EQUIPMENT ADAPTIVE/MOBILITY
2006 Ford E-250
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 12 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2006 Ford E-250, most frequently naming the visibility, electrical and fuel system categories. 31 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 1 NHTSA investigation names it; and 47 manufacturer communications are on file.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Complaint activity over time
When owners filed reports about this model year
View as table
| Month | Complaints filed | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|
| Jan 2006 | 1 | 1 |
| Aug 2006 | 1 | 2 |
| Nov 2006 | 1 | 3 |
| Aug 2007 | 1 | 4 |
| Mar 2009 | 1 | 5 |
| Feb 2011 | 1 | 6 |
| Jan 2012 | 1 | 7 |
| Feb 2012 | 1 | 8 |
| Apr 2014 | 1 | 9 |
| Nov 2014 | 1 | 10 |
| Apr 2020 | 1 | 11 |
| Sep 2022 | 1 | 12 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Visibility214.3%
- Electrical214.3%
- Fuel system214.3%
- Other / unspecified214.3%
- Engine17.1%
- Tires & wheels17.1%
- Body & structure17.1%
- Brakes17.1%
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
Safety recalls
31 campaigns cover this model year
Recalls apply to specific vehicles, not to every vehicle of a model year. Check your VIN with NHTSA or your manufacturer's dealer to confirm whether a recall affects your vehicle.
Check a VIN on NHTSA.govEQUIPMENT ADAPTIVE/MOBILITY
EQUIPMENT ADAPTIVE/MOBILITY
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
HVAC Switch Failures
This investigation was opened based on one complaint and reports from four transportation fleets alleging 182 blower motor control switch failures.ODI was concerned that these melting and burning switches could lead to an open flame that could spread throughout the vehicle.After a comprehensive review of all data related to overheating blower motor control switches in the subject vehicles, ODI did not identify the existence of a safety defect trend.ODI reviewed 1,036 complaints, claims, and field reports of failed blower motor control switches and determined that only two fires were likely to have been caused by a failing subject blower motor control switch.This represents a failure rate of 0.2 R/100K on a population of 1,076,975 vehicles that have been in service for up to 14 years.ODI has found that when the subject switches do fail and begin to melt, they are constructed in a manner that typically prevents the failing switch from igniting and developing into an open flame.Ford Motor Company has agreed to take two actions to further reduce the likelihood an overheated blower motor switch in the subject vehicles.Ford informed ODI that it has implemented a series of design changes to the subject switch that will help prevent it from developing internal high resistance short circuits.Ford has also informed ODI that it would release a Technical Service Bulletin (TSB-11-11-21) instructing subject vehicle owners to replace the electrical connector at the same time a failed switch is replaced.In light of the low rate of failure resulting in open flame and fire spread on the subject vehicles, and Ford's actions to reduce the likelihood of a switch failure through switch design changes and a TSB, further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.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.The ODI complaints cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID under the following (ODI) numbers: 10427875, 10114393, 10257890For additional information, see the attached closing report.
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
When I go to the lake boating, I always remove my battery from the engine compartment and take it with me as a backup in case my boat battery should fail. on September 26, 2022, when leaving the lake, I reinstalled the battery bas I always do and closed the hood. It appeared closed when the hood surface aligned with the side panel. After leaving the boat ramp I turned onto FM 2272 and was accelerating to the posted speed limit of 55. At 40 mph, all of a sudden, the hood flew up into the windshield shattering it from one side of the vehicle to the other. My view of the road was completely obstructed as I was covered in pieces of broken glass. Fortunately, I was able to see the white lane marker through the bottom of the windshield as there was about a 3-inch gap between the bottom of the hood and the bottom of the windshield so I could safely pull my vehicle off the roadway. I know I closed the hood before leaving the boat ramp and even if I hadn't fully closed the hood the secondary hood latch should have prevented the accident from occurring. The secondary. latch is not dependent on the release mechanism and is 100% a mechanical device requiring a person to physically push on the release lever under the hood in order to open it. Had the hood opened while I was on an interstate highway or at night the accident could have been fatal.
- NHTSA ID
- 11486809
- Incident
- Sep 26, 2022
WE PURCHASED A VEHICLE FROM GASCAR AUTO IN MIAMI, FLORIDA ON DECEMBER 31ST, 2019. WE DROVE IT BACK TO MINNESOTA. IT TOOK US 4 MONTHS AND OVER 30 PHONE CALLS TO GET THEM TO SEND US THE TITLE-WHICH THEY WROTE DATE OF SALE AS 4/19/2020. WE JUST RAN THE VEHICLES VIN, (THE DEALERSHIP HAD ALSO RAN A CARFAX, BUT NOT DISCLOSED TO US AN ACCIDENT OR THE DISCREPANCY IN MILEAGE) AND DISCOVERED THE ODOMETER HAD BEEN ROLLED BACK TO READ 100,000 LESS MILES THAN WE WERE TOLD WE WERE PURCHASING IT WITH. WE WERE UNDER THE IMPRESSION WE WERE BUYING WHAT WE WERE TOLD WE WERE BUYING ON THE ODOMETER DISCLOSURE FORM, NOT A VEHICLE WITH 100K MORE MILES. HAD WE KNOWN THAT, AND HAD WE KNOWN THE COMPANY WOULD FALSIFY THE DATES ON THE TITLE AND REFUSE TO GIVE IT TO US, WE NEVER WOULD HAVE PURCHASED THE VEHICLE. THEY LIED ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS ABOUT SENDING THE TITLE, AND IT TOOK A NOTIFICATION OUR ATTORNEY WAS INVOLVED TO GET THEM TO MAIL IT AFTER 4 MONTHS. IN CONTACTING THE DEALER TODAY, HE TOLD US IT ISNT HIS PROBLEM BECAUSE HE HAD "EXEMPT" WRITTEN ON THE FRONT OF THE TITLE. HOWEVER, HE DID FILL OUT THE ODOMETER DISCLOSURE, HE DID FALSIFY THE DATE OF SALE, AND HE DID SELL US A TITLE THAT HAD APPARENTLY ORIGINALLY BEEN PURCHASED BY HIS DEALERSHIP MORE THAN 1 YEAR PRIOR, THOUGH HE NEVER TRANSFERRED THE TITLE TO THE DEALERSHIP FROM THE PREVIOUS OWNER. I AM INCLUDING DOCUMENTATION OF ALL OF THIS.
- NHTSA ID
- 11322109
- Incident
- Dec 31, 2019
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD E250. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE HEATER SWITCH MELTED WITHOUT WARNING. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO A MECHANIC WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT THE SWITCH NEEDED TO BE REPLACED. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS UNKNOWN. THE CONTACT OWNS A FLEET OF VEHICLES WITH THE SAME FAILURE.
- NHTSA ID
- 10654652
- Incident
- Nov 9, 2004
I HAVE BEEN CONTACTED BY THE MANUFACTURER THAT THESE TIRES ARE SUBJECT TO A RECALL (RECALL # 13T-012) AND MUST BE REPLACED DUE TO A SAFETY HAZARD. YET THESE TIRES ARE ON NATIONAL BACKORDER WITH MICHELIN, AND NOONE AROUND HERE (SANTA ROSA, CA) HAS ANY, NOR DO THEY HAVE ANY OF THE OTHER TWO SERIES THAT MICHELIN OFFERS AS A SUITABLE REPLACEMENT (LTXA/T2 OR XPS RIB). AND THERE ARE VERY FEW ALTERNATES THAT ANYONE CAN OFFER ME. AS I SEE IT, I AM DRIVING ON TIRES THAT MICHELIN SAYS ARE UNSAFE, YET THEY HAVE NO SIMPLE SOLUTION TO REPLACE THEM WITH ANOTHER ONE OF THEIR TIRES THAT DOESN'T INVOLVE ME SPENDING A LOT MORE TIME THAN I ALREADY HAVE TO BASICALLY DO THEIR JOB. WE BUY MICHELIN FOR THEIR NAME AND QUALITY, YET THEY ARE BAILING ON ME AS A CONSUMER TO MAKE AN ALTERNATE CHOICE ON MANUFACTURERS AND/OR TIRE DISTRIBUTORS THAT I KNOW NOTHING ABOUT. THANK YOU MICHELIN. *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10576893
- Incident
- Apr 2, 2014
I OWN I FORD FREESTYLE, I AM CURRENTLY REPLACING THE THROTTLE BODY FOR THE SECOND TIME. IT TOOK A MECHANIC MUCH TRIAL AND ERROR TO FIND THE PROBLEM, WHICH COST ME A GREAT DEAL OF MONEY. THE CAR STARTED ACTING THE SAME WAY YESTERDAY! THIS HAS BEEN THE 2ND TIME IN LESS THAN A YEAR! I WISH I COULD GIVE THIS CAR BACK TO FORD! IF THERE IS ANYTHING...ANY KIND OF RECOURSE PLEASE GIVE ME INFORMATION. THANK YOU.... *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10448846
- Incident
- Aug 18, 2011
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2006 FORD ECONLINE E250. THE CONTACT STATED THAT AFTER EXITING THE VEHICLE, THE SMELL OF GASOLINE FUEL EMITTED FROM UNDER THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT CONFIRMED THAT THE ODOR WAS CAUSED BY A LEAK IN THE FUEL LINE ASSEMBLY. THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER WHERE THE FAILURE WAS CONFIRMED. THE MANUFACTURER WAS CONTACTED AND THEY ADVISED THE CONTACT THAT THE VIN DID NOT QUALIFY FOR REPAIRS UNDER NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER:08V057000 ( FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:FUEL INJECTION SYSTEM:FUEL RAIL). THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 56,400 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 56,500.
- NHTSA ID
- 10442252
- Incident
- Dec 8, 2011
- Mileage
- 56,400 mi
SPARK PLUG EJECTION ON CYLINDER #4, BROKEN TREAD ON CYLINDER. *LN
- NHTSA ID
- 10379792
- Incident
- Jan 19, 2011
- Mileage
- 50,000 mi
FRONT PADS AND ROTORS,FRONT UPPER AND LOWER BALL,JOINTS. REAR LOADED CALIPERS,TWO REAR ROTORS REPLACED ON 43,664 MI. 2006 FORD E-250. *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10260368
- Incident
- Feb 27, 2009
- Mileage
- 43,664 mi
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
When performing any transmission fluid changes or topoffs involving MERCON SP, MERCON LV has replaced all versions of MERCON SP and can be used going forward. Mixing MERCON LV and MERCON SP in the same transmission is acceptable. After 30-Jun-2023, MERCON SP ATF will no longer be manufactured and will only be available until inventory depletes.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM: INTEGRATED TRAILER BRAKE CONTROL; ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:SOFTWARE; TRAILER HITCHES
These SKUs are Trailer Brake Control Modules. The customer communication requested return of unsold inventory due to an internal software issue. The internal software issue leads to a false check trailer brake message and Trailer Brake Controller fault whenever the brake pedal is pressed. This will cause the part to be replaced, due to repetitive dashboard warning light, even though it sends signals to the trailer brakes properly.
POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
FORD: WHEN SHIFTING BETWEEN PARK, REVERSE AND/OR DURING 2-3 SHIFT, AN INTERMITTENT CLUNK OCCURS WITH A TORQSHIFT TRANSMISSION. MODEL 2003-2014 F-SUPER DUTY, E SERIES, EXCURSION, F-53 MOTORHOME CHASSIS, LOW CAB FORWARD. *PE
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:DIESEL; POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION:TORQUE CONVERTER
FORD: ON SOME TRUCKS, THERE IS A NO CRANK SITUATION AND IF VOLTAGE ON TRANSMISSION RANGE SENSOR AT PIN 21, IS LESS THAN 5 VOLTS, DISCONNECT THE ENGINE COOLING FAN CLUTCH, ELECTRONICALLY, AND RECHECK VOLTAGE. MODEL 2003-2007 F SUPER DUTY, 2004-2010 E SERIES, 2003-2005 EXCURSION.
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:IGNITION:MODULE
ON SOME VEHICLES, WHEN THE GATEWAY 401 MODULE TRANSITIONS FROM ITS POWER DOWN MODE (IGNITION OFF) TO ITS POWER UP MODE (IGNITION ON) THE MODULE MAY NOT WAKE UP. IF THIS ACTION OCCURS, THE MODULE'S LED DISPLAY PANELS WILL NOT PROVE-OUT AND THE BACKLIGHTS ON THE LED DISPLAY PANELS WILL NOT ILLUMINATE.
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE:DIESEL
LACK OF POWER DUE TO LOW FUEL PRESSURE - FUEL TANK LINER SEPERATION. *KB
Manufacturers file copies of the bulletins they send to dealers with NHTSA. These often describe diagnostic or repair procedures for a known condition. They are not recalls: repairs described in a bulletin are usually only free if the vehicle is still under warranty or the manufacturer has extended coverage.
Compare model years
Complaint and recall counts across every year of this model
| Year | Complaints | Recalls | Investigations | Issue Index |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2022 | 1 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2021 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2020 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2019 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2018 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2017 | 2 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2016 | 1 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2014 | 7 | 11 | 0 | — |
| 2013 | 11 | 11 | 0 | 49.1 |
| 2012 | 8 | 12 | 0 | — |
| 2011 | 6 | 18 | 0 | — |
| 2010 | 9 | 13 | 0 | — |
| 2009 | 2 | 19 | 0 | — |
| 2008 | 6 | 22 | 1 | — |
| 2007 | 6 | 27 | 1 | — |
| 2006Viewing | 12 | 31 | 1 | 60.4 |
| 2005 | 11 | 11 | 1 | 61.1 |
| 2004 | 8 | 18 | 2 | — |
| 2003 | 17 | 8 | 2 | 65.8 |
| 2002 | 17 | 5 | 2 | 61.4 |
| 2001 | 18 | 3 | 2 | 62.3 |
| 2000 | 18 | 5 | 2 | 63.2 |
| 1999 | 31 | 6 | 2 | 58.8 |
| 1998 | 16 | 5 | 2 | 53.0 |
| 1997 | 24 | 4 | 3 | 62.4 |
| 1996 | 20 | 3 | 0 | 48.6 |
| 1995 | 15 | 3 | 0 | 55.1 |
| 1994 | 11 | 3 | 1 | 51.4 |
| 1993 | 7 | 3 | 1 | — |
| 1992 | 14 | 3 | 3 | 61.2 |
| 1991 | 8 | 1 | 5 | — |
| 1990 | 4 | 2 | 6 | — |
| 1989 | 7 | 2 | 5 | — |
| 1988 | 2 | 0 | 4 | — |
| 1987 | 0 | 2 | 3 | — |
| 1986 | 0 | 3 | 4 | — |
| 1985 | 2 | 5 | 4 | — |
| 1984 | 2 | 6 | 3 | — |
| 1983 | 0 | 6 | 1 | — |
| 1982 | 0 | 3 | 1 | — |
| 1981 | 0 | 1 | 1 | — |
| 1980 | 1 | 2 | 1 | — |
| 1979 | 1 | 4 | 1 | — |
| 1978 | 1 | 6 | 1 | — |
| 1977 | 0 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1976 | 0 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1975 | 0 | 5 | 0 | — |
Higher-selling and older vehicles accumulate more reports. Counts are not failure rates and are not directly comparable between vehicles that sold in very different numbers. Older model years have had longer for reports to accumulate.