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 attempting to reverse, the rear-view camera became inoperable. The contact stated that the rearview camera image was intermittently functional. 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 vehicle was taken to the dealer, who confirmed that parts were not yet available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure and referred the contact to the dealer for additional assistance. The approximate failure mileage was 100,000.

NHTSA ID

11776195

Incident

Nov 6, 2026

Mileage

100,000 mi

See attached document for complaint.

NHTSA ID

11776156

Incident

Jul 6, 2026

See attached document for complaint.

NHTSA ID

11776027

Incident

Jul 21, 2026

The contact owns a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 25V695000 (Back Over Prevention); however, the part to complete the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that while reversing, the rear-view camera failed to operate and displayed a blank screen. The dealer was contacted and confirmed that parts to complete the recall repair were not yet available. The dealer informed the contact that Mustang models were prioritized for parts. The contact stated that the manufacturer exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 120,000.

NHTSA ID

11775964

Incident

Nov 5, 2026

Mileage

120,000 mi

The contact owns a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact stated that while attempting to reverse, the rear-view camera became inoperable. The contact stated that the image was intermittently displayed. 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 dealer was contacted, but the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The dealer confirmed that parts were not yet available. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 56,000.

NHTSA ID

11774714

Incident

Oct 30, 2026

Mileage

56,000 mi

The contact owns a 2015 Ford Explorer. The contact stated that while in reverse(R), the rear-view camera intermittently displayed a blank or distorted image. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 25V695000 (Back Over Prevention); however, the part to do the recall repair was unavailable. The contact stated that the manufacturer had exceeded a reasonable amount of time for the recall repair. The dealer was contacted and informed the contact that parts were not yet available for the recall repair. The failure mileage was approximately 100,000.

NHTSA ID

11774614

Incident

Mar 1, 2025

Mileage

100,000 mi

Ford officially announced Safety Recall 25SA9 in October 2025 regarding a defective rearview camera affecting my 2015 Ford Explorer. I have actively inquired about getting this safety defect fixed at my local dealership, Century Ford in Mt. Airy, MD, for at least two years. However, Ford has continuously failed to provide a remedy due to a persistent "parts unavailability" delay. Under federal law, manufacturers are required to remedy safety defects within a reasonable timeframe. It has now been a full year since the recall became official, and two years since the issue was first raised, with no resolution or timeline in sight. This extended delay is completely unacceptable, compromises vehicle safety, and constitutes a failure to remedy the defect in a timely manner. I am filing this official complaint to request NHTSA intervention regarding Ford's failure to supply necessary repair parts to consumers.

NHTSA ID

11774346

Incident

Oct 1, 2025

Out of nowhere the steering assist quit when i turned on the car in question on to go work in the morning. Luckily for everybody it did not happen while on the road like many of the cases i have read about. Now i’m facing a $3,000 bill to repair a very common problem Ford refuses to recall.

NHTSA ID

11773639

Incident

Oct 26, 2026

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.