ELECTRICAL SYSTEM: INSTRUMENT CLUSTER/PANEL
2017 Ford F-150
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 1,401 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2017 Ford F-150, most frequently naming the powertrain (other), engine and electrical categories. 18 safety recalls have been issued covering this model year; 3 NHTSA investigations name it; and 343 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Sep 2021 | 7 | 387 |
| Oct 2021 | 7 | 394 |
| Nov 2021 | 10 | 404 |
| Dec 2021 | 4 | 408 |
| Jan 2022 | 7 | 415 |
| Feb 2022 | 11 | 426 |
| Mar 2022 | 12 | 438 |
| Apr 2022 | 4 | 442 |
| May 2022 | 10 | 452 |
| Jun 2022 | 7 | 459 |
| Jul 2022 | 7 | 466 |
| Aug 2022 | 13 | 479 |
| Sep 2022 | 7 | 486 |
| Oct 2022 | 3 | 489 |
| Nov 2022 | 6 | 495 |
| Dec 2022 | 16 | 511 |
| Jan 2023 | 9 | 520 |
| Feb 2023 | 12 | 532 |
| Mar 2023 | 18 | 550 |
| Apr 2023 | 8 | 558 |
| May 2023 | 9 | 567 |
| Jun 2023 | 14 | 581 |
| Jul 2023 | 15 | 596 |
| Aug 2023 | 16 | 612 |
| Sep 2023 | 9 | 621 |
| Oct 2023 | 17 | 638 |
| Nov 2023 | 9 | 647 |
| Dec 2023 | 14 | 661 |
| Jan 2024 | 20 | 681 |
| Feb 2024 | 8 | 689 |
| Mar 2024 | 12 | 701 |
| Apr 2024 | 22 | 723 |
| May 2024 | 14 | 737 |
| Jun 2024 | 20 | 757 |
| Jul 2024 | 32 | 789 |
| Aug 2024 | 23 | 812 |
| Sep 2024 | 30 | 842 |
| Oct 2024 | 11 | 853 |
| Nov 2024 | 15 | 868 |
| Dec 2024 | 20 | 888 |
| Jan 2025 | 27 | 915 |
| Feb 2025 | 14 | 929 |
| Mar 2025 | 51 | 980 |
| Apr 2025 | 27 | 1,007 |
| May 2025 | 25 | 1,032 |
| Jun 2025 | 28 | 1,060 |
| Jul 2025 | 30 | 1,090 |
| Aug 2025 | 13 | 1,103 |
| Sep 2025 | 23 | 1,126 |
| Oct 2025 | 19 | 1,145 |
| Nov 2025 | 9 | 1,154 |
| Dec 2025 | 14 | 1,168 |
| Jan 2026 | 12 | 1,180 |
| Feb 2026 | 68 | 1,248 |
| Mar 2026 | 27 | 1,275 |
| Apr 2026 | 24 | 1,299 |
| May 2026 | 46 | 1,345 |
| Jun 2026 | 24 | 1,369 |
| Jul 2026 | 19 | 1,388 |
| Aug 2026 | 13 | 1,401 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Powertrain (other)51032.1%
- Engine36122.7%
- Electrical1267.9%
- Brakes1106.9%
- Body & structure1106.9%
- Driver assistance825.2%
- Steering573.6%
- Visibility533.3%
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
18 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.govPOWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS:MASTER CYLINDER; SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:POWER ASSIST
Safety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
Unintended Transmission Downshift and Rear Wheel Lock-up
On March 21, 2025, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE25002) to investigate instances of unexpected transmission downshifting without driver input in model year (MY) 2015-2017 Ford F-150 vehicles (subject vehicles) manufactured by Ford Motor Company (Ford). The complaints allege that, without warning or driver input, the subject vehicles experienced a sudden and rapid deceleration often accompanied by temporary rear wheel lockup, seizure, or skidding, resulting in a loss of vehicle control that increases the risk of crash and injury to all motorists, including those not within the subject vehicles. The MY 2015 and MY 2016 F-150 vehicles were equipped with the “6R80” transmission, while the MY 2017 vehicles were equipped with either the “6R80” transmission or the “10R80” transmission. This investigation was limited to MY 2015-2017 Ford F-150 with the “6R80” transmission. ODI identified 329 Vehicle Owners Questionnaires (VOQs) related to this investigation and sixty percent of these consumers were interviewed to confirm the details of their allegations. Consumers reported that their vehicles’ transmission suddenly downshifted to a lower gear, often to 1st or 2nd gear, without driver input or advance warning. Consumers described the downshift events to be regular and repeated occurrences, with some consumers stating that they no longer drive the vehicle due to safety concerns. Forty-three percent of consumers reported experiencing at least one wheel lockup event, during which the rear tires locked, screeched, or skidded during the transmission downshift. ODI also found that 114 of the 329 consumers reported having their vehicle’s molded lead frame or valve body assembly (which comes with a molded lead frame) replaced, 80 of which were confirmed through consumer submitted repair invoices. In its response to ODI’s Information Request, Ford provided an assessment of potential root cause of failure for the subject vehicles and how this failure is different from the failure associated with MY 2011-2014 Ford F-150 vehicles that was addressed by four safety recalls (16V-248, 19V-075, 19V-433, and 24V-444). Ford has identified that the defect in the recalled vehicle population involved lead frame supplier production issues resulting in signal loss from the Output Shaft Speed (OSS) sensor. Ford has identified that the alleged defect in the subject vehicle population involved degradation of electrical connections within the lead frame due to thermal cycling and vibration over extended time in service resulting in signal loss from the Transmission Range Sensor (TRS). Signal loss from the TRS can result in an unintended shift to neutral, unintended upshift, or unintended downshift which are regulated by a gear “shift map” based on the vehicle’s speed at the time of signal loss. According to Ford’s “shift map”, at speeds between 35-64 mph, the maximum allowable downshift would be to 2nd gear (i.e. a 6th to 2nd gear downshift event) which Ford has designated to represent the worst-case scenario for subject vehicles. Ford has also acknowledged that the worst-case scenario may also involve temporary wheel lockup. However, Ford has stated that the failure mechanism in the MY 2011-2014 F-150 vehicles—previously addressed through recalls—primarily involved OSS sensor signal loss that could result in 6th to 1st gear downshift events. This OSS-related failure mode is distinct from the TRS-related signal loss identified in the subject vehicle population. ODI has identified an additional potential safety defect associated with the alleged defect in the subject vehicles. Preliminary testing performed by NHTSA’s Vehicle Research Test Center (VRTC) showed that when the TRS experiences an intermittent signal loss, one possible outcome is a change in vehicle direction. Specifically, if a vehicle is operating in reverse up an incline when the TRS signal loss occurs, then the vehicle may shift into neutral causing the vehicle to change directions and roll forward. ODI is opening this Engineering Analysis (EA) to, among other things, perform component-level testing and vehicle testing, as well as review additional technical information to better understand the alleged defect that has been identified. To review the reports cited in the Opening Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
Unintended Transmission Downshift and Rear Wheel Lock-up
On March 21, 2025, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this Preliminary Evaluation (PE25002) to investigate instances of unexpected transmission downshifting without driver input in model year (MY) 2015-2017 Ford F-150 vehicles (subject vehicles) manufactured by Ford Motor Company (Ford). The complaints allege that, without warning or driver input, the subject vehicles experienced a sudden and rapid deceleration often accompanied by temporary rear wheel lockup, seizure, or skidding, resulting in a loss of vehicle control that increases the risk of crash and injury to all motorists, including those not within the subject vehicles. The MY 2015 and MY 2016 F-150 vehicles were equipped with the “6R80” transmission, while the MY 2017 vehicles were equipped with either the “6R80” transmission or the “10R80” transmission. This investigation was limited to MY 2015-2017 Ford F-150 with the “6R80” transmission. ODI identified 329 Vehicle Owners Questionnaires (VOQs) related to this investigation and sixty percent of these consumers were interviewed to confirm the details of their allegations. Consumers reported that their vehicles’ transmission suddenly downshifted to a lower gear, often to 1st or 2nd gear, without driver input or advance warning. Consumers described the downshift events to be regular and repeated occurrences, with some consumers stating that they no longer drive the vehicle due to safety concerns. Forty-three percent of consumers reported experiencing at least one wheel lockup event, during which the rear tires locked, screeched, or skidded during the transmission downshift. ODI also found that 114 of the 329 consumers reported having their vehicle’s molded lead frame or valve body assembly (which comes with a molded lead frame) replaced, 80 of which were confirmed through consumer submitted repair invoices. In its response to ODI’s Information Request, Ford provided an assessment of potential root cause of failure for the subject vehicles and how this failure is different from the failure associated with MY 2011-2014 Ford F-150 vehicles that was addressed by four safety recalls (16V-248, 19V-075, 19V-433, and 24V-444). Ford has identified that the defect in the recalled vehicle population involved lead frame supplier production issues resulting in signal loss from the Output Shaft Speed (OSS) sensor. Ford has identified that the alleged defect in the subject vehicle population involved degradation of electrical connections within the lead frame due to thermal cycling and vibration over extended time in service resulting in signal loss from the Transmission Range Sensor (TRS). Signal loss from the TRS can result in an unintended shift to neutral, unintended upshift, or unintended downshift which are regulated by a gear “shift map” based on the vehicle’s speed at the time of signal loss. According to Ford’s “shift map”, at speeds between 35-64 mph, the maximum allowable downshift would be to 2nd gear (i.e. a 6th to 2nd gear downshift event) which Ford has designated to represent the worst-case scenario for subject vehicles. Ford has also acknowledged that the worst-case scenario may also involve temporary wheel lockup. However, Ford has stated that the failure mechanism in the MY 2011-2014 F-150 vehicles—previously addressed through recalls—primarily involved OSS sensor signal loss that could result in 6th to 1st gear downshift events. This OSS-related failure mode is distinct from the TRS-related signal loss identified in the subject vehicle population. ODI has identified an additional potential safety defect associated with the alleged defect in the subject vehicles. Preliminary testing performed by NHTSA’s Vehicle Research Test Center (VRTC) showed that when the TRS experiences an intermittent signal loss, one possible outcome is a change in vehicle direction. Specifically, if a vehicle is operating in reverse up an incline when the TRS signal loss occurs, then the vehicle may shift into neutral causing the vehicle to change directions and roll forward. Based on NHTSA’s analysis of consumer data, information provided by Ford, and preliminary testing conducted by NHTSA’s VRTC, this Preliminary Evaluation is being upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA26001). During this Engineering Analysis, the agency plans to, among other things, perform component-level testing and vehicle testing, as well as review additional technical information to better understand the alleged defect that has been identified from this Preliminary Evaluation. To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.
Seatbelt Pretensioner Fire
On June 18, 2018, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE18-008) to investigate complaints alleging post-crash fires at the B pillar in the area of the seat belt pretensioners on MY 2014-2018 Ford F-150 Regular Cab, and Super Crew Cab Vehicles. On August 24, 2018, Ford Motor Company recalled (FSA 18S27 - NHTSA #18V568) the affected population. Ford's investigation found that some front seat belt pretensioners may generate sparks during deployment in excess of Ford's specification. Sparks in the pretensioner exhaust gases inside the lower portion of the B-pillar may subsequently ignite combustible components contained in the B-pillar, such as insulation or carpet, and may cause a subsequent vehicle fire. ODI also requested relevant information from other manufacturers to assess the potential scope of post-crash pretensioner fires. Ford will notify owners and require dealers to remove B-pillar insulation material and wiring harness tape, and install heat resistant tape, free of charge. The recall notification began September 28, 2018.Owners may contact Ford customer service at 1-866-436-7332.The VOQs associated with the closing of this investigation are: 11143035, 11130056, 11129828, 11128761, 11127993, 11127880, 11124717, 11123419, 11119651, 11119626, 11114065, 11113160, 11111822, 11097937, 11078447, 11014688
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
I scheduled an appointment for a recall on my truck. The appt was set for Monday. The dealership in Pensacola, FL picked up my vehicle and claims they do not have the ability to service the recall. However, prior to scheduling the appt, the truck was driven from Seguin, TX to Pensacola without any issues because we have a family emergency with my father in the hospital. Upon arriving in Pensacola, the issue that has the recall started so I immediately set the appt. The dealership has had my truck for 3 days and plans on holding it for an unknown amount of time as they do not know how to service the recall. The recall service would fix the issue my truck is experiencing, and I know the remedy does not take multiple days to perform. I need my truck back, but the dealership does not understand that I need to go back to Texas with my truck functioning properly. So, I just wanted to make a complaint about the dealership in Pensacola, FL having little to no knowledge about to perform the recall remedy and attempting to perform multiple services that will cost me money I do not have because I was not prepared to pay when the recall service should be free. Highly disappointed with them and the fact that I have no way to go back to Texas with my truck.
- NHTSA ID
- 11756587
- Incident
- Aug 12, 2026
Ford Motor Company put out a recall on the PCM. I had the recall performed and it has caused more damage to my truck. It now has eratic shifting, stuck gears, and going into limpmode. Ford Forums show that this is an ongoing issue after the reset is performed creating an unsafe vehicle to drive. The check engine light is now on and was not prior to this recall reset.
- NHTSA ID
- 11756355
- Incident
- Jul 13, 2026
While driving the trucks transmission gets stuck on a gear and then eventually shifts making the car jerk so hard that it cause some serious head banging. Scared to drive from horror stories of truck down shifting while on the highway. 10r80 problems.
- NHTSA ID
- 11756086
- Incident
- Jul 18, 2026
The contact owns a 2017 Ford F-150. The contact stated that after taking the vehicle to be serviced under NHTSA Campaign Number: 26V237000 (Power Train); the vehicle started making a loud clunking sound while shifting from reverse or drive. The dealer was not made aware of the failure. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 95,782.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755883
- Incident
- Aug 6, 2026
- Mileage
- 95,782 mi
My truck locks into a gear when driving, usually 3rd or 5th gear, but at times 1st or 6th gear. When I stop at an intersection it's difficult to start moving. At times it'll clear after driving awhile, but not always. Sometimes stopping and restarting the truck will help in the moment, but not always. This is a serious safety issue, especially when highway driving, or trying to start from a stop in traffic at an intersection. I took it to the dealer under the NHTSA Recall No.: 26V237. This didn't help the issue, and upon researching the issue I discovered that the Slead frame was the issue. so I took it back to the dealer and they did a diagnostic on it and said it was the Lead Frame, however, the proper code for that recall didn't appear so they would not replace the lead frame for me. The service manager advised me that he would submit it for the recall, however he has had three other vehicles in a week that were having the same issues, and Ford denied the repair. This is obviously not an isolated problem, and should be researched further and possibly a separate recall needs to be established for it.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755629
- Incident
- Jun 1, 2026
The contact owns a 2017 Ford F-150. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the check engine warning light illuminated. The vehicle was taken to the dealer, where it was diagnosed with cam phaser failure. The contact was informed that the cam phaser needed to be replaced. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure but provided no assistance. The contact was advised to contact the NHTSA Hotline to report the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 106,000.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755550
- Incident
- Aug 3, 2026
- Mileage
- 106,000 mi
The contact owns a 2017 Ford F-150. The contact stated that while driving on several occasions at various speeds, the transmission unexpectedly downshifted and the powertrain warning light illuminated. The contact received notification of NHTSA Campaign Number: 26V237000 (Power Train). The vehicle was taken to a dealer where the recall repair was performed; however, after leaving the dealer, the powertrain warning light illuminated. The contact stated that the GPS became inoperable with the "Navigation Fault" message displayed. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 162,000.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755194
- Incident
- Jul 15, 2026
- Mileage
- 162,000 mi
The 10-speed transmission exhibits severe and dangerous shifting behaviors. It frequently shudders and jerks extremely hard when shifting between gears.Most critically, the transmission fails to properly engage into gear. While driving, I came to a complete stop at a red light in active traffic. When the light turned green and I attempted to accelerate, the transmission would not engage into gear, leaving the vehicle completely immobilized and just sitting there in the middle of traffic. Because the truck failed to take off and move forward, it created an immediate road hazard and almost caused me to be severely rear-ended by the traffic behind me.This transmission hesitation and failure to engage poses an immediate and severe safety risk of a high-speed collision.
- NHTSA ID
- 11755117
- Incident
- Jul 17, 2026
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
POWER TRAIN
Customer Satisfaction Program 26N04 Certain 2015-2017 Model Year F-150 Vehicles Equipped with a 6R80 Transmission Transmission Molded Leadframe Replacement
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
Harvest Program 25H05 – Supplement #1 Certain 2011-2021 Model Year Vehicles Software Verification Harvest Program
BACK OVER PREVENTION: REARVIEW SYSTEM BRAKING; BACK OVER PREVENTION: WARNINGS; LANE DEPARTURE: BLIND SPOT DETECTION
Advance Notice – Customer Satisfaction Program 25N17 Certain 2015-2025 Model Year Multiple Vehicle Lines Rear View Camera Replacement If Required After Dealer Evaluation
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM; STRUCTURE:BODY
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
POWER TRAIN
For 20172026 vehicles equipped with a 10R transmission, a revision to the Road Testing Vehicle procedure has been made in the WSM, located in Section 307-01 > Diagnosis and Testing. This updated procedure improves the diagnosis of customer reported transmission concerns and aids in locating the proper root cause. During diagnosis and testing, details regarding whether the condition is more prevalent when the vehicle is hot or cold, throttle percentage at the time of occurrence, vehicle speed, the specific shift involved, and whether the issue occurs during transmission engagements (N>R, N>D, R>D, or D>R) should be noted. Engineering requests including these detailed operating conditions that will significantly assist with root cause analysis. Diagnosis, testing, and repair should use established labor times outside this article.
Special Field Action 25L02 Certain 2017-2024 Model Year California Emissions-Certified Vehicles Transmission Control Assembly Reimbursement
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | 4 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 2025 | 100 | 12 | 0 | 62.6 |
| 2024 | 183 | 10 | 0 | 68.1 |
| 2023 | 396 | 12 | 0 | 60.7 |
| 2022 | 574 | 23 | 2 | 68.2 |
| 2021 | 974 | 29 | 1 | 63.2 |
| 2020 | 709 | 11 | 1 | 64.2 |
| 2019 | 1,302 | 9 | 1 | 64.0 |
| 2018 | 2,265 | 19 | 2 | 66.3 |
| 2017Viewing | 1,401 | 18 | 3 | 70.1 |
| 2016 | 2,010 | 14 | 4 | 67.5 |
| 2015 | 1,671 | 14 | 5 | 68.3 |
| 2014 | 1,515 | 8 | 2 | 62.6 |
| 2013 | 2,970 | 3 | 3 | 61.0 |
| 2012 | 1,776 | 4 | 4 | 58.8 |
| 2011 | 2,184 | 6 | 4 | 58.8 |
| 2010 | 842 | 1 | 0 | 42.6 |
| 2009 | 324 | 2 | 0 | 50.5 |
| 2008 | 368 | 1 | 1 | 51.0 |
| 2007 | 488 | 7 | 1 | 59.4 |
| 2006 | 585 | 14 | 2 | 63.9 |
| 2005 | 1,112 | 14 | 3 | 62.1 |
| 2004 | 2,028 | 16 | 4 | 60.6 |
| 2003 | 422 | 11 | 3 | 66.8 |
| 2002 | 821 | 10 | 3 | 66.2 |
| 2001 | 1,236 | 19 | 6 | 70.9 |
| 2000 | 1,074 | 17 | 4 | 74.6 |
| 1999 | 1,044 | 18 | 5 | 65.6 |
| 1998 | 1,381 | 18 | 11 | 65.5 |
| 1997 | 2,758 | 26 | 18 | 66.9 |
| 1996 | 324 | 7 | 2 | 67.6 |
| 1995 | 626 | 7 | 1 | 64.4 |
| 1994 | 676 | 13 | 2 | 66.4 |
| 1993 | 586 | 13 | 2 | 60.0 |
| 1992 | 470 | 9 | 8 | 67.2 |
| 1991 | 304 | 6 | 12 | 68.8 |
| 1990 | 275 | 5 | 11 | 68.3 |
| 1989 | 224 | 4 | 5 | 67.8 |
| 1988 | 139 | 2 | 6 | 70.4 |
| 1987 | 91 | 3 | 2 | 71.1 |
| 1986 | 61 | 1 | 4 | 61.0 |
| 1985 | 28 | 1 | 2 | 60.8 |
| 1984 | 15 | 1 | 2 | 55.9 |
| 1983 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 59.8 |
| 1982 | 5 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1981 | 2 | 3 | 0 | — |
| 1980 | 3 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1979 | 2 | 10 | 0 | — |
| 1978 | 4 | 10 | 0 | — |
| 1977 | 3 | 6 | 0 | — |
| 1976 | 0 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1975 | 1 | 4 | 0 | — |
| 1973 | 0 | 1 | 0 | — |
| 1968 | 1 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1966 | 1 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1955 | 1 | 0 | 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.