2013 Ford F-53 Problems
Owner-reported complaints filed with NHTSA, grouped by component
Data refreshed
What this page shows
Everything below is an owner-reported complaint submitted to NHTSA about the 2013 Ford F-53, grouped by the component NHTSA recorded on the report. These are not confirmed defects, and they are not recalls. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a category with more reports in it is not evidence that a part is defective.
Complaints are reports submitted by owners and drivers to NHTSA. They are not verified and do not establish that a defect exists.
Reports by component
Ranked by how many owner reports name each component category
- Brakes330.0%
- Exterior lighting220.0%
- Suspension220.0%
- Body & structure110.0%
- Electrical110.0%
- Visibility110.0%
Percentages are of component mentions. A single complaint can name more than one component, so these do not sum to the total complaint count.
Each component in detail
What the reports in each category say, in the owners' own words
Brakes
Reports naming service brakes, the antilock braking system, brake hoses, master cylinders or the parking brake.
From owner reports, verbatim
Brakelines are rusted and I am afraid they will rust through and cause brake failure. Looked at a 2017 model and the brakelines look to be coated to prevent this from happening.
HEADLIGHTS WILL ONLY ILLUMINATE THE HIGHWAY A SHORT DISTANCE AHEAD (50-60 FT) OF THE VEHICLE. CANNOT DRIVE AT NIGHT. ALSO, THE BRAKES TO NOT SEEM TO BE ADEQUATE. *DT CONSUMER SOLD THE VEHICLE.*JB
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Exterior lighting
Reports naming headlights, tail lights, turn signals and other exterior lighting.
From owner reports, verbatim
HEADLIGHTS WILL ONLY ILLUMINATE THE HIGHWAY A SHORT DISTANCE AHEAD (50-60 FT) OF THE VEHICLE. CANNOT DRIVE AT NIGHT. ALSO, THE BRAKES TO NOT SEEM TO BE ADEQUATE. *DT CONSUMER SOLD THE VEHICLE.*JB
THE HEADLIGHTS ON THE MOTOR HOME ARE INADEQUATE FOR NIGHT DRIVING. THEY ARE DANGEROUS CAUSING THE NEED TO USE THE HIGH BEAMS WHICH IS NOT IDEAL. THE DAYTIME DRIVING LIGHTS ON MY CAR DO A BETTER JOB. THE ARE SOME SORT OF CHEAP AFTERMARKET LIGHTS THAT CAN'T BE DOT APPROVED. *DT CONSUMER NO LONGER HAS THE VEHICLE.*JB
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Suspension
Reports naming suspension components — springs, struts, shocks, control arms and related hardware.
From owner reports, verbatim
MOTOR HOME WAS PURCHASED NEW IN MAY OF 2013. WHILE DRIVING THIS SUMMER I NOTICED MORE SWAY/ROLL THAN USUAL, SO I RESEARCHED 'FORD F53 CHASSIS- HANDLING ISSUES'. I FOUND THAT A LOT OF OWNERS REPORTED PROBLEMS WITH SOME OF THE BRACKETS ON THE REAR SWAY BARS. SOME HAD LOOSE OR MISSING BOLTS, LOOSE OR BENT OR MISSING BRACKETS ( EITHER SIDE). I WANTED TO SEE IF THIS COULD BE THE ISSUE I WAS HAVING WITH THE NOTICEABLE INCREASE SWAY/ROLL, SO I CRAWLED UNDER RIG TO INSPECT THE BRACKETS ON JULY 3RD, 2017. I FOUND THE SWAY BAR BRACKET ON DRIVERS SIDE, WAS BENT, BROKEN AND HANGING DOWN. THE UPPER BOLT WAS TIGHT AND HOLDING THE OTHER PIECE OF THE BRACKET (ABOUT 1" SQUARE) THE LOWER BOLT WAS LOOSE AND HOLDING THE REST OF THE BENT/BROKEN BRACKET AND THE POLY BUSHING HAD SLID 2"-3" FROM IT'S INSTALLED POSITION. I DON'T KNOW WHEN THE BRACKET CAME LOOSE/BROKE BUT I KNEW THAT IT WOULD NOT BE SAFE TO CONTINUE DRIVING THE MH IN THIS STATE, SO I ORDERED THE NEW BRACKET FROM A NEARBY FORD PARTS SUPPLIER AND INSTALLED IT MYSELF. I WILL TRY TO ATTACH PICS OF BROKEN BRACKET AS FIRST DISCOVERED AND PIC OF REPLACEMENT BRACKET RECEIPT. THE FORUM THAT I LEARNED OF THIS PROBLEM WAS 'IRV2' AND HAVE FOUND THAT IT HAS BEEN A ISSUE ON ALL MAKES, MODELS AND YEARS WITH THE FORD F53 CHASSIS. AND THAT IT NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT TO NHTSA ATTENTION. AS A LOT OF OWNERS JUST 'FIX' THE PROBLEM THEMSELVES UNLESS VEHICLE IS UNDER WARRANTY AND THE PROBLEM NEVER GETS REPORTED.
THE REAR STABILIZER BAR (ALSO CALLED AN ANTI-SWAY BAR) BRACKET BOLTS CAME LOOSE. THE UNIT HAD UNDER 5,000 MILES ON IT. I TORQUED THE BOLTS AND THEY CAME LOOSE AGAIN AFTER ANOTHER FEW THOUSAND MILES. I WAS A CERTIFIED ASE TECHNICIAN AND ALSO AN AUTOMOTIVE INSTRUCTOR FOR 35 YEARS (RETIRED) AND EVENTUALLY FIXED THE PROBLEM WITH LOCK TIGHT ON THE BOLT THREADS. I HAVE HEARD OF MANY OTHERS WITH THE SAME ISSUES ON THE F-53 RV CHASSIS. BECAUSE THE BOLTS WERE JUST LOOSE NO DRIVING ISSUES WERE NOTICED. MANY HAVE REPORTED TO ME ABOUT MISSING BOLTS AND BRACKETS. WHEN THIS HAPPENS A LOSS OF SWAY CONTROL WILL OCCUR. SINCE ONLY BOLTS WERE LOOSE I DON'T HAVE PICTURES.
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Body & structure
Reports naming the vehicle structure, frame, body panels, doors, hood and trim.
From owner reports, verbatim
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 FORD F-53. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT WINDSHIELD FIBER GLASS WAS SEPARATING FROM THE MOTOR HOME. UPON INSPECTION, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE GLUE BETWEEN THE FIBER GLASS AND METAL WAS PEELING AND CAUSED THE SEPARATION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING OR REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED AND NO FURTHER ASSISTANCE WAS OFFERED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 35,000.
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Electrical
Reports naming the electrical system — wiring, battery, charging, control modules, infotainment and electrical accessories.
From owner reports, verbatim
2014 FOREST RIVER FR3. CONSUMER REQUESTS REIMBURSEMENT FOR ELECTRIC DOUBLE STEP RECALL NOTICE REPAIRS. *LD UPDATED 07/10/2017*JS
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
Visibility
Reports naming windshields, glass, wipers, defrosters and mirrors.
From owner reports, verbatim
TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 2013 FORD F-53. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FRONT WINDSHIELD FIBER GLASS WAS SEPARATING FROM THE MOTOR HOME. UPON INSPECTION, THE CONTACT NOTICED THAT THE GLUE BETWEEN THE FIBER GLASS AND METAL WAS PEELING AND CAUSED THE SEPARATION. THE VEHICLE WAS NOT TAKEN TO A DEALER OR INDEPENDENT MECHANIC FOR DIAGNOSTIC TESTING OR REPAIRS. THE MANUFACTURER INFORMED THE CONTACT THAT THE WARRANTY HAD EXPIRED AND NO FURTHER ASSISTANCE WAS OFFERED. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 35,000.
Too few reports in this category for a page of its own — they appear in the full complaint list.
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.
Elsewhere on this vehicle
Data sources
- NHTSA Office of Defects Investigation — owner-reported complaints and the components recorded on them
Data on this page last refreshed .