RoadVitals

2012 Mitsubishi Fuso FEC72 Problems

Owner-reported complaints filed with NHTSA, grouped by component

Data refreshed

Owner complaintsComplaints are reports submitted to NHTSA by owners and drivers. NHTSA does not verify most reports before publishing them, and a complaint does not establish that a defect exists. Volume is influenced by how many of a vehicle were sold, how long it has been on the road, and how much attention an issue has received.
2
Latest Jun 30, 2020
Components namedHow many of our component categories appear on at least one report for this model year. One report can name several.
1
Crash or fire reportedComplaints whose submitter recorded that a crash or a fire occurred. These are the reporter's own answers on the NHTSA form, not verified findings.
1

What this page shows

Everything below is an owner-reported complaint submitted to NHTSA about the 2012 Mitsubishi Fuso FEC72, 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

  • Engine2100.0%

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

Engine

Reports naming the engine itself — including stalling, misfires, oil consumption, cooling and internal engine components.

2
reports

From owner reports, verbatim

TL* THE CONTACT CALLING ON BEHALF OF ONE OF HIS DRIVERS, WHO WAS DRIVING A 2012 MITSUBISHI FUSO FEC72 AND STATED THAT WHILE HIS DRIVER WAS DRIVING, THE VEHICLE WHEN INTO A DEATH MODE AND SLOWDOWN AS A RESULT, ANOTHER VEHICLE CRASHED INTO THE REAR OF THE VEHICLE. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE DRIVER SUSTAINED LOWER BACK AND NECK INJURIES THAT REQUIRED MEDICAL ATTENTION AND THE FRONT PASSENGER SUSTAINED BACK INJURIES ALSO REQUIRING MEDICAL ATTENTION. A POLICE REPORT WAS FILED. THE CONTACT WAS NOT AWARE OF INJURIES FROM THE OTHER VEHICLE DRIVER. THE CONTACT MENTIONED THAT THE VEHICLE ALWAYS EXPERIENCED THE DEATH MODE FAILURE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO AN OFFICE BUILDING LOT AND LATER TOWED TO PEACH STATE TRUCK CENTER, 6535 CRESCENT DR, NORCROSS, GA 30071, WHERE A NEW PART WAS REPLACED OF AN UNKNOWN RECALL PART. THE ENTIRE DEF SYSTEM WAS REPLACED. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE MANUFACTURER WAS MADE AWARE OF THE FAILURE NUMEROUS TIMES AND WAS PROVIDED WITH A CASE NUMBER. THE APPROXIMATELY FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 123,000. *LN*DT*JB*JB

NHTSA ID 11331706 · filed Jun 30, 2020

AIR FLOW SENSOR PREMATURE FAILURE RATE. AT 68,590 MILES THE PART HAS BEEN REPLACED TWICE. I WAS TOLD BY THE DEALERSHIP THAT THEY HAVE ONE CUSTOMER THAT HAS REPLACED THE AIR FLOW SENSOR A TOTAL OF 10 TIMES ON A VEHICLE WITH 90,000 MILES. *TR

NHTSA ID 10660547 · filed Nov 24, 2014

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

Data on this page last refreshed .