABS CONTROL MODULE CONNECTOR AND REPAIR AS NECESSARY. REPAIRS WILL BE COMPLETED FREE OF CHARGE. THE SAFETY RECALL BEGAN ON OCTOBER 27, 2009. OWNERS MAY CONTACT FORD AT 1-888-222-2751.
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
1PE05066 · Brake Lights Inoperative
Opened Dec 5, 2005 · Closed Mar 24, 2006
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Exterior Lighting; Exterior Lighting:brake Lights; Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Additional source detail variants (3)
Exterior Lighting:brake Lights
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Exterior Lighting:tail Lights
THIS PE WAS OPENED BASED ON TECHNICAL SERVICE BULLETIN (TSB) #05-6-19 ISSUED BY FORD MOTOR COMPANY AND SERVICE BULLETIN #09-008/5 ISSUED BY MAZDA MOTOR CORPORATION TO ADDRESS CONCERNS OF THE CENTER HIGH MOUNTED STOP LIGHT (CHMSL) WIRING HARNESS CHAFFING. THE TSB'S AFFECTED THE FORD SUPER CAB AND MAZDA CAB PLUS VEHICLES ONLY.SERVICE TECHNICIANS CONTACTED THE FORD HOTLINE BECAUSE IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR THE TECHNICIANS TO DIAGNOSE AND LOCATE THE CAUSE OF THE INOPERATIVE BRAKE LIGHTS.FORD AND MAZDA ISSUED THE TSB'S TO AID TECHNICIANS IN THE IDENTIFICATION AND REPAIR OF THE WIRE CHAFE CONDITION.OF ALL WARRANTY CLAIMS SUBMITTED TO FORD FOR BRAKE LAMP FAILURE, FORD IDENTIFIED ONLY 120 THAT WERE RELATED TO WIRE CHAFE NEAR THE CHMSL, AND MOST (115 OF THE 120) WERE REPORTED FOR THE SUPER CAB CHMSL. ODI'S REVIEW OF FORD'S WARRANTY CLAIMS AND COMPLAINT DATA REVEALS A DECLINING TREND FOR THE SUPER CAB AND THAT TREND CLOSELY PARALLELS THE TREND FOR THE STANDARD CAB AS WELL.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.ACCORDINGLY, THIS INVESTIGATION IS CLOSED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.