1992 FORD BRONCO Recalls, Complaints & Safety

EXTERIOR LIGHTING

Defect Description

CERTAIN PRO-A MOTORS CORNER LAMPS, TURN SIGNALS, AND HEADLIGHTS SOLD AS REPLACEMENT LAMPS FOR USE ON CERTAIN PASSENGER VEHICLES LISTED ABOVE. SOME COMBINATION LAMPS THAT ARE NOT EQUIPPED WITH AMBER SIDE REFLECTORS FAIL TO CONFORM TO FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD NO. 108, LAMPS, REFLECTIVE D... Read more

Consequence

WITHOUT THE AMBER REFLECTORS, THE VEHICLE WILL BE POORLY ILLUMINATED, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN A VEHICLE CRASH WITHOUT WARNING.

Remedy

PRO-A MOTORS WILL NOTIFY OWNERS AND OFFER TO REPURCHASE THE LAMPS. THE RECALL BEGAN ON APRIL 3, 2006. OWNERS MAY CONTACT PRO-A MOTORS AT 323-838-2988.

61,944 vehicles affected

Manufacturer: PRO-A MOTORS, INC.

TIRES:TREAD/BELT

Defect Description

THIS IS NOT A SAFETY RECALL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAFETY ACT. HOWEVER, IT IS DEEMED A SAFETY IMPROVEMENT CAMPAIGN BY THE AGENCY. EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION: FORD IS REPLACING ALL FIRESTONE WILDERNESS AT 15, 16, AND 17 INCH TIRES MOUNTED ON FORD TRUCKS AND SUVS. FORD REPORTS TREAD SEPARATION CAN... Read more

Consequence

SHOULD THE TREAD SEPARATE AT HIGHWAY SPEEDS, A VEHICLE CRASH COULD OCCUR, POSSIBLY RESULTING IN PERSONAL INJURY OR DEATH.

Remedy

THE REPLACEMENT/REIMBURSEMENT PROGRAM FOR THIS CAMPAIGN EXPIRED ON MARCH 31, 2002. HOWEVER, CUSTOMERS CAN CONTACT FORD AT 1-877-917-3673 OR GO ON-LINE TO WWW.FORD.COM FOR POSSIBLE ASSISTANCE.

13,000,000 vehicles affected

Manufacturer: FORD MOTOR COMPANY

PARKING BRAKE:CONVENTIONAL

Defect Description

THE PARKING BRAKE CONTROL SELF-ADJUST PAWL DOES NOT LINE UP PROPERLY WITH THE SELF-ADJUST RACHET CAUSING THE PAWL TO SLIP OVER ONE OR MORE TEETH IN THE RACHET.

Consequence

WHEN THE ABOVE OCCURS, IT CAN RESULT IN PARKING BRAKE SYSTEM INEFFECTIVENESS. THE PARKING BRAKE WILL NOT HOLD THE VEHICLE, CAUSING THE VEHICLE TO ROLL FREELY, IF THE TRANSMISSION IS NOT LEFT IN GEAR.

Remedy

A WEDGE WILL BE INSTALLED WHICH WILL SERVE TO LOCK THE PARKING BRAKE SELF-ADJUST MECHANISM PAWL INTO ENGAGEMENT WITH THE RACHET. ALSO, OWNERS WILL BE ADVISED TO RELEASE AND REAPPLY THE PARKING BRAKE WHENEVER TOOTH SKIP OCCURS AND WILL BE REMINDED TO ALWAYS TURN OFF THE ENGINE AND LEAVE THE VEHICLE I... Read more

835,791 vehicles affected

Manufacturer: FORD MOTOR COMPANY

STRUCTURE:BODY:DOOR

Defect Description

WATER CAN ENTER THE DOOR LATCH RELEASE CABLE. IF THE VEHICLE IS OPERATED IN BELOW FREEZING TEMPERATURES, THE WATER IN THE DOOR LATCH RELEASE CABLE CAN FREEZE AND CAUSE THE LATCH MECHANISM TO MALFUNCTION.

Consequence

THE MALFUNCTION OF THE DOOR LATCH RELEASE CAN RESULT INTHREE DIFFERENT PROBLEMS: 1) THE DOOR WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE RELATCHED, 2) THEINSIDE DOOR HANDLE CAN BECOME INOPERATIVE, AND 3) THE DOOR COULD APPEAR TO BELATCHED WHEN IT IS NOT, ALLOWING THE DOOR TO OPEN UNEXPECTEDLY IF IT IS JARRED,AND INCREAS... Read more

Remedy

REVISED DOOR RELEASE CABLES AND WATER SHIELDS WILL BE INSTALLED.

190,000 vehicles affected

Manufacturer: FORD MOTOR COMPANY

Complaint Statistics

56 total complaints 1 crashes 2 fires 1 injuries

Top Reported Components

Component	Complaints
FUEL SYSTEM, GASOLINE:STORAGE:TANK ASSEMBLY	4
STRUCTURE:BODY:DOOR	3
SERVICE BRAKES, HYDRAULIC:FOUNDATION COMPONENTS	2
STRUCTURE:BODY:TAILGATE	2
PARKING BRAKE	2
PARKING BRAKE:CONVENTIONAL:MECHANICAL:LINKAGE AND CABLE	2
ELECTRICAL SYSTEM:WIRING	2
TIRES:TREAD/BELT	2
LATCHES/LOCKS/LINKAGES:DOORS:LATCH	2
PARKING BRAKE:CONVENTIONAL	2

Incident date: Feb 4, 2005

ABOUT TWO MONTHS AGO MY TRANSMISSION WENT OUT IN MY 92 FORD BRONCO ON MY WAY TO WORK WITH A CO-WORKER WITH ME, I WAS PULLING UP TO A RED LIGHT AND WENT TO DOWNSHIFT TO FIRST BUT IT WASN'T THERE, TRIED SECOND NOT THERE EITHER,I HAS TO GIMP ME BRONCO HOME IN THIRD GEAR THERE BY SMOKING AND BURNING UP... Read more

Incident date: Apr 25, 2003

FUEL TANK DEVELOPED LEAKS DUE TO RUST CAUSED BY WATER TRAPPED BETWEEN BRUSH GUARD AND TANK BOTTOM. BRUSH GUARD DESIGNED WITHOUT HOLES TO ALLOW WATER TO DRAIN PROPERLY THUS TRAPPING WATER BETWEEN THE GUARD AND TANK BOTTOM. *NLM

THE PARKING BRAKE DID NOT HOLD THE VEHICLE. THE CONSUMER LOOKED ON NHTSA SITE AND DISCOVERED A RECALL (94V-169001) FOR THE SAME PROBLEM. THE CONSUMER CONTACTED A LOCAL DEALER WHO INDICATED THE CONSUMERS VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED DUE TO VIN. *NLM *NLM

Incident date: Jan 6, 2003

CONSUMER IS HAVING THE SAME DEFECT WITH THERE VEHICLE'S EMERGENCY PARKING BRAKES, AS STATED IN RECALL NUMBER 94 V 169 000 BUT THERE VIN NUMBER IS NOT INCLUDED. PH

Incident date: Jan 30, 2003

TAILGATE RUSTS EXCESSIVELY, AND IT IS THE ONLY PART OF THE CAR TO DO SO.

Incident date: Nov 9, 2000

BOTH DOORS WILL NOT OPEN FROM INSIDE FIRST PASSENGER SIDE, MONTHS LATER DRIVER'S SIDE. *AK

Incident date: Feb 15, 2000

I DONT KNOW IF RECALL IS STILL VALID, DEALER DOES NOT SHOW ON COMPUTER. *AK

Incident date: Apr 13, 1993

THE LEFT AUTOMATIC DOOR LOCK FAILED, THE DEALER REPLACED THE ACTUATOR. *SLC

Incident date: Jul 15, 1993

4 SETS OF TIRES (NO TYPE OR SIZE) HAVE BEEN PUT ON THIS VEHICLE FROM 13897 MILES TO 77883 MILES, SHOCKS HAVE BEEN REPLACED TWICE, THE FRONT RADIUS ARM BUSHINGS HAVE BEEN REPLACED TWICE, BUSHING KITS HAVE BEEN REPLACED ON BOTH SIDES, THE FRONT END HAS HAD SEVERAL ALIGNMENTS, THE TIRES HAVE BEEN BALAN... Read more

Incident date: Jul 15, 1993

Incident date: Aug 15, 1995

THE VEHICLE EXPERIENCED SEVERAL ENGINE RELATED FAILURES, THE THERMOSTAT WAS REPLACED, THE WATER PUMP WAS REPLACED TWICE, THERE WAS AN OIL LEAK, AND THE SERPINTINE BELT WAS REPLACED TWICE. *SLC

Incident date: Feb 26, 1996

THE FRONT BRAKES WERE REPLACED FOUR TIMES, METALLIC DISC PADS WERE INSTALLED, AND ROTORS WERE REPLACED, RESURFACED, AND MACHINED. *SLC

Incident date: Oct 11, 2000

REPLACEMENT TIRES ON A FORD, BRONCO 1992, VNHL P23575R15. TWO FRONT TIRES HAVE CRACKS GOING ALL THE WAY AROUND. TOOK TO MECHANIC, AND HE SAID THAT TREAD WAS ABOUT TO SEPARATE. *AK

Incident date: Jul 24, 2000

THE TIRE IS A FIRESTONE DUNLOP/RV RADIAL ROVER 30X9.5 R15 LT INSURED SAID THAT THE TIRE CAME APART LIKE A RE-TREAD. LET ME KNOW IF YOU NEED ANYTHING ELSE. THANKS! (CLAIM 06-5307-091) *MW

Incident date: Oct 13, 1993

VEHICLE STALLS LIKE A VAPOR LOCK IN MIDDLE OF TRAFFIC. SOMETHING TELLS THE CAR THAT IT OVERHEATING AND IT WILL JUST STOP RUNNING.*AK

Incident date: May 1, 2000

OWNED 5 BRONCO'S AND 3 OUT OF THE 5 ALL HAD A GAS TANK LEAKAGE PROBLEM. THIS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED.

Incident date: May 1, 2000

OWNED 5 BRONCO'S AND 3 OUT OF THE 5 ALL HAD A GAS TANK LEAKAGE PROBLEM. THIS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED.

Incident date: May 1, 2000

OWNED 5 BRONCO'S AND 3 OUT OF THE 5 ALL HAD A GAS TANK LEAKAGE PROBLEM. THIS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED.

Incident date: Jul 20, 1999

RECALL 94V169 000/PARKING BRAKE: VEHICLE EXPERIENCES INTERMITTENT PROBLEM WITH EMERGENCY BRAKE FAILING TO HOLD. DEALER NOTIFIED, AND INFORMED CONSUMER THAT VEHICLE WAS NOT INCLUDED IN RECALL. *AK

Incident date: Aug 1, 1996

REPORTED PROBLEMS TO MANUFACTURER DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE. WAS TOLD BY DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE THAT NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN BY THEM, AS NO RECALL WAS IN EFFECT. *AK

Incident date: Aug 1, 1996

REPORTED PROBLEMS TO MANUFACTURER DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE. WAS TOLD BY DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE THAT NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN BY THEM, AS NO RECALL WAS IN EFFECT. *AK

Incident date: Aug 1, 1996

REPORTED PROBLEMS TO MANUFACTURER DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE. WAS TOLD BY DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE THAT NO ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN BY THEM, AS NO RECALL WAS IN EFFECT. *AK

Incident date: Dec 4, 1997

FUEL LEAK FROM GAS TANK, GAS TANK SHIELD RUSTED RESULTING IN LEAK. (2ND VEHICLE ON DOC# 607560)

Incident date: Feb 14, 1995

WINDOW MOTOR/BUFFER WIND MECH HAS FAILED TWICE. DEALER NOTIFIED AND THEN MANUFACTURER. HAD TO "FIGHT" FFOR THE REPLACEMENT UNDER WARRANTY THE FIRST TIME. HAD TO "FIGHT" W/ FOMOCO IN ADDITION. HAS FAILED FOR SECOND TIME, THREE MONTHS AGO. ALONG W/ A/C. A/C 1200.00 WINDOW 210.00

Incident date: Feb 14, 1995

BOLTS THAT HOLD THE BUMPER TO THE SUSPENSION BRACKET BROKE OFF, CAUSING BUMPER TO DROP.

Incident date: Jul 30, 1998

WHILE DRVING 35 MPH HAD A DIRECT FRONTAL IMPACT AND THE DRIVER'S AIRBAG DID NOT DEPLOY WHICH DID NOT PROTECT THE OCCUPANT IN ACCIDENT. NO PRIOR PROBLEM WITH THE AIRBAG. CAUSE UNKNOWN, PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS. *AK

Crash

Incident date: Dec 2, 1997

VEHICLE EXPERIENCED AN ELECTRICAL FIRE. *AK

Fire

Incident date: Nov 1, 1996

THE DESIGN OF THE GAS TANK AND GAS TANK BRUSH GUARD ALLOWED WATER AND ROAD DEBRIS TO BECOME TRAPPED BETWEEN THE PARTS, CAUSING RUST AND SUBSEQUENT HOLES IN THE TWO PARTS, RESULTING IN GASOLINE LEAKAGE.

Incident date: Mar 20, 1997

MUFFLER MALFUNCTIONED, ALSO REPLACED POWER DOOR LOCKS. *AK

Incident date: Mar 20, 1997

MUFFLER MALFUNCTIONED, ALSO REPLACED POWER DOOR LOCKS. *AK

Incident date: Sep 21, 1996

TRANSMISSION GEAR SHIFT SLIPPED INTO REVERSE, CAUSING ACCIDENT/INJURY.

1 injured

Incident date: Feb 13, 1997

WHILE PARKED THE VEHICLE CAUGHT ON FIRE UNDER THE HOOD. *AK

Fire

BRAKE AND TRANSMISSION FAILURE, FOUR WHEEL DRIVE MALFUNCTION, AND AN INACCURATE SPEEDOMETER.

HEARD A POPPING AND HISSING NOISE WHILE DRIVING BECAUSE THE EXHAUST AIR SUPPLY CHECK VALVE CAME OFF, ALLOWING THE FUMES TO COME THROUGH THE PASSENGER COMPARTMENT. *AK *JB

Incident date: Jun 13, 1996

GAS TANK LEAK.

AN ELECTRICAL SHORT IN THE IGNITION SWITCH CAUSED THE STEERING COLUMN TO SMOKE WHILE DRIVING THE VEHICLE. *AK *SLC

Incident date: Jun 22, 1996

AFTER STARTING THE VEHICLE, SMOKE STARTED COMING OUT OF THE STEERING COLUMN. PLEASE DESCRIBE. *AK

ELECTRICAL SYSTEM; ELECTRICAL SHORT OR SHOCK CAUSED THE VEHICLE WIRES TO BURN. PLEASE DESCRIBE. *AK

Incident date: Apr 1, 1992

DRIVER'S DOOR RELEASE MECHANISM INOPERATIVE.

Incident date: Apr 1, 1992

PARKING BRAKE OPERATION INTERMITTENT.

Incident date: Apr 1, 1992

FRONT PASSENGER SEAT DOESN'T LOCK IN PLACE. TT

Incident date: Dec 1, 1995

REPLACED MASTER CYLINDER. *AK

Incident date: Dec 1, 1995

PREMATURE WEAR OF FRONT BRAKE PADS. *AK

Incident date: Nov 1, 1995

REAR BRAKES FAILED, COULD NOT STOP VEHICLE. *AK

Incident date: Nov 1, 1995

FAILURE OF THE ABS BRAKES. TT

Incident date: Dec 1, 1995

PREMATURE WEAR OF FRONT BRAKE ROTORS. *AK

Incident date: Jan 18, 1996

PARKING EMERGENCY CABLE RUBBED A HOLE INTO THE BRAKE LINE AND CAUSED BRAKE AND FLUID LOSS. TT

Showing 50 of 56 complaints.

NHTSA Safety Investigations — FORD BRONCO

Investigations opened by NHTSA into potential safety defects. These are separate from recalls and may or may not result in a recall.

PE — Closed — Model Year: 2021

Low-pressure fuel pump failure

On July 29, 2024, the Oï¬ce of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened PE24019 to investigate complaints of low-pressure fuel pump failures in MY 2021 Ford Bronco vehicles. Some consumers reported that the failure occurred without warning while driving, resulting in a complete loss of motive power wi... th no ability to restart the engine. Ford determined that several other vehicle models contain low-pressure fuel pumps substantially similar to the 2021 Ford Bronco, including the 2022-2023 Ford Bronco, 2018-2023 Ford F-150, 2022-2023 Ford Expedition, 2019-2023 Lincoln Navigator, 2020-2023 Ford F-250-F-550, 2024 Ford Super Duty Chassis Cab, 2024-2025 Ford Ranger, 2020-2023 Ford Explorer, 2020-2023 Lincoln Aviator, and 2021-2025 Ford Mustang. ODI's investigation found that the aï¬ected vehicles may lose fuel pressure and ï¬ow from the fuel delivery module (consisting of a low-pressure fuel pump, jet pump, reservoir, and other parts) due to a low-pressure pump failure. This can cause the engine to stall while driving. The root cause is reduced internal clearance in the fuel pump, increasing friction and sensitivity to vapor lock. Fuel blockage from contamination inside the jet pump also contributed to the failure. Ford stated that the contamination source was unknown. On July 7, 2025, Ford ï¬led recall 25V-455 for certain 2021-2023 Ford F-550 SD/F-450 SD/F-350 SD/F-250 SD, 2021-2022 Lincoln Navigator, 2021-2022 Ford Mustang, 2021-2022 Ford F-150, 2021-2023 Ford Explorer, 2022 Ford Expedition, and 2021-2023 Ford Bronco vehicles producedÂ between July 1, 2021, and July 30, 2022. The recall also included certain 2021-2023 Lincoln Aviator produced between July 1, 2021, and December 21, 2022. Ford explained in its recall filingthat the production dates used for the recall were based on changes in the manufacturing process. Specifically, Ford determined that in June 2021, the supplier modified the jet pump manufacturing process, producing fuel pump chambers with a lower-than-specified internal clearance. In July 2022, the supplier implemented corrective actions to the manufacturing process by adding two additional vacuum pumps to reduce contamination during the production of the jet pump. ODI has identified approximately 1,000 reports involving vehicles covered in this investigation but excluded from recall 25V-455. However, even with such reports, these vehicles experienced comparatively lower failure rates than the vehicles that are subject to Recall 25V-455. Ford has explained that these vehicles were excluded from the recall population because they did not experience the manufacturing changes that prompted the recall. Specifically, according to Ford, vehicles built before July 1, 2021 (the recall production start date), were not affected by the supplierâs change to the jet pump manufacturing process. Even after closing this investigation, ODI will continue to monitor complaints for vehicles excluded from recall 25V-455 to consider whether they exhibit the same risks as the vehicles encompassed by the recall. The recall remedy is currently under development. In view of Fordâs recall action, ODI is closing this Preliminary Evaluation, but will continue to monitor the issue as a remedy is developed and implemented. ODI will take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identiï¬cation Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.Read more

EA — Closed — Model Year: 2022

Loss of Motive Power

On July 22, 2022, the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) granted a Defect Petition (DP22001) and opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE22007) to investigate allegations of loss of motive power in model year (MY) 2021 Ford Bronco vehicles equipped with 2.7L EcoBoost engines. Complainants were reporti... ng sudden engine failure while driving resulting in a loss of motive power, often without the ability to restart. During PE22007, the cause of engine failure and loss of motive power in the subject vehicles was determined to be intake valve fracture, and the full scope of vehicles affected by the subject defect was identified as all MY 2021-2022 Ford and Lincoln models equipped with either the 2.7L or 3.0L EcoBoost engines, referred to as the âNanoâ engine family.Â If an intake valve fractures in the subject engines, it may drop into the cylinder and contact the piston, often resulting in catastrophic engine damage. On September 29, 2023, PE22007 was upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA23002) to further investigate the subject defect across the full scope of affected vehicles. During EA23002, ODI visited Ford facilities to review technical information related to intake valve fracture in âNanoâ engines, coordinated with NHTSAâs Vehicle Research and Testing Center (VRTC), and analyzed updated field data relating the subject defect. Forensic analysis of fractured intake valves demonstrated that the defective components exhibited âgrinding burnâ or out of specification hardness in the area of the keeper grooves. The presence of grinding burn is evidence that during the groove grinding phase of production, the temperature of the valve became sufficiently high to alter the microstructure of the material and is indicative that the valve supplierâs manufacturing processes were not within control specifications. Grinding burn results in a hard, brittle microstructure and high residual stresses toward the surface of the valve. Through normal engine loading, a valve with grinding burn will likely fracture at the area of highest vulnerability, which is the third keeper groove. In its response to the EA23002 Information Request (IR) letter, Ford provided evidence of 396 customer complaints (including field reports), 825 warranty claims, and 936 engine exchanges. When considering both ODI and manufacturer failure report data, there have been reports representing 1066 unique vehicles within the subject vehicle population. Analysis of the failure report data demonstrates that vehicles equipped with potentially defective intake valves were built within a production âspike periodâ of May 2021 â October 2021. The beginning of the spike period corresponds to a ramp up in production at the valve supplier manufacturing facility, and the end of the spike period aligns with the implementation of several mid-production process improvements and the decision to change the metal alloy used to produce intake valves from âSilchrome Liteâ to âSilchrome 1â. Ford began investigating the subject defect in July 2021, determined the root cause, and took corrective measures for the new production vehicles. Analysis of the failure report data demonstrates that these corrective actions were successful in eliminating the risk of intake valve fracture for subject vehicles produced after October 2021. However, Ford did not take any field action to address vehicles produced during the spike period, and in the several months following the implementation of the production changes, a significant number of field failures continued to occur. It is Fordâs assessment that not all valves produced during the spike period are defective, and that failures associated with the subject defect occur at low time in service. Analysis of the failure report data demonstrates that the vast majority of failures have occurred before 20,000 miles with over half of all reported failures occurring before 5,000 miles. The rate of reported failures related to the subject defect has steadily decreased since November 2021. ODI coordinated with NHTSAâs National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) to conduct statistical analysis and predict the number of future failures associated with the subject defect. The results of this analysis, and the trends identified through the failure report data are generally consistent with Fordâs assessment that defective intake valves will likely fail at a low time in service and indicate that the majority of subject vehicles equipped with defective valves have already experienced a failure. On August 23, 2024, Ford submitted recall 24V635 for subject vehicles equipped with âNanoâ engines and built within the production spike period identified above (total population 90,736 vehicles). The remedy includes an inspection at a Ford/Lincoln dealership where the lifetime engine cycles of the vehicle will be determined. If a vehicle does not meet a threshold for lifetime engine cycles, the dealership will conduct a high RPM engine cycle accumulation procedure, which aims to identify if the vehicle is equipped with defective intake valves. Any vehicle that fails the accumulation procedure will receive an engine replacement under the recall. In addition to recall 24V635, Ford has stated that it will launch customer satisfaction campaign 24N12, which will provide extended warranty coverage to the subject vehicles through the earlier of 10 years or 150,000 miles. In view of the recall action being taken by Ford, ODI is closing this Engineering Analysis. To review the reports cited in the Closing Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov.Read more

PE — Closed — Model Year: 2021

Loss of motive power due to valve intake failure on Ford Bronco vehicles.

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received a petition dated March 16, 2022, requesting an investigation regarding allegations of defective intake valves in model year (MY) 2021 Ford Bronco vehicles equipped with the 2.7L Eco-boost (âNanoâ) engines.Â The petitioner alleged these ... Read more

DP — Closed — Model Year: 2021

Loss of Motive Power

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) received three petitions on March 17, March 18, and March 29, 2022, which requested a defect investigation into an alleged defect of the valves on model year (MY) 2021 Ford Bronco vehicles equipped with the 2.7L Eco-boost engines. The petitioners alleged tha... Read more

RQ — Closed — Model Year: 1992

PARKING BRAKE

There is no summary currently available

PE — Closed — Model Year: 1988

FORD TRUCK INCONSISTENT VEHICLE CONTROL.

SEE CLOSE RESUME

PE — Closed — Model Year: 1989

FLOORBOARD FRACTURE

There is no summary currently available

PE — Closed — Model Year: 1982

FRONT BRK CALIPER SEIZURE

ANALYSIS:ALLEGEDLY, DURING BRAKE APPLICATION THE DISC BRAKE CALIPERSSEIZE, RESULTING IN EXCESSIVE PULL AND/OR FRONT BRAKE LOCK-UP.SOMEREPORTS CITE A COMPLETE LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL RESULTING IN UNFOREWARNEDAND UNAVOIDABLE TRAVEL INTO OPPOSING TRAFFIC LANES.CONSUMERS CLAIM THATSERVICE PERSONNEL HAVE... Read more

Year	Recalls	Complaints
2026	9	0	View
2025	44	44	View
2024	49	76	View
2023	50	235	View
2022	78	416	View
2021	73	270	View
1999	0	5	View
1998	0	2	View
1997	1	1	View
1996	2	109	View
1995	2	131	View
1994	5	114	View
1993	7	45	View
1992 (current)	4	56
1991	2	37	View
1990	1	77	View
1989	2	118	View
1988	1	68	View
1987	1	61	View
1986	1	43	View
1985	1	24	View
1984	4	11	View
1983	2	4	View
1982	1	1	View
1981	1	2	View
1980	4	0	View
1979	6	2	View
1978	6	0	View
1977	2	1	View
1976	2	0	View
1975	2	0	View
1972	1	0	View
1971	1	0	View
1970	1	0	View
1969	0	1	View
1967	2	2	View

Model	Recalls	Complaints
MUSTANG	1,104	11,600	View
RANGER	928	10,371	View
F-350 SD	776	2,363	View
F-450 SD	692	624	View
F-150	692	46,142	View
F-250 SD	638	3,635	View
EXPLORER	624	42,549	View
F-550 SD	578	603	View

1992 FORD BRONCO

Complaint Statistics

Top Reported Components

NHTSA Safety Investigations — FORD BRONCO

FORD BRONCO — All Years Overview

FORD BRONCO — Year by Year

Other FORD Models