Check a VIN

2001 Ford F-150 problems

The most common problem on the 2001 Ford F-150 is engine and cooling, typically around 100,211 miles. Its complaint count is close to a typical F-150 model year.

Typical yearClose to a typical year
Year score
55/100
Owner complaints
1,236
Recalls
8
Service bulletins
169
Worst area
Engine
Fuel economy
11-16mpg
Typical repair
$1,800

The worst 2001 Ford F-150 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.

Specific symptoms reported on the 2001 Ford F-150

Fire or smoke 216Adaptive cruise 81Tire blowout 41Seat belt 37No deployment 33Ball joint 24Fuel leak 21ABS 17Engine failure 17Knocking 17Loss of power 15Wipers 15Stalling 13Brake failure 12Check engine light 10Headlights 10Transmission failure 10Grinding brakes 9Door locks 9Fuel smell 9Misfire 8Jerking 7Sudden acceleration 7Fuel pump 6Hesitation 6Won't shift 6Airbag light 5Harsh shifting 5Power steering loss 5Slipping 5

Recalls 8

Fuel system, gasoline: storage: tank assembly: mountingReported July 29, 2011 · 1,100,000 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Ford is recalling certain 1997 through 2003 model year ford f-150, 2004 model year ford f-150 heritage, 1997 through 1999 model year f-250 less than 8,500 lbs. Gross vehicle weight rating (gvwr), and 2002 and 2003 lincoln blackwood vehicles manufactured from june 20, 1995, through august 4, 2004, originally sold, or currently registered in, connecticut, delaware, illinois, indiana, iowa, kentucky, maine, maryland, massachusetts, michigan, minnesota, missouri, new hampshire, new jersey, new york, ohio, pennsylvania, rhode island, vermont, west virginia, wisconsin, and the district of columbia. Prolonged exposure to road deicing chemicals may cause severe corrosion of the fuel tank straps which secure the tank to the vehicle.
Risk
As a result of the corrosion, one or both straps may fail allowing the fuel lines to separate from the tank, or in some cases, causing the tank to contact the ground. Either scenario may result in a fuel leak presenting a fire hazard.
Remedy
Ford will notify owners and instruct them to take their vehicles to a ford or lincoln dealer to have the fuel tank straps replaced with straps that have increased corrosion protection. Early in this campaign, if replacement straps are not available, dealers may install a cable support under the strap as an interim repair or a steel reinforcement over the existing strap as a permanent repair. Any repairs will be performed free of charge. The safety recall began on september 16, 2011. Owners may contact ford motor company customer relationship center at 1‑866‑436‑7332. Ford's recall campaign number is 11s21

Recall number 11V385000 · Recall details

Vehicle speed controlReported September 7, 2005 · 4,500,000 vehicles affected
What is wrong
On certain pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles equipped with speed control, the speed control deactivation switch may overheat, smoke, or burn.
Risk
A fire at the switch could occur.
Remedy
By letter dated september 12, 2005, owners were instructed to return their vehicles to their dealers to have the speed control deactivation switch disconnected. Owners who have had their speed control deactivated are being notified that parts will be available and advised to make an appointment to reconnect the speed control beginning in february 2006. Owners who did not have their speed control deactivated are being notified to have their system remedied beginning in february 2006. Owners are urged to avail themselves of the free disconnect service as soon as possible because of the significant risk of fire. Owners may contact ford at 1‑800‑392‑3673. (note: also see recalls 05v017 and 06v286)

Recall number 05V388000 · Recall details

Visibility: windshield wiper/washer: motorReported August 8, 2001 · 1,083,000 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Vehicle description: passenger cars, sport utility vehicles, and light and medium duty pickup trucks. A switch located in the plastic cover of the wiper motor gear case could malfunction and overheat, potentially resulting in loss of intermittent wiper function, loss of wiper park function, complete loss of wiper function, or ignition of the plastic cover material. Switch malfunction is most likely to occur when the intermittent setting of the wipers is being used, or when snow or ice obstructs the blades from returning to the "parked" position at the bottom of the windshield. These vehicles were built at the following assembly plants: atlanta plant from 2/11/00 through 7/31/00; chicago plant from 2/14/00 through 8/4/00; kansas city plant from 2/26/00 to 9/4/00; kentucky truck plant from 2/18/00 to 8/31/00; michigan truck plant from 2/23/00 through 8/3/00; norfolk plant from 2/21/00 through 7/27/00; wayne stamping and assembly plant from 2/25/00 through 8/15/00; and wixom plant from 2/15/00 through 8/8/00.
Risk
Loss of visibility while driving increases the risk of a crash.
Remedy
Dealers will inspect the date code on the wiper motor. Motors built with the suspect time frame will have the wiper motor gear case cover replaced. Owner notification began august 20, 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 1‑866‑436‑7332.

Recall number 01V258000 · Recall details

Seat belts: front: buckle assemblyReported July 16, 2001 · 1,400,000 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Vehicle description: passenger and sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and minivans. Equipped with seat belts supplied by trw. It is possible that the driver's and/or front passenger's outboard seat belt buckle may not fully latch. Ford crown victoria built at st. Thomas assembly plant from 4/17/00 - 5/29/01 mercury grand marquis built at st. Thomas assembly plant from 4/17/00 - 5/29/01. Lincoln town cars built at wixom assembly plant from 3/27/00 - 5/30/01. Lincoln navigators built at michigan truck plant from 4/11/00 - 5/31/01. Ford windstars built at oakville assembly plant from 3/23/00 - 5/30/01. Ford rangers built at twin cities plant from 3/28/00 - 5/30/01, and also at the edison plant from 3/13/00 - 5/25/01. Ford f-150 truck built at norfolk plant from 4/18/00 - 5/25/00; at ontario plant from 5/10/00 - 5/28/01; at kansas city plant from 9/11/99 - 5/25/01; and at cuautitlan plant from 5/16/00 - 6/9/01. Ford super duty f-250, f-350, f-450, and f-550 trucks built at kentucky plant from 4/17/00 - 5/27/01; and at cuautitlan plant from 5/16/00 - 6/19/01. Ford excursions built at kentucky plant from 4/17/00 - 10/2/00. Ford expeditions built at michigan truck plant from 4/11/00 - 5/31/01.
Risk
In the event of a crash, the restraint system may not provide adequate occupant protection, increasing the risk of personal injury to the seat occupant.
Remedy
Dealers will inspect the front outboard seat belt buckles and if the buckle fails the inspection process, it will be replaced. Owner notification began july 25, 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 1‑866‑436‑7332.

Recall number 01V227001 · Recall details

Service brakes, hydraulic: foundation components: hoses, lines/piping, and fittingsReported March 23, 2001 · 670 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Vehicle description: light duty pickup trucks. The left front brake hose was damaged during final assembly.
Risk
If the hose is damaged, brake fluid could leak and stopping distances may be increased.
Remedy
Dealers will install a new left front brake hose assembly. Owner notification began march 20, 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 1‑800‑248‑0186 or 1‑800‑392‑3673.

Recall number 01V095000 · Recall details

Air bags: frontalReported March 12, 2001 · 268 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Vehicle description: passenger and sport utility vehicles. The inflator canister in the driver air bag module may have an inadequate weld near the igniter.
Risk
In the event of a vehicle crash, the driver air bag may not deploy as intended, potentially resulting in reduced occupant protection, or a burn injury.
Remedy
Dealers will install a driver air bag module. Owner notification began march 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 01V082000 · Recall details

Equipment: other: owners/service/other manualReported November 28, 2000 · 495,000 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Vehicle description: certain sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and passenger vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of fmvss 225, "child restraint anchorage systems." the affected expedition/navigator owner guides do not identify the locations of seating positions equipped with tether anchorages, and do not provide instructions for securing child seats to these tether anchorages. The f150 sc owner guides do not provide the procedure for securing child seats to the tether anchorages. The taurus/sable owner guides do not identify the center rear seating position as having latch compatible lower anchorages.
Risk
In the event of a crash, the child seat may not be properly attached increasing the risk of injury to the child.
Remedy
Owners will be provided with owner guide inserts revised to provide the required information, and instructions for affixing these inserts to their owner guides. Customers will also be advised that if they prefer, their dealer will affix the inserts to their owner guides.

Recall number 00V396000 · Recall details

Seat belts: front: retractorReported October 30, 2000 · 830 vehicles affected
What is wrong
Vehicle description: regular cab pickup trucks. The driver side seat belt retractor may not fully retract the belt.
Risk
This could cause slack in the seat belt when worn, increasing the risk of personal injury to the seat occupant, in the event of a crash.
Remedy
Dealers will replace the driver's side seat belt assembly.

Recall number 00V348000 · Recall details

See all 8 recalls for the 2001 Ford F-150

Defect investigations

Fuel Tank Strap Failure Due to CorrosionOpened May 4, 2011, closed August 19, 2011

One or both of the steel straps holding up the fuel tank and attaching it to the truck frame can corrode and fail (break or separate).If one strap fails, the tank may tilt and drop and possibly contact the road surface.If both straps break, the entire tank may drop to the road.If either failure occurs while the vehicle is being driven, contact with the road can abrade the tank and create a hole from which gasoline can spill.When the tank drops, it remains attached to the vehicle only by the fuel filler hose and/or supply lines, or in rare instances, by the skid plate, if present.In some cases the weight of the tank sufficiently strained the hoses and fittings and caused separation and subsequent fuel leaks from those connections.The fire hazard created by leaking gasoline is increased by the possible presence of sparks created by the metal tank being dragged along the road.Corrosion of the straps appears to be caused by prolonged exposure to road deicers, frequently road salt, used to treat snow or ice covered roads.States in which large quantities of deicers are applied to roads during the winter season (salt belt states) account for the predominant portion of strap failures.Vehicles in these salt belt states are prone to experience corrosion related failures more frequently and earlier in a vehicle?s life cycle.Ford reports approximately 97 percent of reports it received relating to strap failure involve vehicles that were operated in these high corrosion areas, and 95 percent of the reports to the federal safety agency involved such vehicles.Approximately one-third of F-150 U.S. production was sold in salt belt states.ODI has included in the above counts reports it has received from consumers and reports it has received from Ford in which either the complaint involved confirmed strap corrosion or ODI's assessment of available information suggests corrosion caused the reported problem.Among the incidents reported to the federal safety agency, 441 involved one or both straps failing due to corrosion, 353 involved the fuel tank dropping and/or dragging on the ground, and 180 involved fuel leakage.ODI has received four reports of strap failure in which the leaking fuel ignited but self-extinguished, and one incident in which fire destroyed the vehicle and injured its driver.Ford reported the same injury incident and three other unique fire incidents, including two in which the leaking fuel ignited and fire destroyed the vehicle.There were no injuries associated with the three unique Ford incidents.Ford has agreed to conduct a recall to repair the subject vehicles.The recall will cover vehicles that were originally sold or are currently registered in salt belt states (regardless of vehicle age).The vehiclesincluded in the recall are those subject vehicles that are, or have ever been, registered in Connecticut, Delaware, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, or the District of Columbia.Ford's recall action appears to adequately address the problem at this time.The above vehicle population (1,340,349) includes subject vehicles originally delivered or sold in salt belt states.ODI does not know the current or historical locations of all subject vehicles.According to Ford approximately 73% of the recall population is currently registered (a 27% attrition rate).Ford is also recalling certain MY 1997-1999 F-250 vehicles (under 8,500 GVWR), and MY2002-2003 Lincoln Blackwood vehicles for the same condition, resulting in an estimated 1.1 million total vehicles

EA11006

Fuel Tank Strap Corrosion/RustOpened September 7, 2010, closed May 23, 2011

One or both of the steel straps holding up the fuel tank and attaching it to the truck frame can corrode and break.If one strap breaks, the tank may tilt and drop and possibly contact the road surface.If both straps break, the entire tank may drop to the road.If either failure occurs while the vehicle is being driven, contact with the road can abrade the tank and create a hole from which gasoline can spill.When the tank drops, it remains attached to the vehicle only by the fuel filler hose and/or supply lines, or in rare instances, by the skid plate, if present.This raises the possibility that the weight of the dropped tank could sufficiently strain the hoses and fittings to cause separation and fuel leaks between those components.The fire hazard created by the leaking gasoline is increased by the possible presence of sparks created by the metal tank being dragged along the road.The sparks could ignite the escaped fuel.ODI has included in its incident counts reports it has received from consumers and reports provided by Ford in which either the complaint involved confirmed strap corrosion or ODI's investigation yielded information that strongly suggests the subject defect as the cause of the reported problem.Among the incidents reported to the federal safety agency or Ford, 243 involved the fuel tank dropping below the vehicle and/or dragging on the ground, 95 involved fuel leakage, and nine included reports of sparks from the tank being dragged on the road.ODI has received one report of strap failure in which the leaking fuel ignited but self-extinguished.Ford reported another incident in which the leaking fuel ignited and the resultant fire destroyed the vehicle.There have been no injuries associated with these incidents.ODI has received reports of corrosion induced tank strap failures with other model year F-150 vehicles.ODI is upgrading this investigation to further investigate the frequency, severity and scope of this problem.

PE10036

Spark plug ejection from cylinder headOpened September 22, 2005, closed January 4, 2006

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

Engine compartment firesOpened March 22, 2005, closed August 2, 2006

Ea05-005 is closed with ford?s actions in recalls 05v‑017, 05v‑388, and 06v‑286, recalling approximately 6.7 million vehicles equipped with texas instruments speed control deactivation switches (scds).the brake systems in these recalled vehicles generate a vacuum that can potentially cause the scds to fail and, in certain switch installation orientations, catch fire.ford is also including the entire population of 1998 explorers.ford has informed odi that testing to determine the cause of failures in the 1998 explorers will continue after this investigation is closed.odi believes that the vehicles exhibiting the factors causing scds failure described in this report correlate well with the observed failure rates on these vehicles by model and model year.the closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding by the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist in the non-recalled vehicles manufactured with scds that are not included in ford?s recalls.odi will continue to monitor the non-recalled population for incidence of engine compartment fires.the agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.see attached closing report for details.

EA05005

Front seat belt buckle assemblyOpened February 17, 2005, closed July 6, 2005

During the initial recall campaign in 2001, the subject vehicles were inspected by ford dealerships using a test tool that would detect a defective front seat outboard seat belt buckle assembly.approximately one million vehicles passed the inspection test for one or both front buckles.subsequent to the recall service action, odi received 15 consumer reports alleging that a passed inspection buckle subsequently failed to latch or inadvertently unlatched during use.in addition, ford has identified 543 owner and field reports alleging buckle failure subsequent to passing the inspection test.ford tested and examined over 100 warranty-returned buckles and found that 44% of the buckles had no problem or a condition not related to the recall inspection (non-latch related buckle damage or foreign contamination).warranty claims were highest during the 18-month period after the start of the recall (july 2001) and have been declining during the past 24 months.over the past 12 months, ford has received approximately 12 warranty claims per month out of a vehicle population of about one million.complaints counts are also decreasing.during the past seven months, odi has received only two complaints. 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 the federal safety agency that a safety-related defect does not exist.the agency reserves the right to take further action if warranted by the circumstances.

EA05004

Front seat belt buckle assemblyOpened October 22, 2004, closed February 17, 2005

Under recall campaign (01v227), ford recalled approximately 1.3 million vehicles to inspect and if necessary replace the front driver and/or passenger seat belt buckle.approximately 1.1 million owners responded by taking their vehicles to a dealer for inspection of the buckle using a specialized buckle test tool.ford reported that 829,927 vehicles had both buckles pass the tool test and another 167,336 vehicles had one buckle pass.odi and ford received complaints alleging seat belt buckle failure shortly after passing the original recall inspection service.complainants alleged that the buckle failed by either not latching or false-latching (partial engagement of the latch to the latch plate).a false-latched buckle may release with minor movement or impact against the buckle housing including inadvertent release while the vehicle is in motion.odi is upgrading this recall query to an engineering analysis (ea05-004) to further analyze the field performance of those vehicles that ford dealers passed (one or both buckles) using ford's inspection test (997,263 vehicles).

RQ04011

Technical service bulletins for the 2001 Ford F-150 169

Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.

See all 169 bulletins for the 2001 Ford F-150

2001 Ford F-150 fuel economy

Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.

EngineDriveCityHighwayCombined
4.2L 6‑cylRWD14-151916
4.6L 8‑cylRWD1418-1915-16
5.4L 8‑cylRWD10-1314-1811-15
4.2L 6‑cyl4WD1417-1815
4.6L 8‑cyl4WD13-141714-15
5.4L 8‑cyl4WD10-1214-1611-14

What 2001 Ford F-150 owners say

Most recent owner complaints, unedited.

Filed Jul 17, 2025 · Engine · 249,000 miles · UT · fire

The contact owned a 1996 N/A Ford F-150. The contact stated that while the vehicle was parked and turned off, the firewall located on the driver's side had caught on fire. The fire was extinguished by the Fire Department. A fire report was filed, and a fire report number was not provided. The origin of the fire was not yet determined. A Police report was not filed. The dealer was contacted. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The vehicle was destroyed. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 249,000.

Filed Jul 15, 2025 · Engine, Locks · 145,000 miles · IN

The contact owns a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact stated that the rear doors failed to open due to a fractured cable. The contact added WD-40 to the doors. The contact stated that the battery was draining while the door was opened. The contact stated that the resonator connecting the engine and muffler was rusted. The contact added putty to the area. Additionally, the check engine warning light was illuminated. The local dealer was contacted; however, the vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was contacted and referred the contact to the federal safety agency Hotline. The failure mileage was approximately 145,000.

Filed Jun 30, 2025 · Acceleration · NC · fire

The contact owned a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact stated that he parked the vehicle on the street in front of the residence, and ten minutes later, the contact heard the horn abruptly sounding. His son looked out the window and discovered the vehicle in flames. No warning light was illuminated. The contact called 911 about the failure. There were no injuries sustained. The police and fire departments arrived on the scene, and the firefighters extinguished the fire. The fire consumed and destroyed the entire vehicle. The origin of the fire was in the engine compartment of the driver's side. Police and fire department reports were filed. The vehicle was not towed and remained at the residence. The insurance company was notified of the failure; however, pending an inspection. The contact related the failure to the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 05V017000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL), which was associated with the VIN, and upon research, believed that the recall consequence was related to the fire. The manufacturer was not made aware of the failure and opened a case. The failure mileage was unknown.

Filed Jun 25, 2025 · Acceleration · 283,000 miles · TX · fire

The contact owned a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact stated that while the vehicle was parked and unoccupied, the vehicle caught on fire. The contact stated that a bystander driving by became aware of the fire underneath the hood of the vehicle and used a fire extinguisher to extinguish the fire. The contact stated that failure was caused by brake fluid leaking onto a faulty brake pressor sensor switch, also called a speed control deactivation switch under the hood, and caused the switch to corrode, causing the fire. No injuries were sustained. The contact stated that the Fire Department was not notified of the fire. The vehicle remand at the residence. The vehicle was destroyed. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The contact related the failure to the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 05V388000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL); however, the VIN was not included in the recall. The manufacturer was notified of the failure but offered no assistance. The failure mileage was approximately 283,000.

Filed Feb 27, 2025 · Acceleration · CA · fire

The contact owned a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact received notification of the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 05V017000 (VEHICLE SPEED CONTROL); The contact's husband had left the vehicle unoccupied and parked outside his workplace. The contact's husband was then contacted by his co-workers via walkie-talkie to inform him the vehicle was on fire. When the contact arrived at the scene of the fire, nine other co-workers and himself attempted to extinguish the fire with water and extinguishers however wires were burnt on the front part of the vehicle and they were unsuccessful. The Fire Department was on scene and extinguished the fire. The origin of the fire was unknown, but the fire department did state it had to do with something electric. The fire took place at [XXX] . The vehicle was consumed by the fire. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The contact believes the vehicle is a total loss. The vehicle was consumed by the fire. There were no injuries or property damage. A dealer was called and confirmed that there were 2 open recalls associated with the VIN. The failure mileage was unknown. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

Filed Feb 24, 2025 · Brakes, Engine · MI

n/a

Filed Feb 3, 2025 · Seat belts · 242,000 miles · TX

The contact owns a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact received notification of the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 01V227001 (Seat Belts); however, the part to do the recall repair was not yet available. The contact stated that while driving at various speeds, the front passenger’s seat belt loosened independently, and the front driver’s side seat belt occasionally loosened independently. The local dealer informed the contact that parts for recall repairs were not on backorder. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 242,000. Parts distribution disconnect.

Filed Nov 7, 2024 · Fuel system · 93,000 miles · IL

The contact owns a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact stated that upon entering the vehicle one day, there was an abnormal fuel odor outside the vehicle. The contact’s husband inspected underneath the vehicle and discovered that the fuel tank had detached from the subframe. The contact stated that prior to becoming aware of the failure, the low fuel warning light was occasionally illuminated. The vehicle was not taken to a local dealer. The local dealer was contacted, and the contact was informed that there were no open recalls on the vehicle. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 93,000.

Filed Aug 19, 2024 · Acceleration · 154,000 miles · CA · fire

The contact owns a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact stated while the vehicle was parked and turned off, there was smoke coming from the vehicle. The contact stated the engine compartment had caught on fire. The fire was extinguished by the Fire Department. A fire report was filed, and a fire report number was provided; however, the cause for the failure was not yet determined. A police report was not filed. There were no injuries sustained. The contact had received notification of the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 05V017000 (Vehicle Speed Control). The vehicle was towed to the dealer. The vehicle was not diagnosed or repaired. The manufacturer was made aware of the failure. The failure mileage was approximately 154,000. Parts distribution disconnect.

Filed Nov 7, 2023 · Seat belts · 293,000 miles · SC

The contact owns a 2001 Ford F-150. The contact stated while driving at an undisclosed speed, the driver's side seat belt unbuckled independently. No warning lights were illuminated. The vehicle was not taken to the dealer or an independent mechanic. The vehicle was not repaired. After investigating the failure, the contact related it to the federal safety agency Campaign Number: 00V348000 (Seat Belts) but the VIN was not included. The manufacturer was notified of the failure but referred the contact to the federal safety agency Hotline for assistance. The failure mileage was 293,000.

Used buying checklistWhat to check on a 2001 Ford F-150 before you buy

Compare the 2001 Ford F-150

F-150 vs Chevrolet Silverado 1500F-150 vs Ram 1500F-150 vs GMC Sierra 1500F-150 vs Toyota TundraF-150 vs Nissan Titan

Other model years

1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023202420252026

Questions about the 2001 Ford F-150

Is the 2001 Ford F-150 reliable?

Owners have filed 1,236 complaints about the 2001 Ford F-150, close to a typical F-150 model year.

What is the 2001 Ford F-150 year score?

The 2001 Ford F-150 scores 55 out of 100 (below average). The score compares it with the other model years of the Ford F-150: 75 is a typical year, 50 means twice the usual complaints, and serious complaints and recalls lower it.

What is the most common problem with the 2001 Ford F-150?

Engine and cooling, with 278 complaints, typically around 100,211 miles. Next is acceleration (180).

How many recalls does the 2001 Ford F-150 have?

8 recalls, covering fuel system, gasoline, vehicle speed control and visibility.

What year does the Ford F-150 have bad engine?

The Ford F-150 model years with the most engine complaints are 2018 (591 complaints), 2013 (567 complaints) and 1997 (544 complaints).

What gas mileage does the 2001 Ford F-150 get?

Official estimates for the 2001 Ford F-150 range from 11 to 16 mpg combined. The most efficient version (4.2L 6-cyl, RWD) gets 14-15 city and 19 highway.

Share your experience with the 2001 Ford F-150

Tell other buyers what went wrong and what it cost. We review every report before it appears, and we never publish names, emails or VINs.

No names, contact details or links. Reports about a dealer or a person are not published.

VIN decoder

See the problems and recalls for an exact car

Buying a used 2001 Ford F-150?

Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.

Check its history
Is this car on a recall?Check VIN