Tl* the contact owns a 1994 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that while driving approximately 40 MPH, it became difficult to steer the vehicle. The contact stated that the front suspension detached at the ball joint. The failure caused the brake dust cover to puncture the tire. The vehicle came to an abrupt stop. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic to be repaired. The ball joint was replaced along with the brake dust cover. The contact stated that the failure recurred on the passenger's side of the vehicle while driving at approximately 10 MPH. The vehicle was not taken back to be repaired. A dealer was not contacted. The manufacturer was not informed of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 140,000.
1994 Ford Crown Victoria: ball joint or control arm failure
22 of the 192 complaints about the 1994 Ford Crown Victoria describe ball joint or control arm failure.
- owner complaints
- 22
- of this car's complaints
- 11%
- typical mileage
- 112,000
- recalls
- 2
Is there a fix? There are 2 recalls for this area of the car. See below
Ball joint or control arm failure by model year
What owners say
Tl*the contact owns a 1994 ford crown victoria. The contact stated that the upper and lower ball joints were very noisy while driving 20 MPH. He suggested that they may be rusty due to the high pitch noise he hears throughout the vehicle. The contact inspected the ball joints and stated that they appeared to be damaged. The vehicle has not yet been inspected by a dealer or mechanic. Through online research, he found the federal safety agency campaign id number 98v322000 (suspension:front:control arm:lower ball joint). The manufacturer stated that the VIN was excluded from the recall. The contact believes that it should be included since the failures were identical. The failure mileage was 40,000 and current mileage was 48,000. Updated 07/28/09. *lj updated 07/30/09.
Tl*the contact owns a 1994 ford crown victoria lx. The contact stated that the vehicle squeaked and squealed. The contact refused to provide detailed failure information. She stated that she experienced the same failure listed in the recall. There is a recall for the suspension: front control upper arm upper ball joints and lower ball joints (the federal safety agency campaign id #95v194000, 98v322000). The mileage information was unavailable because the odometer failed at 162,000 miles.
Dt*: the contact stated while attempting to make a right turn, the lower ball joint on the front passenger side made a rattling noise. The contact recognized the noise from having the driver side lower ball joint replaced last year during regular maintenance. The vehicle has not been inspected. Updated 3/3/2006 - *nm while making a right turn the right front tire exploded due to a break in the lower front control arm and ball joint.
Dt: the contact owns a 1994 ford crown victoria. The tie rod fell off the vehicle on may 1, 2005. The repair shop repaired the problem. The vehicle had not been driving differently before tie rod fell out. Was sitting in a parking spot, and was just backing out when tie rod fell out. *ak
A squeaking noise was heard while applying the brakes. Vehicle vibrated uncontrollably while driving. Consumer drove vehicle to dealer for inspection, and mechanic determined that passenger 's side upper and lower ball joints needed to be replaced due to corrosion.
At highway speed the left lower control arm (tie rod) ball joint catastrophically failed. Fortunately, the car was controllable and pulled to the shoulder. It was later towed to the residence.*ak a check of tsbs/recalls revealed that ford had initiated a recall for certain crown victorias, specifically 1990-1996 police, fleet, and ngv vehicles. Ford (local dealer and corporate) has been advised of the problem but claim the vehicle was not the subject of a recall action. The vehicle in question was equipped with a "handling & performance package" which may have incorporated a steering linkage similar to that subject to ford's recall. I'm concerned for several reasons. First, we bought the car new and it has been well maintained and inspected annually; the joint should not have failed. Second, the joint could be the very same one that was the subject of a recall. In the first concern, ford should take action to ensure that other owners of similarly equipped cars are advised of the possibility. The potential for serious injury was great. In the second, how do I ascertain whether or not the joint was the same one that precipitated the recall? Finally, I plan to document the failure (digital pictures etc) and perform repairs. How should I proceed with confronting ford?
The consumer was pulling into a parking spot, when he heard a noise under the front of the vehicle, then found the tie rod on the ground. The consumer feels that if he would have been driving, this could have been life threatening due to a loss of control.
Consumer states while pulling into a parking spot there was a noise heard under the front of the vehicle. The front tie rod was on the ground. Consumer lost all control of the vehicle. Nlm jlg
Ball joint on right side separated from lower control arm. This vehicle was not identified by ford as having problems with faulty ball joints. I am reporting this to identify there maybe other vehicles with ball joint problems.
While driving, the passenger side lower control arm ball joint broke, causing the passenger side of the vehicle to drop to the ground, consumers steering then became reduced causing the vehicle to sideswipe a tree, and also the tire needed to be replaced due to a large slash being in the tire, on feb 25, 2000 the drivers side of the vehicle began to make a noise, and while the vehicle was parked at the mechanic shop, the drivers side dropped to the ground, consumer was informed that the drivers side front ball joint assembly needed to be replaced, consumer believes that his vehicle should have been included in recall #98v322000.
While driving driver's side and passenger's side wheels malfunctioned. Wheels went outward and landed up, facing pavement on the sides. *ak the lower control arm ball joint failure caused the passenger side of the vehicle to drop and damaged two doors. The driver's side underneath was making a grinding noise. Consumer took to the dealer, the vehicle dropped to the ground while waiting for repair. Consumer states the federal safety agency sent him a recall campaigns 98v32000 but his vehicle was not included.
Related recalls
Suspension: front: control arm: lower ball joint
- What is wrong
- Vehicle description: certain 1996-1999 ford crown victoria police, fleet, natural gas, and 1996-1999 lincoln town car limousine vehicles that were produced with a lower control arm ball joint containing a one piece bearing; and 1990-1996 ford crown victoria police, fleet, and ngv vehicles and 1990-1996 lincoln town car limousine vehicles that have been serviced with either a ball joint containing the one-piece bearing or a front lower control arm containing a ball joint with a one-piece bearing. The one-piece bearing within the lower control arm ball joint can weaken slowly during use and eventually crack. This could result in separation of the ball and cap of the joint, allowing the control arm to drop to the ground.
- Risk
- If this occurs while the vehicle is moving, reduced steering control could occur, increasing the risk of a crash.
- Remedy
- Dealers will replace the lower control arm ball joints (2).
Recall number 98V322000 · Recall details
Suspension: front: control arm: upper arm
- What is wrong
- The bolts that attach the front upper control arms to the frame mounting brackets can loosen and fracture at one of the bolt holes causing substantial negative camber and steering pull to the affected side.
- Risk
- If the driver's side bracket fractured at both bolt holes, the steering control arm can contact the steering column shaft and result in a loss of steering control increasing the potential for an accident.
- Remedy
- Dealers will inspect the torque levels of the four upper control arm mounting bolts, and if any are loose, the brackets will be inspected for damage. If damage is present, it will be repaired.
Recall number 95V194000 · Recall details
Questions about the 1994 Ford Crown Victoria ball joint
Is ball joint or control arm failure a common problem on the 1994 Ford Crown Victoria?
22 of 192 owner complaints about the 1994 Ford Crown Victoria (11%) mention ball joint or control arm failure. The model year with the most reports is 1996.
Is there a recall or service bulletin for this on the 1994 Ford Crown Victoria?
There are 2 recalls and 0 service bulletins for the same area of the car. Check them below with your VIN.
Other symptoms on the 1994 Ford Crown Victoria
Fire or smoke 16Headlights 8ABS 7Grinding brakes 6Transmission failure 6Adaptive cruise 5No deployment 5Brake failure 5Wipers 5
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 1994 Ford Crown Victoria?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history