FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:STORAGE:TANK ASSEMBLY:FILLER PIPE AND CAP
2001 Ford F Super Duty
Recalls, owner-reported complaints, investigations and safety data
Data refreshed
Overview
Our database contains 32 NHTSA owner-reported complaints for the 2001 Ford F Super Duty, most frequently naming the engine, transmission and tires & wheels categories. 1 safety recall has been issued covering this model year; 7 NHTSA investigations name it; and 39 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Feb 2001 | 1 | 1 |
| Apr 2001 | 1 | 2 |
| May 2001 | 1 | 3 |
| Jun 2001 | 1 | 4 |
| Jul 2001 | 1 | 5 |
| Aug 2001 | 4 | 9 |
| Sep 2001 | 2 | 11 |
| Oct 2001 | 1 | 12 |
| Dec 2001 | 3 | 15 |
| Jun 2002 | 1 | 16 |
| Jul 2002 | 1 | 17 |
| Sep 2002 | 1 | 18 |
| May 2003 | 1 | 19 |
| Aug 2003 | 1 | 20 |
| Jan 2004 | 1 | 21 |
| Nov 2004 | 1 | 22 |
| Jun 2005 | 1 | 23 |
| Aug 2005 | 2 | 25 |
| May 2007 | 1 | 26 |
| Aug 2007 | 1 | 27 |
| Nov 2007 | 1 | 28 |
| Mar 2010 | 1 | 29 |
| Oct 2010 | 1 | 30 |
| Sep 2014 | 1 | 31 |
| Feb 2015 | 1 | 32 |
What owners report
Complaints grouped by the component NHTSA recorded
- Engine923.7%
- Transmission821.1%
- Tires & wheels513.2%
- Seat belts513.2%
- Interior & seats25.3%
- Driver assistance25.3%
- Fuel system25.3%
- Steering25.3%
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
1 campaign 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.govSafety investigations
NHTSA inquiries naming this vehicle. An investigation is not a finding of a defect.
ENGINE STALLING
IN A DECEMBER 3, 2007 LETTER, FORD ADVISED NHTSA THAT IT WILL CONDUCT A SAFETY RECALL TO REPLACE THE CAM POSITION SENSOR (CPS) IN APPROXIMATELY 1.2 MILLION SUBJECT VEHICLES TO ADDRESS REPORTS OF ENGINE STALLING.A NEW DESIGN CPS WITH IMPROVED PERFORMANCE AND DURABILITY WILL BE INSTALLED AS A REMEDY.OWNER NOTIFICATIONS WILL BEGIN IN DECEMBER 2007. THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE DURABLE, FULL-SIZED, MEDIUM DUTY TRUCKS COMMONLY USED FOR COMMERCIAL PURPOSES, RESCUE/EMERGENCY RESPONSE, AND COMMERCIAL OR RECREATIONAL TOWING.CPS FAILURE IS COMPARABLE TO UNEXPECTEDLY TURNING THE KEY OFF SINCE THE SIGNAL IT PRODUCES IS VITAL TO THE ELECTRONIC ENGINE CONTROL SYSTEM.CPS SIGNAL LOSS TERMINATES FUEL INJECTION RESULTING IN AN ENGINE STALL.ONCE STALLED, THE ENGINE MAY RESTART RIGHT AWAY, OR MAY RESTART AFTER A DELAY (TYPICALLY 5 TO 10 MINUTES), OR MAY NOT RESTART AT ALL.IN ADDITION TO EXPOSING THE DRIVER AND OTHER MOTORISTS TO CRASH RISK DUE TO LOSS OF MOTIVE POWER OR VEHICLE DISABLEMENT, ENGINE STALLING ALSO EFFECTS THE POWER ASSISTED STEERING AND BRAKING. THROUGH CONSUMER INTERVIEWS, ODI DETERMINED THAT CPS FAILURES OCCURRED WITHOUT ANY FORM OF WARNING, AT ANY VEHICLE SPEED (50% AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS), AND UNDER ANY DRIVING CONDITION, SUCH AS ACCELERATING.CONSUMERS REPORTED THAT ABOUT A THIRD OF THE VEHICLES FAILED TO RESTART, WITH ANOTHER THIRD REPORTING DELAYED RESTARTING.HALF THE VEHICLES THAT DID RESTART EXPERIENCED ANOTHER STALL ON THE SAME OR A SUBSEQUENT DRIVE CYCLE (BEFORE CPS REPLACEMENT) RE-EXPOSING THOSE CONSUMERS TO THE RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH A STALLING EVENT.IN THEIR VOQ REPORTS, HALF OF THE ODI COMPLAINANTS DESCRIBED DIFFICULTY CONTROLLING THE VEHICLE DUE TO LOSE OF POWER ASSIST SYSTEMS, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHO WERE TOWING AT THE TIME OF THE INCIDENT. THE ONE ALLEGED INJURY INCIDENT OCCURRED IN AN INTERSECTION WHEN A SUBJECT VEHICLE STALLED WHILE TURNING ACROSS ONCOMING LANES OF TRAFFIC.ALTHOUGH UNSUBSTANTIATED, THE COMPLAINANT ALLEGED AN INJURY TO A CHILD OCCUPANT DURING ODI'S INTERVIEW.THE OTHER CRASH ALLEGATIONS MOSTLY INVOLVED LOW SPEED, LOSS OF CONTROL INCIDENTS OFTEN CAUSED BY LACK OF POWER ASSIST; NO INJURIES ARE REPORTED IN THESE INCIDENTS, AND PROPERTY DAMAGE, IF ANY, WAS MINIMAL.CONSUMERS ALSO REPORTED OTHER INCIDENTS WITH SIGNIFICANT SAFETY RISKS, SUCH AS DISABLEMENT IN A LANE OR ON A SHOULDER OF A HIGH-SPEED ROADWAY OR INTERSTATE, OR EXTENDED DISABLEMENT IN REMOTE AREAS DURING SEVERE WEATHER CONDITIONS. THE POPULATION ABOVE IS FORD'S ESTIMATE OF THE 1.4 MILLION SUBJECT VEHICLES PRODUCED THAT ARE CURRENTLY REGISTERED.THE FORD COMPLAINT AND WARRANTY COUNTS NOTED ABOVE ARE CURRENT AS OF FORD'S LAST SUBMISSION DATED JUNE 21, 2007; THEY DO NOT INCLUDE F-450, F-550, OR ECONOLINE COUNTS AS THESE PRODUCTS WERE NOT FORMALLY WITHIN SCOPE OF THE INVESTIGATION WHEN FAILURE INFORMATION WAS REQUESTED.WARRANTY DATA ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT ABOUT HALF THE CLAIMS INVOLVED A STALL WHILE DRIVING EVENT ( FORD'S ASSESSMENT) AND THAT POOR CPS DURABILITY WAS A LONGSTANDING CONCERN.FORD REPORTED THAT THE NEW CPS DESIGN SHOULD MEET OR EXCEED THEIR 10 YEAR, 150K MILE LIFE EXPECTANCY DESIGN REQUIREMENT.
ENGINE STALLING
THE CAM POSITION SENSOR (CPS) PROVIDES A CRITICAL SIGNAL TO THE SUBJECT VEHICLE (SV) ENGINE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, THE LOSS OF WHICH RESULTS IN AN ENGINE STALL.DURING PE06-011, FORD STATED IN THEIR RESPONSE TO ODI THAT IT IS CONTINUING TO INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF CPS RELATED ENGINE STALL AND FURTHER ADVISED THAT AN UPDATE WILL BE PROVIDED UPON COMPLETION OF THE INVESTIGATION.FORD DATA SHOWS THAT 20% OF THE 716,000 SVS ARE EQUIPPED WITH MANUAL TRANSMISSIONS WHICH ARE CAPABLE OF BACK-DRIVING THE ENGINE WHEN A STALL OCCURS; POWER ASSISTED STEERING AND BRAKING ARE NOT LOST DURING ENGINE BACK-DRIVE.FORD DATA ALSO INDICATES THAT BACK-DRIVE OCCURS IN AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION VEHICLES ABOVE CERTAIN ROAD SPEEDS.THE MANUFACTURER REPORTS NOTED REFERENCE 755 UNIQUE VEHICLES; 2 ARE DUPLICATIVE OF ODI REPORTS.IN ITS REVIEW OF CUSTOMER AND FIELD REPORTS, FORD IDENTIFIED SOME 800 REPORTS ALLEGING ONE OR MORE ENGINE STALLS POTENTIALLY RELATED TO A CPS FAILURE IN THESE 755 VEHICLES (FORD?S ?A? CATEGORY REPORTS).ODI HAS NOT COMPLETED ITS REVIEW OF THESE OR OTHER FORD REPORTS, NOR HAS IT CONFIRMED THIS COUNT.ALL BUT ONE OF THE 9 CRASH ALLEGATIONS APPEAR TO BE MINOR IN NATURE ALTHOUGH ODI IS STILL INVESTIGATING THESE CRASH/INJURY ALLEGATIONS AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY INVOLVE A CPS FAILURE.BASED ON EARLY ASSESSMENT OF THE APPROXIMATELY 166,000 SUBJECT VEHICLE WARRANTY CLAIMS FORD PAID, THERE APPEARS TO BE VARIABILITY IN CLAIM RATES BETWEEN CERTAIN SV PRODUCTION PERIODS; AN EXPLANATION FOR THIS HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED.FORD REVIEWED A SAMPLE OF THE WARRANTY CLAIMS AND INDICATED THAT ABOUT HALF MAY INVOLVE A STALL DUE TO CPS FAILURE; ODI HAS YET TO CONFIRM THIS ASSESSMENT.THE INVESTIGATION IS THEREFORE UPGRADED TO ENGINEERING ANALYSIS EA06-012 SO THAT ODI CAN CONTINUE TO INVESTIGATE THE SCOPE, FREQUENCY AND CONSEQUENCES OF CPS RELATED ENGINE STALLING.
SPARK PLUG EJECTION FROM CYLINDER HEAD
ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2005, ODI RECEIVED A PETITION REQUESTING THAT THE AGENCY INVESTIGATE ALLEGATIONS OF ENGINE SPARK PLUG EJECTION IN CERTAIN MODEL YEAR 1997 THROUGH 2004 FORD VEHICLES WITH TRITON V-8 AND V-10 ENGINES.ODI RECEIVED A TOTAL OF 474 NON-DUPLICATIVE COMPLAINTS ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WHERE THE COMPLAINANT, OR THE DEALER REPAIRING THE VEHICLE, REPORTED THAT A SPARK PLUG DETACHED FROM THE CYLINDER AND/OR EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE.AS OF DECEMBER 8, 2005, ODI IS NOT AWARE OF ANY ALLEGATIONS WHERE THE ALLEGED DEFECT RESULTED IN A LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL, A CRASH, AN INJURY, OR A FATALITY IN ANY OF THE 10,319,810 SUBJECT VEHICLES.IN ADDITION, ODI IS AWARE OF ONLY TWO INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE STALLED WITHOUT RESTART.INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ODI CONSUMER COMPLAINTS AND OBTAINED FROM 72 TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS WITH COMPLAINANTS SHOWED THE FOLLOWING:(1) 99% OF THE COMPLAINTS WERE ON MY 1997 TO 2002 SUBJECT VEHICLES.(2) MOST THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED HEARING A LOUD POP WHILE DRIVING OR UPON STARTING UP THE VEHICLE FOLLOWED BY A LOUD, REPETITIVE CLICKING OR POPPING SOUND.(3) MANY OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THE POPPING SOUND WAS ACCOMPANIED BY SOME LOSS OF VEHICLE POWER; HOWEVER, IN 99% OF THE INCIDENTS REPORTED, THE VEHICLE DID NOT STALL.IN THE VERY FEW INCIDENTS WHERE THE VEHICLE DID STALL, MOST VEHICLES COULD BE RESTARTED.(4) ONLY A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE COMPLAINANTS CITED THAT THEY SMELLED GAS OR A SLIGHT BURNING SMELL WHEN THE INCIDENT OCCURRED.(5) IN ALL BUT A VERY FEW INCIDENTS, VEHICLE DAMAGE WAS LIMITED TO THE ENGINE.IN ONE INCIDENT, THE COMPLAINT REPORTED THAT THE FUEL RAIL WAS DAMAGED AND REPLACED AFTER ONE OF THE SPARK PLUGS EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE; HOWEVER, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT THE DAMAGE DID NOT RESULT IN ANY TYPE OF FUEL LEAK OR FIRE.IN ANOTHER INCIDENT, THE ONLY INCIDENT WHERE A FIRE WAS ALLEGED, THE COMPLAINANT REPORTED THAT NO FLUID LEAK WAS OBSERVED, BUT THAT A FIRE RESULTED AFTER THE SPARK PLUG HAD EJECTED FROM THE ENGINE AND HE HAD RESTARTED THE VEHICLE AND DRIVEN TO ANOTHER LOCATION.NONE OF THE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED ANY DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE HOOD.(6) ONLY TWO COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THEY OBSERVED WHAT APPEARED TO BE SOME DROPS OF FUEL COMING FROM THE CYLINDER WHERE THE SPARK PLUG HAD FAILED OR ON THE SPARK PLUG ITSELF; HOWEVER, EACH OF THESE COMPLAINANTS REPORTED THAT THERE WAS NO SMOKE OR FLAMES AS A RESULT OF HIS INCIDENT.AS THE PETITIONER NOTED, AND ODI?S ANALYSIS SHOWED, IT IS POSSIBLE FOR A SPARK PLUG TO DETACH FROM THE ENGINE CYLINDER THREADS IN THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI?S ANALYSIS OF 474 COMPLAINTS DESCRIBING SUCH INCIDENTS FOUND ONLY A VERY FEW ALLEGED ANY SAFETY-RELATED CONSEQUENCES.NONE OF THESE SHOWED ANY EVIDENCE OF A SERIOUS SAFETY CONSEQUENCE.GIVEN THE LARGE POPULATION AND RELATIVELY LONG EXPOSURE TIME OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES, THE COMPLAINT ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE RISK TO MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY FROM THE ALLEGED DEFECT IS VERY LOW.IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, IT IS UNLIKELY THAT NHTSA WOULD ISSUE AN ORDER FOR THE NOTIFICATION AND REMEDY OF THE ALLEGED DEFECT AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE INVESTIGATION REQUESTED IN THE PETITION.THEREFORE, IN VIEW OF THE NEED TO ALLOCATE AND PRIORITIZE NHTSA?S LIMITED RESOURCES TO BEST ACCOMPLISH THE AGENCY?S SAFETY MISSION, THE PETITION IS DENIED.
FRONT SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY
DURING THE INITIAL RECALL CAMPAIGN IN 2001, THE SUBJECT VEHICLES WERE INSPECTED BY FORD DEALERSHIPS USING A TEST TOOL THAT WOULD DETECT A DEFECTIVE FRONT SEAT OUTBOARD SEAT BELT BUCKLE ASSEMBLY.APPROXIMATELY ONE MILLION VEHICLES PASSED THE INSPECTION TEST FOR ONE OR BOTH FRONT BUCKLES.SUBSEQUENT TO THE RECALL SERVICE ACTION, ODI RECEIVED 15 CONSUMER REPORTS ALLEGING THAT A PASSED INSPECTION BUCKLE SUBSEQUENTLY FAILED TO LATCH OR INADVERTENTLY UNLATCHED DURING USE.IN ADDITION, FORD HAS IDENTIFIED 543 OWNER AND FIELD REPORTS ALLEGING BUCKLE FAILURE SUBSEQUENT TO PASSING THE INSPECTION TEST.FORD TESTED AND EXAMINED OVER 100 WARRANTY-RETURNED BUCKLES AND FOUND THAT 44% OF THE BUCKLES HAD NO PROBLEM OR A CONDITION NOT RELATED TO THE RECALL INSPECTION (NON-LATCH RELATED BUCKLE DAMAGE OR FOREIGN CONTAMINATION).WARRANTY CLAIMS WERE HIGHEST DURING THE 18-MONTH PERIOD AFTER THE START OF THE RECALL (JULY 2001) AND HAVE BEEN DECLINING DURING THE PAST 24 MONTHS.OVER THE PAST 12 MONTHS, FORD HAS RECEIVED APPROXIMATELY 12 WARRANTY CLAIMS PER MONTH OUT OF A VEHICLE POPULATION OF ABOUT ONE MILLION.COMPLAINTS COUNTS ARE ALSO DECREASING.DURING THE PAST SEVEN MONTHS, ODI HAS RECEIVED ONLY TWO COMPLAINTS. A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT 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 RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.
Recent owner complaints
Reports submitted to NHTSA, shown in the owner's own words
MY DRIVER SIDE FRONT SEAT BELT WILL COME UNBUCKLED FOR NO APPARENT REASON.NO MATTER SPEED ANGLE ETC. *JS
- NHTSA ID
- 10682031
- Incident
- Feb 2, 2015
FORD F250 2001 6.8 V-10 SPARK PLUG BLOW OUT I JUST HAD TWO OF MY TEN PLUGS BLOW OUT ON MY 2001 F250 GAS 6.8 V-10 WITH 161K MILES. I TUNED UP THE ENGINE AT THE RECOMMENDED 100K MILES USING THE SPECIFIED PROCEDURES FOR THIS ENGINE. I KNEW THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THIS ENGINE AND WAS EXTREMELY CAREFUL DURING THE TUNE-UP AND PLUG REPLACEMENT. I AM A CERTIFIED AIRCRAFT MECHANIC WITH FAA INSPECTION AUTHORIZATION. I USED A CERTIFIED TORQUE WRENCH TO INSTALL THE PLUG WITH THE CORRECT TORQUE. THERE WAS NO ERROR IN TECHNIQUE OR INSTALLATION ON THIS SPARK PLUG REPLACEMENT. I JUST PAID $720 TO HAVE TWO SPARK PLUG HELI-COIL INSERTS DONE ON THIS ENGINE THAT BLEW OUT THE TWO FRONT LEFT PLUGS. THERE IS A SIMILAR PROCEDURE FOR AIRCRAFT ALUMINUM CYLINDERS (CALLED JUGS) WITH STRIPPED SPARK PLUG BOSS DEFECTS. AN AIRCRAFT SPARK PLUG HAS A LARGER 18MM DIAMETER PLUG WITH FULL DEPTH THREADS (NOT THE ? THREAD OF THE FORD V-10 AND OTHER FORD ENGINE DESIGNS). AIRCRAFT SPARK PLUGS ARE TORQUED TO 35 FT/LBS (VS THE 8.9 FT/LBS (107 IN/LBS) SPECIFIED BY FORD). THE MAXIMUM RPM OF MOST AIRCRAFT ENGINES IS 2700 RPM AS OPPOSED TO 6000+ RPM IN THE FORD ENGINES. THIS RESULTS IN A SIGNIFICANTLY LESS STRESS ON THE PLUG BOSS AREA THAT IT WOULD HAVE IN A FORD ENGINE. THE ENGINEERING THOUGHT THAT WENT INTO THIS FORD DESIGN IS TOTALLY NONSENSICAL OR NON-EXISTENT. THERE IS NO LOGICAL REASON THAT THEY SHOULD DESIGN THIS THREAD DEPTH WITH ? DEPTH IN AN ALUMINUM HEAD INSTEAD OF THE FULLY AVAILABLE 7/8? OF THE SPARK PLUG THREADS THAT ARE INSTALLED. THIS IS A GROSS ERROR IN DESIGN CONSIDERATION THAT HAS RESULTED IN THOUSANDS OF SPARK PLUGS BLOWING OUT OF FORD ALUMINUM HEADS. HOW LONG BEFORE MY REMAINING 8 PLUGS BLOW? WHERE WILL I BE WHEN IT HAPPENS? WHAT WILL BE THE RESULTANT DAMAGE TO THE ENGINE, VEHICLE OR PERSONS IN THE TRUCK? HOW MUCH WILL IT COST TO REPAIR? *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10630671
- Incident
- Aug 28, 2014
- Mileage
- 161,000 mi
I PURCHASED A 2001 FORD SUPER DUTY NEW. THE TRANSMISSION FAILED AT 61K MILES AT 6 YEARS OLD. I REPLACED THAT TRANSMISSION WITH A 'REBUILT BY FORD' TRANSMISSION WITH A 3 YEAR, 36K MILE WARRANTY. THAT TRANSMISSION FAILED (DISINTEGRATED) WITH 31K MILES AT 37 MONTHS. ALTHOUGH THE DEALER IS HELPING WITH THE COST OF REPLACING IT AGAIN, FORD WILL NOT HELP AT ALL. THE REPLACEMENT TRANSMISSION FAILED TWICE UNDER WARRANTY AND WAS SERVICED WITH 25K MILES ON IT. *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10360478
- Incident
- Oct 6, 2010
- Mileage
- 92,000 mi
WAS SITTING AT STOP LIGHT, AND ALL OF A SUDDEN THERE WAS A POP, AND THIS TERRIBLE NOISE STARTED COMING FROM ENGINE AREA. PULLED INTO A PARKING LOT, AND CALLED MY HUSBAND. HE CAME DOWN, AND INSPECTED THE ENGINE. HE FOUND THE NUMBER 4 SPARK PLUG MISSING. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME THIS FAILURE HAS HAPPENED. HAD TRUCK TOWED TO A FORD DEALER, AND THEY INSTALLED A SPARK PLUG INSERT, AND REPLACED SPARK PLUG, AND COIL. $424.52 WAS TOTAL REPAIR BILL WHICH INCLUDED TOWING. OLD PARTS ARE NOT AVAILABLE. *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10321022
- Incident
- Mar 16, 2010
- Mileage
- 123,475 mi
MY 2001 FORD F350 SUPERDUTY EJECTED A SPARK PLUG FOR THE SECOND TIME IN A YEAR. I FINALLY HAD TO BUY AN INSERT KIT TO FIX THE PROBLEM MYSELF COST ME 450.00 PLUS A NEW IGNITION COIL FOR 55.00. FORD WOULD NOT EVEN THINK OF TAKING THE BLAME FOR THIS PROBLEM TELLING ME THAT IT IS VERY UNCOMMON FOR THIS TO HAPPEN???????I DIDN'T HAVE A FIRE BUT I DID SEE SOME SMOKE AND SMELLED GAS VAPORS WHEN THE PLUG EJECTED IT ALSO SCARED THE HELL OUT OF MY WIFE AND I..IF IT HAPPENED ON THE INTERSTATE THERE COULD HAVE BEEN AN ACCIDENT FROM THE LOSS OF POWER AND THE SUDDEN SHOCK FROM THE NOISE.. I REALLY THINK THIS FAILURE IN THE FORD TRITON MOTOR SHOULD BE LOOKED AT CLOSELY AND MAKE FORD RECALL THESE ENGINES....THANK YOU DAVE CURTIN *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10210127
- Incident
- Apr 8, 2007
- Mileage
- 125,000 mi
ENGINE STALLS AT IDLE. *TR
- NHTSA ID
- 10200714
- Incident
- Jun 3, 2005
DRIVERS SEAT BELT RANDOMLY DISCONNECTS. MAY DISCONNECT 2 TIMES WITHIN 5 MINUTES OR MAY DISCONNECT ONCE IN 2 WEEKS. EVERYTIME I CONNECT THE BELT I TUG AND YANK TO MAKE SURE IT IS CONNECTED BUT DOING THIS MAKES NO DIFFERENCE. I HOPE IT DOES NOT DISCONNECT IN AN ACCIDENT.
- NHTSA ID
- 10191680
- Incident
- May 24, 2007
- Mileage
- 124,000 mi
2002 CLASS A MOTORHOME SPARK PLUG HAD BLOWN OUT THE ENGINE HEAD UPON START UP. *MR THE CONSUMER STARTED THE VEHICLE AND HEARD A LOUD NOISE. IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT THE #1 SPARK PLUG HAD EXITED THE ENGINE HEAD AND WAS LODGED IN THE FRONT AXLE. THE CONSUMER REQUESTED REIMBURSEMENT. *SC
- NHTSA ID
- 10133430
- Incident
- Aug 1, 2005
- Mileage
- 20,718 mi
Manufacturer communications
A bulletin sent by a manufacturer to its dealers. Not a recall, and repairs are not necessarily free.
EQUIPMENT ADAPTIVE/MOBILITY
FORD: THE RESTRAINT CONTROL MODULE (RCM) WHEN USING VCM II, WOULD HAVE AN ERROR CODE 35 AND DIAGNOSTIC TROUBLE CODE (DTC) B1035, AND DIFFICULTY ATTEMPTING PROGRAMMABLE MODULE INSTALLATION (PMI). MODEL 2001-2004 F-SUPER DUTY. *PE
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:EXHAUST SYSTEM:EMISSION CONTROL:CATALYTIC CONVERTOR; POWER TRAIN:AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION:CONTROL MODULE (TCM/PCM/TECM)
FORD/LINCOLN/MERCURY: PROGRAM OF AFFECTED VEHICLES REGISTERED IN CA (8500 GVWR), MA (6000 GVWR), OR VT (6000 GVWR) AND WHO PREVIOUSLY PAID TO HAVE REPAIRS PERFORMED THAT ARE NOW COVERED UNDER FEDERAL EMISSIONS WARRANTY. 1999-2001 MODEL YEARS. *PE
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:ENGINE
SOME 1997-2008 VEHICLES EQUIPPED WITH A 4.6L 2V, 5.4L 2V, OR 6.8L 2V ENGINE--SPARK PLUG THREAD REPAIR PROCEDURE--NOT COVERED UNDER NEW VEHICLE LIMITED WARRANTY. *NJ THIS INCLUDES F-53 MOTORHOME CHASSIS. UPDATED 2/23/10. *PE
FUEL SYSTEM, OTHER
FUEL CONDITIONER. LOW POWER, POOR FUEL ECONOMY, FUEL GELLING IN COLD WEATHER, EXCESSIVE WHITE SMOKE ON COLD START, HARD START, OR COKING OF COMPONENTS EXPOSED TO EXHAUST. *TT
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING
WDS COP KIT DIAGNOSTIC TIP - COIL ON PLUG (COP) IGNITION SYSTEMS - ENGINE MISFIRE OR ROUGH RUNNING. *TT
ENGINE AND ENGINE COOLING:EXHAUST SYSTEM:MANIFOLD/HEADER/MUFFLER/TAIL PIPE
USE OF STAINLESS STEEL EXHAUST STUDS IN SERVICE FOR 5.4L 2V ENGINE. *TT
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2012 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2011 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 2008 | 31 | 0 | 1 | 34.8 |
| 2005 | 27 | 0 | 0 | 30.4 |
| 2004 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 26.5 |
| 2003 | 27 | 0 | 6 | 48.7 |
| 2002 | 34 | 0 | 4 | 43.7 |
| 2001Viewing | 32 | 1 | 7 | 45.2 |
| 2000 | 63 | 3 | 4 | 55.4 |
| 1999 | 93 | 3 | 5 | 58.0 |
| 1998 | 14 | 0 | 2 | 34.5 |
| 1997 | 24 | 3 | 2 | 52.0 |
| 1996 | 8 | 2 | 0 | — |
| 1995 | 12 | 1 | 0 | 46.2 |
| 1994 | 20 | 2 | 0 | 43.3 |
| 1993 | 3 | 3 | 1 | — |
| 1992 | 8 | 2 | 1 | — |
| 1991 | 1 | 2 | 2 | — |
| 1990 | 1 | 1 | 2 | — |
| 1989 | 1 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1988 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1987 | 1 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1986 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1985 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1984 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1983 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1982 | 0 | 0 | 0 | — |
| 1981 | 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.