IllustrationLOCK CYLINDER FAILED CAUSING DRIVER TO BE SHOCKED WHEN KEY WAS INSERTED INTO IGNITION.
1989 Ford Tempo
Owner reports · Recalls · Investigations
More warning signs than most Tempo years
Owner complaints for the 1989 Ford Tempo are substantially higher than the model-year median of 30.
About this comparison →How this year compares
Owner complaints by model year
Compare all Tempo 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
Limited mileage data: 4 of 124 reports include usable mileage. There isn’t enough coverage to show a useful chart.
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.
- Electrical System. Review the 33 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Engine And Engine Cooling. Review the 26 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
- Seat Belts. Review the 20 owner reports in this category and discuss these concerns during a pre-purchase inspection. Read reports →
NHTSA owner reports · September 18, 2026 snapshot.
5 crash reports21 fire reports5 injury reports
Electrical System complaints
33 reportsWHEN STARTING SMOKE CAME FROM THE STEERING COLUMN. LEARNED LATER THAT THE SMOKE WAS DUE TO A SHORT IN THE ELECTRICAL HARNESS UNDER THE DASH. REPAIRS WERE MADE BY INDEPENDENT REPAIR SHOP ( REPAIRS WERE DONE ON BOTH HARNESS UNDER THE HOOD AND UNDER THE DASH). MANUFACTURER WAS NOTIFIED. *AK
WENT TO PIONEER FORD TO GET PROBLEM FIX BUT IN REPAIRING THIS PROBLEM THEY BROKE DRIVERS SEAT AND MADE CAR UNSAFE TO DRIVE AND REFUSED TO REPAIR IT THEY SAID JUST BECAUSE THE VEHICAL WAS OVER 10 YEARS OLD THEY WERE NOT RESPOSIBLE
ALTERNATOR WIRING HARNESS MELTED BECAUSE OF A SHORT.
POSSIBLE IGNITION SWITCH FAILURE AFTER RECALL (95S28) REPAIR PERFORMED RESULTING IN VEHICLE FIRE. NLM
WHILE DRIVING SMOKE STARTED COMING FROM STEERING COLUMN AREA; VEHICLE PREVIOUSLY REPAIRED UNDER RECALL #96V071000; IGNITION SWITCH. *AK
EXPERIENCED IGNITION SWITCH MALFUNCTION, KEY WOULDN'T TURN TO START, AFTER REPLACING IGNITION SWITCH EXPERIENCED FIRE WHICH STARTED IN EXTREMELY COLD CONDITIONS, NOTICED SMOKE COMING FROM IGNITON SWITCH, THEN STEERING COLUMN CAUGHT FIRE, VEHICLE WAS TOTALLED. *AK
HAD RECALL WORK DONE, WIPED MEMORY OF RADIO AND CLOCK, BATTERY NEEDS CONSTANTLY TO BE JUMPED. *AK
ENGINE FAN FAILED.
FULLER FORD 96V071. DEALER CHARGES OWNER $81.65 FOR A DIAGNOSTIC TEST BEFORE PERFORMING THE RECALL ORDER. *AK
Official recalls
196V071000 · Electrical System:ignition
Apr 25, 1996
THE IGNITION SWITCH COULD EXPERIENCE AN INTERNAL SHORT CIRCUIT.
Consequence & remedy
Consequence: THIS CONDITION COULD CAUSE OVERHEATING, SMOKE, AND POSSIBLY FIRE IN THE STEERING COLUMN AREA OF THE VEHICLE.
Remedy: DEALERS WILL REPLACE THE IGNITION SWITCH.
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
4PE96005 · Rear Brk Adjuster Failure
Opened Jan 19, 1996 · Closed May 28, 1996
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic
1984 - 1991 FORD TEMPO/MERCURY TOPAZ
DP96002 · Rear Brake System Failure
Opened Jan 11, 1996 · Closed Jan 19, 1996
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Service Brakes, Hydraulic
There is no summary currently available
EA91052 · Seat Belt Separation
Opened Nov 27, 1991 · Closed Nov 24, 1992
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seat Belts
There is no summary currently available
EA90008 · Failed Passive Restraint
Opened Dec 27, 1989 · Closed Dec 31, 1991
Status: closed (inferred from source dates) · Seat Belts
WE HAVE RECEIVED NUMEROUS REPORTS WHICH ALLEGE A MALFUNCTION OR FAILURE OF THE PASSIVE RESTRAINT SYSTEM.ADDITIONAL REPORTS ALLEGE THAT THE PASSIVE RESTRAINT SYSTEM FAILED TO RESTRAIN/ADEQUATELY PROTECT THE OCCUPANT DURING AN ACCIDENT