The contact owns a 1999 Ford E-350 Jamboree equipped with Sailun Tires, Tire Line: Terramax H/T, Tire Size: 225/75/R16, DOT Number: (535PLE50). The contact stated that while driving approximately 55 MPH, there were pieces of the driver's side inside dual tire striking the underside of the vehicle and hitting the highway. The contact managed to drive the vehicle back to his residence. The contact stated that the tread had separated leaving only the steel belt and the side wall. The vehicle was not taken to be diagnosed. The dealer was not contacted. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate vehicle failure mileage was 80,000 and the tire failure mileage was 5,000.
The worst 1999 Ford E-350 problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Tires24
- Engine13
- Fuel system9
- Steering6
- Brakes5
- Electrical5
- Airbags3
- Suspension3
- Acceleration2
- Body2
- Wheels2
- Seat belts1
- Visibility1
Specific symptoms reported on the 1999 Ford E-350
Recalls 9
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 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 will handle the repairs for this campaign. Owners should contact sure-lock at 1‑908‑231‑1804 or mobilityworks at 1‑800‑769‑8267.
Recall number 04V562000 · Recall details
Fuel system, gasoline: storage: tank assembly
- What is wrong
- Vehicle description: on certain vans with ambulance prep packages or other severe-duty applications involving operation at or near the gross vehicle weight with frequent twisting of the vehicle body, such as off-road, rough road or speed bump events, the 35 gallon mid-ship fuel tank could develop a crack where it contacts the frame cross member. If the fuel tank cracks, fuel leakage could occur.
- Risk
- Fuel leakage in the presence of an ignition source could result in a fire.
- Remedy
- Dealers will inspect the fuel tank and, if cracked, will replace the tank. Insulator pads will be installed on all vehicles to reduce the stress levels in the fuel tank. Owner notification began april 19, 2001. Owners who take their vehicles to an authorized dealer on an agreed upon service date and do not receive the free remedy within a reasonable time should contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673.
Recall number 01V114000 · Recall details
Equipment: other: labels
- What is wrong
- Vehicle description: bi-fuel cng pickup trucks and bi-fuel cng vans, modified by cfi control systems, inc., fail to conform to the requirements of fmvss no. 303, "fuel system integrity of compressed natural gas vehicles." the label affixed to the fuel filler door by the vehicle modifier contains the inspection date and expiration date of the cng tank. However, it does not contain the statement "see instructions on the fuel container for inspection and service life."
- Risk
- These vehicles do not comply with the requirements.
- Remedy
- Owners will be provided a label with the required statement, along with instructions for affixing the label at the fuel filler door. Owner notification began november 2, 2000. Owners who take their vehicles to an authorized dealer on an agreed upon service date and do not receive the free remedy within a reasonable time should contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673.
Recall number 00V284000 · Recall details
Wheels: lugs/nuts/bolts/studs
- What is wrong
- Vehicle description: cutaways and stripped chassis with single rear wheels. The lug nuts can potentially bottom out on a shoulder on the studs.
- Risk
- If this occurs, there can be an inadequate clamp load to attach the wheel to the axle, resulting in noise, damage to the wheel and hub, or in extreme cases, loss of a rear wheel while the vehicle is being driven.
- Remedy
- Dealers will replace the rear wheel attaching studs.
Recall number 00V115000 · Recall details
Latches/locks/linkages: doors: latch
- What is wrong
- Vehicle description: utility vans equipped with the "60/40" hinged side cargo doors. The strikers for the 60/40 door single latch system were found to contain stress cracks at the striker wire lower stake joint. Strikers with stress cracks may not meet the requirements of fmvss no. 206, "door locks and door retention components."
- Risk
- In the event of a crash, the door strikers may not hold the door, increasing the risk of personal injury or property damage.
- Remedy
- Dealers will replace the door striker.
Recall number 99V046000 · Recall details
Power train: manual transmission
- What is wrong
- Vehicle description: pickup trucks built with single rear wheels and equipped with 3.55:1 and 3.73:1 axle ratio. These vehicles were built with incorrect speedometer driven gears, resulting in a lower speedometer reading than the actual vehicle speed being driven.
- Risk
- This can result in the vehicle being driven at an unsafe or illegal speed should the driver not realize that his vehicle road speed is greater than the speedometer indication.
- Remedy
- Dealers will install the correct speedometer gear.
Recall number 98V257000 · Recall details
See all 9 recalls for the 1999 Ford E-350
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
HVAC Switch Failures
ODI has received 1 complaint and reports from 4 transportation fleets alleging 182 switch failures.Each fleet operates mini buses built on a Ford E350 or E450 cutaway chassis.The OEM HVAC blower switches have melted, smoked, burned or experienced open flame and become inoperable on vehicles in each fleet.Some drivers have reported a burning smell or smoke coming from the dash.One fleet reported a vehicle fire.No injuries were sustained.However, the bus was carrying special needs children when the driver noticed smoke coming from the dash.The driver was able to evacuate the children prior to the vehicle becoming engulfed in flames.This PE has been upgraded to an Engineering Analysis (EA) to determine if the blower motor switch failures create a situation where a vehicle fire is possible and presents a safety risk to the driver and other passengers.
PE09055
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
Rapid tire deflation
This investigation was opened on certain ford pickup trucks and vans to evaluate the effects of a valve stem ejection (with rapid air loss) and a slow leaking valve stem on vehicle handing.during the investigation, odi evaluated over 1,100 complaints and warranty claims, conducted vehicle dynamic testing on a subject vehicle with the failure mode replicated, interviewed owners, and examined complaint vehicles in the field.the results of the test program indicates the effect of a valve stem ejection on these vehicles is easily controlled. Further, with a population of almost 900,000 vehicles, having two to four years of exposure, odi is aware of only 3 minor crashes and is unaware of any injuries.the small number of crashes relative to the large population of vehicles is consistent with the testing which was performed. Therefore, this investigation is closed.see the attached report for full technical details.
EA02018
Blow back during refueling
There is no summary currently available
PE99047
Technical service bulletins for the 1999 Ford E-350 32
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
- Brake booster system may exhibit a brake pedal kickback and/or grabbing condition when applying the brakes
- Cracks in the left or right spring tower flange
- Vibration/harshness above 45 mph (72 km/h) after tire balance
- Clunk from front suspension
- A bump steer steering feeling, noted when the vehicle's front wheels/tires contact road surface irregularities
- Malfunction indicator lamp (MIL) illumination with no hard fault
- Subject regarding early wear of the inner brake pad on the rear disc brakes
- Vibration / roughness on acceleration or under load at about 50-55 mph. tt
- Concerns with bump steer steering feeling noted when front wheels / tires contact road surface irregularities
What 1999 Ford E-350 owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
I recently purchased a used 24' 1999 winnebago itasca spirit with very low mileage and at that time I noticed a shaking or vibration problem possibly coming from the tires. I owned a motor home in the past and have some experience. This motor home sat for several years so I attributed the shaking to the memory in the rubber of flat spots on the bottom from sitting for a long time that usually smooth out when driven especially after 30 or 40 miles on a warm day, but after a 400 mile trip it didn't smooth out, in fact it seems to have worsened. Before purchasing it from a private party I ran an instavin and carfax report and only discovered an uncompleted the federal safety agency recall #05s28 on the speed control only. I then searched several forums and discovered many, many reports of the same problem with the shaking and learned it is due to faulty wheels and ford is not making good the problem but offered an expensive fix that I understand is also iffy. I am very concerned about my family's safety driving on these defective wheels and first looked into replacing the tires which I learned isn't the problem but the faulty wheels that were an oem ford part, so I want to add my complaint to the many you already have and maybe ford will fix this potentially serious safety problem.
I was in an accident and my air bags did not work I have damage to front end and rear end
Tl* the contact owns a 1999 ford e-350 equipped with nexen tires, tire line: roadian ht, tire size: lt225/ 75r16 (n/a), and dot number: beakbamr3312. The contact stated that while driving at various speeds, the steering wheel started violently shaking without warning. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic where it was diagnosed that the front passenger side tire steel belt was fractured and needed to be replaced. The tire was not replaced. The manufacturer was not notified of the failure. The approximate vehicle failure mileage was 91,012 and the approximate tire failure mileage was 14,913.
The vehicle stalls on numerous occasions due to lack of fuel. Investigation proved that the interior paint of the gas tank peals blocking the fuel pump. Research shows that delamination of the gas tank is frequent in this model causing a very unsafe condition as the van can stop at anytime as it looses power and propulsion due to the paint flakes blocking the fuel.
Tl* the contact owns a 1999 ford f350. The contact stated that while driving 60 MPH, the contact noticed that the fuel tank was dangling from the vehicle. The vehicle was taken to an independent mechanic for diagnosis where it was stated that the fuel tank support straps were rusted. The vehicle was repaired and the manufacturer was not notified. The approximate failure mileage was 150,000.
Tl* the contact owns a 1999 ford e-350 equipped with unicorn creation lt tires, line size 225/75/r16. The contact stated that she heard a loud noise outside the vehicle and noticed that the passenger side rear outer tire blew out. The tire was taken to a tire shop and they stated that the steel belt separated. The failure mileage was 73,498.
Tl* the contact owns 1999 ford e-350 equipped with runway enduro ht tires, line sizes lt225/75/r16. The contact stated that after inspecting the driver side rear outer tire she noticed that it had become deflated. The tire was taken to a tire shop who stated that cracks had developed in the tire walls and the steel belt separated. The failure mileage was 73,000.
Tl* the contact owns a 1999 ford e350 van. The contact stated that the diesel fuel tank developed corrosion. The corrosion had filtered into the engine and caused the engine to stall while the contact was driving 65 MPH. The contact took the vehicle to a local mechanic who advised that the entire fuel system needed to be replaced due to the corrosion. The contact had the fuel tank and fuel injectors cleaned previously but the cleaning did not remedy the issue. The failure mileage was 285,000. The VIN was not available.
Tl* the contact owns a 1999 ford e350. The contact was driving 35 MPH when the vehicle exhibited an abnormal pop. Immediately, fuel flooded into the vehicle cabin. The vehicle was taken to the dealer where the dealer advised the contact that they had to replace the spark plug. The manufacturer was contacted but provided no assistance. The failure mileage was 372,000 and the current mileage is 372,500 updated 07/06/12 *bf the cylinder heads were replaced as well. Updated 07/12/12
Compare the 1999 Ford E-350
Other model years
199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025
Questions about the 1999 Ford E-350
Is the 1999 Ford E-350 reliable?
Owners have filed 72 complaints about the 1999 Ford E-350, 4.2 times a typical E-350 model year.
What is the most common problem with the 1999 Ford E-350?
Tires, with 24 complaints, typically around 73,000 miles. Next is engine (13).
How many recalls does the 1999 Ford E-350 have?
9 recalls, covering vehicle speed control, equipment adaptive/mobility and fuel system, gasoline.
What year does the Ford E-350 have bad tires?
The Ford E-350 model years with the most tires complaints are 1997 (24 complaints), 1999 (24 complaints) and 2000 (18 complaints).
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 1999 Ford E-350?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history