1979 FORD F-250

0 recalls, 1 complaints

No recalls found for this vehicle.

Complaint Statistics

1 total complaints

Top Reported Components

Component	Complaints
TIRES	1

Incident date: Jun 5, 2012

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS A 1979 FORD F-250 WITH BF GOODRICH KO ALL TERRAIN TIRES, SIZE: 35X12.5R16. THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE TREAD WAS SEPARATING ON ALL FOUR TIRES. THE CONTACT SPOKE WITH THE MANUFACTURER AND WAS TOLD THAT THE TIRES WERE OUTDATED AND DID NOT HAVE ANY COVERAGE. THE DOT NUMBER WAS NO... Read more

NHTSA Safety Investigations, FORD F-250

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: 2017

Power tailgate opens unintended

By letter dated December 4, 2019, Ford Motor Company (Ford) notified the Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) of a safety defect that may exist in model years (MY) 2017 through 2019 Ford Super Duty F-250, F-350, F-450 vehicles equipped with an electric tailgate. Following the receipt of five consum... er complaints alleging unintended tailgate opening without vehicle operator knowledge, while the vehicles were in motion, NHTSA opened this investigation to assess the manufacturer's data including warranty claims, field reports, design changes, etc.In vehicles equipped with an electric tailgate, water can enter the electrical wiring system and may cause a short circuit resulting in the unintended activation and release of the tailgate latch. This could allow unintended opening of the tailgate while the vehicle is in motion.Analysis of the data provided by Ford found that the frequency of a tailgate opening unintended was high in vehicles equipped with electric tailgates. Unintended tailgate opening without vehicle operator knowledge may result in loss of unrestrained cargo, increasing the risk of a crash. In response to this investigation, Ford decided to conduct recall 19V-864.Owners will be notified by mail and instructed to take their vehicle to a Ford dealer to modify the tailgate/frame wiring harnesses by adding jumper pigtails to isolate the tailgate release control circuits, and will install a new tailgate handle release switch. With recall action 19V-864 taken by Ford Motor Company this investigation is closed. Further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by NHTSA that a safety-related defect does not exist on other model or MY vehicles outside of the recall scope. The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.The ODI reports cited above can be reviewed at: http://www-odi.nhtsa.dot.gov/owners/SearchNHTSAID using the following complaint identification numbers: 10984283,11004227,11082643,11090089,11104638,11115381,11140680,11141071, 11141075,11141174,11141200,11141331,11141447,11141547,11141548,11142572, 11142618,11142657,11153541,11153959,11157225,11160936,11165124,11165590, 11166199,11166802,11170049,11171409,11171509,11171685,11180009,11182035, 11186146,11191151,11191353,11193045,11194958,11203615,11206443,11209199, 11229482,11230768,11233349,11233436,11255126,11265643.Read more

RQ, Closed , Model Year: 2011

Vehicle Commanded Engine Shutdown

The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened this RQ to investigate allegations that the scope and remedy of safety recall 13V-535 were inadequate. Recall 13V-535 was limited to a relatively small population of Ambulance Package vehicles and ODI received complaints of pickup trucks and Fire Engi... ne Prep Package vehicles being affected by the same defect. Ford manufactured approximately 555,985 subject vehicles between February 22, 2010 and January 30, 2015 that may be affected by defective EGT sensors and Powertrain Control Module (PCM) software calibration. The subject vehicles are equipped with four (4) EGT sensors to monitor engine operating conditions. An EGT sensor fault may produce false exhaust over-temperature signals. If these signals are produced, the Powertrain Control Module (PCM) implements a Failure Management Effects Mode (FMEM) and the driver receives a Stop Safely Now (SSN) system warning on the instrument cluster message center. The FMEM triggers a 70% reduction in available engine power over a period of no more than 45 seconds, during which it may not be possible to accelerate or maintain vehicle speed. The PCM then commands the engine to shut down when vehicle speed reaches approximately 1 mph. There is no immediate restart capability. Depending on the PCM software calibration, ignition key position and ambient temperature conditions, the engine may not restart until the end of a 10-60 minute cool down period.Ford and its component supplier(s) made numerous changes to the PCM software calibration and the design, material and manufacture of the EGT sensors over the period of subject vehicle production. This continuous product improvement affected vehicle performance regarding the alleged defect. Ford acknowledges the defect condition in the subject vehicles but argues that an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety is limited to Ambulance Package and Fire Engine Prep Package vehicles where commanded shutdown could impact emergency response and patient care. Ford also argues that the defect trend is in decline. Ford also initiated a new safety recall (15V-175) to address the 13V-535 remedy concerns in the Ambulance Package vehicles and Fire Engine Prep Package vehicles. The 15V-175 remedy reprograms the PCM with a new software calibration that stops a single EGT sensor fault to cause the vehicle to enter the FMEM shutdown mode.Ford also initiated an EPA emissions recall (14E03) for all subject vehicles that reprograms the PCM with the software calibration employed in safety recall 15V-175. Finally, Ford initiated a Customer Satisfaction Program (15M01) providing extended warranty coverage of 8 years or 80,000 miles for the the EGT sensors on certain MY2011-2012 subject vehicles.Due to the EPA emissions recall, that had a 66.6% completion rate in Ford's December 2015 progress report to the EPA, the defect trend is in decline. ODI is not aware of any crashes, deaths or injuries related to the alleged defect.ODI believes the alleged defect poses a safety risk but notes that the EPA emissions recall is addressing the safety problem.Compelling issuance of a duplicate recall would not represent a wise use of agency resources.Accordingly, this Recall Query is closed.This action is not a finding that no defect exists and NHTSA will take further action if such action is warranted.Read more

PE, Closed , Model Year: 2008

Alleged Loss of Steering

The Office of DefectsInvestigation (ODI) opened PE13-014 after identifying five complaints alleging steering gear failure in model year (MY) 2008 Ford F-250 and F-350 Super Duty pick-up trucks and to evaluate the relationship between the design history of the steering gear assembly and the alleged d... efect.As background, ODI investigated steering gear sector shaft fractures in approximately 1.3 million MY 1999 - 2001 Ford Super Duty pick-up trucks and MY 2000 - 2001 Ford Excursion sport utility vehicles in Engineering Analysis EA01-009.The investigation determined that the sector shaft failures were the result of extraordinary, possibly multiple, impacts and not the result of fatigue.No defect in design, manufacturing or materials was identified in the sector shaft.EA01-009 was closed August 19, 2003 with 169 complaints, resulting in a rate of 12.9 incidents per 100,000 vehicles after approximately one year of service.Ford increased the diameter of the sector shaft from 1.375 inches to 1.625 inches at the start of MY 2005 production, increasing the resistance of the steering gear assembly to torsional overload by approximately 48% and changing the failure mode from sector shaft fracture to cracked or broken sector shaft gear teeth.The redesigned steering gear assembly was used in approximately 1.1 million MY 2005 through 2009 Ford Super Duty pick-up trucks, including the subject vehicles.Figure 1 shows the basic steering system design used in Ford Super Duty trucks investigated in EA01-009 and PE13-014. Figure 2 shows the locations of failures resulting from impact related torsional overloading of the sector shaft for the subject vehicles and the prior generation Ford Super Duty trucks investigated in EA01-009.Figure 3 shows an example of a failed sector shaft investigated in EA01-009 and comparisons of fracture surfaces of sector shafts failing from fatigue loading and from torsional overload.Ford provided field return part analysis of failed steering gears from MY 2005 through 2009 Super Duty trucks found evidence of broken sector shaft gear teeth and piston damage consistent with incidents of single event overload (Figure 4).Laboratory analysis found no evidence of fatigue or material property defects in any of the fractures.Analysis of complaint rates by vehicle build month showed no patterns indicating potential manufacturing quality issues and no difference before and after Ford introduced design changes to the input shaft and sector shaft seals in July 2007 to address potential leak concerns (Figure 5).Analysis of failures by time in service indicates a random failure pattern/distribution, consistent with incidents of impact induced overload (Figure 6). The complaint rate for the subject vehicles after approximately 5 to 6 years, 7.1 incidents per 100,000 vehicles, is lower than the rate observed in EA01-009. Furthermore, similar to the condition investigated in EA01-009, a number of incident records include evidence of impact loads (e.g., curb strikes) and several alleged crashes include incidents in which information suggests that the steering gear failure was most likely a result of crash forces, rather than the cause of the crash.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 will monitor this issue and reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.The ODI complaints cited above can be reviewed at wwRead more

EA, Closed , Model Year: 2005

VIOLENT FRONT END OSCILLATION

THIS INVESTIGATION WAS OPENED BASED ON 78 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS OF SEVERE SUSPENSION AND STEERING WHEEL OSCILLATIONS AFTER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TRAVELED OVER AN UNEVEN SURFACE.ODI WAS CONCERNED ABOUT THESE COMPLAINTS BECAUSE MANY OF THEM ALLEGED LOSS OF CONTROL AND THE LOSS OF CONTROL OCCURREDAT SPEED... S ABOVE 50 MILES PER HOUR.AT THE TIME THESE COMPLAINTS WERE RECEIVED, ODI WAS ALSO AWARE OF THE TSB 07-10-10 AND EARLY WARNING FIELD REPORTS THAT DISCUSSED THE SHIMMY CONDITION ON THE SUBJECT VEHICLES.SINCE OPENING THIS INVESTIGATION, ODI HAS CONFIRMED, BASED ON CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, WARRANTY DATA, TESTING CONDUCTED BY VRTC, AND ODI INSPECTION OF COMPLAINT VEHICLES, THAT THE OWNERS OF THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE EXPERIENCING SHIMMY EVENTS ON THEIR VEHICLES.HOWEVER, ODI HAS ALSO CONFIRMED THAT OWNERS TYPICALLY DO NOT MAINTAIN THEIR TIRES AT THE PRESSURES RECOMMENDED BY FORD ON THE TIRE LABEL.FURTHER, ODI HAS FOUND THAT IN ORDER FOR SHIMMY TO OCCUR, TIRE PRESSURES MUST BE SUBSTANTIALLY BELOW (AT LEAST 20%) THOSE SPECIFIED ON THE VEHICLE TIRE LABEL.ODI CONSIDERS THESE UNSAFE TIRE CONDITIONS TO BE THE RESULT OF ONE OF THREE TYPICAL SITUATIONS.THE TIRES ARE BEING IMPROPERLY MAINTAINED, THE OWNERS ARE INTENTIONALLY SETTING THE TIRE PRESSURES LOW TO ENHANCE RIDE QUALITY, OR AFTERMARKET TIRES (NOT DESIGNED FOR USE ON THE VEHICLE) ARE INSTALLED TO CHANGE THE APPEARANCE OR FUNCTION OF THE VEHICLE.THE SUBJECT VEHICLES ARE INTENDED AND DESIGNED TO BE USED AS HEAVY DUTY VEHICLES AND AS SUCH REQUIRE THAT THE TIRES BE CAPABLE OF HANDLING THE LOADS FOR WHICH THE VEHICLE IS DESIGNED AND MARKETED.IN ORDER FOR THE TIRES TO BE CAPABLE OF HANDLING THESE LOADS, THE PROPER TIRE PRESSURE MUST BE MAINTAINED.IN LIGHT OF THE INFORMATION GATHERED IN THIS INVESTIGATION AND FORD'S AGREEMENT TO NOTIFY SUBJECT VEHICLE OWNERS (NOW AND EVERY TWO YEARS UNTIL THE VEHICLES REACH TEN YEARS FROM THEIR PRODUCTION DATE) ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING PROPER TIRE PRESSURES ON THEIR VEHICLES, FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, SEE THE ATTACHED CLOSING REPORT.Read more

PE, Closed , Model Year: 2005

VIOLENT FRONT END OSCILLATION

ODI HAS RECEIVED 78 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS OF SEVERE SUSPENSION AND STEERING WHEEL SHIMMY AND OSCILLATIONS COMMENCING AFTER THE SUBJECT VEHICLES TRAVELED OVER AN UNEVEN ROAD SURFACE. THE MAJORITY OF THESE INCIDENTS OCCURRED AT SPEEDS OF 50 MPH OR GREATER.THIRTEEN OF THE COMPLAINTS RECEIVED BY ODI ALLEG... Read more

RQ, Closed , Model Year: 1999

PARKING BRAKE FAILURE

ON MAY 11, 1998, FORD MOTOR COMPANY FILED A DEFECT INFORMATION REPORT CONCERNING PARKING BRAKE FAILURE ON CERTAIN 1999 F-350 SUPER DUTY VEHICLES BUILT AT THE KENTUCKY TRUCK PLANT FROM JANUARY 26, 1998 THROUGH APRIL 24, 1998; RECALL 98V-101.THE REDUCTION IN PARKING BRAKE EFFECTIVENESS MAY OCCUR ON SO... Read more

PE, Closed , Model Year: 1999

STEERING SHAFT FRACTURE

ALLEGED THAT THE STEERING SHAFT MAY FRACTURE

PE, Closed , Model Year: 1994

SEPARATED FRONT SUSPENSION

CONSUMER COMPLAINTS REPORT THAT BOLTS WHICH RETAIN THE AXLE PIVOT BRACKET TO THE FRAME CROSS MEMBER CAN LOOSEN OR FAIL, CAUSING THE INBOARD END OR THE AXLE TO BECOME DETACHED FROM THE VEHICLE.OWNERS ALLEGE THAT THIS COULD RESULT IN LOSS OF STEERING CONTROL, HOWEVER THE COMPLAINT DATA SHOWS ONLY ONE ... INCIDENT WHERE THE VEHICLE LEFT THE ROADWAY FOLLOWING AXLE SEPARATION, WITH NO DAMAGE TO THE VEHICLE.IN ADDITION TO THE 225 CONSUMER COMPLAINTS, THERE WERE 4,315 WARRANTY CLAIMS RELATED TO THE FRONT SUSPENSION AND MEMBERS, AND 22 VEHICLES WERE REPLACED FOR GOODWILL.DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY FORD, UNDER REQUEST FOR CONFIDENTIAL TREATMENT INDICATE THAT THE BOLTS WERE INADEQUATE FOR THE DURABILITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE VEHICLE.ALSO, BOLTS WERE FOUND TO HAVE BEEN INADEQUATELY TORQUED AT ONE OR MORE ASSEMBLY PLANTS.OTHER FACTORS, SUCH AS WAX TREATMENT OF THE FRAME, CONTRIBUTED TO THE PROBLEM.INCREASED BOLT DIAMETER AND INCREASED TORQUE APPARENTLY CORRECTED THE PROBLEM.A SERVICE BULLETIN, 96-20-13, WAS ISSUED TO ADVISE DEALERS OF THIS CORRECTIVE ACTION.IN THESE DOCUMENTS, FORD ALSO REPORTED THAT A VEHICLE, EQUIPPED FOR SIMULTANEOUS CATASTROPHIC FAILURE OF ALL PIVOT BRACKET FASTENERS, WAS EVALUATED RESULTING IN A SLIGHT VEHICLE PULL TO ONE SIDE WITH NO LOSS OF VEHICLE CONTROL.ODI HAS NOT REPLICATED FORD'S VEHICLE TESTING, HOWEVER ANALYSIS OF THE DESIGN OF THE FRONT SUSPENSION INDICATES THAT EVEN IF THE INBOARD END OF THEAXLE BECAME DISCONNECTED FROM THE FRAME, THE OUTBOARD END WOULD REMAIN FIRMLY ATTACHED TO THE LEAF SPRING WITH TWO U-BOLTS.THIS WOULD RETAIN THE WHEEL IN ITS APPROXIMATE POSITION, ALTHOUGH THE WHEEL ALIGNMENT WOULD BE GREATLY IN ERROR.THEREFORE IT IS UNLIKELY THAT CONTROL OF THE VEHICLE WOULD BE LOST.OWNERS REPROT MANY SIGNIFICANT NOISES IN THE SUSPENSION, SUCH AS CREAKING, GROANING, CLUNKING, AND SQUEAKING, PRIOR TO NOTICING ANY SEPARATION OF THE AXLE.THIS PROVIDES WARNING OF THE LOOSENING OF THE BOLTS TO THE DRIVER, AND SHOULD NOT BE IGNORED.FORD HAS STATED THAT REPAIRS WILL BE COVERED UNDER THE VEHICLE'S BUMPER WARRANTY.COMPLAINTS ABOUT WARRANTY COVERAGE BY A FORD DEALER SHOULD BE ADDRESSED TO FORD, OR TO APPROPRIATE STATE AND LOCAL AGENCIES.A SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT TREND HAS NOT BEEN IDENTIFIED AT THIS TIME AND FURTHER USE OF AGENCY RESOURCES DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE WARRANTED.THE CLOSING OF THIS INVESTIGATION DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A FINDING BY NHTSA THAT NO SAFETY-RELATED DEFECT EXISTS.THE AGENCY RESERVES THE RIGHT TO TAKE FURTHER ACTION IF WARRANTED BY THE CIRCUMSTANCES.Read more

PE, Closed , Model Year: 1992

ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRES

There is no summary currently available

FORD F-250 - All Years Overview

Complete safety history for the FORD F-250 across all model years (1991, 2020).

152 Total Recalls

11,563 Total Complaints

9 Investigations

375 Reported Crashes

300 Reported Fires

19 Reported Deaths

FORD F-250 - Year by Year

Compare recalls and complaints across model years. Click any year to see full details.

Year	Recalls	Complaints
2022	0	156	View
2021	0	209	View
2020	1	352	View
2019	4	1,922	View
2018	1	616	View
2017	2	1,718	View
2016	0	430	View
2015	2	426	View
2014	0	236	View
2013	0	153	View
2012	1	423	View
2011	2	384	View
2010	0	109	View
2009	1	92	View
2008	6	255	View
2007	4	84	View
2006	3	332	View
2005	1	207	View
2004	7	201	View
2003	7	151	View
2002	7	189	View
2001	9	269	View
2000	10	417	View
1999	19	702	View
1998	9	76	View
1997	14	348	View
1996	5	212	View
1995	4	238	View
1994	10	156	View
1993	9	183	View
1992	7	149	View
1991	7	145	View
1990	0	5	View
1989	0	14	View
1979 (current)	0	1

Other FORD Models

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

Vehicle Safety

Consumer Safety

Infrastructure

Public Health