Tire brand and size: pathfinder sport s a/t 245/75-16 put on rear of 2003 ford e250 extended length work van. Bought new from discount tire. As soon as I got on the interstate I noticed the vehicle felt unstable. Was wandering in rear. When making a lane change is was really bad and felt unsafe as the rear swayed from side to side. Had them take these tires off and replace with a major brand and this problem went away. I highly recommend some one looks into these tires as I think the potential is there for causing a spin out or roll over.
The worst 2003 Ford E-250 problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
- Electrical4
- Steering3
- Acceleration2
- Airbags2
- Brakes2
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Electrical4
- Steering3
- Acceleration2
- Airbags2
- Brakes2
- Tires2
- Suspension1
- Wheels1
Recalls 7
Vehicle speed control
- What is wrong
- Ford is recalling model years 1995-2003 windstar, 2000-2003 excursion diesel, 1993-1997 and 1999-2003 f-250 sd through f-550 sd diesel, 1992-2003 e-150 through e-550, 1995-2002 explorer, 1997 and 2002 mercury mountaineer, 1995-1997 and 2001-2003 ranger, and 1994 f53 vehicles equipped with the texas instruments speed control deactivation switch (scds). The scds may leak internally and then overheat, smoke, or burn.
- Risk
- A vehicle fire could occur with or without the engine running.
- Remedy
- Ford will notify owners that dealers will install a fused wiring harness in line with the scds. On 1999-2003 windstar vehicles with a leaking scds, dealers will also inspect the ABS control module connector and repair as necessary. Repairs will be completed free of charge. The safety recall began on october 27, 2009. Owners may contact ford at 1‑888‑222‑2751.
Recall number 09V399000 · Recall details
Vehicle speed control: cruise control
- What is wrong
- Ford is recalling 225,000 my 1992-2003 econoline, my 1993-1995 taurus sho, my 1992-1998 crown victoria, my 1993 bronco, f-series, my 1995-1997 f-series super duty stripped chassis, my 1992-1998 mercury grand marquis, and my 1992-1995 lincoln town car vehicles. The affected vehicles were previously repaired using a wiring harness that is not compatible with the vehicle circuit polarity.
- Risk
- As a result, the fuse is located in the output circuit rather than in the intended input power feed circuit, and may not offer the intended protection in the event of an electrical short to ground.
- Remedy
- Dealers will install a new wiring harness, or replace the mating electrical component. The recall began on february 18, 2008. Owners may contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673.
Recall number 08V051000 · Recall details
Vehicle speed control
- What is wrong
- On certain pickup trucks, passenger vehicles, sport utility vehicles, and motor homes chassis, the speed control deactivation switch may, under certain conditions, leak internally and then overheat, smoke, or burn.
- Risk
- This could result in an underhood fire.
- Remedy
- Dealers will install a fused wiring harness. Owners of the passenger cars included in this campaign will be instructed to return their vehicles to their dealers to have the speed control deactivation switch disconnected as an interim repair. As soon as repair parts are available (expected october 2007), owners will be instructed to return to the dealers for installation of a fused wiring harness. The recall began on august 13, 2007, and mailing completed by september 19, 2007. Owners may contact ford at 1‑888‑222‑2751.
Recall number 07V336000 · Recall details
Equipment adaptive/mobility
- What is wrong
- On certain vans built on ford e250/e350 chassis and equipped with sure-lok wheelchair securement systems, the sprocket teeth of the retractor assembly is out of alignment.
- Risk
- In the event of a vehicle crash, the wheelchair may not be adequately secured possibly resulting in injuries to a wheelchair occupant.
- Remedy
- Dealers will inspect and replace the wheelchair securement retractors as necessary. Sure-lok is conducting the owner notification and remedy for this campaign. Owners should contact sure-lock at 1‑908‑231‑1804 or accubuilt at 419‑222‑1501.
Recall number 04V589000 · Recall details
Electrical system: wiring
- What is wrong
- On certain vans, a diode in the anti-lock braking system (ABS) module may experience an electrical short.
- Risk
- The electrical short may cause an ABS malfunction that would illuminate the ABS warning light, or the module may overheat resulting in a burning odor, smoke, and/or fire. This condition may occur while the vehicle is being driven or unattended.
- Remedy
- Dealers will install a new fuse in the ABS circuit and install a heat shield over the ABS module. The recall began on october 15, 2004. Owners should contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673. Also ford is extending the limited warranty (for a one time replacement) of the ABS module for a total of 10 years or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date, whichever occurs first. If your vehicle has already accumulated more than 150,000 miles, this coverage will last until september 30, 2005.
Recall number 04V444000 · Recall details
Engine and engine cooling
- What is wrong
- On certain vans, the air filter element material process resulted in an air filter paper element that can smolder or burn. This change in filter paper composition combined with the configuration of the air induction system, may allow hot carbon particles to contact the air filter element during certain driving conditions that create hot particles.
- Risk
- These hot particles may ignite the air filter element with the potential for air induction system damage or underhood fire.
- Remedy
- Dealers will inspect and replace the air filter element. The recall began september 27, 2004. Owners should contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673. Also ford is extending the limited warranty (for a one time replacement) of the ABS module for a total of 10 years or 150,000 miles from the warranty start date, whichever occurs first. If your vehicle has already accumulated more than 150,000 miles, this coverage will last until september 30, 2005.
Recall number 04V445000 · Recall details
Equipment: other: labels
- What is wrong
- Certain vans and wagons fail to conform to the requirements of part 567, "certification." for certain 2003 e250 vans built with lt225/75r16e tires, the rear axle rating is incorrectly listed on the label. In addition, the tire pressure is incorrectly listed on the label for the rear tires on certain 2002 e350 wagons and for the front tires on certain 2002 e250 vans built with these tires.
- Risk
- Failure to follow proper vehicle loading specifications or tire inflation recommendation can result in tire failure, increasing the risk of a crash.
- Remedy
- Owners will be provided with supplementary tire labels containing correct information and installation instructions. If an owner so desires, their dealer can install the label for them. The recall began on july 8, 2004. Owners should contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673.
Recall number 04V232000 · Recall details
See all 7 recalls for the 2003 Ford E-250
Defect investigations
HVAC Switch Failures
This investigation was opened based on one complaint and reports from four transportation fleets alleging 182 blower motor control switch failures.ODI was concerned that these melting and burning switches could lead to an open flame that could spread throughout the vehicle.After a comprehensive review of all data related to overheating blower motor control switches in the subject vehicles, ODI did not identify the existence of a safety defect trend.ODI reviewed 1,036 complaints, claims, and field reports of failed blower motor control switches and determined that only two fires were likely to have been caused by a failing subject blower motor control switch.This represents a failure rate of 0.2 R/100K on a population of 1,076,975 vehicles that have been in service for up to 14 years.ODI has found that when the subject switches do fail and begin to melt, they are constructed in a manner that typically prevents the failing switch from igniting and developing into an open flame.Ford Motor Company has agreed to take two actions to further reduce the likelihood an overheated blower motor switch in the subject vehicles.Ford informed ODI that it has implemented a series of design changes to the subject switch that will help prevent it from developing internal high resistance short circuits.Ford has also informed ODI that it would release a Technical Service Bulletin (TSB-11-11-21) instructing subject vehicle owners to replace the electrical connector at the same time a failed switch is replaced.In light of the low rate of failure resulting in open flame and fire spread on the subject vehicles, and Ford's actions to reduce the likelihood of a switch failure through switch design changes and a TSB, further use of agency resources does not appear to be warranted.The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that no safety-related defect exists.The agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.The ODI complaints cited above can be reviewed at www-odi.the federal safety agency.dot.gov/owners/Searchreference under the following (ODI) numbers: 10427875, 10114393, 10257890For additional information, see the attached closing report.
EA10003
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 the federal safety agency 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 the federal safety agency?s limited resources to best accomplish the agency?s safety mission, the petition is denied.
DP05005
Technical service bulletins for the 2003 Ford E-250 16
Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.
- This SKU is a front upper ball joint
- Ford: when shifting between park, reverse and/or during 2-3 shift, an intermittent clunk occurs with a...
- Brake booster system may exhibit a brake pedal kickback and/or grabbing condition when applying the brakes. nj
- Headlight adjustment needed. kb
- Malfunction indicator lamp on with diagnostic trouble code P1131 and/or P1151 - 4.2L engine. tt
- Headlight adjustment - chassis cab incomplete vehicles. tt
- Diagnostic trouble code B1876, B1880, B1915 and/or B1920 in the ecs module - vehicles equipped with...
- Vibration/harshness above 45 mph (72 km/h) after tire balance. tt
- Customer satisfaction program 04N03. additional warranty coverage for anti-lock brake system module. tt
- Intermittent clunk on 3-2 downshift during coastdown/tip-in. oasis. to include 2005 F-150, e-series and...
2003 Ford E-250 fuel economy
Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.
| Engine | Drive | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4.2L 6‑cyl | RWD | 12 | 16 | 14 |
| 4.6L 8‑cyl | RWD | 12 | 17 | 14 |
| 5.4L 8‑cyl | RWD | 12 | 15 | 13 |
What 2003 Ford E-250 owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
Tl* the contact owns a 2003 ford e-250. The contact stated that the engine temperature gauge failed. The contact took the vehicle to the dealer and was told that the instrument panel would need to be replaced. The failure prevented the contact from knowing if the vehicle was overheating. The vehicle was not repaired. The failure and current mileages were 60,000.
Tl* the contact owned a 2003 ford e-250. The contact stated that upon starting, the vehicle surged in reverse and crashed into a building. The vehicle was destroyed and towed to an independent repair shop. The failure was not diagnosed. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was 170,000. The VIN was unavailable.
Tl* the contact owns 2003 ford e-250. The contact stated while driving 2 MPH, pressure was applied to the brake pedal and it depressed to the floor. The contact engaged the emergency brake in order to stop the vehicle. An independent mechanic examined the vehicle and stated that there was a small pinhole in the brake lines that developed due to corrosion. As a result, brake fluid was leaking from the brake lines. The vehicle was in the process of being repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure, but offered no assistance. The failure and current mileages was 93,636.
Loss of instruments in 2003 f250 diesel with 50,153 miles. Fuse replaced by service center and instruments came on. 3 days later they went off while in 4 wheel low and the the engine stopped (battery's dead). I had no control over steering and went off the road. Repair of damaged wiring in steering column fixed problem. This is a well documented problem on the web and known to the service centers I have contacted. If wiring is worn in a 50,000 mile truck I would think it probably will occur in similar models. The truck could have sustained severe damage and possibly resulted in injury. Why no recall or at least notification of owners.
Tl*the contact owns a 2003 ford e-250. The contact noticed the ABS warning light was illuminated on the instrument panel and the gears would not engage. The contact restarted the vehicle and it began to function normally; however, the ABS light continued to illuminate. The dealer was contacted and stated there was a fee to diagnose the failure. The vehicle was not taken to the dealer for diagnostic testing. The vehicle was not repaired. There was a recall under the federal safety agency campaign id number: 04v444000 (electrical system:wiring) that may be related to the failure but the VIN was not included. The approximate failure mileage was 84,000.
Tl*the contact owns a 2003 ford e-250. The vehicle has trail king a/s mud n snow load range e tires, size lt235 85 r1. The contact noticed pulsation and vibration in the front end of his vehicle while driving 75 MPH. A week later, while driving approximately 75 MPH again, the vibration worsened. Almost immediately, the tread separated and the front passenger side tire exploded, which resulted in $1,900 worth of damage to the vehicle. The manufacturer has not been notified. The current mileage was approximately 115,000 and failure mileage was approximately 114,800.
Tl*the contact owns a 2003 ford e250. While driving 35 MPH in inclement weather conditions, the contact crashed into a lightpole and several trees. The vehicle was completely destroyed and none of the air bags deployed. A police report was filed. The vehicle has not been inspected to determine the cause of the failure. The manufacturer and dealer have not been notified. The failure and current mileages were 27,000. Updated 03/04/09. *lj updated 03/04/09.
I received a recall notice (#05s28) from ford concerning a defective speed control deactivation switch (creating a fire hazard) on a vehicle I own. When I contacted dealership service departments as instructed (two different dealerships) I was told the necessary parts will not be available until at least december 07 but that I could have the speed control disconnected until parts were available (meaning two trips to the dealership - two days without use of a company vehicle). I have contacted ford directly and was told the same. How can it possibly take longer to obtain replacements for hazardous defective parts than it takes to order a custom vehicle from the factory? Does your organization have any authority to force a manufacturer to expedite such matters?
Dt*: the contact stated while driving 35 MPH around a curve an accident occurred trying to avoid an on-coming vehicle. The consumer hit a railroad post. This launched the vehicle into a creek. The air bags did not deploy, however the seat belts did restrain the contact. Due to the air bag's failure to deploy, the contact was seriously injured. The fire department rescued the contact and a police report was processed at the scene of the accident.*ak updated 08/08/06.
Compare the 2003 Ford E-250
Other model years
1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201620172022
Questions about the 2003 Ford E-250
Is the 2003 Ford E-250 reliable?
Owners have filed 17 complaints about the 2003 Ford E-250, 2.1 times a typical E-250 model year.
What is the most common problem with the 2003 Ford E-250?
Electrical system, with 4 complaints, typically around 50,103 miles. Next is steering (3).
How many recalls does the 2003 Ford E-250 have?
7 recalls, covering vehicle speed control, equipment adaptive/mobility and electrical system.
Was there a recall on the 2003 Ford E-250 electrical?
Yes, 1 recall: 04V444000. Check your VIN to see if your car still needs the free repair.
What gas mileage does the 2003 Ford E-250 get?
Official estimates for the 2003 Ford E-250 range from 13 to 14 mpg combined. The most efficient version (4.2L 6-cyl, RWD) gets 12 city and 16 highway.
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2003 Ford E-250?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history