2015 Ford Explorer

On January 27, 2023, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE23-001 to investigate allegations of A-pillar trim panel detachment on model year (MY) 2011-2019 Ford Explorer vehicles. At the time of opening, the office had received 164 Vehicle Owner Questionnaires (VOQs) reporting this failure. ODI has received 671 VOQs regarding this failure, including 1 alleged crash and 2 alleged injuries. Some consumers have reported that the failure occurred while they were driving at highway speeds, with the detached trim panel entering the path of travel of the vehicle behind them, requiring the driver of the following vehicle to take evasive action. It is noteworthy that motorists who experience this type of road hazard are less likely to accurately identify the subject vehicle the item detached from and report the event to the NHTSA. In its April 17, 2023 response to ODI’s information request, Ford provided 175 consumer complaints (including field reports) and 14,162 warranty claims related to A-pillar trim panel detachment. Ford relayed that the subject vehicles utilize a plastic A-pillar bracket, which is bolted to the vehicle structure during assembly. The A-pillar trim panel is attached to the bracket utilizing 7 plastic clips. Contributory factors which have been identified by Ford as leading to the subject defect include incomplete installation at the assembly plant, inadequate part stack up, damage to fasteners during installation, and failure to follow proper repair procedure during windshield replacements or other services. On January 19, 2024, Ford filed safety recall 24V-031 for MY 2011-2019 Ford Explorer vehicles to address the subject defect. In the Part 573 Safety Recall Report, Ford identified that a detached A-pillar trim panel can create a road hazard for other road users, increasing the risk of a crash. The recall remedy includes an inspection of the existing A-pillar trim panel and, if necessary, the replacement of the component. The remedy A-pillar trim panels will be installed with an additional adhesive for robustness and utilize an inspection procedure to ensure full engagement of all the retention clips during installation. In view of the recall action being taken by Ford, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.

During the EA17-002 investigation, the agency reviewed and analyzed reports of exhaust odors in the passenger cabins of Model Year 2011 to 2017 Ford Explorers. This investigation required an approach that incorporated knowledge and expertise from the automotive, medical, environmental health, and occupational safety fields. The agency conducted an in-depth investigation that encompassed the review of over 6,500 consumer complaints, conducting field inspections, and testing the relevant vehicles, both independently and in coordination with Ford and other entities. During the investigation, the evolution of Ford service bulletins intended to reduce the level of exhaust odors and carbon monoxide (CO) entering the occupant compartment was examined and independent tests to evaluate the effectiveness of the final Field Service Actions (FSA) for both consumer and police vehicles were conducted. As part of the investigation, the agency also examined the effects of cracked exhaust mani-cats on the measured CO levels in the vehicles and tested the FSA repairs to ensure they did not adversely impact occupant compartment CO levels due to cracked mani-cats.The investigation identified upfitting issues for Police Interceptor vehicles. Upfitting (sirens, lights, cages, auxiliary power, etc.) is typically performed by governmental fleet operations, independent repair facilities, or local Ford dealers after the sale of the new vehicle. Sealing issues caused by upfitting were responsible for the highest measured carbon monoxide levels in tested vehicles. The police FSA instructs how to inspect the quality of the vehicle upfits and how to properly seal any leaks caused by these upfits, at no cost to the police agency. Similarly, the highest CO levels measured in consumer vehicles were usually traced to sealing issues caused by rear crash damage where the repairs did not ensure sealing integrity. The most recent Ford FSA procedure for both the police (17B25) and consumer vehicles (17N03) includes an HVAC reprogramming operation. Tests by Ford and NHTSA have demonstrated a substantial reduction of CO levels due solely to the HVAC reprogramming. Other FSA repairs also demonstrated measurable contributions to CO level reductions during controlled tests.Throughout the investigation, vehicles accurately measured with higher levels of carbon monoxide were almost always affected by upfitter alterations, damage, or other causes compromising rear passenger cabin seals.NHTSA received thousands of reports alleging odors which triggered a variety of physiological responses, predominately nausea, headaches, and lightheadedness. NHTSA focused the investigation on accurately measuring vehicle CO levels, and accurately measuring carboxyhemoglobin (COHB) levels from properly administered blood tests. Using rigorous test methods to produce exhaust gas intrusion in vehicles with a properly performed FSA, occupant compartment CO levels remained below current environmental limits for CO in any environment (EPA ambient air quality standards). Furthermore, even without FSA repairs, no vehicles unaffected by upfitter issues or prior crash damage were identified with CO levels that exceed accepted occupational CO exposure levels. This investigation finds that the 2011-2017 Ford Explorer vehicles when accurately measured produce occupant compartment CO levels which fall below current accepted health standards, and could not identify COHB levels for vehicle drivers or other occupants, which exceeded thresholds for acute physiological effects. Therefore, the agency has not identified a defect that represents an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety.This inve

During the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration?s (NHTSA?s) investigation into the Ford carbon monoxide allegations, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) identified additional Vehicle Owner Questionnaire (VOQ) reports with similar exhaust odor claims.Presently, ODI has identified 791 VOQs for Model Year 2011-2017 Ford Explorers pertaining to exhaust odor claims.ODI has identified three crashes and 41 injuries potentially linked this issue.The reported injuries range from unspecified to loss of consciousness, with the majority being nausea, headaches, or dizziness ? all of which can be symptomatic of carbon monoxide exposure.Additionally, Ford provided 2,400 reports including owner complaints, warranty claims, dealer field reports, and legal claims, that involve 2,051 vehicles that may be connected to the exhaust odor issue.NHTSA's Vehicle Test and Research Center tested multiple vehicles, including complaint vehicles, during the investigation.ODI also conducted field inspections of complaint vehicles and crashes involving police units that occurred while the officers were on duty.When possible, data was collected to quantify carbon monoxide levels in the examined vehicles.Based on the information gathered to date, NHTSA upgraded this investigation to an Engineering Analysis (EA17-002).

On April 29, 2015, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE15-017 to investigate a report alleging incidents of front brake hose failure in model year (MY) 2015 Ford Explorer Police Interceptor vehicles used by the Sacramento Police Department in its pursuit driving training program (VOQ 10705832).On September 28, 2015, ODI upgraded the investigation to an Engineering Analysis (EA15-005) to assess maximum front caliper crimp temperatures under various test conditions, test hose assemblies removed from police interceptor service for any signs of thermal degradation, and further assess field data for evidence of a defect trend related to the alleged defect.The alleged defect results from exposure to extremely high heat at the caliper-side hose crimp. NHTSA?s vehicle testing suggests that the conditions necessary to produce the critical temperatures in the subject components result from drive-soak intervals that can occur during the Sacramento training program.NHTSA's testing of hose assemblies returned from police interceptor service did not identify any evidence of thermal degradation.NHTSA has not confirmed any incidents of caliper crimp failures due to overheating in vehicles not subjected to the Sacramento training course driving.The low number of hose assembly failure reports and the absence of any verified incidents of heat related front brake hose crimp failures since 2015 suggests that the Sacramento PD incidents resulted from conditions unique to the training program.A safety related defect trend 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 a safety-related defect does not exist.The Agency will take further action if warranted by the circumstances.For additional information, see the Closing Report in the document file for EA15-005 on www.nhtsa.gov.

The contact owns a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact stated that while reversing at an undisclosed speed, the rear-view camera was intermittently inoperable. The message "Rear-view Camera Unavailable - Contact Dealer" was displayed on the instrument panel. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 25V695000 (Back Over Prevention); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. A local dealer was contacted and stated that parts were only available for Ford Mustang vehicles. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair.

NHTSA ID

11766440

Incident

Aug 11, 2025

The contact owned a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact stated that while driving, the front windshield trim detached from the vehicle. Additionally, the ABS warning light illuminated on the instrument panel, and the "Service Advancetrac" message was displayed. Additionally, the message “Transmission not in Park” was displayed. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The vehicle was taken to a dealer where it was diagnosed with gear shifter failure and an obsolete instrument panel.

NHTSA ID

11765973

Incident

Sep 21, 2026

The contact owns a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact stated that the rear-view camera displayed incorrectly, causing the screen to go blank or forcing the image to appear reversed, shifted, or upside down. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 25V695000 (Back Over Prevention); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The local dealer was contacted. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the issue.

NHTSA ID

11765888

Incident

Sep 21, 2026

Oil smell in vehicle cabin, most likely from ptu, based on the oil smell.

NHTSA ID

11765711

Incident

Sep 15, 2026

Driving down road and A pillar trim started to vibrate. Eventually while driving within 2 hour the lower part of the pillar raised up and flopped in wind. It was inspected and rejected for recall replacement in April 2025. Visual inspection by dealer service writer states the a pillar trims definitely meets the requirement for replacement but recall has expired

NHTSA ID

11765710

Incident

Sep 15, 2026

Failure of replaced toelinks to be properly torque or design flaw. The toelinks continue to slide out of alignment and kick bottomf of both tires out. Causes instability in car, issues with differential and unnecessary wear of rear tires.

NHTSA ID

11765707

Incident

Aug 15, 2026

The rear view camera display has intermittently not worked for over 2+ years. It appears blank or distorted and says contact your dealer. This happens about 80% of the time. I originally contacted the dealer about 18 mos ago, when this started happening and they said "they'd never heard of it" and in Oct. 2025 received a recall notice. The recall notice from Ford is Safety Recall Notice 25SA9/NHTSA Recall 25V695. I have called multiple times to the dealer to get this repaired as it's a safety issue! I called again today, Sept. 18th, and they said the parts are not available for the 2015 Ford Explorer, only other Fords listed on the recall. This needs to be addressed ASAP and parts made available. There are multiple safety issues on the 2015 Ford Explorer sport that are safety concerns, and Ford never addresses them in a timely manner.

NHTSA ID

11765307

Incident

Dec 31, 1969

I have reported this multiple times here and to Ford. The 2015 Ford explorer sport bucket seats in the back seat have defective seat belts. They do not release properly and in fact 1 of the 2 I had a child get STUCK in the seatbelt. I have been told by Ford dealer, and an outside service center, and I've looked it up as well online that over 200+ppl have complained of this issue. SEATBELTs that are LOCKED/DO NOT RELEASE is a huge safety issue!Yes this problem has been confirmed by Ford and an independent service center. No warnings occurred when this happened. This first appeared over 4 years ago and FORD has done NOTHING to address it!

NHTSA ID

11765294

Incident

Sep 1, 2023

Ford and Lincoln vehicles equipped with wired keyless entry keypad systems and accessory wireless keyless entry keypad systems may or may not come with a wallet card containing the master code. Unlike the integrated wired keypad, the accessory wireless keypad master code cannot be retrieved from the vehicle using a diagnostic scan tool or from the label printed on the body control module (BCM). The Factory Keyless Entry Code application within the diagnostic scan tool will not provide an applicable master code for the accessory wireless keypad. If the wallet card for an accessory keypad is not available, the "Wireless RF Keypad Diagnosis Guide" can be referenced and provides direction on how to retrieve the master code. This guide is located under the Workshop Manual tab > Accessories > Installation > Wireless RF Keypad Diagnosis Guide > PPT C > Step C2.<br /><br /> Note: The only available keypad for some vehicles from the assembly plant is the accessory wireless keyless entry keypad. The integrated wired keypad cannot be installed on vehicles not equipped from the factory with a wired keyless entry k

Some 2015-2021 Ford and Lincoln vehicles may exhibit an illuminated MIL with diagnostic trouble codes (DTCs) P0011, P0012, P0014, P0015, P0016, P0017, P0018, P0019, P0021, P0022, P0024 and/or P0025. Pinpoint test HK in the Powertrain Control and Emissions Diagnosis (PC/ED) or in Section 303-14 of the Workshop Manual (WSM) has been updated to address this concern.

While performing a transmission repair on some 2012-2024 Ford and Lincoln vehicles, a transmission seal kit may be on backorder due to supply chain interruptions. While performing a transmission repair on some 2012-2024 Ford and Lincoln vehicles, a transmission seal kit may be on backorder due to supply chain interruptions.

All accessory stick-on keyless entry keypads come with a wallet card containing the master code. If the accessory keypad was factory installed, this card will be placed in the glove box and should be handed to the vehicles owner during initial delivery. Unlike the integrated (wired) factory keypad, the accessory keypad master code cannot be retrieved from the vehicle using a diagnostic scan tool. If the wallet card for an accessory keypad is lost, follow these steps to recover the code. Dealer Key Code access is granted through the Dealer Program Enrollment System (DPES); dealership management can authorize users. The authorized user must go to FMCDealer.com > Parts and Service > Parts Product Line Information > Keys/Entry Devices > Aftermarket Keyless Entry Keypad Code Access. Follow the instructions on the screen to obtain the master code for the accessory keypad.

For 2015-2024 Ford and Lincoln vehicles equipped with turbocharged engines and customer concern of an engine oil leak, refer to Workshop Manual (WSM), Section 303-00 for oil leak inspection and testing methods. Ford has evaluated turbochargers replaced for oil leak symptoms and although oil may collect on the external surface of a turbocharger, it is extremely rare for a turbocharger assembly to be the root cause of the oil leak. Careful inspection of the turbocharger oil feed and drain tubes should be performed along with the recommended WSM procedures as needed. Warranty claims for turbocharger replacement going forward will be assessed.

During service and repair requiring removal and replacement of a crankshaft bolt and/or crankshaft damper, achieving proper torque of the crankshaft pulley bolt is critical. Incorrect torque may allow the bolt to loosen resulting in the timing gear breaking and engine damage. Replacement of the bolt is critical to the repair and accurately following the installation procedure in the Workshop Manual (WSM) Section, 303-01 is extremely important. The bolt torque procedure can be found in the crankshaft front seal removal and installation procedure or in the engine assembly procedure.